Dear @billstevenson : No it's not. For the contrary it's a good music/audio conversation.
@lewm posted: " Raul and I are more often than not on opposite sides of controversies like this one . " and you posted:
" it can be worthwhile to discuss matters of mutual interest even if our diverse backgrounds prevent full accord .... "
I think that mature audiophiles as us in reality are more in agreements than against each to other even when we do not have a full accord. As a fact what makes an audio conversation a good one is precesily when exist no full accord because it's when the different " sides " of the whole conversation works as a lesson for any one of us and is the only way to grow up. Obviously that the people involved in that conversation must have the attitude to always learn.
Some times in a hot audio conversation and when I think that the other gentleman has no " reason " on the subject time latter ( days, months or even years after. ) I take in count that that gentleman was rigth and me wrong.
"""
we can agree that faithfulness to a spcification such as, but not limited to, the RIAA equalization curve would be sine qua non to achieving reasonable sound reproduction """
not only agree but for me this is the first target and characteristic between a preamplifier/headamp or the like and a phono stage where when we read or some one talks about phono stage the name really comes because that audio item has the inverse RIAA eq. and not because its gain level or something else.
You mentioned the second and third targets in a phono stage where both depends in between: gain/amp levels and noise levels.
So we are talking the same audio language, good.
" You argue to strive for reproduced sound that is comparable to live music "
well, I said that my reference as your is live MUSIC. What means that reference for me? to know in precise way how and which is the kind of sound that produce the normal music instruments and to know it not only in different kind of enviroments ( orchestra halls, open stages, amplified or not, etc, etc. ) but at near field too with single instruments or blended..
I agree in your comments about and could add that even two same Steinway piano models in the same venue sounds different because can be that have different build material chords ( vintage. ) or something with the piano differences in the build wood or paint and the like. Exist no two same year Stradivarious with exactly the same sound.
Again, in agree that is imposible to mimic live MUSIC through a home audio system.
Now, I posted several times that my audio system main target is to be truer to the recording or at least nearest to.
For my effort trying to approach and have success in that target I need that at every single link in the audio system chain be faithfulness developing the lowest every kind of distortions ( obviously each audio link item must be a good design and with excellent quality design execution. ).
With those premises in mind and knowing in deep both technologies: tubes and SS, by first hand whole experiences I decided to left behind the tube alternative because can't fulfill my main system target. I's just imposible to do it for the tube alternative. As any alterative tubes has trade-offs but against the target are severe trade-offs insuperable limitations to achieve the targets where SS is way nearer to acomplish it.
I don't listen MUSIC in my system only because I'm a MUSIC lover and I just like it. NO I like to listen MUSIC in my system the way SHOULD be and this " SHOULD be " means truer/nearest to the recording. This is way different to listen only because I like it what I hear even if is wrong.
We are in agreement of the critical importance role of the inverse RIAA eq in a phono stage and to be truer to the recording this inverse phono stage RIAA eq. MUST MIMIC the RIAA curve ( inverse. ) used during the recording.
What means " mimic ": exactly that, with no frequency deviations in between. Well, because its inherent tube limitations this alternative can't fulfill that premise and the SS alternative can do it in a nearest way. Yes, accuracy is always the name of the game here. Ideal could be: cero tolerance that per sé is imposible to achieve.
Of course that I'm using full SS electronics. I don't want to talk in deep about my system but only to give you a precise example where tubes can't do it and my phonolinepreamp does:
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipPJLuDhIxhHGsjv2ZABr3TIpxMewVor1Pz33vhLoiISsURJmmnxUQB9cuwNnpog...
that kind of performance is near " perfect " ( nothing is. ) not only because the frequency deviation levels are lower than 0.015db ! but because both channels performs almost exactly.
Btw, you can check through Stereophile electronics measurements ( every kind of. ) and always both channels ( every kind of audio item. ) measures different, way different!
Well, that's me about MUSIC and audio.
Thank's for your answer.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC not distortions,
R.
@lewm posted: " Raul and I are more often than not on opposite sides of controversies like this one . " and you posted:
" it can be worthwhile to discuss matters of mutual interest even if our diverse backgrounds prevent full accord .... "
I think that mature audiophiles as us in reality are more in agreements than against each to other even when we do not have a full accord. As a fact what makes an audio conversation a good one is precesily when exist no full accord because it's when the different " sides " of the whole conversation works as a lesson for any one of us and is the only way to grow up. Obviously that the people involved in that conversation must have the attitude to always learn.
Some times in a hot audio conversation and when I think that the other gentleman has no " reason " on the subject time latter ( days, months or even years after. ) I take in count that that gentleman was rigth and me wrong.
"""
we can agree that faithfulness to a spcification such as, but not limited to, the RIAA equalization curve would be sine qua non to achieving reasonable sound reproduction """
not only agree but for me this is the first target and characteristic between a preamplifier/headamp or the like and a phono stage where when we read or some one talks about phono stage the name really comes because that audio item has the inverse RIAA eq. and not because its gain level or something else.
You mentioned the second and third targets in a phono stage where both depends in between: gain/amp levels and noise levels.
So we are talking the same audio language, good.
" You argue to strive for reproduced sound that is comparable to live music "
well, I said that my reference as your is live MUSIC. What means that reference for me? to know in precise way how and which is the kind of sound that produce the normal music instruments and to know it not only in different kind of enviroments ( orchestra halls, open stages, amplified or not, etc, etc. ) but at near field too with single instruments or blended..
I agree in your comments about and could add that even two same Steinway piano models in the same venue sounds different because can be that have different build material chords ( vintage. ) or something with the piano differences in the build wood or paint and the like. Exist no two same year Stradivarious with exactly the same sound.
Again, in agree that is imposible to mimic live MUSIC through a home audio system.
Now, I posted several times that my audio system main target is to be truer to the recording or at least nearest to.
For my effort trying to approach and have success in that target I need that at every single link in the audio system chain be faithfulness developing the lowest every kind of distortions ( obviously each audio link item must be a good design and with excellent quality design execution. ).
With those premises in mind and knowing in deep both technologies: tubes and SS, by first hand whole experiences I decided to left behind the tube alternative because can't fulfill my main system target. I's just imposible to do it for the tube alternative. As any alterative tubes has trade-offs but against the target are severe trade-offs insuperable limitations to achieve the targets where SS is way nearer to acomplish it.
I don't listen MUSIC in my system only because I'm a MUSIC lover and I just like it. NO I like to listen MUSIC in my system the way SHOULD be and this " SHOULD be " means truer/nearest to the recording. This is way different to listen only because I like it what I hear even if is wrong.
We are in agreement of the critical importance role of the inverse RIAA eq in a phono stage and to be truer to the recording this inverse phono stage RIAA eq. MUST MIMIC the RIAA curve ( inverse. ) used during the recording.
What means " mimic ": exactly that, with no frequency deviations in between. Well, because its inherent tube limitations this alternative can't fulfill that premise and the SS alternative can do it in a nearest way. Yes, accuracy is always the name of the game here. Ideal could be: cero tolerance that per sé is imposible to achieve.
Of course that I'm using full SS electronics. I don't want to talk in deep about my system but only to give you a precise example where tubes can't do it and my phonolinepreamp does:
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipPJLuDhIxhHGsjv2ZABr3TIpxMewVor1Pz33vhLoiISsURJmmnxUQB9cuwNnpog...
that kind of performance is near " perfect " ( nothing is. ) not only because the frequency deviation levels are lower than 0.015db ! but because both channels performs almost exactly.
Btw, you can check through Stereophile electronics measurements ( every kind of. ) and always both channels ( every kind of audio item. ) measures different, way different!
Well, that's me about MUSIC and audio.
Thank's for your answer.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC not distortions,
R.