2 Jan
2006
2 Jan
'06
4:57 a.m.
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 00:43:17 -0500 (EST)
der Mouse <mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca> wrote:
Could someone
point me to harmonic distortion data, transient
analysis or some good old scope traces to prove that a couple of
6B4's in class A push-pull deliver better sound than a pair of
MOSFETs can?
No. Such data can prove that the sound is different. Which is
_better_ is a matter for judgement and opinion; it is inherently
impossible to "prove" a subjective judgement ("better sound") with
objective data.
Even something as apparently unarguable as "lower THD" does not equal
"better sound";
The principle of High Fidelity is perfect reproduction. The
amplifier stages should introduce NOTHING into the signal.
'Better sound' means as near to an exact reproduction as
possible. Granted, this isn't possible for a lot of recordings
of music, where the whole recording is a collage of
faked/tweaked/doctored snippets. Listen to live recordings of
acoustic piano sometime. You want ALL the crap between you and
the original sound ripped out and thrown away.
indeed, there are companies making good money selling
devices specifically designed to introduce distortion of various kinds,
devices which wouldn't be used unless _someone_ thought the resulting
sound was better than the un-distorted sound. My own power amp even
includes such deliberate distortion capability.
If it makes a recording sound subjectively 'nicer' to you then
that's fine. But that's just one step removed from a box that
'simulates' stereophonic sound from a monophonic recording.
Anything that changes or adulterates the signal runs against the
principles of High Fidelity. My Yamaha integrated Amp even has a
bypass switch on it that cuts out ALL the tone controls and
signal doctoring the Amp otherwise is capable of.
Ultimately, once you discard the founding principles of High
Fidelity, "it's all just entertainment, folks." Which can be
very nice. But let's not confuse the issue.