Leonardo_BVB
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Posts
- 68
- Likes
- 17
Quote:
In principle, I totally agree with your statement, it is a mantra in Hi-Fi, that the shorter the signal path, the purest the sound (that is based also in physic laws, of course). The point of using a buffer is to "colour" the sound and that, obviously, will alter the signal causing a loss of information (there is an element of degradation, no doubt about it). This is the "bad side effect", on the positive side, this degradation is barely audible if good components are used and then, you have the "beneficial effect" of the tubes "colour" if you like it (I do). Your point is totally correct: Why bothering with a buffer and not buying instead a tube amp? The answer to this pertinent question is because Berlioz wanted to use a solid amplifier (SPL Phonitor) with the tube "touch" and there is no other way unless you buy a CD with valves. In my case the answer is a little bit more esoteric: I wanted to have a decent hybrid in which the first phase would be done by valves and the amplification by solid amplification so I could have a better lineal response but still preserving the "flavor" of the tubes. The Icon BA2 does have zero gain so it is not exactly a preamplification phase as such but it does the trick. There are multiple examples of preamplification by valves with the power amplification done by solid power amplifiers and it works very well indeed. I suppose I could have gone for a nice Woo audio headamp instead but nonetheless I am very happy with the result and it does work for me. The other alternative that I had was buying a valve SACD but there are not many options out there and they are far too expensive.
| Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why add needless components to a system? I "get" the point of a buffer adding tube characteristics to the sound, but I don't "get" why you would buy a buffer instead of just using a tube amp in the first place. Buffers seem to be completely pointless products. Further, every bit of equipment you run the signal through degrades the sound. Every extra tube, every extra capacitor, everything, takes a little something away from the signal. Why add more? If anything, you want to minimize the amount of parts the signal has to pass through. Like so many things in life, you want to use the fewest parts of the highest quality. Here's an amp I'm building: 
As you can see, the attenuator connects right to the tube, which is hooked to the output transformer. There's one resistor and one cap going to ground. That's it. That's all you need. If you want the best sound, then you should use the fewest parts of the highest quality. You're not going to get that by adding yet another box to the signal chain. As for the Phonitor's crossfeed - I think this is more signal processing than actual crossfeed. I'm not much of a fan of signal processing, either. It never sounds natural. A little subtle crossfeed can help, but outright signal processing is a gimmick. No thanks. |
In principle, I totally agree with your statement, it is a mantra in Hi-Fi, that the shorter the signal path, the purest the sound (that is based also in physic laws, of course). The point of using a buffer is to "colour" the sound and that, obviously, will alter the signal causing a loss of information (there is an element of degradation, no doubt about it). This is the "bad side effect", on the positive side, this degradation is barely audible if good components are used and then, you have the "beneficial effect" of the tubes "colour" if you like it (I do). Your point is totally correct: Why bothering with a buffer and not buying instead a tube amp? The answer to this pertinent question is because Berlioz wanted to use a solid amplifier (SPL Phonitor) with the tube "touch" and there is no other way unless you buy a CD with valves. In my case the answer is a little bit more esoteric: I wanted to have a decent hybrid in which the first phase would be done by valves and the amplification by solid amplification so I could have a better lineal response but still preserving the "flavor" of the tubes. The Icon BA2 does have zero gain so it is not exactly a preamplification phase as such but it does the trick. There are multiple examples of preamplification by valves with the power amplification done by solid power amplifiers and it works very well indeed. I suppose I could have gone for a nice Woo audio headamp instead but nonetheless I am very happy with the result and it does work for me. The other alternative that I had was buying a valve SACD but there are not many options out there and they are far too expensive.
