HAD on tubes vs solid state

[boldaslove6789]

I'm 21 and hooked on tube amps, been hooked since 11, nothing compares. I try to educate as much as I can to the youth.Long live tube amps LOL

[Structo]

That's cool Greg.

When I was 21 they were trying to hammer solid state and transistors into our heads.

Don't get me wrong, there are a ton neat things that wouldn't be possible with out the chip circuits but for simple analog amplification, tubes it is.

[badtweed]

Why people are listening to that babble from this guy with the doo rag on his fat head is beyond me. What a bunch of half baked bologna.

[gilgalad101]

That's cool Greg.

When I was 21 they were trying to hammer solid state and transistors into our heads.

Don't get me wrong, there are a ton neat things that wouldn't be possible with out the chip circuits but for simple analog amplification, tubes it is.

...and they still are trying to hammer that stuff into our heads. I'm disappointed that there isn't any tube curriculum in today's EE degrees (at least not in mine at Clemson), but I completely understand that there just isn't enough time to teach us about the good stuff.

[Billion81]

Why people are listening to that babble from this guy with the doo rag on his fat head is beyond me. What a bunch of half baked bologna.

I'm sorry- What have you contributed to the amp world?? Better yet, given the lame ass judgement in your post- what (if anything) have you contributed to anyone, anywhere.

And please post a pic of your body and head since that seems to be your basis for the potential for intellect.

I thought when I came to TAG I could leave this kind of vacuous and laggard commentary behind...Alas I was wrong.

We're surrounded.

[David Root]

gligalad101, I would doubt there are any EE academics teaching today that are capable of teaching an MI tube course at anywhere near the level of this forum, never mind that of the Ancients. Terman comes to mind.

More important, if there were, the EE academic administration would not allow it because it's a) retrogressive and b) irrelevant to modern requirements for slaves to industry.

[Cliff Schecht]

gligalad101, I would doubt there are any EE academics teaching today that are capable of teaching an MI tube course at anywhere near the level of this forum, never mind that of the Ancients. Terman comes to mind.

More important, if there were, the EE academic administration would not allow it because it's a) retrogressive and b) irrelevant to modern requirements for slaves to industry.

I almost posted about this post earlier too but I wanted to see what others would say.

While some of the topics that come up in tubes show up in other EE topics, we still use a specialized form of design that ignores what is generally considered good design practice (to a point, not entirely) and designs towards taking advantage of strange non-linearities in our devices. Everything else in a tube amp is just there to support the tubes in operating properly. This is an antiquated way of designing anyways, most parts now are more drop and place without having to take too much into consideration. While I use my knowledge of tubes as an advantage elsewhere (helps in understanding MOSFET and other transistor devices for me), the information we use is when designing tube guitar amps is almost completely application specific.

You'll learn quickly that EE school doesn't teach you electronics, it teaches you the principles behind the circuits. Electronics is too broad of a topic to teach everything in one class. There are too many subsections (audio, RF, digital, power, IC, etc..) to try to teach everything even in 4 years. I took 5 years in my undergrad (started grad at the same time) and really, I taught myself most of the things that I really use as a circuit designer. It's really up to you to collect all of these things you are taught and apply them to different areas, whether that area be tubes or IC design.

[daydreamer]

It's funny this post has come down to something I've been struggling with, 'what is the best way to get up to speed with TUBE electronics'? I've been looking at night courses at polytechnic, reading and reading, but it really does come down to what you can pull together yourself then...collecting books, keeping up with forums etc, it seems TUBE technology isn't taught so much as it is learned...if you get my drift.

[mdroberts1243]

It's funny this post has come down to something I've been struggling with, 'what is the best way to get up to speed with TUBE electronics'? I've been looking at night courses at polytechnic, reading and reading, but it really does come down to what you can pull together yourself then...collecting books, keeping up with forums etc, it seems TUBE technology isn't taught so much as it is learned...if you get my drift.

I've collected & read a lot of books on tube electronics design and IMO Merlin Blencowe's book has done the best job so far. He doesn't just give you the algebraic equations for common amplifier stages but goes into the tonal implications of each stage with some surprising insights (e.g. the common cathode follower used in Fender amps is 'flawed' in such a way that it contributes significant 2nd harmonic distortion even at low volumes). I highly recommend this book!

'Designing Tube Preamps for Guitar and Bass' by Merlin Blencowe (Hardcover ... http://amzn.to/9vMCEz)

[badtweed]

Why people are listening to that babble from this guy with the doo rag on his fat head is beyond me. What a bunch of half baked bologna.

I'm sorry- What have you contributed to the amp world?? Better yet, given the lame ass judgement in your post- what (if anything) have you contributed to anyone, anywhere.

And please post a pic of your body and head since that seems to be your basis for the potential for intellect.

I thought when I came to TAG I could leave this kind of vacuous and laggard commentary behind...Alas I was wrong.

We're surrounded.

Sorry to have dared cast doubt against your dumble god's silly musings. You probably are surrounded by at least a few educated folks who have degrees in electronics and know when they hear a bunch of "bologna".
Don't let my opinion stop you from drinking the kool aid though.

[vibratoking]

I really don't want the day to come when a SS amp sounds as good as a tube amp, because that will surely spell the doom of the vacuum tube at it's already weakened state.

I don't understand this comment. If SS can sound every bit as good as a tube, why would you be worried about the what happens to tubes? I love the sound of tubes, but I won't be sorry to see them go if something as good or better is designed or invented. It is just a matter of time.

The coursework for a typical EE degree is mainly theoretical. There is very little to no hands-on work. For instance, the average new EE grad thinks that ground is ground. This is normally not taught, but is easily understood when armed with the proper theoretical knowledge. The idea is that you can apply the theory to anything that interests you. SS is taught mainly because that is what industry wants and what industry will pay designers to design with. Who will pay an EE to design with tubes? There is basically no industry around tube design. Certainly not enough to support the the community of EEs. Universities are competing for students and coursework in tubes is not going to draw students. I can hear the sales pitch now "...enroll here, we teach outdated technology". The transistor is far superior to the tube in almost every way. I can only think of a few places where the tube is preferred - guitar amps and audiophile equipment.

Why people are listening to that babble from this guy with the doo rag on his fat head is beyond me.

Most of us respect HAD because he designs and builds great amplifiers. If you read the prior posts you'll see that I disagree with HADs original comments about crystal lattice. I commented why I disagree. Your comment offers no technical reason to represent your opinion. So I should believe you because you think HAD is fat and has a rag on his head? Your comments make you appear illogical, undeducated and ignorant. Thanks for illuminating us about who you are.

[badtweed]

I really don't want the day to come when a SS amp sounds as good as a tube amp, because that will surely spell the doom of the vacuum tube at it's already weakened state.

I don't understand this comment. If SS can sound every bit as good as a tube, why would you be worried about the what happens to tubes? I love the sound of tubes, but I won't be sorry to see them go if something as good or better is designed or invented. It is just a matter of time.

The coursework for a typical EE degree is mainly theoretical. There is very little to no hands-on work. For instance, the average new EE grad thinks that ground is ground. This is normally not taught, but is easily understood when armed with the proper theoretical knowledge. The idea is that you can apply the theory to anything that interests you. SS is taught mainly because that is what industry wants and what industry will pay designers to design with. Who will pay an EE to design with tubes? There is basically no industry around tube design. Certainly not enough to support the the community of EEs. Universities are competing for students and coursework in tubes is not going to draw students. I can here the sales pitch now "...enroll here, we teach outdated technology". The transistor is far superior to the tube in almost every way. I can only think of a few places where the tube is preferred - guitar amps and audiophile equipment.

Why people are listening to that babble from this guy with the doo rag on his fat head is beyond me.

Most of us respect HAD because he designs and builds great amplifiers. If you read the prior posts you'll see that I disagree with HADs original comments about crystal lattice. I commented why I disagree. Your comment offers no technical reason to represent your opinion. So I should believe you because you think HAD is fat and has a rag on his head? Your comments make you appear illogical, undeducated and ignorant. Thanks for illuminating us about who you are.

Good Keith Olbermann impression!

Couple of facts for you who feels the need to use ad hominem over facts.
Fact is, he is wearing a doo rag and his head is fat. Get over it.
His comments are silly and you just can't stand having your hero criticized for more of those silly "marshmellowesque" remarks that he throws out there. I actually don't think even he believes that nonsense.

His amps are good sounding and certainly just a wee little bit overhyped.

[vibratoking]

Couple of facts for you who feels the need to use ad hominem over facts.
Fact is, he is wearing a doo rag and his head is fat. Get over it.
His comments are silly and you just can't stand having your hero criticized for more of those silly "marshmellowesque" remarks that he throws out there.

Did you even read my post? You commented on it, but you obviously didn't bother to read and understand it. I posted that I disagreed with HAD on the crystal lattice comment. I disagreed based on a technical argument. That makes your ad hominem and hero remarks stupid and uninformed.
Fact - a persons' size and attire have nothing to do with their intellectual validity. Your remarks are completely irrelavent. There is nothing to 'get over' as you put it.
Fact - you have offered nothing of technical merit.
Fact - I am laughing at your willingness to contiually shove your foot deeply into your mouth in front of this forum.
Fact - This is my last post to you on this subject, unless you decide to do a 180 degree flip and say something technically meaningful.

[badtweed]

Couple of facts for you who feels the need to use ad hominem over facts.
Fact is, he is wearing a doo rag and his head is fat. Get over it.
His comments are silly and you just can't stand having your hero criticized for more of those silly "marshmellowesque" remarks that he throws out there.

Did you even read my post? You commented on it, but you obviously didn't bother to read and understand it. I posted that I disagreed with HAD on the crystal lattice comment. I disagreed based on a technical argument. That makes your ad hominem and hero remarks stupid and uninformed.
Fact - a persons' size and attire have nothing to do with their intellectual validity. There is nothing to 'get over' as you put it.
Fact - you have offered nothing of technical merit.
Fact - I am laughing at your willingness to contiually shove your foot deeply into your mouth in front of this forum.
Fact - This is my last post to you on this subject, unless you decide to do a 180 degree flip and say something technically meaningful.

Yes, please make this your last angry "straw man" post with the silly "you gotta gotta argue with me my way," whiny ultimatum.

Do you also wear a doo rag on a large head?

Still don't know why folks listen to the "tech" explanations from the big boy much less waste time trying to explain them.

I think he has a good sense of humor (unlike some people) and knows that he is just laying out nonsense rather than just say, "I'm not sure about how to answer your question but in all truthfulness, all I did was modify Leo's circuit until something sounded much better. Guess I got lucky through hard work and perseverance."
Baffle em with bs as they say.

[ToneMerc]

Fact is, he is wearing a doo rag

FYI, HAD is wearing a badana, which is definitely not a doo rag...................I certainly would know.