Topic: Question on use of Tube Buffers with AV receiver

[remixprod]

Hi Sirs,

is it practical or even possible to use a yaqin cd3 tube buffer with my existing kenwood 7.1 av receiver? im planning to connect it to a cd player (in stereo mode) using rca.

i would want to achieve a "tube like" audio quality.. in a more affordable way.. is this possible? thanks in advance..

[JojoD818]

As for the question of possibility, yes it is possible to connect it that way.

As for the audio quality,  you get what you pay for, so don't expect too much. What I'm trying to say is, if you want "tube like" sound quality, you need to spend a little bit more, like getting a tube amp which would mean a separate audio setup already. So there goes your wallet...

[brainf]

Yes it's *possible* but there are many factors in play here - how resolving is your setup (sensitive and detailed to any changes introduced into the audio chain), the design of the tube buffer itself, source material...etc. 

I'm having a good results in my setup - source is NMT feeding analog signal to my AVR via a JojoD tube buffer, modded slightly with his guidance and blessings   

In my case, I was looking for a slightly "warmer and fuller" sound from my FLAC files, which I got with the tube buffer intermediary.

One added bonus to using a tube buffer is that you can run long interconnects without compromising SQ.

hope this helps!

[remixprod]

thanks guys for the help 

[Digities]

just wanted to add: most receivers will accept an analog signal but it will be turned to digital, processed by those sharc dsps and turned again into analog using it's own dac. this happens even in pure audio mode. double whammy and probably hurts the signal more than helps it.

[markcrenz]

just wanted to add: most receivers will accept an analog signal but it will be turned to digital, processed by those sharc dsps and turned again into analog using it's own dac. this happens even in pure audio mode. double whammy and probably hurts the signal more than helps it.

not if the receiver has pure direct switch.

[qguy]

here my suggestion...   

if you can buy the tube buffer at used prices go for it, so you can try what a buffer does. Once extra funds are available, sell the tube buffer and buy a tube amp or a decent 2 channel integrated amplifier.

[remixprod]

Thanks for the suggestion guys, yea, we have to hear it para malaman talaga saving up then.. Hehe

[Digities]

not if the receiver has pure direct switch.

even if it has a pure direct switch it will still do the conversion. all receivers do volume control in the digital domain.

[markcrenz]

even if it has a pure direct switch it will still do the conversion. all receivers do volume control in the digital domain.

no. they have digital CONTROL but attenuation of the signal is done via opamps within the analog volume control IC, much like individual miniature preamps. no adc/dac involved.
sample of such chip: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/cs3308-18.html

[Stagea]

no. they have digital CONTROL but attenuation of the signal is done via opamps within the analog volume control IC, much like individual miniature preamps. no adc/dac involved.
sample of such chip: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/cs3308-18.html

That used to be the case in older receivers. The trend with newer devices is to do things in the digital domain, which can unfortunately be harmful to sound quality at lower volumes (if not implemented well). Many new multichannel DAC chips from TI, Wolfson, etc. have built-in digital volume controls that accept serialized control inputs including individual attenuation settings per channel. This makes adding an analogue control after the DAC an optional thing, which can be ommited to save cost. Nowadays, 'direct' may not be a true analogue bypass and may just bypass the main Decoder/DSP chip.

[markcrenz]

pati sa "pure direct" ganyan na rin?

[Stagea]

The "pure direct" (and equivalent) modes of most current mainstream avrs also work with digital inputs, which makes me wonder if they are still true analog bypass modes (unless they treat analog inputs differently). That and the makers now only claiming the turning off of unnecessary subsystems (video, dsp, front panel display, etc) makes me think that these are no longer the same "pure direct" modes that were present in older AVRs.

Marantz, Arcam, Nad, Rotel, Cambridge, Cary, etc. have analog bypass modes (called bypass, source direct, etc.) that only work with analogue inputs. I know that these truly omit any digital processing.

[markcrenz]

we were discussing analog input, not digital input, master ivan

just wanted to add: most receivers will accept an analog signal but it will be turned to digital, processed by those sharc dsps and turned again into analog using it's own dac. this happens even in pure audio mode. double whammy and probably hurts the signal more than helps it.

not if the receiver has pure direct switch.

even if it has a pure direct switch it will still do the conversion. all receivers do volume control in the digital domain.

[JojoD818]

If that's the case (Stagea's and lesleyc's) then that sucks for audio, I was hoping that the method Mark mentioned was still the way receivers go in terms of Pure Direct.

Though honestly, I have to confess I haven't studied the newer sharc processors and their ways. So the 50/50 Music/HT receivers are no more? Everything's going digital now...

[markcrenz]

If that's the case (Stagea's and lesleyc's) then that sucks for audio, I was hoping that the method Mark mentioned was still the way receivers go in terms of Pure Direct.

Though honestly, I have to confess I haven't studied the newer sharc processors and their ways. So the 50/50 Music/HT receivers are no more? Everything's going digital now...

technology advancement working against us?!   

[JojoD818]

technology advancement working against us?!   

for purists maybe, that's a big no no... but it's always simpler to build a dedicated music setup imo. 

[Stagea]

Though honestly, I have to confess I haven't studied the newer sharc processors and their ways. So the 50/50 Music/HT receivers are no more? Everything's going digital now...

Traditional audio brands that happen to make AVRs (Cary, Arcam, NAD, Marantz, CA, etc.) still almost exclusively do things the old way (in fact many are processing-averse). Mainstream brands are indeed going for more and more integration, and doing things digitally is often just simpler and cheaper (though I think Yamaha and Denon still use analog attenuation chips exclusively... I'm not sure for how long).

Some older integrated chip designs like the WM8777 still allowed for analogue bypass and still included analogue master volume controls (all in a single chip). More common integrated codec chip designs (like those from Cirrus and lower-cost Wolfson chips like the WM8581) omit this and handle volume adjustments purely on the digital side. Implementing a purely analog bypass path on the latter types would mean off-chip circuitry (plus companion chips) and increased board space (you know how that sits with penny pinching accountants). With ever decreasing cost envelopes and ever increasing feature sets of mainstream AVRs for entry level and mainstream models, manufacturers are bound to cut corners.

A digital volume control can be very good too (think Lyngdorf or TacT), but I really doubt those that are built into these low cost chips (which are the ones lower cost AVRs are bound to use).

[Stagea]

for purists maybe, that's a big no no... but it's always simpler to build a dedicated music setup imo.  

Agree! Simpler and often better-sounding (if properly setup), imho.

[JojoD818]

Traditional audio brands that happen to make AVRs (Cary, Arcam, NAD, Marantz, CA, etc.) still almost exclusively do things the old way (in fact many are processing-averse). Mainstream brands are indeed going for more and more integration, and doing things digitally is often just simpler and cheaper (though I think Yamaha and Denon still use analog attenuation chips exclusively... I'm not sure for how long).

Some older integrated chip designs like the WM8777 still allowed for analogue bypass and still included analogue master volume controls (all in a single chip). More common integrated codec chip designs (like those from Cirrus and lower-cost Wolfson chips like the WM8581) omit this and handle volume adjustments purely on the digital side. Implementing a purely analog bypass path on the latter types would mean off-chip circuitry (plus companion chips) and increased board space (you know how that sits with penny pinching accountants). With ever decreasing cost envelopes and ever increasing feature sets of mainstream AVRs for entry level and mainstream models, manufacturers are bound to cut corners.

A digital volume control can be very good too (think Lyngdorf or TacT), but I really doubt those that are built into these low cost chips (which are the ones lower cost AVRs are bound to use).

It is obvious that the path these manufacturers are going through will be less and less analog and more and more into digital. Large scale integration also makes room for more dsp and processing schemes which the HT market is always after.

However, my sentiments (same as Mark's I believe) is that these route is going to be more into the realm of HT rather than into purist's Audio system. So it will be less and less into Audio but more exciting stuff into HT as there will be more for it than Audio.

Agree! Simpler and often better-sounding (if properly setup), imho.

Yeah, it's the only solution I got left if I want to go pure Audio. Simple as it may seem, nothing beats a dedicated Audio setup now more than ever especially during the advent of more digital processing schemes.

[ATJr.]

Hi Sirs,

is it practical or even possible to use a yaqin cd3 tube buffer with my existing kenwood 7.1 av receiver? im planning to connect it to a cd player (in stereo mode) using rca.

i would want to achieve a "tube like" audio quality.. in a more affordable way.. is this possible? thanks in advance..

buffers are always cathode followers, 100% negative feedback, no 2nd harmonic distortion....

on the other hand, tube buffers have very high input impedance, very low output impedance, so what this means is that your source is not loaded by your buffer so much and so it is free to do its thing with minimal interaction from the buffer, this is good for mids and highs......
another benefit is the low output impedance, you buffer can drive your cables with ease.....

tube buffers are a good first step experience, but bear in mind that you are not yet really into tubes with buffers, it is like having your face into the door.....your body not yet fully inside....

[JojoD818]

buffers are always cathode followers, 100% negative feedback, no 2nd harmonic distortion....

I remember the x10d not being one. It's a couple of cascaded anode followers with lots of global feedback.

So it ain't always cathode followers, some schmuck always thinks of something different.

on the other hand, tube buffers have very high input impedance, very low output impedance, so what this means is that your source is not loaded by your buffer so much and so it is free to do its thing with minimal interaction from the buffer, this is good for mids and highs......
another benefit is the low output impedance, you buffer can drive your cables with ease.....

+1

Expertly defined.

tube buffers are a good first step experience, but bear in mind that you are not yet really into tubes with buffers, it is like having your face into the door.....your body not yet fully inside....

Masama daw yan namiminto... kaya tuloy po kayo... 

[markcrenz]

Masama daw yan namiminto... kaya tuloy po kayo... 

What's the difference between a tube buffer and a tube preamp? sino sa kanila ang mas malapit sa pinto, o medyo nakapasok na?

[JojoD818]

What's the difference between a tube buffer and a tube preamp? sino sa kanila ang mas malapit sa pinto, o medyo nakapasok na?

buffer has gain = ~1

preamp has gain = 10~20

It doesn't matter if it's tube, transistor, opamp, or digital, it's a standard definition.

Hhmmm... palagay ko yun preamp nakapasok na. Pero maski naman yun tube buffer pasok na din yun kasi nga masama yan namiminto eh. 

[Cjtjader]

What's the difference between a tube buffer and a tube preamp? sino sa kanila ang mas malapit sa pinto, o medyo nakapasok na?

Alam ko ay para sa impedance matching ng 2 components.

[JojoD818]

Alam ko ay para sa impedance matching ng 2 components.

OT:

Kumusta lakad niyo? Sarap ng kwentuhan sa Valero St hahaha! 

Andami lang distractions ano? 

[Cjtjader]

OT:

Kumusta lakad niyo? Sarap ng kwentuhan sa Valero St hahaha! 

Andami lang distractions ano? 

Ground loop at power strip ang suspects!.......sarap nga ...pero welcome naman sila bilang distractions!!

[JojoD818]

Ground loop at power strip ang suspects!.......sarap nga ...pero welcome naman sila bilang distractions!!

OT:

O sige ikaw na bahala diyan, I'm just a phone call away brader. 

Ako na muna bahala sa mga distractions ha... 

[Cjtjader]

OT:

O sige ikaw na bahala diyan, I'm just a phone call away brader. 

Ako na muna bahala sa mga distractions ha... 

Oks, Brader! 

[ATJr.]

jojo you are correct about the x10d, lots of open loop gain tamed by global negative feedack....
i had in mind those yaqin buffers that the TS asked....."yaqin cd3 tube buffer"