A $500 upgrade that is almost imperceptible and requires a full spectrum of additional hardware to appreciate in any capacity really exemplifies the "audiophile" culture.
That's pretty much what it is... If you blind A B test you usually can't tell the difference between "quality" and "top of the line, fully engineered for audio quality". For the potentially incoming comments, how many people have a C64 hooked up to a fully analog amplifier? Probably not many... And this is a computer, released in the era of transistors. It's sound profile is what makes sid chip tunes sound the way they do, changing that is not an improvement in my opinion, that's never how it was used. (Edited for spelling)
I didn't think it was imperceptible at all and I'm not in any way an audiophile. There was a bit of fuzziness to the original recording that was simply not there on the nutube recording. Is that worth $500? hell no. but I could hear a difference.
Dave, about the sound comparison, if you take the two recordings, and line them up 100% in a DAW or audio editor, and then reverse the polarity on one of the tracks and then play both tracks simultaneously, they should cancel each other out completely - if the tracks are identical. If not, you would be able to hear ONLY the difference between the two tracks. Then you can save it as a new track and import it back in the DAW, if you want to compare the waveforms.
So, I'm curious... is the SID chip itself precise enough that any two renditions of the same tune would ever come out exactly the same (even when played on the same hardware)?
Because what you want to actually remove is noise I think, and do correct me if I am wrong, best way to do it actually record several recordings on each setup. Do the track comparison described by KDN above, and see which setup has the most divination between recordings. Yes. You compare the same setup with itself. That is a fair bit of work. But that is if you are interested in the noise reduction part. Other elements may also have an impact on the sound. Like getting a softer or harsher sound. But those difference I would say is more of a subjective quality. While consistency of playback is more of an objective quality.
I'll try to make it clear. Vacuum tube doesn't improve sound. It's actually distorts sound. Vacuum tubes modulate... They add some harmonics to sound, even harmonics to be precise. But unlike odd harmonics even harmonics somehow (it may be related to human nature) convincing us that it sounds good. You can get that "improved" sound by connecting any source (analog or digital) to tube amp or even tube amp emulator.
This is why people like tubes so much. They color the sound in a way that is technically "wrong", but sounds better to some people because tube amplification makes the sound "warmer". You can hear this even when the audio is converted to a lossy digital format. If you use a lossless format at a high enough bit depth and sample rate (44100Hz @ 16 bit, for example), the resulting waveform that comes out of your speakers is *identical* to an analog source. Which is why the whole analog vs digital argument for audio is pointless. The point I'm making is that tube amplified audio will still sound the same, even if converted to digital (so long as you use a lossless format like WAV or FLAC, neither of which UA-cam uses, in order to save bandwidth).
@Dr. Octogon Yes they do, but also there could be different stages in a signal chain that introduces different kinds of distortion. Take a guitar for example, it is common (in metal music) to use an overdrive pedal like the Ibaneze "Tube screamer" which mostly adds distortion to the peaks of the signal, and then goes into a guitar amp that does have a pre-amp (where most of the raw thick distortion is added) and then the output amp stage which compresses the sound and adds the tube saturation. So, one can layer the distortions with a pleasing result. Not sure though if the EVO64 people managed to do this or not.
Regarding vinyl… yes, I reduce a lot of stuff before sending off to the plant. For instance I sum the bass frequencies to mono below 100 Hz and I roll off a lot of the high frequencies from around 10 kHz and up. Also, the intensity is compressed all over to reduce most of the spikes. Vinyl is often pretty much lower quality compared to Chrome tape like the Attack of the Petscii Robots is… or even better, the 24 bit 44.1 kHz digital masters that people get as downloads. So vinyl… yes it gives a certain analog feel and even «warmth», but it is inferior in most ways nowadays. 🤷🏼♂️😄
I think it'd be best to accept that there are people who just like the sound of Vinyl for whatever reasons, that's why I'm avoiding any kind of "technical" discussions, because you can't really discuss about personal preferences imho. And technically the answer is very clear imho as you (and alot of others) have pointed out.
I totally agree where we're talking about New vinyl - where I have found a better result from vinyl certainly compared to CD is older stuff (70s/80s) where the CD was mastered badly. Unfortunately this seems to be a major issue on a lot of stuff. A well mastered CD (without getting into Hi-Res audio) can sound better than vinyl, but on a lot of stuff the vinyl beats it because it was mastered by people who knew what they were doing and not out to 'get it on CD and flog it'. And there's something romantic about vinyl, and it's not all sound - it's nice to know that on earlier stuff it's a direct analog representation of what actually took place in the studio - but I appreciate that modern and remastered stuff negates this. David's view here is spot on with the tube amp - maybe it's better/preferable, but is it worth $500? If it makes you feel fuzzy inside knowing it's there and $500 isn't a lot to you then maybe... I won't be buying it ;-)
In that first audio section, I could clearly hear A difference between the original and the valve version; in the next section, not so much. I'd be hard-pushed to say that the valve audio was better though - part of the charm of the 8-bit computers is the raw-sounding audio.
But keep in mind that this was comparing the original stock C64 and the NUTUBE64 output from the Evolution64, I wish the standard ("transistor") output from the Evolution64 would have also been included. So the difference you heard is probably due to the very different circuitry and filtering between the stock C64 from the 80s and the Evolution64.
It didn't sound better to me either, just sounded like there was a little more bass. Which is probably just due to amplification more than anything. There was no comparison done with the default output of the new board, only the original C64 output (which is 40 years old at this point).
You are correct that the NuTube is a VFD - that's the exact technology they used to create it. The two little rectangles not only light up when the tube is powered (seen at 4:43), they vary in intensity reflecting the signal that's being supplied. If you're curious, the tube itself is a twin triode configuration, with a directly heated cathode. A directly heated cathode is the typical arrangement for a VFD. I think that's also why the rectangles vary in intensity - in an indirectly heated arrangement, the filament just receives a set voltage.
@@frankowalker4662 boil tubes and VFD down… they're glass-encased with a vacuum pulled with emitters/cathodes/filaments/plates etc. If the VFD replicates the same thing a tube can do, who cares what shape it is?? It is a gimmick however in this case, even if full sized tubes were used.
@@frankowalker4662 they are actually valves, they're just not built in the traditional arrangement of a valve. Just like Nuvistors and Subminiature tubes are still valves despite not looking like a 300B. Are they flashy with the phospher that lights up? Yeah, but so are magic eye tubes (and even those you could use as a preamp). They're neat options that unfortunately haven't caught up, but sound amazing for guitar. Now, are they a gimmick in audiophile gear? ABSOLUTELY. Tubes ARE gimmicky. They're way more nonlinear than transistors, noisier and less reliable too. But that's not the charm behind them. The charm is seeing their filaments light up, physically getting hot, and sometimes even having a purple-y blue-ish cloud of electrons build up inside them. It's the connection with what was seen as cutting edge tech back then, and it still working today, that is the gimmick. Kinda like owning a muscle car. It's not efficient, it's loud, and it's environmentally horrible to run them, but damn are they a great collection of engineering achievements coming together into a beautiful piece of gear. It's the kinda thing you throw in there for fun, IMO.
@@Okurka. Emulators are great, and they also serve a purpose, but having accurate hardware (especially new hardware rather than antique chips) fills gaps and complements emulators in important ways. It's a healthy system that has both.
Thing is, replacement boards like this are among the least useful such projects, because what's really in dwindling supply are the chips themselves. If anything, spare boards (and cases) should be getting _easier_ to find because of all the computers whose chips have died.
@@stevethepocket Very true. The chips (and the same for the TIA chip in the Atari, as I understand it) are really crucial and I hope something's being done to RE and rebuild them at some point. We're going to need them more and more to preserve these systems.
04:02 This is when 8-Bit guy is at his absolute best, the music kicks in and we know that things are about to go down in an educational and entertaining way
Dual Sid setups are awesome. I love my FPGASID in "pseudo stereo" mode. It uses Voices 1 & 2 on the left channel, then Voices 2 & 3 on the right, creating a stereo effect. Makes 1983 games pretty amazing. (It'll do full stereo as well, but for existing games, the pseudo does the trick)
@@FRobot-rx4kz Mine were made by Aries Electronics - I got them because the normal ones wouldn't fit where I needed them, and these are extremely compact even flush to a bypass capacitor. You can get them on Mouser and Digikey, both for a princely sum ;)
There is a problem with these ARIES low profile ZIF sockets. When you decide to use SID recreations with machined round pins, it makes it almost impossible to close the ZIF lever because of the machine pin diameter. Do yourselves a favor and use the regular ZIF socks and you won't have any issues. many recreations use these machine pins, not just the SID chips. Jameco electronics sells these at very good prices at around $13 or $14 USD so to me, that is cheap considering what folks are charging things these days.
I did notice that the evo board had slightly better lower frequencies, and that’s about it. The problem with audio is that you have to spend quite a bit of money to get a very slight increase in sound quality and you have to spend that money on the equipment it’s being playing from and whatever actually has the music on it (a record, a digital file, or whatever else) and then you just get stuck in this endless loop where you keep spending more and more money to get a very slight or even non existent increase in quality. And to be honest for the 8 bit music that the C64 would be making it really just isn’t noticeable, you could spend $10K on an amplifier it really isn’t going to matter. For most people, there is no difference in sound quality between a transistor amplifier and a tube amplifier. But there are always a few people who claim to think a tube amp sounds better and it’s hard to tell if they actually hear a difference or if it’s just placebo because they spent 10 times what a transistor amp costs.
1:45 That's exactly correct. NuTubes are repurposed/reengineered VFDs used to give vacuum tube characteristics like sag to audio circuits without requiring the excessive power draw of 100+ year old technology. They're most common use is in the Vox MV line of guitar amplifiers and a certain variant of the Ibanez Tube Screamer overdrive pedal Listening to the demo, there's a minor EQ difference likely caused by the amplifier circuitry and NOT the NuTube. it's an incredibly small difference and charging $500 for an upgraded amplifier for a 40 year old 3 voice synth is simply end users getting fleeced by bad faith promises. For reference, i'm listening on Beyerdynamic DT770s plugged into an Audient iD14 Mk1 interface
I got a nutube in my Korg Volca NuBass, wich is a 303 like acid synth. The nutube is used in the oscillator and suboscillator drive. Sounds quite pleasing.
I think that the nutube sounded marginally better but it really is an audiophile feature from the start. It's just impossible to convey how much difference those two have over a youtube video.
My theory for your inverted audio output: the Nu Tube is a pair of triodes and I suspect it is being used as an low input impedance inverting amplifier because that's the easiest way to make a low noise amplifier with a single triode (or transistor, works roughly the same way). There are two triodes so one of these simple class A amplifiers for each of left and right output.
They even don't thinked about non-inverting amp circuit (Actually just need to connect to a different pin and have one another resistor to do that).What more,they sounds like oversaturated😂.
Techmoan used an audacity feature to combine the two tracks (one has to be inverted as well) and if there would be any quality improvement, there would have been a signal. If not, they would have been identical and x - -x would still be 0.
I love your video's intro. It just smacks of something good is about to happen. Never having owned a C64, I'm a ZX Spectrum kind of guy, i find these videos really interesting and informative. Keep them coming.
This is a fair assessment. $500 is simply the price of these types audio devices...but to match it up with the most important feature of the C64 is just amazing. Expensive?...yeah...insane? ... definitely! and I love it!
I would have believed it! I loved my C64 well past its prime. I would go to yardsales specifically for Commodore magazines so I could enter the code and feel like a programmer!
I watched that episode of Retro Recipes and he was in ecstasy at this board. He also designed, fund raised, and got manufactured the clone keys for an authentic keyboard.
Regarding the audio comparison: the thing to do here is to subtract one signal from the other so that all that's left is the difference. That will very quickly tell you if the valve-based amplifier is actually contributing much, and how (e.g. if it's producing more high-frequency sound you'll get high-frequency noise). Ideally, the result will be very quiet, indicating that there's very little difference between the two.
Strange, the audio difference was fairly clear to me. (Might be because I have a great soundcard and soundsystem hooked up to my pc though...) The Nutube output seemed like it had a broader sound-stage, slightly less distorted notes, and a "warmer/deeper" sound. Of course, I might be imagining the whole thing. In any case, it really isn't worth 500 bucks extra for an improvement that small, even for an audiophile.
I do think I heard a *slight* difference in quality for the vacuum tube amp vs the other system. If I had to describe it, I'd say that the non-tube one sounded slightly tinnier, but only on the first one.
I noticed a huge difference in the audio from the nutube, it's kind of weird to me that other people didn't notice the massive difference. It's almost like listening to a different midi library.. almost. That said, you(8BitGuy) hit the nail on the head. Even if it sounds better, it doesn't sound $500 better. And that's one of those things I'm constantly asking myself when I want something. I want this or that, but I don't $$$ want it. An SBC for example, I want a Radxa Zero, but I don't $80 want it.
This is the sort of project that always piques my interest on a technical level, but then (inevitably, due to what goes into it, NOT overpricing, I think) prices itself waaaay outside my budget. Thanks for making a video about it! I have to admit, BTW, that with all the Commodore 64 / 128 / etc. videos you've made over the years, I had assumed that you probably had a massive stockpile of C64 IC's in your workshop, LOL. Apparently, "assuming" strikes again!
Yeah, to me it looks like the designers had fun designing it and trying to throw everything at it just for fun, in a "we can make this work" style. I think it's really cool, even though I'd take original hardware.
I could tell the difference between the standard SID and NuTube versions of the music (in this video). Insofar as, I reckon I could identify them in an A-B test. I think the NuTube version definitely sounded better. But you're correct to say they were very similar and the $500 option won't sell a lot of copies. I would still like to hear some of my own tunes through it on my studio speakers 😀
11:46 This one was the clearest difference to me, the nutune sounds fatter, like it has a ring to it. From what I recall that is additional harmonics that should be considered distortion but people like it (it does sound warmer). Can also do that with a software filter of course, which is typically the approach I prefer because then you can color sound whenever and however you want. But hey, to each their own.
Hi there. I`m Stefano - . the initiator of the project, designer of the schematic, and the producer of the boards. The nutube DOES sound different, but unfortunately the compressed/transistorized version of the clip does not reproduce that difference. Tubes (and JFETs) have a different proportion of odd vs even distorsion than transistors (or mosfet). In simple words, even-distorted sounds good. Odd-distorted sounds bad. In the nutube64 device, there are two small trimmers to make the "even" distorsion positive or negative. Once the odd distortion is minimized at the working point , biasing the grids one side you will get more "ambient", while on the other side you get more "crystalline". The personal feeling about the cost of the object is subjective so it does not require comments: the nutube64 is an add-on board, so the old-C64 board can be run without it, stereo, with the usual transistorized output, and with all the features that have been shown in this and other videos. W.R.T the original SID commodore output. It is an emitter follower with a gigantic base swing introducing a lot of non-linear logarithmic distortion. The original C64 developers chose this solution because it was quick and cheap. Perfectly fine. A better design could have been possible, but the C64 would have been more expensive, so that was ok: market penetration - not quality - was the priority. What it is done is done. The old C64 bypass electrolytic capacitor is most likely dry so its ESR is all over the place. My board has also a lot of other features to improve quality and overall I`m quite satisfied. Martin, please send an email to the evo64 guys. You will get yours, listen with your studio speakers, play with different grid-bias and enjoy your beautiful tunes.
Man, my heart stopped when I saw you insert the bottom chips upside down, and then turned the power on; I was so worried there would be damage to your VIC II chip. I'm glad it survived! And yes, if they're gonna design a board like that... they need clear indicators. That's just ridiculous.
@@The8BitGuy I'm not really a trekkie either, but I have watched all of the TV shows, and qapla' is said frequently enough that it was immediately recognizable to me. Was just an interesting and entertaining easter egg when you were showing off the PCB.. Got an audible chuckle out of me. PCB designers showing off their nerdy sense of humor. If I had thought of it, I'd have done the same lol
This somewhat reminds me of the ultra high graphics settings in new games, yes, they look better in comparisons, but if you're actually focusing on the game itself high or even medium typically would look the same
What a Time to be alive when you can build a brand new C64 from all new parts! I like the flexibility of this board that you can build a brand new system, or use original C64 chips.
If you count FPGA. And if you count FPGA, get an Ultimate64 instead. If you want an "authentic" C64 then it can't be built from new parts because new parts don't exist to replace the old ones. If you have a bad board, buy a replacement C64. if you want a clean board with reclaimed chips you can cheaply buy a brand new PCB.
@@espressomatic You will be able to build a true new C64 as soon as the CIA chips are made available, it's explained in the Perifrastic's video. Unless you are really picky about what counts as a replacement.
I think the target market is not the average joe out there but someone that wants a newish and hopped up C64. You would be shocked at how much ppl spend to Mod their cars, lol. -Mark.
Again, great video!!! Keep it up!!! I honestly tought the C128's video looked better, but youtube compression can interfere. Also, wouldn't a Retrotink upscaler help with better video capturing? You could use an HDMI capture device...
I love projects like this! It’s important to keep old computers working and they’re awesome to play with. While I do hear a big difference with the NuTube (it sounds a lot clearer imho, especially the highs), it’s definitely not worth the money as far as I can tell from a highly compressed UA-cam video.
One thing I did notice in the first audio section, is that the real C64 seemed a bit sharper sounding, with the nutube reducing those peaks, but maybe the audiophiles can help me figure out what that means
It's hard to say for sure without putting the audio thorugh a frequency analyzer, but I'd expect the higher quality audio system gets a bit more lows through, effectively reducing overall emphasis on high "sharp" tones. Tubes also add some distortion of their own, which tends to subjectively round out the sound a bit.
The new chip sound is way smoother. I always loved the scratchy sound of the original C64 but I can def hear a difference. Would love to see a video with more game music like R-type, Skate or Die, Outrun. Wizzball but most of all Nemesis The Warlock. Love those tunes. Great video!
Great review as always - I am on the preorder list for the basic stuff, I was really hoping the NuTube would be something fantastic, but it just seems like a waste of money for 99% of the people. :( I have a keyboard and case waiting for this! :)
I think that the issue is that, while valves can sound really good, just having a valve in a circuit doesn't make the circuit good by being there. Couple that with the component not being a valve that's intended for audio amplification and you're not really going to have an easy time recreating the same qualities that you'd get from a high end audio product unless you have some very good engineers designing the circuit. You'd probably get similar, if not superior, valve emulation from using a JFET-based circuit (which would likely be considerably cheaper as well). This is of course somewhat of a moot point given that the waveform that's being fed into it isn't particularly complex. The SID chip is very musical in its own right but it's got hard limits when it comes to the actual sophistication of the sound as compared to a record. If you're comparing the two amps you're probably going to need to hook them up to something that's outputting a high fidelity recording made in a studio to really identify much in the way of difference between the two, as that would give a better idea of the difference in response between the two designs
One thong about a Korg Nutube - it's made by cooaboration of Korg and Itron Noritake factory - possibly the biggest VFD display factory. It uses some of VFD technology and even has glowing spots, but used mainly as double triode amplificator. I have one in my mobile DAP (battery life up to 6 hours at best LOL) and it really changes the sound compared to regular semiconductor amplification modules.
I can definitely hear the difference without and with the NuTube. The NuTube has more of a scooped sound. I would be hard pressed to say which I prefer without using it for many hours. Definitely not worth $500 for most people. It is interesting though and I would pay the add on price if it was much cheaper... like maybe $100-$150. I could see how this would appeal to folks who use the C64 in music creation. I will add that I don't think the development of the NuTube add-on is dumb idea. I think it is an awesome idea.
I work with audio and music and I could clearly hear the difference too. I could also see that the valve-processed waveform was smoother with fewer spikes. Probably better value than that $500 add on would be an external on valve amplifier such as a headphone amp that could be used with lots of devices.
My friend has a dual SID setup on his C-64. It’s a small board that has two sockets for two SID chips, which is then plugged into the socket where the original chip installs in. His setup consists of two ARMSIDs, one as a 6581 and one as a 8580, and wiring that routes to the outside with the audio outputs.
Five hundred dollars? Hoo man, not a ghost of a chance. It was nice seeing another video from you, though! You and Lon are like the next generation of TechTV.
I think you should heatsink that VIC-II. They run pretty hot and is normally dissipated through the metal housing on the original board…a VIC-II on this board might not run long without some fins.
Thanks Dave! Interesting video! I can DEFINITELY hear the difference in sound - it is in the accuracy of the attack and the overall smoothness of the sound. The note decay seems MUCH more realistic. (As to digital vs. analog - meh. If you sample high enough you're OK. My digital piano is just fine.)
The Nu-Tube is a triode-type tube which creates a 180 degree phase shift at each amplification stage due to it being a voltage controlled current source. When the control voltage increases, the output current increases, which reduces the voltage at the plate if a normal series resistor and plate coupling capacitor are used, which is what I suspect.
I personally was able to hear a widened soundstage and slightly cleaner and brighter profile with the NuTube upgrade. If I had the money, I'd buy one with all the upgrades! Hopefully at some point I'll be able to.
1) It's pretty. 2) It works. 3) It's $300, plus you find the main chips. 4) The video is obviously better if you have a good monitor like the 1084. If you have to use a TV or going thru an NTSC (or even some S-Video) converters, you will have a hard time seeing the difference. 5) The vacuum tube audio signal is inverted. However, this might only matter if you are summing this output with the output of a real C-64, and probably not only then. The human ear can't hear the difference between speaker polarities, unless you have intermodulation between multiple speakers. 6) The vacuum tube audio sounded notably different to me, it seems to have more highs. You could see that in the capture waveform too. Whether more highs is a good or bad thing may depend on the audio you are playing. Whether the marginal improvement is worth any money at all to you depends on your desires. Audiophiles would like it, because for them More Money = Better. Overall, it's pretty, it works, it is somewhat expensive, and it sounds and looks slightly better/different from the original. That would make it worthwhile for some people, and not so for others. It would have been interesting to hear a capture from the non-vacuum tube audio to compare. The amount of highs basically depends on the value of a cap and a resistor, so it might have more highs also. Is there a pink noise or white noise generator for the C64? Capturing the output of that and using an RTA to get an envelope of the audio output on this and a C64 would be interesting.
I could definitely hear a difference on the sound test between SID and NuTube. To me, the NuTube had more high frequency sounds, but that actually made it sound a little bit harsher to my ears. Granted I'm just sitting here with desktop speakers and the video isn't that loud, but the difference was notable to me. I'd be interested in seeing a very close up shot of the waveform, especially the peaks, to see how they might differ.
In the intro of the Giana theme I hear quite a difference, but that could be due to SID tolerances. Transistor amplifiers don't add or take away to/from sound like tubes do (at least not intentionally). Whatever the tube adds will still be there if you further "process" it with transistor amps or digitally.
Vinyl vs digital audio is like a CRT vs LCD panel. The vinyl & CRT smoothens the signal and makes it look more natural and not so digital and 100% perfect. I think it's about the saturation, the slight artifacts and distortions.
There's definitely a difference in the audio recordings you made. The tube seems to have a slightly more full sound profile, but honestly I couldn't say one sounds significantly better than the other, they're just a tad different is all. Like you said there's recording and youtube compression to deal with, but I think with such simplistic wave forms out of the SID it really wouldn't matter much anyways.
On the issue of audio quality: there are two ways to look at audio: subjectively and objectively. The objective aspects are things you can measure such as loudness, clipping, distortions, frequency response, jitter, etc. On the subjective side, its as complex as the human mind is. Outside of obvious objective issues (eg. too distorted, not loud enough etc) the subjective stuff, aka "which sounds better?", is not something that can be objectively measured. Hence there is no right or wrong. It's personal taste and every person is going to have a different opinion. All you can do is what you did and give you opinion. But, it's vital to understnand that when speaking subjectively in terms of preference, there is no right and wrong and every opinion is valid. There is no objective data in subjective analysis unless you are doing a controlled study with a large sample set.
I think audiophiliation in this case or maybe other cases as well is mostly a self inflictive phenomenon but there is a reason for it as the matter of intellectual connection to the phenomenon its the human ambition and willing for transcendental abstraction we like to shift from more analogue waves to digital ones and vice versa all over .
I'm still using a Dazzle DC90 too! I've been converting what's left of my VHS collection to digital for years and years (and years) 😮💨 on my Win XP 64 laptop. Nice to see Impossible Mission again. "Stay Forever".
The tube amp sounds more buzzing/distorted. Maybe there is a bit more low end but it is difficult to say if it is just the difference in volume between the two. Perhaps even a bit muffled / lacking high end, but can't tell for sure using TV speakers. I think I prefer the original sound to be honest. The tube amp definitely colors the sound in a way that is audible even here on UA-cam, but whether you or anyone else notices or cares is a completely different story. I would not have noticed myself just a couple of years ago, before I started recording music myself.
Audio professional opinion. The nutube is about adding saturation (distortion) nothing to do with the integrity of an analog chain. This saturation is basically addition of harmonics that can sound nice and will be “even order” in a tube/valve so it’ll sound “in tune” with the source material. I wouldn’t bother myself but it’s not about analog signal path purity. Unless you want a really cool distortion tool in your computer that can be controlled for music creation maybe🤷♂️ But I wouldn’t get it
I'm gonna say not to the Nutube upgrade as I could not hear much of a difference, but the dual SID demos really are awesome, and there are even some quad SID setups out there using the rare HARDSID PCI Card that have produced some really cool music.
Funnily enough, I used to play C64 sound through a tube amp back in the day... It was just an old "pull" out of a stereo/record console though. A bit cheaper than $500 and it actually did drive the speakers via output tubes. If one really wants to hear the "tube sound" then that s the better way to do it.. the distortion is from the combination of the output tubes and the transformer. :/
The output transformer of traditional tube amplifiers do add something to the sound, but otherwise a vacuum tube is just like a FET - it's not supposed to "tubify" the sound, it's an electronic amplifying device just like any other field-effect transistor.
A $500 upgrade that is almost imperceptible and requires a full spectrum of additional hardware to appreciate in any capacity really exemplifies the "audiophile" culture.
I'm waiting for an audiophile blockchain powered AI that is funded by an MLM scheme.
That's pretty much what it is...
If you blind A B test you usually can't tell the difference between "quality" and "top of the line, fully engineered for audio quality".
For the potentially incoming comments, how many people have a C64 hooked up to a fully analog amplifier? Probably not many... And this is a computer, released in the era of transistors. It's sound profile is what makes sid chip tunes sound the way they do, changing that is not an improvement in my opinion, that's never how it was used.
(Edited for spelling)
But this VFD style amplifier tube is awesome :)
I didn't think it was imperceptible at all and I'm not in any way an audiophile. There was a bit of fuzziness to the original recording that was simply not there on the nutube recording.
Is that worth $500? hell no. but I could hear a difference.
I listen to good old mp3 on my airpod pro and couldn't be happier.
Dave, about the sound comparison, if you take the two recordings, and line them up 100% in a DAW or audio editor, and then reverse the polarity on one of the tracks and then play both tracks simultaneously, they should cancel each other out completely - if the tracks are identical. If not, you would be able to hear ONLY the difference between the two tracks. Then you can save it as a new track and import it back in the DAW, if you want to compare the waveforms.
So, I'm curious... is the SID chip itself precise enough that any two renditions of the same tune would ever come out exactly the same (even when played on the same hardware)?
@@der4rdi That's a damn good question! I don't know...
Audacity itself have a function to combine multiple tracks into one and generate a new track.
If one needs to go to such great lengths to determine the difference, then the difference is not great enough.
Because what you want to actually remove is noise I think, and do correct me if I am wrong, best way to do it actually record several recordings on each setup. Do the track comparison described by KDN above, and see which setup has the most divination between recordings. Yes. You compare the same setup with itself. That is a fair bit of work. But that is if you are interested in the noise reduction part.
Other elements may also have an impact on the sound. Like getting a softer or harsher sound. But those difference I would say is more of a subjective quality. While consistency of playback is more of an objective quality.
I'll try to make it clear. Vacuum tube doesn't improve sound. It's actually distorts sound. Vacuum tubes modulate... They add some harmonics to sound, even harmonics to be precise. But unlike odd harmonics even harmonics somehow (it may be related to human nature) convincing us that it sounds good. You can get that "improved" sound by connecting any source (analog or digital) to tube amp or even tube amp emulator.
This is why people like tubes so much. They color the sound in a way that is technically "wrong", but sounds better to some people because tube amplification makes the sound "warmer". You can hear this even when the audio is converted to a lossy digital format. If you use a lossless format at a high enough bit depth and sample rate (44100Hz @ 16 bit, for example), the resulting waveform that comes out of your speakers is *identical* to an analog source. Which is why the whole analog vs digital argument for audio is pointless. The point I'm making is that tube amplified audio will still sound the same, even if converted to digital (so long as you use a lossless format like WAV or FLAC, neither of which UA-cam uses, in order to save bandwidth).
@Dr. Octogon Yes they do, but also there could be different stages in a signal chain that introduces different kinds of distortion. Take a guitar for example, it is common (in metal music) to use an overdrive pedal like the Ibaneze "Tube screamer" which mostly adds distortion to the peaks of the signal, and then goes into a guitar amp that does have a pre-amp (where most of the raw thick distortion is added) and then the output amp stage which compresses the sound and adds the tube saturation.
So, one can layer the distortions with a pleasing result. Not sure though if the EVO64 people managed to do this or not.
I wonder if this is because they have a quadratic-ish response rather than linear
Because audiophools are confused about production and reproduction.
@@EMAngel2718 It's because of how tubes work. One of the reasons is internal capacity between electrodes.
I appreciate your brutal honesty in your reviews. You don't let the fact you get these enthusiast items for free get in the way of the review.
Regarding vinyl… yes, I reduce a lot of stuff before sending off to the plant. For instance I sum the bass frequencies to mono below 100 Hz and I roll off a lot of the high frequencies from around 10 kHz and up. Also, the intensity is compressed all over to reduce most of the spikes.
Vinyl is often pretty much lower quality compared to Chrome tape like the Attack of the Petscii Robots is… or even better, the 24 bit 44.1 kHz digital masters that people get as downloads.
So vinyl… yes it gives a certain analog feel and even «warmth», but it is inferior in most ways nowadays. 🤷🏼♂️😄
I think it'd be best to accept that there are people who just like the sound of Vinyl for whatever reasons, that's why I'm avoiding any kind of "technical" discussions, because you can't really discuss about personal preferences imho.
And technically the answer is very clear imho as you (and alot of others) have pointed out.
I totally agree where we're talking about New vinyl - where I have found a better result from vinyl certainly compared to CD is older stuff (70s/80s) where the CD was mastered badly. Unfortunately this seems to be a major issue on a lot of stuff. A well mastered CD (without getting into Hi-Res audio) can sound better than vinyl, but on a lot of stuff the vinyl beats it because it was mastered by people who knew what they were doing and not out to 'get it on CD and flog it'.
And there's something romantic about vinyl, and it's not all sound - it's nice to know that on earlier stuff it's a direct analog representation of what actually took place in the studio - but I appreciate that modern and remastered stuff negates this.
David's view here is spot on with the tube amp - maybe it's better/preferable, but is it worth $500? If it makes you feel fuzzy inside knowing it's there and $500 isn't a lot to you then maybe... I won't be buying it ;-)
even back then, a lot of stuff was mastered on digital tape.
Master to dbx! Unless Dolby doesn't let you license a 50 year old analog technology...
That "warmth" has always come from analog distortion.
In that first audio section, I could clearly hear A difference between the original and the valve version; in the next section, not so much. I'd be hard-pushed to say that the valve audio was better though - part of the charm of the 8-bit computers is the raw-sounding audio.
But keep in mind that this was comparing the original stock C64 and the NUTUBE64 output from the Evolution64, I wish the standard ("transistor") output from the Evolution64 would have also been included.
So the difference you heard is probably due to the very different circuitry and filtering between the stock C64 from the 80s and the Evolution64.
I thought it was a bit less noisy.
The tube one sounded like it had a little "warm" distortion on it.
Seemed to have a thicker padding and warmth. 500$? nah
It didn't sound better to me either, just sounded like there was a little more bass. Which is probably just due to amplification more than anything. There was no comparison done with the default output of the new board, only the original C64 output (which is 40 years old at this point).
You are correct that the NuTube is a VFD - that's the exact technology they used to create it. The two little rectangles not only light up when the tube is powered (seen at 4:43), they vary in intensity reflecting the signal that's being supplied. If you're curious, the tube itself is a twin triode configuration, with a directly heated cathode. A directly heated cathode is the typical arrangement for a VFD. I think that's also why the rectangles vary in intensity - in an indirectly heated arrangement, the filament just receives a set voltage.
I was going to say that, they are'nt propper valves, just VFD's, so you would'mt get the rich valve sound anyway. It's just a gimmic.
@@frankowalker4662 boil tubes and VFD down… they're glass-encased with a vacuum pulled with emitters/cathodes/filaments/plates etc. If the VFD replicates the same thing a tube can do, who cares what shape it is?? It is a gimmick however in this case, even if full sized tubes were used.
@@frankowalker4662 They are valves. Maybe a indirectly heated cathode would be a upgrade. Otherwise quite much the same stuff!
@@frankowalker4662 they are actually valves, they're just not built in the traditional arrangement of a valve. Just like Nuvistors and Subminiature tubes are still valves despite not looking like a 300B.
Are they flashy with the phospher that lights up? Yeah, but so are magic eye tubes (and even those you could use as a preamp). They're neat options that unfortunately haven't caught up, but sound amazing for guitar.
Now, are they a gimmick in audiophile gear? ABSOLUTELY.
Tubes ARE gimmicky. They're way more nonlinear than transistors, noisier and less reliable too. But that's not the charm behind them.
The charm is seeing their filaments light up, physically getting hot, and sometimes even having a purple-y blue-ish cloud of electrons build up inside them. It's the connection with what was seen as cutting edge tech back then, and it still working today, that is the gimmick.
Kinda like owning a muscle car. It's not efficient, it's loud, and it's environmentally horrible to run them, but damn are they a great collection of engineering achievements coming together into a beautiful piece of gear.
It's the kinda thing you throw in there for fun, IMO.
Vacuum tubes in the old days were the opposite of reliable. Do you know if they have they fixed that issue?
I love the Klingon nod with the word Qapla' right in the upper middle.
I can't believe I had to scroll this far to find someone else who mentioned that...
FYI Dazzle video drivers have been in the linux kernel for a while now. Just plug it in and the OS sees it as a webcam.
I like that there are options out there to keep the C64 alive.
Me too.
I really wish there were more projects like this, specifically for the Atari 2600 and TI-99/4A systems.
A free emulator does that, too.
@@Okurka. Emulators are great, and they also serve a purpose, but having accurate hardware (especially new hardware rather than antique chips) fills gaps and complements emulators in important ways.
It's a healthy system that has both.
Thing is, replacement boards like this are among the least useful such projects, because what's really in dwindling supply are the chips themselves. If anything, spare boards (and cases) should be getting _easier_ to find because of all the computers whose chips have died.
@@stevethepocket Very true. The chips (and the same for the TIA chip in the Atari, as I understand it) are really crucial and I hope something's being done to RE and rebuild them at some point. We're going to need them more and more to preserve these systems.
Listening to the dual SID chip demo with my headphones on was pretty sweet. Could really appreciate the stereo effect
04:02 This is when 8-Bit guy is at his absolute best, the music kicks in and we know that things are about to go down in an educational and entertaining way
and then suddenly cuts out whilst he's talking
When I hear the intro music I am transported back to the 80's when your favorite tv show finally came on.
What's the name of this particular track?
I don't even care about this generation of computing as it was a little before my time, I still watch all his videos. They are great!
Are you keeping up with the Commodore? Cause the Commodore is keeping up with you!
Isn’t he always? 😂✌️
And its stuck in my head AGAIN!
i remember the Australia commodore ad
Creepy commodore! Leave me alone!!! 😂
Dual Sid setups are awesome. I love my FPGASID in "pseudo stereo" mode. It uses Voices 1 & 2 on the left channel, then Voices 2 & 3 on the right, creating a stereo effect. Makes 1983 games pretty amazing. (It'll do full stereo as well, but for existing games, the pseudo does the trick)
Started watching in 2018 and you really set me on a course towards my love of computers and compsci.
I used those ZIF sockets on my Amstrad CPC builds. They are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination, but they are very good indeed.
Who makes them? I've never seen them before...original 3M textool are not a bargain either....
@@FRobot-rx4kz Mine were made by Aries Electronics - I got them because the normal ones wouldn't fit where I needed them, and these are extremely compact even flush to a bypass capacitor. You can get them on Mouser and Digikey, both for a princely sum ;)
@@FRobot-rx4kz they are made by Aries Electronics and they come in 24, 28 and 40 pin count
They are more than US$10 a pop
There is a problem with these ARIES low profile ZIF sockets. When you decide to use SID recreations with machined round pins, it makes it almost impossible to close the ZIF lever because of the machine pin diameter. Do yourselves a favor and use the regular ZIF socks and you won't have any issues. many recreations use these machine pins, not just the SID chips. Jameco electronics sells these at very good prices at around $13 or $14 USD so to me, that is cheap considering what folks are charging things these days.
I did notice that the evo board had slightly better lower frequencies, and that’s about it. The problem with audio is that you have to spend quite a bit of money to get a very slight increase in sound quality and you have to spend that money on the equipment it’s being playing from and whatever actually has the music on it (a record, a digital file, or whatever else) and then you just get stuck in this endless loop where you keep spending more and more money to get a very slight or even non existent increase in quality. And to be honest for the 8 bit music that the C64 would be making it really just isn’t noticeable, you could spend $10K on an amplifier it really isn’t going to matter. For most people, there is no difference in sound quality between a transistor amplifier and a tube amplifier. But there are always a few people who claim to think a tube amp sounds better and it’s hard to tell if they actually hear a difference or if it’s just placebo because they spent 10 times what a transistor amp costs.
1:45 That's exactly correct. NuTubes are repurposed/reengineered VFDs used to give vacuum tube characteristics like sag to audio circuits without requiring the excessive power draw of 100+ year old technology. They're most common use is in the Vox MV line of guitar amplifiers and a certain variant of the Ibanez Tube Screamer overdrive pedal
Listening to the demo, there's a minor EQ difference likely caused by the amplifier circuitry and NOT the NuTube. it's an incredibly small difference and charging $500 for an upgraded amplifier for a 40 year old 3 voice synth is simply end users getting fleeced by bad faith promises. For reference, i'm listening on Beyerdynamic DT770s plugged into an Audient iD14 Mk1 interface
I got a nutube in my Korg Volca NuBass, wich is a 303 like acid synth. The nutube is used in the oscillator and suboscillator drive. Sounds quite pleasing.
I always hum along to your intro when I start watching each of your videos 😁
The tagline on Korg's product page for that tube is "A new vacuum tube which puts vacuum fluorescent display technology to practical use"
The dual (stereo) SID-chip option definitely sounds better; I can easily hear the stereo separation on my iPad Air 5 (in landscape orientation.) 😍
I think that the nutube sounded marginally better but it really is an audiophile feature from the start. It's just impossible to convey how much difference those two have over a youtube video.
I was just rewatching old 8bitguy and 8bitkeys videos as this came up, what perfect timing!
Thanks for another interesting, enjoyable episode. Nice to know about options like this for keeping those old machines alive
My theory for your inverted audio output: the Nu Tube is a pair of triodes and I suspect it is being used as an low input impedance inverting amplifier because that's the easiest way to make a low noise amplifier with a single triode (or transistor, works roughly the same way). There are two triodes so one of these simple class A amplifiers for each of left and right output.
They even don't thinked about non-inverting amp circuit (Actually just need to connect to a different pin and have one another resistor to do that).What more,they sounds like oversaturated😂.
Techmoan used an audacity feature to combine the two tracks (one has to be inverted as well) and if there would be any quality improvement, there would have been a signal. If not, they would have been identical and x - -x would still be 0.
Phase is irrelevant, as long as it is different between channels.
You mean x + (-x)
@@PubstarHero yes
I love your video's intro. It just smacks of something good is about to happen.
Never having owned a C64, I'm a ZX Spectrum kind of guy, i find these videos really interesting and informative. Keep them coming.
The sound is crisper and cleaner with the vacuum tubes, trust my ears. Good to have news from you Dave!
I do really enjoy that you review things honestly and provide feedback to manufacturers where needed 👍. Far too many fake videos nowadays !
I don't even know if you are a real person or a bot. So why shall your words have any weight?
I don't even know if you are a real person or a bot. So why shall your words have any weight?
10 PRINT”BOT “;: GOTO 10
Interesting video, as always. It’s great to see continued support for the C64, although a $500 audio upgrade is pushing it a bit.
Way to much money for minimal upgrade,and not all chips are there,they could at least put in clones,as much as possible.
Great video! Hope you weathered the recent ice storms this week well! Greetings from a fellow S. Fort Worth resident.
Thank you David and excellent video release.
This is a fair assessment. $500 is simply the price of these types audio devices...but to match it up with the most important feature of the C64 is just amazing. Expensive?...yeah...insane? ... definitely! and I love it!
Dual SID sounds are incredible for an old platform. I LOVE it.
love your work dude.
Great job, always interesting video, congratulations
Imagine being visited in the 80s from your future self, and being told that the C64 is still being made and has all these futuristic upgrades…
Radical, Dude!
Upgrade to futuristic vacuum tube technology
I would have believed it! I loved my C64 well past its prime. I would go to yardsales specifically for Commodore magazines so I could enter the code and feel like a programmer!
Went to the future, hoping for flying cars, and all I got was an audiophile C64. Bummer.
You weren't pining for a home computer that could do what the C64 couldn't?
It's cool seeing the C64 continue on with new equipment! That was my first computer. 😁
I watched that episode of Retro Recipes and he was in ecstasy at this board. He also designed, fund raised, and got manufactured the clone keys for an authentic keyboard.
Regarding the audio comparison: the thing to do here is to subtract one signal from the other so that all that's left is the difference. That will very quickly tell you if the valve-based amplifier is actually contributing much, and how (e.g. if it's producing more high-frequency sound you'll get high-frequency noise). Ideally, the result will be very quiet, indicating that there's very little difference between the two.
Strange, the audio difference was fairly clear to me. (Might be because I have a great soundcard and soundsystem hooked up to my pc though...)
The Nutube output seemed like it had a broader sound-stage, slightly less distorted notes, and a "warmer/deeper" sound.
Of course, I might be imagining the whole thing.
In any case, it really isn't worth 500 bucks extra for an improvement that small, even for an audiophile.
I do think I heard a *slight* difference in quality for the vacuum tube amp vs the other system. If I had to describe it, I'd say that the non-tube one sounded slightly tinnier, but only on the first one.
FWIW: The vacuum tube sample clearly sounds fuller, or at least louder.
enough for me to drool over it
I noticed a huge difference in the audio from the nutube, it's kind of weird to me that other people didn't notice the massive difference. It's almost like listening to a different midi library.. almost.
That said, you(8BitGuy) hit the nail on the head. Even if it sounds better, it doesn't sound $500 better.
And that's one of those things I'm constantly asking myself when I want something. I want this or that, but I don't $$$ want it.
An SBC for example, I want a Radxa Zero, but I don't $80 want it.
This video was awesome, and made my day
This is the sort of project that always piques my interest on a technical level, but then (inevitably, due to what goes into it, NOT overpricing, I think) prices itself waaaay outside my budget. Thanks for making a video about it!
I have to admit, BTW, that with all the Commodore 64 / 128 / etc. videos you've made over the years, I had assumed that you probably had a massive stockpile of C64 IC's in your workshop, LOL. Apparently, "assuming" strikes again!
I've only been working on electronics for about a year, but just one glance at that board and you can tell it's a very high quality build.
Yeah, to me it looks like the designers had fun designing it and trying to throw everything at it just for fun, in a "we can make this work" style. I think it's really cool, even though I'd take original hardware.
I rather do not like the somewhat hodge podged nutube daughter board design and screw terminals for connecting it, but the rest looks real slick.
When I had my C64, I connected the audio out to my guitar amp, sounded awesome for 1989 😀
I genuinely could hear a great difference between the two sound samples, even after being compressed on UA-cam and played through a terrible old TV
Very cool Zif-Socket! I've never seen that before! Thanks for the review!
they are made by Aries Electronics and they come in 24, 28 and 40 pin count
I could tell the difference between the standard SID and NuTube versions of the music (in this video). Insofar as, I reckon I could identify them in an A-B test. I think the NuTube version definitely sounded better. But you're correct to say they were very similar and the $500 option won't sell a lot of copies. I would still like to hear some of my own tunes through it on my studio speakers 😀
11:46 This one was the clearest difference to me, the nutune sounds fatter, like it has a ring to it. From what I recall that is additional harmonics that should be considered distortion but people like it (it does sound warmer). Can also do that with a software filter of course, which is typically the approach I prefer because then you can color sound whenever and however you want. But hey, to each their own.
I'd say the $500 option sounded even better with Martin Galways seal of approval. ;)
Hi there. I`m Stefano - . the initiator of the project, designer of the schematic, and the producer of the boards. The nutube DOES sound different, but unfortunately the compressed/transistorized version of the clip does not reproduce that difference. Tubes (and JFETs) have a different proportion of odd vs even distorsion than transistors (or mosfet). In simple words, even-distorted sounds good. Odd-distorted sounds bad. In the nutube64 device, there are two small trimmers to make the "even" distorsion positive or negative. Once the odd distortion is minimized at the working point , biasing the grids one side you will get more "ambient", while on the other side you get more "crystalline". The personal feeling about the cost of the object is subjective so it does not require comments: the nutube64 is an add-on board, so the old-C64 board can be run without it, stereo, with the usual transistorized output, and with all the features that have been shown in this and other videos. W.R.T the original SID commodore output. It is an emitter follower with a gigantic base swing introducing a lot of non-linear logarithmic distortion. The original C64 developers chose this solution because it was quick and cheap. Perfectly fine. A better design could have been possible, but the C64 would have been more expensive, so that was ok: market penetration - not quality - was the priority. What it is done is done. The old C64 bypass electrolytic capacitor is most likely dry so its ESR is all over the place. My board has also a lot of other features to improve quality and overall I`m quite satisfied.
Martin, please send an email to the evo64 guys. You will get yours, listen with your studio speakers, play with different grid-bias and enjoy your beautiful tunes.
Started computing in the 80’s with the C-64sx loved that computer 💻
Man, my heart stopped when I saw you insert the bottom chips upside down, and then turned the power on; I was so worried there would be damage to your VIC II chip. I'm glad it survived! And yes, if they're gonna design a board like that... they need clear indicators. That's just ridiculous.
1:14 QAPLA'! How did nobody else notice that?!
Freaking Klingon greeting wishing someone fortune or "good luck"- That's freaking hilarious
That's funny. Even I didn't noticed because I'm not familiar with Klingon spelling rules.
@@The8BitGuy I'm not really a trekkie either, but I have watched all of the TV shows, and qapla' is said frequently enough that it was immediately recognizable to me. Was just an interesting and entertaining easter egg when you were showing off the PCB..
Got an audible chuckle out of me. PCB designers showing off their nerdy sense of humor. If I had thought of it, I'd have done the same lol
@@mashrien I came here to say this... wanted to search to see if any one else said it first.
@@mashrien Pretty sure it means 'Success' though.
This somewhat reminds me of the ultra high graphics settings in new games, yes, they look better in comparisons, but if you're actually focusing on the game itself high or even medium typically would look the same
or 4K and 8K,i mean what's the point.
Now that's just an ignorant opinion and objectively false.
Every day 8BG uploads is always a good one!
I always love the music from 8 bit guy.
What a Time to be alive when you can build a brand new C64 from all new parts! I like the flexibility of this board that you can build a brand new system, or use original C64 chips.
Cool but a costly endeavor considering PC emulsions are cheap or free.
@@HOLLASOUNDS *emulation
@@blakegriplingph Good lord Dyslexia strikes again.
If you count FPGA. And if you count FPGA, get an Ultimate64 instead. If you want an "authentic" C64 then it can't be built from new parts because new parts don't exist to replace the old ones. If you have a bad board, buy a replacement C64. if you want a clean board with reclaimed chips you can cheaply buy a brand new PCB.
@@espressomatic You will be able to build a true new C64 as soon as the CIA chips are made available, it's explained in the Perifrastic's video. Unless you are really picky about what counts as a replacement.
I think the target market is not the average joe out there but someone that wants a newish and hopped up C64. You would be shocked at how much ppl spend to Mod their cars, lol. -Mark.
Again, great video!!! Keep it up!!! I honestly tought the C128's video looked better, but youtube compression can interfere. Also, wouldn't a Retrotink upscaler help with better video capturing? You could use an HDMI capture device...
YEAH 8-bit GUY! I love this channel!
I love projects like this! It’s important to keep old computers working and they’re awesome to play with.
While I do hear a big difference with the NuTube (it sounds a lot clearer imho, especially the highs), it’s definitely not worth the money as far as I can tell from a highly compressed UA-cam video.
One thing I did notice in the first audio section, is that the real C64 seemed a bit sharper sounding, with the nutube reducing those peaks, but maybe the audiophiles can help me figure out what that means
It's hard to say for sure without putting the audio thorugh a frequency analyzer, but I'd expect the higher quality audio system gets a bit more lows through, effectively reducing overall emphasis on high "sharp" tones. Tubes also add some distortion of their own, which tends to subjectively round out the sound a bit.
Dual Sid is absolutly amazing! Nice Video
1:41 Nutube was developed by Korg, and Noritake, a manufacturer of vacuum fluorescent displays, so that makes sense.
The new chip sound is way smoother. I always loved the scratchy sound of the original C64 but I can def hear a difference. Would love to see a video with more game music like R-type, Skate or Die, Outrun. Wizzball but most of all Nemesis The Warlock. Love those tunes. Great video!
Great review as always - I am on the preorder list for the basic stuff, I was really hoping the NuTube would be something fantastic, but it just seems like a waste of money for 99% of the people. :(
I have a keyboard and case waiting for this! :)
I think that the issue is that, while valves can sound really good, just having a valve in a circuit doesn't make the circuit good by being there.
Couple that with the component not being a valve that's intended for audio amplification and you're not really going to have an easy time recreating the same qualities that you'd get from a high end audio product unless you have some very good engineers designing the circuit.
You'd probably get similar, if not superior, valve emulation from using a JFET-based circuit (which would likely be considerably cheaper as well).
This is of course somewhat of a moot point given that the waveform that's being fed into it isn't particularly complex. The SID chip is very musical in its own right but it's got hard limits when it comes to the actual sophistication of the sound as compared to a record.
If you're comparing the two amps you're probably going to need to hook them up to something that's outputting a high fidelity recording made in a studio to really identify much in the way of difference between the two, as that would give a better idea of the difference in response between the two designs
One thong about a Korg Nutube - it's made by cooaboration of Korg and Itron Noritake factory - possibly the biggest VFD display factory. It uses some of VFD technology and even has glowing spots, but used mainly as double triode amplificator. I have one in my mobile DAP (battery life up to 6 hours at best LOL) and it really changes the sound compared to regular semiconductor amplification modules.
Oh boy! You went down the tube vs transistor rabbit hole. Good luck!
I can definitely hear the difference without and with the NuTube. The NuTube has more of a scooped sound. I would be hard pressed to say which I prefer without using it for many hours. Definitely not worth $500 for most people. It is interesting though and I would pay the add on price if it was much cheaper... like maybe $100-$150. I could see how this would appeal to folks who use the C64 in music creation.
I will add that I don't think the development of the NuTube add-on is dumb idea. I think it is an awesome idea.
I work with audio and music and I could clearly hear the difference too. I could also see that the valve-processed waveform was smoother with fewer spikes. Probably better value than that $500 add on would be an external on valve amplifier such as a headphone amp that could be used with lots of devices.
I reckon the NuTube sound was perhaps a bit "fuller" in the Audacity test, but there's no way I'd pay $500 for that.
Love the videos man!
My friend has a dual SID setup on his C-64. It’s a small board that has two sockets for two SID chips, which is then plugged into the socket where the original chip installs in. His setup consists of two ARMSIDs, one as a 6581 and one as a 8580, and wiring that routes to the outside with the audio outputs.
Your point is what?
Wow, that Cowboy's Dream demo sounded incredible. What beautiful stereo
Five hundred dollars? Hoo man, not a ghost of a chance. It was nice seeing another video from you, though! You and Lon are like the next generation of TechTV.
:25, love the Klingon reference. Btw, I want that t-shirt!
Yes that fluorescent-display is there to substitute vacuum tubes as it has similar charasteristics. Some guitar effects pedal use this technology.
I think you should heatsink that VIC-II. They run pretty hot and is normally dissipated through the metal housing on the original board…a VIC-II on this board might not run long without some fins.
I'm not sure he uses it a lot. Probably just to test some apps and make video. He codes on emulator.
Thanks Dave! Interesting video! I can DEFINITELY hear the difference in sound - it is in the accuracy of the attack and the overall smoothness of the sound. The note decay seems MUCH more realistic. (As to digital vs. analog - meh. If you sample high enough you're OK. My digital piano is just fine.)
Man it really blows my mind how back in the day you could open a pc that was in a keyboard and replace the chip just like that.
The Nu-Tube is a triode-type tube which creates a 180 degree phase shift at each amplification stage due to it being a voltage controlled current source. When the control voltage increases, the output current increases, which reduces the voltage at the plate if a normal series resistor and plate coupling capacitor are used, which is what I suspect.
I personally was able to hear a widened soundstage and slightly cleaner and brighter profile with the NuTube upgrade. If I had the money, I'd buy one with all the upgrades! Hopefully at some point I'll be able to.
Great video. I am still in disbelief how much people still invest in our beloved C64.
Nice video all around. Personally, I heard a significant difference in the audio. Might brighter and detailed sounding in the new system.
1) It's pretty.
2) It works.
3) It's $300, plus you find the main chips.
4) The video is obviously better if you have a good monitor like the 1084. If you have to use a TV or going thru an NTSC (or even some S-Video) converters, you will have a hard time seeing the difference.
5) The vacuum tube audio signal is inverted. However, this might only matter if you are summing this output with the output of a real C-64, and probably not only then. The human ear can't hear the difference between speaker polarities, unless you have intermodulation between multiple speakers.
6) The vacuum tube audio sounded notably different to me, it seems to have more highs. You could see that in the capture waveform too. Whether more highs is a good or bad thing may depend on the audio you are playing. Whether the marginal improvement is worth any money at all to you depends on your desires. Audiophiles would like it, because for them More Money = Better.
Overall, it's pretty, it works, it is somewhat expensive, and it sounds and looks slightly better/different from the original. That would make it worthwhile for some people, and not so for others.
It would have been interesting to hear a capture from the non-vacuum tube audio to compare. The amount of highs basically depends on the value of a cap and a resistor, so it might have more highs also.
Is there a pink noise or white noise generator for the C64? Capturing the output of that and using an RTA to get an envelope of the audio output on this and a C64 would be interesting.
I could definitely hear a difference on the sound test between SID and NuTube. To me, the NuTube had more high frequency sounds, but that actually made it sound a little bit harsher to my ears. Granted I'm just sitting here with desktop speakers and the video isn't that loud, but the difference was notable to me. I'd be interested in seeing a very close up shot of the waveform, especially the peaks, to see how they might differ.
The bottom one did sound brighter. He should have inverted the bottom wave so they matched.
In the intro of the Giana theme I hear quite a difference, but that could be due to SID tolerances.
Transistor amplifiers don't add or take away to/from sound like tubes do (at least not intentionally). Whatever the tube adds will still be there if you further "process" it with transistor amps or digitally.
Vinyl vs digital audio is like a CRT vs LCD panel. The vinyl & CRT smoothens the signal and makes it look more natural and not so digital and 100% perfect. I think it's about the saturation, the slight artifacts and distortions.
There's definitely a difference in the audio recordings you made. The tube seems to have a slightly more full sound profile, but honestly I couldn't say one sounds significantly better than the other, they're just a tad different is all.
Like you said there's recording and youtube compression to deal with, but I think with such simplistic wave forms out of the SID it really wouldn't matter much anyways.
On the issue of audio quality: there are two ways to look at audio: subjectively and objectively. The objective aspects are things you can measure such as loudness, clipping, distortions, frequency response, jitter, etc. On the subjective side, its as complex as the human mind is. Outside of obvious objective issues (eg. too distorted, not loud enough etc) the subjective stuff, aka "which sounds better?", is not something that can be objectively measured. Hence there is no right or wrong. It's personal taste and every person is going to have a different opinion. All you can do is what you did and give you opinion. But, it's vital to understnand that when speaking subjectively in terms of preference, there is no right and wrong and every opinion is valid. There is no objective data in subjective analysis unless you are doing a controlled study with a large sample set.
I think audiophiliation in this case or maybe other cases as well is mostly a self inflictive phenomenon but there is a reason for it as the matter of intellectual connection to the phenomenon its the human ambition and willing for transcendental abstraction we like to shift from more analogue waves to digital ones and vice versa all over .
Thanks for the honesty! Proper audiophile malarkey :)
This is one of the very few channels where I just click the "like" button at the very start of the video and I never had to change my mind at the end.
even though i didn't grow up with this computer, i do love both the original and evo64 board
I'm still using a Dazzle DC90 too!
I've been converting what's left of my VHS collection to digital for years and years (and years) 😮💨 on my Win XP 64 laptop. Nice to see Impossible Mission again. "Stay Forever".
awesome music, and Ultima !!!
The tube amp sounds more buzzing/distorted. Maybe there is a bit more low end but it is difficult to say if it is just the difference in volume between the two. Perhaps even a bit muffled / lacking high end, but can't tell for sure using TV speakers. I think I prefer the original sound to be honest. The tube amp definitely colors the sound in a way that is audible even here on UA-cam, but whether you or anyone else notices or cares is a completely different story. I would not have noticed myself just a couple of years ago, before I started recording music myself.
Audio professional opinion. The nutube is about adding saturation (distortion) nothing to do with the integrity of an analog chain. This saturation is basically addition of harmonics that can sound nice and will be “even order” in a tube/valve so it’ll sound “in tune” with the source material.
I wouldn’t bother myself but it’s not about analog signal path purity. Unless you want a really cool distortion tool in your computer that can be controlled for music creation maybe🤷♂️
But I wouldn’t get it
I'm gonna say not to the Nutube upgrade as I could not hear much of a difference, but the dual SID demos really are awesome, and there are even some quad SID setups out there using the rare HARDSID PCI Card that have produced some really cool music.
Funnily enough, I used to play C64 sound through a tube amp back in the day...
It was just an old "pull" out of a stereo/record console though. A bit cheaper than $500 and it actually did drive the speakers via output tubes.
If one really wants to hear the "tube sound" then that s the better way to do it.. the distortion is from the combination of the output tubes and the transformer.
:/
The output transformer of traditional tube amplifiers do add something to the sound, but otherwise a vacuum tube is just like a FET - it's not supposed to "tubify" the sound, it's an electronic amplifying device just like any other field-effect transistor.