Neuhaus T-2 vacuum tube amplifier turns heretic, offers USB input
By Vlad Savov 
posted July 28th 2009 2:33PM
posted July 28th 2009 2:33PM
[Via Switched]
posted July 28th 2009 2:33PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
cool toaster
I used to be the same way about analog vs Digital.
It depends on what you are doing. Throwing on your iPod and playing your library on random, or firing up the tubes and playing a 45RPM reissue of Metallica - And Justice For All from the origional tape master.
There is a difference, you just have to slow down and enjoy the music.
Not to say if you never hear a good system makes you any less of a music lover. Its whatever you can afford.
Thou shall not put "vacuum tube amplifier" and "USB input" in one sentence, much less build such an atrocity.
So a 40W amp for $800. Ridiculous. The love for tube amps is standard audiophile nonsense.
Thinking watts has anything to do with sound quality is even more so.
So is comparing tube watts to solid state watts.
Oh no, I'm under attack from audiophiles!
Someone post some actual proof that there's anything to this whole "analog is better" for the typical human being. Or post proof that audiophiles have superhuman ears.
They won't bother, audiophiles never do. Anyway, tube amps have more distortion than modern solid state amps. Look at the signal-to-noise ratio for this $800 amp: 85dB? That's not very good. You could spend that same $800 on Emotiva XPA-5 and have a 5-channel 1000W amp with a signal-to-noise ration above 100dB. But, hey, the people that buy things like this are the same ones that buy expensive speaker wire, wire lifts, bi-wire speakers, and all the other assorted snake-oil that is pushed on audiophiles. Their money.
Vidikron: "40 watts..., ridiculous...audiophile nonsense"
Trey and Ryan: reasonable responses meant to point out that watts mean different things, and shouldn't be a basis for judgement
Vidikron: "oh noes! I'm under attack!" (weenie)
Sorry Vidikron, but while measurements can be very valuable in deciding what equipment to purchase, audio is indeed a subjective experience. Which amp connected to what source powering what speakers in what room to who's ears - there's a lot of room for difference. Heck, even the same amp/source/speaker/room combo can sound different to different listeners.
Audio is a hobby, part of the fun is listening to different gear and music. I'm happy to see a low-cost tube amp out their, and even more happy to see it has USB connectivity. This undercuts the Peachtree Nova Integrated I've been thinking about buying by a couple of Benjamins...
Next time, if you don't want to be attacked, don't make such an asinine comment about equipment you don't understand. The Emotive you mention is a very nice amp, but it's a different beastie - specifically, it lacks USB input and a built-in DAC, so someone considering the Neuhaus (or the Peachtree) wouldn't even bother to cross-shop the Esoteric. Why bother complaining about what other people might buy instead?
Sorry, but IMO it is ridiculous. Yes, audio is very subjective, but some things are clearly snake oil and tube amps are one of those areas. They aren't better than solid state amps and their pricing is absurd. And, yes, I realize that the Emotiva is a different beast, but since the pricing of this unit is clearly based on the tube amp portion I was making a comparison to what $800 could buy you in terms of amps that would highlight the absurdity this device. If you want something similar functionality you could likely buy a decent receiver for that price that has an iPod dock and would blow this thing away.
Sure, it's your opinion, but you don't have to be an ass about it.
Well, sorry if it comes off like I'm being an ass, that is not my intention. I'm just rather opinionated about things like this since the entire A/V market is full of snake oil and myths.
Fair enough, but ranting about your view without providing concrete evidence is not any better than audiophiles ranting about their view without concrete evidence.
At least I've pointed out signal/noise ratios and made comparisons with other equipment.
Vidikron compared it to equipment that doesn't do the same thing. The Neuhaus has USB input and a built-in DAC. The Esoteric amp he mentioned does not. Apples != Oranges.
And again, as I explained above, the pricing on this device is clearly driven buy the tube amps. So I made a comparison that highlighted the absurd pricing and higher audio distortion of tube amps.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Have you ever even used a tube-based amplifier in your life? From the way you talk about the inherently higher THD+N of a tube amplifier, I'm guessing "no." And where are you getting this "Tubes = SUPER EXPENSIVE OMGOMGOMG" thing from? You can buy solid state devices in the thousands of dollars, and you can buy tube ones as low as about $80. (Google "Qinpu" or go look around eBay if you don't believe me)
A decent tube amp can be had at around the 300-400 dollar range. That is really neither here nor there though (some people spend tens of thousands).
You might have heard that audiophile sound was about getting as close to reference as possible (as close to A going in and A going out) but when you study the high end of the audiophile market, you quickly discover that it isn't reference audio that these people want. What audiophiles in this price bracket want is audio that specifically conforms to whatever their preference is (Warm, Airy, etc) with little to no regard for what the original audio engineer had intended for the home listener to hear. Tube amps add warmth (usually) that simply isn't there, and for that reason, I personally have never found a purpose for them. That doesn't mean that I don't understand why some people would like them, but I'd much rather have accurate sound than overly colored sound.
As for tube amps in general, there are musicians all over the world that swear by them. The sound is simply different from what you can get with a solid state amp, and there is no denying that. They have their function, even if it isn't your cup of tea.
This is a ridiculous hobby. Spend your money on charity or something, or even give it out on the streets. Sheesh.
Umm, if you can solder and read schematics you can build a Starving Student Millet for about $50. And you can find a ton of vintage tube amps for less than $80.
I think this is for people that use uncompresed music file. Makes perfect sense as a way of getting good sound out of a cheep but convienient pc or mac system into some decent audiophile speakers.
FLAC (and other lossless audio files) stored/played on a PC matched to a good DAC are an arguably better quality (and certainly more convenient) solution to digital audio than a standalone CD player.
/computeraudiophilegeek
Sound quality is so subjective. "arguably better quality" means you just want to argue about it, but don't have any real proof.
And?
OK:
* FLAC is lossless, so no noise contribution or signal loss there.
* "a good DAC" has $higher SNR.
* "a standalone CD player" has $lower SNR.
Now it's conclusively proven.
Wait, what? You say you'd have chosen a different DAC, or a different CD player? Great, so we *can't* have "any real proof" about general comparisons between two categories of setups, only between specific setups. I guess that means we should just stop making general comparisons like that, no matter how helpful they might actually be, right?
And please, don't use the but-quality-is-subjective line here. SNR and THD are not subjective. If you want to spectrally filter the sound, do that in your equalizer. If you want to deliberately distort it with non-linear amplification, do that in a separate stage. Argue to your heart's content about the subjective differences of different filters you can throw on it, but an amplifier's job is to amplify sound without noise or distortion, and its effectiveness at that is anything but subjective.
A "CD player" is actually usually a CD player and a DAC.
My logic is that, with an equivalent DAC (sometimes exactly the same DAC can be found in standalone form as well as in CD players), the playback of the non-real time multi-read error corrected lossless audio file ripped from the CD is superior to the on-the-fly reading from a standalone CD player.
However, having said that, I freely admit that the actual enjoyment of the sound that you hear is what is important; and that it is purely subjective.
I happen to like the sound that my cheap record player makes when playing some rather old and scratched records, and I even like the sound of some music over a crappy mono radio.
I don't think that those qualities wouldn't do very well in "objective" SNR and THD tests, but I happen to rather like them :-)
But will it run HD800s ???
"Sound quality is so subjective" This statement is horribly wrong. Sound quality is NOT subjective what so ever. There are so many different things to look at when determining the actual sound quality of a piece of music. From the equipment used to record/capture the sound, the converters used to write the sound to data. Tape or Digital, Tape to Digital for editing then back to Tape? What medium it's being played from(original tape, dubbed, ADAT, 8-track, cassette tape, CD, mp3, FLAC) and when looking at the digital mediums like mp3, what was used to convert it and at what quality? 128 or VBR?
All this is even before you think about what the music is played on, what speakers it is coming from, what environment.
Bottom line is that there is nothing subjective about sound quality.
Now whether this actual product was built for amazing sound or just a fancy looking low quality vacuum tube based amp so the people with a fat wallet can pretend they know all about supreme sound to their guests.. I'm not quite sure.
You are right and wrong; sound QUALITY can be objectively measured, and is expressed in watts, spls, frequency ranges, THD%, and a slew of other measurements.
However, all of those qualities of sound are processed not by machines, but by an individual's unique brain. We each hear sounds differently, and different sounds create different physiological responses that we describe either positively or negatively. This is obvious by simply noticing that people like different genres of music. If sound was completely objective, then everyone would agree that specific combinations of tones and rhythms are enjoyable - this is obviously not true. Some people think classical is slow and boring, others think industrial is screechy and harsh, some say rap is nothing but booms and shouting. Different ears hear sound differently, based on the way their brains process the audio information.
Subjectivity: "Subjectivity may refer to the specific discerning interpretations of any aspect of experiences. They are unique to the person experiencing them, the qualia that are only available to that person's consciousness. Though the causes of experience are thought to be objective and available to everyone, (such as the wavelength of a specific beam of light), experiences themselves are only available to the subject (the quality of the colour itself)."
That's why some systems sound better to some people, while other people can't discern any difference at all... Anyone want to explain why I have to have the latest Intel Processor, or the newest LCD panel (seriously, why do I care if it has 178 degree viewing angle when I'm going to be seated directly in front of the screen?). Computer geeks, and videophiles (I assume Vidikron is one since he chose to name himself after a high-end projector/monitor producer) aren't that much different than audiophiles. Ya'll would laugh if you saw my home theater - after all I'm using an S-video cable (snert, how OLD!) to connect my DLP projector.
I'm in the camp that believes audio equipment should be as neutral as possible, but in the end no equipment is perfect. I just think that people should be aware that tube amps have measurably worse performance than solid state amps. If someone prefers the sound of tube amps, fine, but I think they should also be aware that they are basically saying they prefer the tube amp's brand of distortion and are paying a hefty fee for more distorted audio in the process.
I agree, I like neutral gear as well. I have a Yamaha B-2 (V-Fets, baby) powering Bozak B-305s as my two-channel system. It is extremely neutral, and never needs more than 10 watts - even though the B-2 can provide an honest 50 into 16 ohms at less than 0.008% THD. Please don't think I'm bragging, I have less than $500 in the system since I bought it vintage/used. Money isn't everything...
But people don't always buy gear based on specs - witness the popularity of MP3 players. Sure they're spending hundreds on the latest iPod (sometimes many over the course of years), but they don't care that they're paying a premium price for distorted sound quality. People can decide for themselves if they're happy with the quality of the sound their equipment can reproduce. The Neuhaus is an admittedly very cheap amp - which is why it is a good starting point for people to decide if they like that "tube sound". Then, maybe, they'll drop $$$ on some serious McIntosh gear...
It's time for the Myth Busters to decide if Vacuum Tube Amps vs. Solid State amps really any better or worse when listening to music. They probably wouldn't touch this subject, way to subjective of opinions, it's like asking somebody you like Coke or Pepsi, PC VS MAC.
But from a personal point of view, personal taste, you have to love the look of Vacuum Tube amps, especially the hand crafted designs, there is something mystique about Vacuum/Valve Tube amplifiers
BTW: Check out my own, one of the kind PC Tube Motherboards...
http://picasaweb.google.com/ty.monroe/PCTubeAudio#5015719049134339122
Yeah, but MP3 players have portability and convenience going for them (as do MP3s themselves). Some people are willing to sacrifice quality for convenience, but that's not really the issue here. Here we're talking about dropping $800 on a glorified iPod dock. I'm just saying you can get much more value for your money and won't have to sacrifice anything.
Marco
That deserves an article all to itself here on Engadget. Very cool. BTW, nice Yammies!
Vidikron
Except that it's not an iPod dock at all. It is a stand-alone tube amp with a USB input and a built-in DAC. Most iPod docks (with the exception of the Wadia iTransport) don't do any D/A conversion, nor do they add any amplification to the signal.
It's always possible to find a better value, but stop trashing the Neuhaus just because you don't understand why someone would want it. You made your argument against tubes, but that's your opinion. Some people like tubes, and this amp might be what they're looking for, at a very decent price.
Fair enough, I guess we've both had our say. I've got to hit the road anyway, but thanks for helping me pass the time :)
BTW, you have some very nice classic equipment, though you may want to do something about that S-video cable attached to your DLP ;)
Thanks, Aopen made these boards back 04 on a limited run. Happen to get my hands on one off of FleaBay, but I had to recap the board, but that’s ok, I installed better quality CAPS on the board that were installed originally from the factory.. Since that picture, I’ve disconnected that Cooler Master VU meter, it was causing some distortion, it’s more for looks then anything.
@letstakeawalk
"You are right and wrong; sound QUALITY can be objectively measured, and is expressed in watts, spls, frequency ranges, THD%, and a slew of other measurements.
However, all of those qualities of sound are processed not by machines, but by an individual's unique brain."
That post was so right, and you should also get into personal preference now. Some like it high and tight, some like it low and loose. I personally enjoy a crashing treble, no one else seems to, but I do. Am I wrong? Yes in most circles, but they are not in my living room right now. The person that likes the warmer sound from a tube amp likes that sound quality. Where's the objective measurement on that? The sound you prefer from your audio equipment is entirely subjective. The only thing objectiveness has every granted me was the range of frequencies available and the efficiency of the speaker.
I agree with what most people have been saying here. Tube amps sound very nice. I prefer their sound to an equally priced solid state amp any day. Also in the highest end, tube amps still rule supreme.
I don't understand the statement "Those among us who think MP3 compression is just a-okay will find this new device boils down to a handsome-looking external sound card".
If this device is meant to be used with your PC, you will be using MP3 compression even if you are using the Tube amp right? Since all the tube amp is doing is taking the audio output from your PC [decoding the MP3 file], converting it to analogue, and sending it to your headphones/speakers?
Help me understand why analogue is better, when it's being converted from a digital source? How could this sound any different than with a digital amplifier?
All sound (as electric signals) has to be converted into analogue so that the current can be fed to the speakers. There is no such thing as a digital speaker. Digital amplifiers are relatively new, and have pros (very small, cheap, and cool running) and cons (hard to fix), but even they must provide an analogue signal to the speakers.
@ Letstakeawalk, actually these speakers by PERSEUS (MS20) and others similar I've seen have a direct TosLink and COAX connection eliminating the analog source which actually make them a Digital speaker in terms of connection.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.hfdecoding.com/uploads/ms20.png&imgrefurl=http://hoka.defiant.co.uk/blog/default.aspx%3Fdtf%3D20080301000000%26dtt%3D20080331235959&usg=__PqiHMWynltYYQQAZc_0cywCltg8=&h=325&w=400&sz=48&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=JChXvD1DTuwBOM:&tbnh=101&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3DPERSEUS%2Bms20%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1G1GGLQ_ENUS334%26um%3D1
Marco
Close but no cigar. Those speakers have built-in amps and D/A converters inside the speaker enclosure to convert the audio signal to analogue. Perhaps I should have been more specific with my original statement: there is no such thing as a digital speaker driver. The driver is the mechanical device (most of us just call it the speaker) than converts the analogue electrical signal into soundwaves.
Noted: I guess the Analog part would be the speaker itself
20w a channel is enough to blow many large speakers with a tube amp... seams everyone forgets there is always two sides to electrical currant. The amps are very high and allow for extremely fast response in terms of amps rise and drop, thus making the sound sound much tighter. If you get a high end solid state you'll notice the wattage ratting drop... but at the same time they sound much louder and cleaner. I'm not going more into it because you can just look for the info you're self's.
For DIYers build your own: http://www.audioxpress.com/reviews/media/1102hansen2145.pdf It took me 2 hours or so with a soldering iron and some nail clippers. It might not look nice, but you can build an enclosure for it and it is A LOT cheaper than $800.
I made mine for less than $140 and love it. Full disclosure I do not work for any audio amp. company.
Since most people are either flaming it or defending the amp in the article, I would be curious to know how you actually use the one you built and, if willing, please describe the system you have yours in. I'm actually really interested in how you use it and how it sounds and what you listen to. -thanks, totally not a flame or troll question.
Okay, bare with me. This isn't that stupid. Imagine an audio hobbyist who is riding the cutting edge for fun and they have set up a room with a computer in it with the sole purpose of downloading and delivering huge and completely uncompressed audio files to very nice stereo speakers for their listening enjoyment. They already own a range of other components and speakers for CD's, SACD's, etc, and they have no interest in email, browsing, or anything else, this is a dedicated music station. I balked at first, but after thinking about it, I understand it. Every audio enthusiast knows the amp is crucial to sound quality but who makes an amp as dedicated to this experiment as this one? It could actually be a fun setup for those outliers purely interested in great music via the internet. The $800 price tag, surprisingly to the uninitiated, puts it in the "mad money" range of most people who would own a system like this. It's definitely a niche. Maybe I think the niche is more narrow that it actually is. Two questions: Can USB carry an undiminished signal? Are the internals of this amp decent and worth the $800?
Two very good questions, and two that I can't answer, which is why I'm beginning to look into amps like this one and the Peachtree I mentioned before. I have a great two-channel system, and my home theater is pretty good. But here in the computer room, I've just got a little Marantz receiver hooked up to the headphone jack out of my PC. I like to watch Netflix, and I'm a big fan of Last.fm internet radio, so I'm looking for a better way to get the sound out of my PC. I don't need a lot of power or perfect sound, just the USB and the DAC...