KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,902
|
Post by KeithL on May 17, 2019 13:18:31 GMT -5
Errr.... no. If you check back to postings from around the time when we still owned Carver... And just before that, when the deal was on the way to happening, and we expected to own them... You'll see that my opinions on tube equipment haven't changed in a very long time...
I've almost certainly owned more tube gear than most people here (at least fifty amps that I know of - before I stopped counting). However, from the very beginning, I've always found it lacking in terms of - pick your term - "accuracy" or "sonic purity".... I've always subscribed to the "original definition" - that "the perfect amplifier would be a straight wire with gain"...
And, as far as I'm concerned, I've never heard a tube amplifier that came close to fulfilling that goal... In all fairness, a lot of early solid state equipment was equally flawed, although in different ways.... However, solid state equipment has continued to improve, and I now find a lot of solid state gear that is close to a perfect approximation of that "straight wire with gain"....
(And, by that definition, a "perfect" tube amp would sound identical to a "perfect" solid state amp - since there is only one was to perfectly reproduce an original.)
(There is a different definition that widens that to be "whatever is necessary to produce an overall experience that is closest to the original". That definition would obviously include equipment that alters the signal, or even that distorts it, if it produces a response in the listener that is closer to their original experience. For example, if a recording lacks harmonics that were present in the live performance, and an amplifier later adds distortion that is similar to those missing harmonics,
the overall result, and how it affects a listener, may be closer to the original... and will in fact be closer to the original than an accurate rendering of the recording itself. The catch is that it becomes very difficult to know when you actually have something closer to the original... And when you have something that simply sounds like what you believe the original, which you never actually heard, probably sounded like... )
Now, Emotiva, as a company, is always going to do our best to deliver the products that our customers ask for... And, believe it or not, not everyone here agrees about everything... There are several people here who LIKE tube gear and even own some... Emotiva is NOT going to sell, or not sell, tube equipment because I personally do or don't like it... So you never have to worry about that... (We stopped selling Carver gear, and cancelled our plans to introduce Emotiva tube gear, for the very simple reason that demand was lacking - it simply didn't sell well.)
And, as tube gear goes,Carver made, and I guess still does make, some excellent tube gear... For the record, it is also rather closer to solid state gear, in terms of performance, than a lot of other tube gear... Compared to most other brands of tube gear, Carver's amps have more power, lower distortion, higher damping, and more feedback - and generally sound closer to modern solid state gear.
(Check the specs for yourself.) Keith doesn’t sell tubes. Had the Carver deal worked out, I’m pretty sure the “guru” would have a different message for the faithful. And what ever happened to Emo’s “All out assault on the high end” (mostly tube components from Audio Research, BAT, Mcintosh, Conrad Johnson, Cary and others)? Still workin’ on it I guess. The thing we must watch about Keith is that in his arguments, the only rational answer somehow ends up being what he purveys. I happen to prefer tubes for the sound of natural acoustic instruments in real acoustic space, but understand that ‘70’s or ‘’80’s processed rock may have more “slam”, “zing” or such on transistor components to others. Your money, your ears, your choice. I also highly value long-term value retention, mostly found in US made high quality marques.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,902
|
Post by KeithL on May 17, 2019 13:33:07 GMT -5
"Curious how many folks are into tube amps or preamps."
That is the caption on the first posting in the thread. To me "how many folks are into tube amps or preamps" is another way of saying "how many folks LIKE tube amps or preamps" ... (People who don't like something, or actively dislike it, are NOT "into it"...)
So, in fact, that is EXACTLY what the poll is about.
And, just for the record... for several years I headed one of the main technical departments at an analyst firm that did competitive product analysis.... (Although we usually concentrated more on technical details than on public perceptions.)
So, to be concise......
If you want a quick idea about how many people find tube gear interesting enough to respond to a survey about it - then this will do the job nicely. However, if you want a more broad view, for example about the total number of people who are interested in it, or to include the people who have abandoned an interest in tube gear, then you need to offer more options... Data is data - but how we humans perceive exactly what it means is quite variable. For example, one person may be surprised that "almost 30 people say they like and use tube gear".... While another may realize that 30 is a very small percentage of the many thousands of members we have on this forum. (And, in order to be even somewhat accurate, we should really only count the number of members who have been active since the poll was posted, and so had an opportunity to see and respond to it if they chose to.)
The reality is that, in this specific case, the vast majority haven't responded at all, so we really have no idea what anybody outside of the few who responded think.
I think you will find that it has a lot to do with self-selection. The poll actually included the term "vacuum tube amplifiers" in the title. This title, by its choice of wording, does little or nothing to encourage people who are not interested in tube gear to read or respond to it. This actually applies a strong bias in favor of people who "still consider tube equipment interesting".
Very few people who aren't interested in tube gear bothered to answer, or even read, the questionnaire.
And, when they did, it then failed to offer any choices that would apply to people who "tried it and got rid of it because they didn't like it". (So, to me, it seemed very specifically like a poll about how many people are considering buying tube equipment... rather than how people felt about it.)
As Gary said.... how you interpret the choice of questions is itself open to interpretation. However, to me, it seemed odd that there were no options at all for "don't like tube equipment". And, in the interest of completeness, I would be interested to know how many people have tried it, DIDN'T like it... and why. (For example, how many people didn't hear any difference, how many heard a difference and didn't like it, and how many heard a difference, liked it somewhat, but didn't find that it justified the cost.)
All due respect Keith, but this poll has NOTHING to do with "liking". Are you an expert in consumer research methodology? Well, I am. There are different kinds of polls. Some are about liking vs. disliking something (and/or degree thereof.) This poll's topic is NOT liking/disliking. It's about "owning/using" tube amps vs. "not" If you are trying to read into this poll that it's about liking, well...might want to brush up on your reading skills. You want to find out how much "liking" there there? Start a poll on that. For a minimal fee, I'll draft the questions for you in a professional manner. Mark
|
|
|
Post by donh50 on May 17, 2019 13:38:28 GMT -5
Curious how many folks are into tube amps or preamps. Reading this, the opening post, and the poll questions, led me to believe the poll was asking not only tube-owners but those who have an interest in tubes to respond, and would inevitably lead to opinions from SS and tube owners. Blasting someone for their opinion, on either side, just seems petty and childish. As for me, I have owned a lot of tube and SS gear over the decades, and listened to far more (mainly years ago when I was "in the biz" and thus had far more access to the gear), and can confidently say I can pick out a tube amp from a SS amp in a DBT most of the time. The exceptions are speakers with relatively small impedance excursions and tests at low'ish volume. As for which I prefer, meh, who cares? I like some things about tubes, some about SS, but for my current speakers SS is a better match to their impedance and my wallet. Whatever - Don
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on May 17, 2019 14:50:50 GMT -5
I smell dead horse. Dead horse I smell.🤢
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by klinemj on May 17, 2019 14:52:53 GMT -5
"Curious how many folks are into tube amps or preamps." That is the caption on the first posting in the thread. To me "how many folks are into tube amps or preamps" is another way of saying "how many folks LIKE tube amps or preamps" ... (People who don't like something, or actively dislike it, are NOT "into it"...)
So, in fact, that is EXACTLY what the poll is about. And, just for the record... for several years I headed one of the main technical departments at an analyst firm that did competitive product analysis.... (Although we usually concentrated more on technical details than on public perceptions.) So, to be concise......
If you want a quick idea about how many people find tube gear interesting enough to respond to a survey about it - then this will do the job nicely. However, if you want a more broad view, for example about the total number of people who are interested in it, or to include the people who have abandoned an interest in tube gear, then you need to offer more options... Data is data - but how we humans perceive exactly what it means is quite variable. For example, one person may be surprised that "almost 30 people say they like and use tube gear".... While another may realize that 30 is a very small percentage of the many thousands of members we have on this forum. (And, in order to be even somewhat accurate, we should really only count the number of members who have been active since the poll was posted, and so had an opportunity to see and respond to it if they chose to.)
The reality is that, in this specific case, the vast majority haven't responded at all, so we really have no idea what anybody outside of the few who responded think.
You haven't even read the questions, have you? The questions define what the poll is about. Not a single one refers to "liking". And regarding being "into" tube amps..."into" does not mean liking. And, the questions make that clear...own "one/use it" all the way to "don't own one". Owning vs. not is the context for "into" in this poll. Give it a break. And, it's quite clear from your commentary that you focused on technical research and not perception research. Also, regarding any poll, polls never include the "vast majority". They are a sampling of respondents. That's all. Mark
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 17, 2019 15:37:34 GMT -5
Very few people who aren't interested in tube gear bothered to answer, or even read, the questionnaire. I would love to see your proof of this statement. LOL! Mark Hi Mark, I very nearly didn’t respond because of exactly that, The title says the poll is about “Vacuum Tube Amplifiers” and since I have absolutely no interest in them I wasn’t even going to open the thread. I thought it was going to be a poll about which tube amps people have or which they like, subjects that I couldn’t contribute anything to. I just happened to be bored on the day (it’s was 7.30 in the morning here and I was sitting at the airport waiting to board a flight to the Gold Coast) and I opened the thread to see who had responded and what they said, then I read the poll question and answers and realised that I could contribute, despite the thread title. Cheers Gary
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,902
|
Post by KeithL on May 17, 2019 15:44:36 GMT -5
We seem to have come full circle.... Yes, I read the subject, and, since I have an interest in tube amplifiers, it seemed to apply to me. The closest dictionary definition of "being into something" is "being interested in it".... although it usually carries a positive connotation.
(People rarely identify themselves as being "into something" which they dislike.)
However, when I looked at the responses offered.... - it offered "people who currently use tube amps" (which didn't apply to me) - it offered "people who've never used tube amps" - it offered "don't own one and don't plan to" (which technically applies to me, but is either misleading or incomplete, depending on how you look at it)
- but it OMITTED to offer the choice that accurately applies to me ("used to own one but no longer do")
Therefore, to be blunt, I was somewhat offended to find that, while the survey seemed to invite my input, I was not given the opportunity to provide a correct and complete answer. (I would feel the same way if I'd opened a survey about "Your favorite color" and found the only answers available were "green" and "yellow" - when neither is MY favorite color.)
To me, it seemed much like a poll on "cigarette smoking"..... that offered options for "current smoker" and "never tried it" but omitted an option for "ex smokers". (If I were to see that my immediate response would be that the framers of the poll simply found information about ex-smokers unwelcome... or didn't want it to show up on the published results.)
At least to me, it seems intuitively obvious that anyone seeking information for "how people feel about something" would want to know about ex-users and why they became ex-users. I would also suggest that, when a poll is posted on a forum, the goal is both to inform the person posting the poll, and to present that information to other readers.
(And, if the poll is intended to be informative to potential new users, reasons why previous users abandoned the product would be of even more interest to them.) The problem I've always found with "perceptual research" is that it often fails to correlate very well with facts (depending on the details of the situation). For example, the number of people who "plan to purchase a Mercedes Benz in the next five years" generally doesn't work well at all as a predictor of who will actually own one. Likewise, data from surveys about "who thinks it sounds like a great product" after viewing a commercial may or may not translate into useful data about how well it will sell.
(We found many people who expressed a lot of interest in the Carver tube amps.... but, even when we offered them at an exceptionally good price, that interest substantially failed to translate into sales, or new owners.)
I should also point out that, as I'm sure you're well aware, it's simple to "skew" the results of a survey by phrasing the title, the questions, or the response choices you offer, in a certain way. (A lot more people will check the box indicating that "they're a careful shopper" than will check the box that says they "always check the price tag first"... ) "Curious how many folks are into tube amps or preamps." That is the caption on the first posting in the thread. To me "how many folks are into tube amps or preamps" is another way of saying "how many folks LIKE tube amps or preamps" ... (People who don't like something, or actively dislike it, are NOT "into it"...)
So, in fact, that is EXACTLY what the poll is about. And, just for the record... for several years I headed one of the main technical departments at an analyst firm that did competitive product analysis.... (Although we usually concentrated more on technical details than on public perceptions.) So, to be concise......
If you want a quick idea about how many people find tube gear interesting enough to respond to a survey about it - then this will do the job nicely. However, if you want a more broad view, for example about the total number of people who are interested in it, or to include the people who have abandoned an interest in tube gear, then you need to offer more options... Data is data - but how we humans perceive exactly what it means is quite variable. For example, one person may be surprised that "almost 30 people say they like and use tube gear".... While another may realize that 30 is a very small percentage of the many thousands of members we have on this forum. (And, in order to be even somewhat accurate, we should really only count the number of members who have been active since the poll was posted, and so had an opportunity to see and respond to it if they chose to.)
The reality is that, in this specific case, the vast majority haven't responded at all, so we really have no idea what anybody outside of the few who responded think.
You haven't even read the questions, have you? The questions define what the poll is about. Not a single one refers to "liking". And regarding being "into" tube amps..."into" does not mean liking. And, the questions make that clear...own "one/use it" all the way to "don't own one". Owning vs. not is the context for "into" in this poll. Give it a break. And, it's quite clear from your commentary that you focused on technical research and not perception research. Also, regarding any poll, polls never include the "vast majority". They are a sampling of respondents. That's all. Mark
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on May 17, 2019 16:38:01 GMT -5
Per Keith:
"Now, Emotiva, as a company, is always going to do our best to deliver the products that our customers ask for.."
-Like a standalone dac in a streaming age, or amplifiers with real muscle power supplies?
-Or a pre/pro without hourly glitches?
-Or, more to the point, at least a tube preamp?
Keith, give it up. You guys have abandoned the good stuff.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,902
|
Post by KeithL on May 17, 2019 17:00:17 GMT -5
I'm sorry audiobill...
We can't please everyone.
Perhaps I should rephrase that: "We always do our best to design and manufacture products that will appeal to a significant number of current and future customers."
We are a commercial company, and not a boutique audio shoppe, so we do have to stick with products we can sell a significant number of. Unfortunately, as it turned out, while there may be enough of a market for those Carver tube amps to keep Bob fed, it wasn't enough to justify a product line for us.
You may also be surprised to know that there are still a lot of standalone DACs that don't do streaming. (Although the number still around in our normal target price range is slowly dwindling.)
I can't say much about big heavy power supplies... except that they are in fact big and heavy...
However, even many of our diehard "big iron" fans have started coming around to the idea that the only ones who really care about "big iron" are the guys who make their living doing hernia surgery. The SMPS we use in most of our current amps weighs about four pounds - and it delivers about 3 kW - regulated.
So far, it has also proven to be more reliable than our previous designs.
We, and a substantial percentage of our customers, really do consider that to be a big step forward. Per Keith: "Now, Emotiva, as a company, is always going to do our best to deliver the products that our customers ask for.." Like a standalone dac in a streaming age, or amplifiers with real muscle power supplies? Or, more to the point, at least a tube preamp? Keith, give it up. .
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on May 17, 2019 17:32:51 GMT -5
OK, finally got it, thanks.
A mass production consumer company, with few high end aspirations.
Not an "All Out Assault On the High End" as formerly touted.
Thanks, Keith, this explanation helps us reset our expectations.
|
|
|
Post by pop on May 17, 2019 18:03:36 GMT -5
OK, finally got it, thanks. A mass production consumer company, with few high end aspirations. Not an "All Out Assault On the High End" as formerly touted. Thanks, Keith, this explanation helps us reset our expectations. I think it’s rather apparent the aspirations have changed. We used to have a solid one stop shop with Emotiva, we don’t anymore. It frustrates me too when I look at the product line. I disappeared from the forum and came back expecting to see some exciting new products on the drawing board. Seems like everything is “on the radar” but not being put into production. Now this thread train is derailed. Permanently hah
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on May 17, 2019 18:20:40 GMT -5
Yeah, somewhat interesting while it lasted, and somewhat pathetic to hear Keith’s old warhorse excuses.
Customers like to be delighted, not pacified imo.
|
|
|
Post by pop on May 17, 2019 18:38:57 GMT -5
I don’t think Keith’s response is pathetic or an excuse, it sounds like to me the company is simply going in a different direction.
Bad for most of us but maybe they have a larger group of new buyers with the direction they are going.
Emotiva was all about excitement. We all refreshed this forum to see new updates from Big dan and Lonnie. Oh well
I bought my XMC based on the modular platform, now it’s gone. That was the whole point. I don’t want to upgrade my processor, I don’t want a new one. I wanted to be able to update it as needed.
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 17, 2019 19:52:34 GMT -5
I don’t think Keith’s response is pathetic or an excuse, it sounds like to me the company is simply going in a different direction. Bad for most of us but maybe they have a larger group of new buyers with the direction they are going. Emotiva was all about excitement. We all refreshed this forum to see new updates from Big dan and Lonnie. Oh well I bought my XMC based on the modular platform, now it’s gone. That was the whole point. I don’t want to upgrade my processor, I don’t want a new one. I wanted to be able to update it as needed. Regarding the XMC-1, modularity was the promise made. On the other hand, we know upgrades would not be free, and neither would they be inexpensive. The plan to offer a trade-in of the XMC-1 to the XMC-2 to me is quite a bargain, considering all of the upgrades included. Perhaps you can look at it as them making one big modular replacement - you send them your old unit and they upgrade all of the boards and even supply a new chassis and case.
|
|
|
Post by pop on May 17, 2019 19:58:33 GMT -5
I don’t think Keith’s response is pathetic or an excuse, it sounds like to me the company is simply going in a different direction. Bad for most of us but maybe they have a larger group of new buyers with the direction they are going. Emotiva was all about excitement. We all refreshed this forum to see new updates from Big dan and Lonnie. Oh well I bought my XMC based on the modular platform, now it’s gone. That was the whole point. I don’t want to upgrade my processor, I don’t want a new one. I wanted to be able to update it as needed. Regarding the XMC-1, modularity was the promise made. On the other hand, we know upgrades would not be free, and neither would they be inexpensive. The plan to offer a trade-in of the XMC-1 to the XMC-2 to me is quite a bargain, considering all of the upgrades included. Perhaps you can look at it as them making one big modular replacement - you send them your old unit and they upgrade all of the boards and even supply a new chassis and case. The problem is I currently have no need whatsoever for the XMC2. But they have stamped it as a limited time deal. I don’t feel like I should have to fork over the cash for what I don’t need currently. What happens in another year or 2 when I upgrade to a 4K projector? Is my XMC still valid for upgrades? You don’t sell a unit on the promise of future upgrade and then deplete it from the lineup. Of course I could be jumping to conclusions, but can dan promise me my XMC will be available for updates in 2 years plus?
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,161
|
Post by geebo on May 17, 2019 20:04:54 GMT -5
Regarding the XMC-1, modularity was the promise made. On the other hand, we know upgrades would not be free, and neither would they be inexpensive. The plan to offer a trade-in of the XMC-1 to the XMC-2 to me is quite a bargain, considering all of the upgrades included. Perhaps you can look at it as them making one big modular replacement - you send them your old unit and they upgrade all of the boards and even supply a new chassis and case. The problem is I currently have no need whatsoever for the XMC2. But they have stamped it as a limited time deal. I don’t feel like I should have to fork over the cash for what I don’t need currently. What happens in another year or 2 when I upgrade to a 4K projector? Is my XMC still valid for upgrades? You don’t sell a unit on the promise of future upgrade and then deplete it from the lineup. Of course I could be jumping to conclusions, but can dan promise me my XMC will be available for updates in 2 years plus? But even upgrade modules would have a limited time of availability, no? Certainly they wouldn't be available forever.
|
|
|
Post by pop on May 17, 2019 20:06:55 GMT -5
The problem is I currently have no need whatsoever for the XMC2. But they have stamped it as a limited time deal. I don’t feel like I should have to fork over the cash for what I don’t need currently. What happens in another year or 2 when I upgrade to a 4K projector? Is my XMC still valid for upgrades? You don’t sell a unit on the promise of future upgrade and then deplete it from the lineup. Of course I could be jumping to conclusions, but can dan promise me my XMC will be available for updates in 2 years plus? But even upgrade modules would have a limited time of availability, no? Certainly they wouldn't be available forever. Sure, but if I don’t need an upgrade I skip it and wait for the next module. Right? Did I miss something about the XMC? I wasn’t aware there was a policy to upgrade as they release. I thought the whole premise was I could Upgrade when I needed to to suit my needs. If the XMC new hdmi board goes away for a new one. Awesome! I skipped a whole step
|
|
|
Post by pop on May 17, 2019 20:09:25 GMT -5
I also am not trying to be argumentative about it if that’s how I’m coming across. Maybe I never completely understood the upgrade path with the XMC which is whatever. It’s a great unit and has preformed flawlessly for me. I’m not unhappy. I just don’t want to upgrade to something I don’t need to have to upgrade again to the latest and greatest before I needed anything. Does that make sense?
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by klinemj on May 17, 2019 21:41:22 GMT -5
The problem I've always found with "perceptual research" is that it often fails to correlate very well with facts This statement alone shows how little you know about anything other than purely technical research. If the fact is, despite excellent technical data, that some key chunk of a market will not choose a product for a particular reason...then the fact is that the technical data will not sway them. And, similarly, even if you have data that says someone should not like a particular product (a tube amp, for example), if a core group continues to own and use them and like/love their sound...no amount of technical data will persuade them otherwise. That...is a fact. Mark
|
|
|
Post by lehighvalleyjeff on May 17, 2019 22:19:05 GMT -5
Is it possible that the way we perceive micro details and harmonics in sound might differ based upon personal preference or flavor? I’ve heard both sides of this argument countless times. In the end two amps might have similar specs on paper and for any myriad of reasons person 1 might love it while person 2 thinks it sounds lousy.
Sonic purity is an intangible destination in home audio that many of us might never achieve and frankly that’s probably a good thing for the industry. If we only reproduce sound with one type of gear it becomes boring and there’s no longer a need for competitive research because every amplifier has the same specs and sound. Simply an inaccurate statement on its face because we all have preferences in how we like to hear music. And they differ and that’s ok.
Tubes or solid state? Vanilla or Chocolate? Neither is right or wrong or more close to accurate as a general statement. Just different flavors
|
|