Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Paul S wrote:

This may also be a factor in the "randomness" capability, which is really only freedom of movement, and not "randomness", per se.

OK, is it “randomness” of “freedom of movement”, the question is not about juts semantics. Since Paul said I have been thinking about is and I have to admit those thought fascinate me. The “randomness” would imply the will of amplifier vs. “freedom of movement” would imply the transparency of amplifier to external source of pace randomness. It is very much not the same.

I feel Pail was wrong and I still would insist that it is not “freedom of movement” but randomness. I never experience in live music neither “freedom of movement” nor randomness, the pace of live music whatever it is and there is not reference in my mind to some kind of pace-setting framework. What I question a pace of live event I equation it in context of musical idea and the “program” of the piece. What I question a pace of reproduced muss invent then in addition to original performing pace I recognize the pace aberrations of playback. If so, and if we take the pace aberrations out of repentances of attention then we can see that the timing aberrations are not connected to the timing of original events and can’t be called “freedom of movement”. The “freedom of movement” implies high amplitude of obedience of aberrations to the original pace but the original pace doe not exist.

So, what we have here is not “freedom of movement” but rather a randomness of amplifier’s timing self-control. I think that this randomness comes with randominisation of error. It like when we have frequency-centric noise injected into sound then we recognize it as “harmonic problem” but if we have more or less white noise then we do not feel that the noise interact with sound. A good example is a LP record noise. It is random my nature then we play record and have no problem. However, if the record has scratch on one side and each turn of the record we have a click that come at the same “pace” then it annoys us tremendously…. Now pretend that an amplifier somehow might take this non-unsystematic click from this scratch and spread it appearance at random moments. Then we will me bother but the click much less as then the click will be not interacting with the pace of the plays musical material.

Romy the Cat wrote:

OK, here is an easy homework: how to randomize elections flow but do not create microscopic? The answer is actually contains in the question. The answer is one of the solutions that my first thing that I will be trying sometimes.

Now, in context of what I expressed in the first part of the post I am planning tonight to make some actual experiments with my single stags IDHT driver, trying to “randomized” the electrons flow, it is not truly randominisation but insertion of something soft of geometrical  errors. If it works (a big question!!!) then I will post explanation of how it was done. If it works it might be interesting to see what ease it might affect. It is very possible that it will destroy the tube itself, so I will dedicate one of my 6E6P as the Pavlovian Dog… If it does work then it is very interesting to see if the effect would be the similar of what I have experience with the DHT last week. On another side it all might open who knew can of worms and to alter the ways how tubes might be operating..

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site