> Yes I know, that's why I wrote technically better.
I would still disagree with your use of the word "better."
> The distortions and coloring your tube amplifier produce might sound good to you, but they're imperfections.
"Sounding good to the listener" is the criteria by which this kind of musical equipment is evaluated. According to this standard, tube amps are "better."
As a tech-head I totally get where you are coming from. The more accurate reproduction of the sound does create a lot of value as it enables new sounds and techniques. But as a musician, I don't really care about optimizing the electrical and acoustic properties of the physical system. I only really care about the sound I get out of it at the end.
Distortion is, by the exact same measure of sonic clarity and reproductive accuracy, horribly broken from a technical point of view. Yet that effect underpins whole genres of music. In many situations it is "better" than the "technically accurate" reproduction.
I would still disagree with your use of the word "better."
> The distortions and coloring your tube amplifier produce might sound good to you, but they're imperfections.
"Sounding good to the listener" is the criteria by which this kind of musical equipment is evaluated. According to this standard, tube amps are "better."
As a tech-head I totally get where you are coming from. The more accurate reproduction of the sound does create a lot of value as it enables new sounds and techniques. But as a musician, I don't really care about optimizing the electrical and acoustic properties of the physical system. I only really care about the sound I get out of it at the end.
Distortion is, by the exact same measure of sonic clarity and reproductive accuracy, horribly broken from a technical point of view. Yet that effect underpins whole genres of music. In many situations it is "better" than the "technically accurate" reproduction.