Rep Power: 329

i know i would...

http://www.audiocubes.com/product_in...roducts_id=722

will i? umm, no. but i'd like too

 
Rep Power: 0

Um, can you say "gimmicky"?

 
Rep Power: 786

LOL looks great

How would that thing create good sound over a normal deck, what is so special about vacuum tubes, I don't get it...

 
Rep Power: 329

i know someone other than me will know. i've heard that Second-order harmonic distortion makes for a richer sound than that produced by solid-state systems.

ok i lied, i didn't hear that, i read about it: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.08/play.html?pg=8 scroll down to def tones. and i don't know what exactly it does.

not flaming, but this is a pretty anti gimmicky amp if you ask me. i'm jealous that the japanese get this and we get the frickin ghost

 
Rep Power: 0

Vaccuum tube amps generally sound warmer. I don't know all that much about vacuum tubes specifically, aside from how they sound, but I assume that the link you gave me describes what the effect is caused by.

You'd have to know something about the physics of sound to understand what second-order (aka even-order) harmonic distortion is, but the general idea is that a tube amp produces frequencies that are multiples of the input signal (aka harmonics), but every other multiple (even multiples). So if the input is 100hz, you'd get 100 * 2, 100 * 4, 100 * 6, etc. This is probably more information than you really care to know, so just realize that tube amps change the sound of what they are playing -- they play frequencies that are not there in the original signal.

Now, when playing my Rhodes, for example, I definitely prefer hearing it through the tube preamp it's running through. I love the warm sound of tube amps. But when you are playing back music, you want to play it back the way the producer created it. If the producer wanted a song to sound warmer, he would have made it sound warmer before he released it.

So that's why I say it's gimmicky. Because tubes are (depending on the intended sound) desired in music creation, not music playback. (Of course, there are people -- very RICH people -- who disagree... which keeps manufacturers of tube amps intended for music playback in business...)

The other reason I said it was gimmicky was because of the tube on display right smack dab in the middle... and those incredibly important meters there to tell you, uh.. well, nothing you need to know actually...

I think I tend to have stronger opinions about audio-related topics than many people, because I (try to) produce music. Listeners who want to change the sound of the song they listen to in order to make it sound "better" annoy me... mainly because I know how much work goes in to getting the song to sound to be just right. I don't run my songs through an EQ and pump the bass up, because that's not how it's supposed to sound. So when some kid pops a CD into his car stereo, which is hooked up to 4 15" amped subs, with the bass all the way up on the EQ, and "Bass Boost (tm)" on, I tend to form very negative opinions of him. He is basically destroying the songs that some producers spent a ton of time trying to get right. I see the people who use tube amps to play their music as doing much the same thing (though perhaps to a lesser degree).

(N.B. I think I am actually giving a very one-sided view of this. There are, I think, people who swear by tube amps for their stereo systems, and would probably say it is much the same as listening to vinyl rather than CDs. And I have to say I don't really fault people for listening to vinyl rather than CDs. Vinyl does sound good, even if a CD might be more accurate. I take a more critical view of tube amps, which probably comes partly from my critical view of ultra-expensive audio equipment (Monster cables, $3000 headphones, etc. etc. etc.). But I won't go into that! )

 
Rep Power: 329

ok i give you probs for not just throwing an uneducated comment out there. and i understand what you are saying about the 2nd order thing to a point.

but if i remix a song, am i destroying it as it was meant to be created? or am i trying to change it out of appreciation? the maxxed out BBoost just sounds like *** to most everyone, but i don't mind people tweaking their systems. i tweek for general use, but the fact is different cds have different ambient volumes to them already.

i just think this is a slick unit. i don't know that showing the tube, or other gauges, is neccesary, but virtually every deck has digital crap that's the same way.

 
Rep Power: 0

Remixing a song is a different animal. If you remix a song, you are changing it artistically, not just sonically. If you run a song through a tube amp, you can't claim to have done anything near what a producer does when he remixes a song...

The original point of an EQ in the home (or car) stereo* was to fix any problems in the speakers and/or room (or car, as the case may be). You use an EQ to get a flat response -- meaning all frequencies played at the same level sound the same volume when they end up at your ear.

(*Disclaimer: this is actually just an educated guess, not a verified fact...)

All this having been said, my post made it sound like I really can't stand people who tweak their systems to change the sound, which isn't quite true. I mostly just think people who do that sort of thing (e.g. boost the bass a lot) are wrong and missing out on their music. But hey, if they enjoy that, who am I to argue? Same goes for tube amps for listening to music. I think it is a shame that people want to use them, but again, who am I to argue?

I will, however, stand firm on my position that tube amps are not better than solid state amps (again, for listening), any more than pumping up the bass is better than having a flat response. Some people may prefer them... but that's all I'll acknowledge.

Hmm, I sound way more worked up about this that I really am!

Anyway, my original comment was meant in the following way. I think that people hear the words "tube amp" and see the bulging vacuum tube and the fancy meters and think, "It's got to be good!" A bit like someone thinking a car has to be awesome when they see a giant fin on the back and hear the aftermarket exhaust. I probably should have been a bit more descriptive in the beginning, though.

 
Rep Power: 329

see, my whole thinking can be summarized by my seeing this deck and not believing it was a panasonic. panasonic in car audio IS the big *** wing, stickers, and taillights. i've never knowingly listened to a tube amp reproducing music so i can't say which i prefer.

i just think the deck is basic by the standards of US car audio, and the tube amp probably is a gimmick. most SQ people won't run their speakers off the deck anyways.

 
Rep Power: 0

Um, I bought a Panasonic HU and it's sweet as hell. Here's the link of the one I installed:

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-p2k77a6...5410&s=0&cc=01

I glows a cool, bright blue and at night it's really sweet. I am getting some blue LED's to put in other places in the car and make it all glow a neon blue. This HU for the price can't be beat. Hey, it has three, 5v outputs for amps or subs. Compare that to any other HU in that price range, or even higher and you'll see why I chose this puppy. I can't be more pleased. Oh, yea.. it plays MP3 files too!

People don't like Panasonic and I don't know why. I compared the specs with Alpine and Pioneer and nothing came close when you looked at features vs specs. What can I say.

 
Rep Power: 329

if specs were EVERYTHING, i would likely be driving a different car

not to say that there aren't some bargains to be found

 
Rep Power: 0

I bought a Panasonic hu about 6 years ago, i gave it to my sister when i bought the Civic. To this day the unit still works, for the time I owned it up till no I had no problems at all.

It worked great when it dropped to -35 C in the winters and works well in extreme heat +35 C outside.