Apple Review

Listening to music in a vacuum--or why some audiophiles love the sound of tube amplifiers

2008-01-03T14:30:00.005-08:00

Vacuum tubes are hot!(Credit: Steve Guttenberg)

It's like the difference in taste between a tomato you grew in your backyard or one of those plastic things at the supermarket, or frozen pizza vs. a slice fresh out of the oven in Little Italy. We're talking big differences here. And those are the sort of sensual pleasures high-end audio delivers compared to iPods and ear buds. Sure, the little buggers sound good enough, but if you really love music, don't you want to hear your tunes sound as good as they can?

I'm sitting here listening to the late British singer/songwriter Nick Drake, and his lines "Do you feel like a remnant of something that's passed?/Do you find things are moving a little too fast?" put the consumer electronics' current ball of confusion in perspective. If you've had enough of the never ending parade of formats: cassette, LP, CD, DVD-Audio, SACD, AAC, FLAC, Dolby Digital, Dolby TrueHD, DTS, DTS-ES, DTS 96/24, DTS Master Audio, Blu-ray, DVD, HD DVD, HDMI, HDMI, 1.1, HDMI 1.2, HDMI 1.3, HDMI 1.3a, and now HDMI 1.3b, you might be ready to drop out.

This little Darling 1626 amplifier that came to me from George Lenz of TubesUSA is the perfect antidote to that malaise. The amp is an all-vacuum tube design (no transistors) and hooked up to my Zu Audio Druid Mk IV speakers the sound is spectacularly beautiful. There, I said it, the "B" word, which is after all, why musicians seek out old Martin guitars and Steinway pianos. It's why some folks go for early analog Moog synthesizers. It's the sound baby!

The Darling 1626 in all its glory.(Credit: Steve Guttenberg)

It's the same deal with vacuum tube audio amplifiers, they somehow coax more natural sound from recordings than solid state or digital amplifiers do. The tone feels richer, warmer, sweeter, more like the way instruments sound in real life. My recordings take on a dimensional solidity, and vocals sound distinctly more flesh and blood human. Tubes also look really cool; sure, they have their followers here in the land of Coca Cola, but European and Asian audiophiles are even more devout believers.

The Darling 1626 amplifier goes for $2,500, but this amplifier wasn't born in a factory; Lenz only builds one when he has a buyer. He imports all sorts of tubes and not only tests each one, he actually takes the time to listen to them as well! He also sells exotic Japanese amps, like the Kurashima 2A3 integrated amplifier ($4,995) that pumps out four (4) watts per channel, double the juice of the Darling, but since my Zu speakers are extremely efficient, they can sing with a couple of watts. These handmade amplifiers aren't cheap, but the pleasures of living with handcrafted designs are a big part of their appeal. The people like Lenz who build these things do it for the love of it, and that's a rare commodity in the twenty first century. The TubesUSA Web site is loaded with great info, especially for the hard-core DIY (do it yourself) audiophile crowd.

'Star Trek' horn is enough to rile aliens

2008-01-03T14:30:00.003-08:00

(Credit: Amazon)

In case anyone was wondering, the ringtone craze is officially out of control. Well past their cell-phone roots, custom tunes for home land lines are just one example of a phenomenon that has even extended to doorbells. But its application in car horns are clearly the worst of the bunch.

And accessories such as the "Wolo 485 Star Trek Air Horn," we fear, may indicate that the trend is gaining in popularity. For better or worse, this device blares only one tune with its five air trumpets--the theme from the final frontier--similar to the custom old-school horns that played the likes of the opening notes of The Godfather theme.

Given universal obession with all things Star Trek, however, the Wolo 485 has the potential to go where no horn has gone before--at 118 decibels the whole way, according to Geek Alerts. If alien life forms were to launch an attack in retaliation, their actions would be perfectly justified.

Washington Post sticks by RIAA story despite evidence it goofed

2008-01-03T14:30:00.001-08:00

It's late on Wednesday evening and the Washington Post has yet to correct a story that accused the recording industry of trying to paint law-abiding music fans as criminals.

But the paper should make things right and soon.

Marc Fisher, a Post columnist, wrote on Sunday that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) asserted in a legal brief that anyone who copies music from a CD onto their computer is a thief. The document, filed last month, was part of the RIAA's copyright suit against Jeffrey Howell, an Arizona resident accused of illegal file sharing.

Quoting from the brief, Fisher wrote that the RIAA had argued that MP3 files created from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" and violate the law. If it were true, the move would represent a major shift in strategy by the RIAA, which typically hasn't challenged an individual's right to copy CDs for personal use.

The problem with the Fisher's story is that nowhere in the RIAA's brief does the group call someone a criminal for simply copying music onto a computer. Throughout the 21-page brief, the recording industry defines what it considers to be illegal behavior and it boils down to this: creating digital recordings from CDs and then uploading them to file-sharing networks.

A sentence on page 15 of the brief clearly spells out the RIAA's position: "Once (Howell) converted plaintiff's recording into the compressed MP3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiff." "Rather than suing its customers and slamming reporters, the RIAA might better spend its energies focusing on winning back the trust of an alienated consumer base." --Marc Fisher, columnist

The key words there are "shared folder" and it's an important distinction. It means that before the RIAA considers someone a criminal, a person has to at least appear to be distributing music.

The Post story, which followed similar pieces in Ars Technica and Wired.com, has spurred scores of other media outlets to repeat the paper's erroneous assertion. Ironically, even typically anti-RIAA blogs, such as Engadget, Gizmodo and TechDirt have jumped in on the side of the RIAA.

"The Washington Post story is wrong," said Jonathan Lamy, an RIAA spokesman. "As numerous commentators have since discovered after taking the time to read our brief, the record companies did not allege that ripping a lawfully acquired CD to a computer or transferring a copy to an MP3 player is infringement. This case is about the illegal distribution of copyrighted songs on a peer-to-peer network, not making copies of legally acquired music for personal use."

After reading Lamy's statement, Fisher didn't back down.

He responded in an e-mail to CNET News.com: "The bottom line is that there is a disconnect between RIAA's publicly stated policy that making a personal copy of a CD is ok and the theory advanced by its lawyers that in fact, transferring music to your computer is an unauthorized act."

He took one more shot before signing off: "Rather than suing its customers and slamming reporters, the RIAA might better spend its energies focusing on winning back the trust of an alienated consumer base."

Still, Fisher received little support from respected and independent copyright experts. William Patry, the copyright guru at Google--not exactly known as a lackey for copyright holders--wrote on his blog that the RIAA is being "unfairly maligned" in the Post story.

Patry does, however, caution that recent statements made by the RIAA and included in Fisher's story reflect the group's growing tendency to use language as a means of control.

Fisher quoted Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, who testified recently in court that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song."

Patry disagreed.

"This new rhetoric of 'everything anyone does without (RIAA) permission is stealing' is well worth noting and well worth challenging at every occasion," Patry wrote. "It is the rhetoric of copyright as an ancient property right, permitting copyright owners to control all uses as a natural right; the converse is that everyone else is an immoral thief."

Greg Sandoval is a former Washington Post staff writer.

Radiohead on iTunes? Yup

2008-01-03T11:38:00.001-08:00

Filed under: iTunes

As many of you (judging by the number of e-mail tips we have received) know, the latest Radiohead album, "In Rainbows" is now available on iTunes. The album is $9.99 in the US and released via iTunes Plus, meaning the files are DRM free. This is the first Radiohead album to appear on iTunes (though fans will note that frontman, Thom Yorke's solo album, "The Eraser," has been on iTunes since its debut in 2006), where Radiohead has remained one of an ever-shrinking group of high profile artists not to list their catalog with the digital service.

Previously, "In Rainbows" was available as a free or "pay what you want" download directly from the band. While the success of this promotion has been debated, it was always clearly devised as a promotion nonetheless. Shortly before launching the "In Rainbows" download promotion/experiment, Radiohead announced that the record, at that time, would not be released via iTunes. So what has changed? Well, the biggest change is that Radiohead is no longer with EMI. Digital sales have long been a point of contention between the band and their former label (and it is a primary reason the back catalog is not on iTunes and will probably not be on iTunes in the foreseeable future), now that the band has control over its own music and licensing terms (and is releasing the album via independent labels online and in retail stores), iTunes has become a viable distribution method.

To make it even more clear: Radiohead decided to split from their large record label, in order to build-up hype for the album's official charting release, they did the free/pay-what-you-want online promotion. Now that the album has been officially released (so that it can be tracked by SoundScan and other technologies), it is being made available through both online and retail outlets. For instance, the album is also available at Amazon.com's DRM-free MP3 store for $7.99 US. Amazon also carries the majority of the EMI back-catalog (excluding "Kid A," for reasons unclear to me), which I assume is the result of differing contracts between the two digital services.

Thanks to everyone who sent this in.

Apple Review

Listening to music in a vacuum--or why some audiophiles love the sound of tube amplifiers

'Star Trek' horn is enough to rile aliens

Washington Post sticks by RIAA story despite evidence it goofed

Radiohead on iTunes? Yup

Gift ideas for your dysfunctional boss

BenQ shares SideShow spotlight

Apple developing dynamic keyboard

Mac 101: Keyboard text selection

MacHeist 2 bundle will include Pixelmator

QuickShareIt 2.0

Mark/Space ships Missing Sync for iPhone

Widget Watch: HD Radio

More iChat Effects

Pharos brings GPS to digital cameras

HP bows updated MediaSmart TVs

Rumor places Jay-Z and Apple in record label deal

JVC looks to the trees for latest earbud design

LG.Philips plans supersized touch screens

HP kicks off CES season with two (sort of) new laptops

Dell shrinks down the Inspiron 1525

Dymo's colorful spinmaster

Home ringtones may not be music to your ears

A roadmap for ending the high-def format quagmire

Mixer attachment stops senseless spatula death

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for iPod Games

HP introduces LCDs with improved contrast

HP adds anti-virus, other features to MediaSmart Server

HP MediaSmart Receiver x280N: set-top Media Center Extender

Bye Bye Wavebirdie

Calling Mac Devs: Audacity needs your help!

HP announces complete range of new desktops

Coming soon: A notebook with a terabyte

Songbird's growing pains

A spy bot that's begging to be caught

Apple presenting "secret" at Final Cut meet; Radiohead on iTunes

Lenovo launches three IdeaPad laptops

A reverse engineer finds Kindle's hidden features

Stereo Bluetooth headset cuts the cord for $57.99

Digital camera goggles let you shoot underwater, look like a pod racer

Will Apple Rescue Intel's Silverthorne?

Air France to begin study of inflight cell phone use

The history of the Atari 2600

Jammie Thomas loses lawyer but avoids paying RIAA's legal fees

New Year's tech resolutions

Is the 'I can't hear the difference' myth killing the speaker business?

Transmit: An exhaustive review

HierarchicalDock 1.2 is ready to go

Resolve to organize: Together 2.0.4

Lenovo's Olympic USB drive is well short of a 10

Green or not, this car is ugly in any color

Wizz away with plasma "enhancement"

Answer all your Macworld questions with Macworld Bound

TUAW Talkcast #21: Should Auld Acquaintance...

Mini-review of Mac OS X: The Missing Manual, Leopard Edition

Apple may offer external optical drive with new sub-notebook

MsgFiler 2.0.1 is ready

Whiskipedia launches, and it's exactly what you think it is

iTunesFS: your music in Finder

BusySync updated to version 1.5

iCab 4.0

Macsimum News: Apple's hits and misses in '07

Net stats place Mac user share at 7.3 percent in December

New Year's resolutions: Mac style

Leopard Tweaking Guide

Machines at War: light RTS

Software that's ready for takeoff in 2008

Axiotron's ModBook now shipping

Mac Automation: saving Automator workflows

OnyX 1.9

Widget Watch: Showcase your TiVo's content on your Mac

Net Applications: Macs hit a record OS share in December, iPhone up 33%

Tracking the Keynote Index Fund

Waiting for Pacemaker

Gear Live answers iPhone 1.1.3 questions

TUAW wishes you a shiny, bright New Year

Ask TUAW: Protecting files, Remoteless Front Row, Boot problems, and more

iPhone Doom updated, close to playable

Five ways you can make life easier for new Mac users

Beta Beat: Simple sync with Changes