Audio Samples
- Thread starter analag
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
Kingston
Well-known member
analag said:
Me neither.
When I was a kid I used to think tube gear is required for some magic sound that I could not define. Turned out it was tape and its severe band-limiting all along. Maybe skewed frequency responses of transformers here and there, too. I mean add 6 stages of even finest I/O transformers and what comes out is not the same anymore.
I worked with tape for years which was an exercise in trying to compensate for the extra bass and laidback top end which always seemed lazy after hearing the input from the console before the playback. (We would switch the tape monitor from input to output ,while recording),and compensate by boosting hi freq on eq,s and roll off the bass. Now I listen to old recording and marvel at the friendliness of rock guitar sounds verses the brutal honesty of all the nasty peaky sound of overdriven guitars from that time period. It made listenable and enjoyable.
I have a tubetec compressor . It’s got a nice sound but look at the side-chain circuit and its as modern with an array of chips and timing circuits . So big difference cloning and real design choices.
I still have my solid state Ampex machines and plan to be using them this year after recap. They are cool filters if you don’t mid working on them when not recording. Audio is futile!
There is a great deal of interest and support for the sound of tube amplifier overload, especially in guitar amps. A great deal of R&D and multiple patents have been issued for solid state mimics of this iconic vacuum tube overload characteristic.analag said:
The difference is very visible if you look at a saturated (clipped) waveform of solid state vs. vacuum tube audio path, and audible if you listen to them.
JR
H.L. Menken said:
Dont feed the troll...
