[Harry Manback]

If a record is recorded by microphone from a tube guitar amp, then distributed digitally, why would I need a tube amp to playback "that warm tube sound"? Wouldn't it be "baked in"? Does this make the argument for using tube based amps moot?

 

[castleofargh]

If a record is recorded by microphone from a tube guitar amp, then distributed digitally, why would I need a tube amp to playback "that warm tube sound"?

you wouldn't because this makes no sense.

Wouldn't it be "baked in"?

yes it would be, it's the same reason why I don't need to plug my headphone into a piano when I want to playback piano recordings ^_^.

Does this make the argument for using tube based amps moot?

rejecting one silly argument to use tube amps doesn't mean there can't be other perfectly fine reasons to use one:
"I like the sound of that amp"
"I'm so bad at associating gears and setting up the gain that I clip everything I play and it really sounded horrible with the solid state amp I tried"
"ohhhh, shiny!".
and bunch of other reasons.

 

[Harry Manback]

you wouldn't because this makes no sense.



yes it would be, it's the same reason why I don't need to plug my headphone into a piano when I want to playback piano recordings ^_^.



rejecting one silly argument to use tube amps doesn't mean there can't be other perfectly fine reasons to use one:
"I like the sound of that amp"
"I'm so bad at associating gears and setting up the gain that I clip everything I play and it really sounded horrible with the solid state amp I tried"
"ohhhh, shiny!".
and bunch of other reasons.

Why would you say this makes no sense. I see mic'd amps used in recording all the time.

No need to be so abrasive dude. Chill out.

 

[castleofargh]

maybe you want to reread and pay more attention to the structure of the sentences. because it's no fun to have to justify myself about something I didn't do, and to have to argue a point I didn't make.
you're getting mad at me for the parts where I agreed with you...

 

[Harry Manback]

I dub thee troll.

 

[bfreedma]

I dub thee troll.

You’re calling him a troll because he agreed with you? Take a step back and reread Castle’s response - he agreed with you on the first two points then shared other reasons why people buy tube amps as he concurred with your position that “tube warmness” was already baked in and not a good reason to go with a tube amp.

 

[old tech]

If a record is recorded by microphone from a tube guitar amp, then distributed digitally, why would I need a tube amp to playback "that warm tube sound"? Wouldn't it be "baked in"? Does this make the argument for using tube based amps moot?

Yes, production is recorded and what is recorded is played back.

It is the same misconception some have that recorded ultrasonic frequencies need ultrasonic playback. Well it is a double misconception, mainly by the hi res crowd, that ultrasonic frequencies affect the frequencies we can hear - but putting that aside, even if it did affect the frequencies we can hear, it would be baked into the recording. We don't need hi res playback to replicate that effect.

 

[gregorio]

[1] If a record is recorded by microphone from a tube guitar amp, then distributed digitally, why would I need a tube amp to playback "that warm tube sound"? [2] Wouldn't it be "baked in"? [3] Does this make the argument for using tube based amps moot?

1. You wouldn't.
2. Yes, it would.
3. Yes, it does.

In practice, most audiophiles are not interested in fidelity, they're ONLY interested in what they think sounds better and, what they think sounds better is influenced/dictated by audiophile marketing (magazine reviews and the "impressions" of others who've been suckered by that marketing). Therefore, it's entirely possible that someone might think a tube amp sounds better; due to pretty lights/appearance, because they actually like the additional distortion (lower fidelity), just for the pleasure/bragging rights of ownership or some combination of all the above. This is all effectively what castle stated.

G

 

[Harry Manback]

you wouldn't because this makes no sense.



yes it would be, it's the same reason why I don't need to plug my headphone into a piano when I want to playback piano recordings ^_^.



rejecting one silly argument to use tube amps doesn't mean there can't be other perfectly fine reasons to use one:
"I like the sound of that amp"
"I'm so bad at associating gears and setting up the gain that I clip everything I play and it really sounded horrible with the solid state amp I tried"
"ohhhh, shiny!".
and bunch of other reasons.

I suppose I mistook your tone as dismissive. If that wasn’t your intent, then apologies to you.

 

[castleofargh]

just an unfortunate misunderstanding. no harm done. I was really mostly agreeing with you and only dismissing the ideas you found suspicious yourself.
I hope next time you can see me for the jerk I really am

 

[sonitus mirus]

Heaven forbid if some of these tube fans would “compromise” fidelity with DSP.

 

[bigshot]

DSPs can do the same thing as tubes, just with less randomness

 

[71 dB]

DSPs can do the same thing as tubes, just with less randomness

Randomness can be a good thing. The problem with DSP is that you need hardware to run it. Some people rather have a tube amp that have a pc running DSP.

 

[bigshot]

I've never found randomness to help at all in designing my A/V systems. I usually have to keep attending to specifics to get it to improve. I think randomness might be better for people who don't have any particular goal in mind and are interested mostly in change for change's sake. I almost always know what I'm trying to accomplish and if I get there, I want to stay.