PDA

View Full Version : Solid State vs. Tube Amps



Steve Gonzales
03-02-2005, 04:17 AM
Solid State vs. Tube Amps












<HR style="COLOR: #000000" SIZE=1>



<!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->I would like to hear about the difference in these two types of amplifiers. Maybe de-bunk some myths and some in-depth explanation of the pros and cons of both types. Other than the obvious differences, why does a low watt tube amp seem to be more powerful than it's rating would suggest?. I am a Solid State guy myself and even with 90db plus efficient speakers, I find that peaks of 200+ watts are not uncommon to see with today's Digital recordings and their wide dynamic range. I see tube guys freak-out when I mention that many watts, like I'm deaf and need 110db's just to enjoy the music. Nothing could be further from the truth. I also find that just the ambient noise level in the city causes me to double my average power level (duh) and wonder how some 8 wpc SET could EVER power, say, some Altec 19's or JBL L300's?. I realize that alot of pure horn designs of the golden era simply had to have sensitivity ratings in 100-105db + @1w/1m due to the state of amplifier evolution back then. I spoke to a good friend, Electronics Engineer and former JBL pro dealer, Mr Jack Sproul, about this and he said that when you get down to the nuts and bolts of a tube amp, it's old hat. Their distortion levels and performance (generally) can't even begin to compete with State of the Art SS amps. His opinion is that the tube "purists" are really in love with how a tube amp COLORS the signal!. That "warmth" that is often associated with tube amps is a by-product of component limits/characteristics, topology and is inherent in the basic tube amplifier design and that this produces a type of naturally occurring E.Q. I LOVE audio and admire and RESPECT EVERYONE'S CHOICE for their own set-up. I've listened to some REALLY GREAT tube amps recently (Audio Research) and must admit that they were DEAD QUIET, SWEET and projected a WONDERFUL SOUNDSTAGE!. I am curious to hear your opinions about this. My best friend, Mr David Brink, will be building a quad (as in 4)-amped system using 300B based amps on top and EL34 for mid/midbass and maybe a big CJ on bottom or SS Perraux. I can see where in this type of system, that a small amp can be used to power efficient drivers to deafening levels but, I can't see how you can power a big, passively crossed-over, relatively efficient speaker of 90db @1w/1m and get the most out of well recorded music. I must stress that this is not a FEUD!, no, I SEEK to be ENLIGHTENED by those with REAL WORLD experience. I will say thank you to all that understand and respond with that in mind. Lordy!, I'm almost scared to get into tubes, because if it turns out to be the next best thing to sliced bread, I might have to save some extra money for the divorce ;) , Sincerely, Steve G






<!-- / message -->

57BELAIRE
03-02-2005, 06:46 AM
Great question...I'm sure you'll get an engineer onboard to explain in depth the technical aspects, but I can offer some personal insight with tubes vs. transistors.

Tube amps have always been the preferred choice for musical instrument amplification, especially electric guitar. There is a warmth and "musicality" inherent with tubes that was explained to me by a tech ""it's all about even harmonics". I don't know about that, but when I switched over to a s.s Standel amp from a tube Fender, that lasted about 5 minutes. The overall sound was harsh and brittle. Gone was that sweet "overdrive" and smooth distortion...a hallmark of tube amps.

As power requirements for live performances increased, the need for larger amps paved the way for small, powerful, cheaper solid state designs. A typical 300 watt s.s amp weighed in at about 15 lb. compared to the all-tube Ampeg SVT at around 85 lbs. To this day an all-tube amp will usually cost twice as much as it's transistorized counterpart.

Enter the "hybrid amps" which I happen to subscribe to. A single 12AX7 is inserted in the preamp circuitry and the power amp is solid state. The attack of the note is softened which results in a somewhat "sweeter" sound.

As far as my personal preferences for home listening...I try to recreate the sound of a live performance, stage center, so give me gobs of clean wattage.

So far 1200+ watts of transistorized power is doing me just fine...

John Nebel
03-02-2005, 08:38 AM
Mike Albinson: (Walker's engineering assistant) If you want a subject fraught with idiocies, at the moment there's this craze that valve (tube) amplifiers are better. and that Quad II valve amplifiers are now the best, in terms of reproduction. Read through the technical press of about twelve years ago and you will learn that transistors are much better than valves and the valve amplifier is dead on its feet. Now today it is having a grand revival! It's fashion - there's no reality to it. A modern transistor amplifier is better on any count you care to mention than the Quad II was, with the possible exception, that if you must go and overdrive the thing the valve amplifier does show marginal differences. There have been a few bad transistor amplifiers. It's easier to make a bad transistor amplifier than a bad valve amplifier. However you made the valve amplifier, it might hum or something. but usually it was reasonable linear.

http://www.onethingaudio.com/FOR/QUA/GEN/9512-QUA-GEN-HIS-PW.htm

Zilch
03-02-2005, 11:27 AM
"Fraught with idiocies, there's no reality to it."

[Just $$$$!]

That about sums it up....

alskinner
03-02-2005, 03:52 PM
Having tried numerous solid state and tube amps one thing is for certain it depends on who you ask as to which is better. There have been good advances in both. As for a personal preference I prefer tube amps driving compression drivers in that for me they take the edge or harshness off. In my four way four amped system I have a Audio Matriere Accordance EL34 based amp driving the 076 tweeters, a modified Dynaco ST-70 using the 16ohm taps driving the 2441 drivers, a Threshold Stasis 2 driving the 2 2012 midrange drivers and a Sunn SPL 9000 driving the 2235 woofers. I tried moving the amps arround to different drivers and found that for me getting the horn drivers to sound dynamic without harshness only worked with tubed amps. Also the soundstage really improved with this configuration. For Low Freq drivers I still prefer SS as I have found tubes for the most part to muddy up the bass. I know there are advocates for both sides of the issue. But for JBL Horns especially the older ones I haven't found anything better than tubes. Having said all that tube amps can be finicky and the brand or type of tubes can make a difference in the sound. But with a little electronic experience many of the old tube amps can be modified to produce some amazing results.

Just my 2 cents worth

AL

Earl K
03-02-2005, 04:41 PM
Thanks for that alskinner .

I do believe there is a lot to this subject - just like I find that crossover caps need to be matched to the rest of the working system .

F.I. : I find that MPP motor runs on horns "tame" the dynamics in certain frequency areas while being generous to the lower mids . This generally seems to offer a "lengthening of the tone or pulse" and is most dramatic on things like solo violin ( and specifically , Louis Armstrongs' trumpet playing - and he could always use a touch of added warmth to that horn ). This is not measurable with the standard complement of test gear . But these dynamic rearrangements readjust the harmonics and thus the timbre. This is all very apparent on compression drivers ( IME ). :yes:

:cheers:

scott fitlin
03-02-2005, 04:53 PM
Thanks for that alskinner .

I do believe there is a lot to this subject - just like I find that crossover caps need to be matched to the rest of the working system .

F.I. : I find that MPP motor runs on horns "tame" the dynamics in certain frequency areas while being generous to the lower mids . This generally seems to offer a "lengthening of the tone or pulse" and is most dramatic on things like solo violin ( and specifically , Louis Armstrong trumpet playing - and he could always use a touch of added warmth ). This is not measurable with the standard complement of test gear . But these dynamic rearrangements readjust the harmonics and thus the timbre. This is all very apparent on compresion drivers ( IME ). :yes:

:cheers:Well said! :)

Steve Gonzales
03-02-2005, 05:05 PM
Keep it flowing Gentlemen!!! Thank you!

Alex Lancaster
03-02-2005, 06:54 PM
:) Steve: Remember when I said "snake oil :bs: ?, I have not heard anything better than M Levinson or Krell, even moneywise, I do not want to spend that money, so I´m happy with a Crown K2, a Sony N77ES, and an N80ES.

alskinner
03-02-2005, 07:37 PM
You are absolutly right about "snake oil". There are so many so called audiophile products out there that give marginal positive results for an extreme amount of money. Krell does build an outstanding amp but even the Krell I tried exhibited some harshness on the compression drivers being driven alone. That's why a lot of research has to go into designing an audio system that gives the personal pleasure that we all enjoy. In the world of "magical cables" and "status symbol" audio systems sometimes the best sound is found in experimentation. There are so many variables in audio reproduction that no single component will provide everything that's needed without all other components synced with it. I admit I am old school in a lot of ways, heck I remember winding my own chokes and inductors when I first got into ham radio., but also have a great appreciation of the advancements in audio technology. Same is true of solid state and tubed amps. There are a lot of high priced products that are built on the ability of the company to market rather than the quaility of the sound.

Mr. Widget
03-02-2005, 07:47 PM
:) Steve: Remember when I said "snake oil :bs: ?, I have not heard anything better than M Levinson or Krell...

Well then there is personal preference. I have listened to several Krell amps over the years and I just haven't liked them. Obviously there are many who do and are willing to plop down big bucks to buy them.


...why does a low watt tube amp seem to be more powerful than it's rating would suggest?
<!-- / message -->

To quote Paul Klipsch, "B.S.!". The soft clipping typical of most tube amps gives them a warm fat sound as they are played beyond their rather low rated power. Essentially people are pouring in a bit of distortion into their musical mix. The distortion not only "warms" the music it also makes the music sound louder. If you compare a 40 watt SS amp to a 40 watt tube unit the 40 watt SS amp sounds painful at clipping and the tube amp "blooms". Obviously, if you go too deep into the distortion the tube amp sound goes to hell too.

All that said, a really well made tube amp can have a very pleasing sound when used in multi-amp systems. There are also tube amps that do bass well, but they are rare and typically quite expensive.

Widget

Steve Gonzales
03-02-2005, 08:25 PM
Great USEABLE information!!!!. I realize that when a general question like this is posed, there are SO many factors that contribute to a what will be a person's own bottom line (taste in music ,system expectations, preferences,etc) is and consequently no one answer will cover this absolutely. I do appreciate the different trains of thought. I will try some tube amplification in my own system at some point, just to experience for myself. I now have a good baseline in which to start. I am glad to finally hear an explanation of why tube amps seem to have more power than their SS counterparts, thank you, that makes all the sense in the world Widget!. I also enjoyed the info about even harmonics. Great!. Also, thank you all for keeping it a discussion and not a war ( us vs. them). alskinner: you have almost the EXACT driver compliment as my Dream DYI JBL 4 way. They must sound "out of this world"!. Will you profile them in the new photo gallery?. Once again, thank you for sharing your knowledge so freely, Sincerely, Steve Gonzales

Steve Schell
03-03-2005, 02:20 AM
Hi Steve,

Well, you've opened up a huge subject, one where folks are usually highly polarized in their preferences and beliefs (me too). The civil discourse here is such a relief from the usual flame war.

I have been a fan of, and developed a preference for tube amps since I began building tube circuits in the mid '80s. The crummy looking little 6BQ5 integrated amp I found in the trash just seemed to make records come alive more than the solid state gear I had used up till then. I progressed through hotrodding Dynaco amps for awhile, checking my progress with comparisons to an Akai receiver and Sansui integrated amp. A friend and I dabbled with building up various single ended and output transformerless tube amps, some of which produced more smoke than sound. When Sound Practices magazine began in 1992 I moved into the world of directly heated triodes and large industrial horn speakers.

When it comes to specifications and traditional measurements, it's no contest; a $150 SS receiver will outperform almost any tube amp. Setting that aside for a moment, there is this curious phenomenon where many thousands of listeners have come to prefer tube amplification. This goes way beyond being a mere fad. The popularity of tubes has been growing rapidly for more than twenty years now, and it is to the point where solid state gear is almost an endangered species at high end trade shows like CES. Could there be a reason for this beyond fad or fashion?

It has been often stated that the simple triode is the most inherently linear amplifying device known to man. There is nothing warm, fuzzy, mushy, rolled off or distorted about a tube per se. The sound of any given amp is a result of its design and the behavior of the circuit under working conditions. Many of the common negative attributes of tube amps are due to inadequate power supply design, complexity, poor driver stages, bandwidth limited transformers etc. These can all be overcome by selecting the proper devices, using a good simple circuit, and building with the best quality parts. Sure, this costs money.

Most tube amps will measure quite high total harmonic distortion. Many these days feel that THD measurements are grossly inadequate, as listening impressions so often disagree with the measurements. Tubes tend to be rich in low order harmonics and have very low levels of high order harmonics. Solid state circuits tend to have a more even distribution, and may measure much higher levels of upper harmonics despite a much lower THD spec. Low order harmonics, even in high levels, result in a slight change in the perceived timbre of sounds. High order harmonics, even in small amounts, can sound gritty, grating and harsh. Lynn Olson has suggested that harmonic distortion measurements should be weighted, with the amount of a particular harmonic being multiplied by its order, or perhaps even a square or cube of the order. There is little chance of this being adopted by the engineering community any time soon! Also, many amps of both types use high levels of negative feedback to achieve lower measured distortion, a technique that I have found to suck the life out of recordings, flatten the perception of depth and remove many subtleties such as reverberant decays and hall ambiance. Most of the best sounding, worst measuring amps use little or no NFB.

My favorite home brewed amp uses all directly heated triodes in single ended configuration, with transformer coupling between the three stages and battery biasing of all tubes. This results in an extremely simple circuit, with no capacitors except for B+ filtering and only a small number of low value resistors. The transormers are all pricy, wide bandwidth designs. The output tube is a 45, capable of 1.6 watts, or as I like to say 1,600 milliwatts. Strange as it seems, it drives my system to very high levels without obvious clipping on all but the loudest demo material. Sure, it must be clipping transients some of the time, but I have yet to find another amplifier that makes recordings sound as real in my system as this one does. An amp like this can bring about an almost overwhelming sense of involvement with a good recording, providing more of a magic carpet ride than my Akai receiver and any amount of Maui Wowie did years ago.

Steve Gonzales
03-03-2005, 02:49 AM
Great post Steve. The distortion in the harmonics and their "order', is that like order=octaves and when you speak of timbre, I understand that to be the unique sonic signature of say a flute playing middle C as opposed to a piano? So, on paper, without the true weighting of the factors you describe, a tube amp is not as bad as specs would suggest. Interesting..., I was for years, playing the "numbers game", basing all my opinion on what HiFi magazine was reporting about Brand X's distortion figures. As you can probably tell, I just want to find out what can sound best, with an open mind, seeking out new things for improving the sound of my rig. This discussion has opened my eyes to more possibilities than ever before. I've just recently fell in love with compression driven horns and have heard and read about the sweet marriage between the two (tube amps & comp drivers). That response took some time to do and I appreciate EVERY second it you took to do so. Thanks Steve. Also, I hope to see some of your goodies in the new gallery section of the Forum, Best Regards, Steve Gonzales

yggdrasil
03-03-2005, 05:35 AM
I have heard that tubes have limited lifetime and changes quite a lot over time.

Can anyone elaborate on that?

scott fitlin
03-03-2005, 09:33 AM
Over time, you will have to re-bias your tubes, how much and when depends on how much and how hard you use your tube amp! Eventually tubes need to be replaced, you can hear when the tubes are shot, at the end of their lifespan they make noise, called Tube Roar, sounds like noise!

scott fitlin
03-03-2005, 09:40 AM
:) Steve: Remember when I said "snake oil :bs: ?, I have not heard anything better than M Levinson or Krell, even moneywise, I do not want to spend that money, so I´m happy with a Crown K2, a Sony N77ES, and an N80ES.I like older Levinsons, I also heard Krells, and Krell makes tight bass, but I find them edgy and kind of harsh in the upper mids and highs! If one can afford them as subwoofer amps, that would be my way to use them!

For my mids and highs I still like my old Crown D-150A and Crown Power Line-2,s! The D-150A and JBL 2441,s work well together, they just do.

Jus my opinion! :D

Steve Schell
03-03-2005, 12:21 PM
Steve, the harmonics generated by an amplifier will be at multiples of the frequency being reproduced. If you look at an amplifier producing a 100Hz. sine wave on a spectrum analyzer, there will be (hopefully much lower) spikes at 200, 300, 400, 500 etc. In musical terms, the 2nd (200) is an octave above the fundamental, the third is approximately a fifth above that, the third a fourth above that, the fourth two octaves above the fundamental. Going higher the harmonics begin falling awkwardly in between notes on the musical scale, which is one reason why they begin sounding like fingernails on a blackboard.You are correct- a major reason we can easily identify different musical instruments playing the same note is that they contain very different amounts of the various harmonics, which creates their recognizable timbre.

A weighting system as proposed by Lynn Olson would certainly cast the performance of the typical tube circuit in a different light, one that might agree more with listening impressions. Perceptions vary so much between individuals, though. At trade shows I encounter systems that are bright, shrill, edgy, bleached out, distorted, you name it. The exhibitor will appear to be quite proud of the sound he's getting- if it was my room I'd shut the door until I could figure out what's wrong.

Johnny, tubes do wear out over time. Mostly it's a matter of the cathode, whose job is to shed electrons, being slowly poisoned by the impure vacuum inside the envelope which impairs its emission capability. A well made tube used properly in a circuit will usually last several thousand hours, sometimes tens of thousands for understressed small signal tubes. There may be measurable changes in performance throughout their life, but practically speaking they sound good until they don't, then it's time to change them.

Steve Gonzales
03-03-2005, 04:07 PM
Electrons are particular, they have mass, right? So when a tube has been through a heavy/long work cycle, the vacume gets contaminated with this "matter" or erosion of plate material?. Very cool stuff to know. As for the weighting issue: when I see specs discussed and read that there are good/bad things about an amps ability to reproduce even/odd harmonics, that is saying that the amps ability to faithfully reproduce individual components of the whole signal that, in turn, makes up and gives whatever was recorded, its unique sonic signature? So, in other words, timbre distortion!. If I am following this correctly, I can see how this could explain the love so many have for tube amps. I know my Bud, Mr. David Brink, has EVERYTHING a person could EVER want as far as gear is concerned ( and it wasn't handed to him!), and he swears by tubes. Not for any other reason than that they SOUND RIGHT. I am VERY intrigued. Every layer of understanding is exciting with it's newfound promise. No more numbers game(s)!. When Mr. Jack Sproul explained to me the tube/SS difference, he mentioned that when the first good SS amps came out, they were hated for the "dry", "lifeless" manner in which they reproduced music. I now strongly suspect this is due to the manner in which they translate the "WHOLE" signal!. Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to just dump my SS amps. I will consult with David and also welcome any suggestions for an amp in the moderately priced range. I can't wait to hear my 375's driven by a sweet little EL34 based amp now!. I am grateful to you Steve (and others) for lifting the vail of confusion concerning tube amps. I can see where it could/will lead to having to find recordings that were thoughtfully recorded with the whole chain i.e.= record/mix/mastered with the right type of gear in each step!. Please give me your thoughts as to my stated understanding of your explanations. I want to get this right. Thank you and best regards, Steve G

porschedpm
03-03-2005, 10:24 PM
To me, comparing the virtues of SS vs Tube amps is analogous to comparing a photograph to a painting of the same scene. Some will prefer the photograph because it is a more accurate representation. Accepting the fact that at times a photograph may be brutally accurate, they prefer a photograph's detail and accuracy. To others, the painting is more pleasing to their eyes. Even though paintings may not be as true a depiction of the scene, the way the artist blends the strokes, the colors and hues, especially in the case of the impressionists, the artist creates a world that some feel is more beautiful (or relaxing or pleasant, etc) than the harshness of real life. To say one is better than the other is a matter of preference.

Mr. Widget
03-03-2005, 11:00 PM
The painting on the left is a faithful reproduction of a red wall. The photo on the right is of a white(?) car, near Paris(?)....

Widget ;)

Steve Gonzales
03-04-2005, 01:32 AM
The very heart of this discussion is a fact finding mission. Those that have made up their mind absolutely about one or the other cannot hope to gleen anything from it. What is good is that I've learned some really interesting points about tube amps that were begging to be answered. From one model to another in any brand and type of amplifier, there are differences, so I don't for one minute expect a blanket statement to be true about the difference between the two types alone too. I have been a staunch defender of the SS crowd for 25 years. I am skeptical about tube amps still somewhat. Here's the BIG BUT (pun intended): there are SO MANY people ,whos opinion I hold in high regard, that own and enjoy them that I am curious to the point that I will seek out a good one to try and make my own mind up with my ears. I can lie to others but my ears have NEVER lied to me. I am now armed with some baseline information in which to do so and I'm thankful. TTYL, Steve G

Steve Schell
03-04-2005, 01:49 AM
Steve, as I understand it the cathode of the tube (which boils off electrons which are then attracted by the high voltage potential of the plate and controlled by the potential of the grid) is slowly poisoned by contaminants within the envelope. Impurities which remain inside the tube from the imperfect vacuum established when the tube was manufactured deposit themselves on the cathode surface, impairing its ability to release electrons. The silvery substance visible in most tubes is the "getter", a substance designed to trap and hold most of the impurities when the tube is manufactured. Sometimes a slight vacuum leak can introduce gasses into the tube later on as well.

In a push pull tube output stage, even order harmonics are cancelled out, leaving the odd order harmonics to remain. This skewed balance is thought by some to result in a less accurate sound. Single ended circuits do not cancel any harmonics, so they remain in their natural proportion. So, the THD will measure higher but here is another case where measurements do not necessarily correlate with listening impressions. Another aspect of single ended circuits is that the primary of any interstage or output transformers carries the standing current of the preceding tube; the audio signal represents a small variation in this DC current, and a slight varying of the magnetization of the transformer core. With a push pull transformer, the alternating audio signal causes the magnetization of the core to collapse and reform in the other direction with every half cycle of signal, placing the smallest, most delicate audio signals in the transformer's most nonlinear region. I think this is the key to why single ended circuits seem to pass so much more fine detail without alteration.

Porschedpm, in your analogy were you intending a solid state amp to represent the more detailed and accurate rendering of a photograph, and a tube amp to represent the pleasant but less accurate painting? We'll have to agree to disagree if this is the case, at least if the tube amp is an ambitious DHT SE design.

Mr. Widget
03-04-2005, 02:06 AM
Steve G,

If you want to hear a really good tube amp to help you in your SS vs. tube exploration, I would suggest Cary. Their better amps are really great, and unfortunately way out of my price range. Audio Research and Conrad Johnson also make many wonderful tube amps. You can listen to a modded Dynaco, but then you are heading in to the realm of personal preference as some are pretty good and others are more like the photo I posted above. Some of Cary's more affordable amps are unfortunately also in this category.:(

Widget

Ian Mackenzie
03-04-2005, 03:27 AM
Steve,

You have certainly got some very fine responses.

Some years ago when I was an active member of our local audio club we had numerous debates and demonstrations on SS versus tubes with amps.

In one test on my earlier JBLs we compared a bunch of SS amps and some tube amps incl Quad 405, Phase linear, Playmaster series 111, a Mullard tube 30+30, Cary Single Ended 7 watt.

Out of that lot the Mostfet Playmaster was the prefered SS amp and the baby Cary of the tubes. Surprisingly they sounded similar in tonal character and overall quality.

On the face of such comparions its chalk and cheese and apples versus applies unless your can identify the optimum load conditons for a given design either SS ror tube and aside from basic topology differences this is why there is such wide spread opinion imho. Under real load conditions an amplifier will exhibit all sorts of odd behaviour in one way or another despending on the design as they are all compromises. And cheap or not so good designs of either often taint opinions for a lifetime and create almost religious cult followings in both camps.

For example some tube amps are far from a pure voltage source, and with a speaker that may have a low impediance (or reactive) and at higher frequencies they sound mellow or fat at low frequencies if they have a dip in impediance in the bass. This results larger amounts of 2nd harmonic distortion as a result...some audiophiles even venture to call this musicality as it tends to be pleasing to the ear.

However a good value amp tends to have even amplitude of harmonic distortions across all frequencies, where as SS amps tend to have rising distortion with frequencies over 1000hz or so as a result of loss of open loop gain and falling feedback at high frequencies (A/B amps here). The effect of this and the switching distortions that ocurr in the output stage that are looped via the feedback (for correction) with increasing harmonics give rise the harsh nature of the run of the mill SS amps.

SS amps with mild or little feedback that are designed to be linear to start with tend to sound better subjectively. These also tend to be more expensive.

Given all the above its easier to make a tube amp using the best known topology and thats class A in either Push Pull or Single Ended. They don't mind getting hot and notably Cary makes excellent Class A triode amps.

However, the Fet has similar properties to the Tube and when designed correctly a Fet amplifier can produce suprisingly impressive performance and notably the Aleph Passlabs is an excellent Single Ended amp which shares many qualities of both tube and SS amps and can range in power from 30-200 watts.

Another SS amplifer designed by the late JL Hood (who was a consultant to Toshiba and other semconductor manufacturers) was in fact a challenge to the Williamson Valve amplifier of the 60's and Hood claim he could not hear the difference. I have built this amp and have no reason to challenge this claim as it was subjectively superior to the modern day Cary 35+35 Push Pull Class A amp.

Steve, try as many amps as you can. In the end its a tasting exercise and how they all blend with you system, but stick with a good vintage of each type of amp.

regards

Ian

Steve Gonzales
03-04-2005, 03:46 AM
Ian, I will do just that! Refreshing to see this get back on track and go somewhere meaningful, Thanks again to ALL you Gentlemen.

luxmanlover
03-10-2005, 07:31 PM
My 2(where's the cents key?????) after my month or so of hybrid system (tubes on top ss on bottom), listening experience has been very positive. Cd's I considered unlistenable have become a joy to play again, much like the transition from metal/plastic horns to wood, not quite as dramatic but a definate improvemnt none the less. I find the sound much more detailed and yet not harsh like you get with excess top end sometimes. The midrange on good recording, wraps literally wraps around you. With 4" voice coils like in the 2235h's I found the bass on the weak side. Other speaker combo's are probalby better suited to use with small SE amps like the I'm using, a 10 watt single ended 6l6gc unit.
Kelly

Steve Gonzales
03-11-2005, 07:04 PM
I am looking at tube amps for the top end of my system (2395/375 combo/076). I have a feeling that the only reasonable way for me to go is SS on the bottom. I dare think that I could afford a powerful enough tube amp in a stereo/fullrange set-up. I've got to get some JBL electronic crossovers to start this testing with. looks like this summer is a good time to start. Thanks again for the input, Steve G

luxmanlover
03-11-2005, 07:13 PM
I use a Urei 525 on my set up. I works great, very flexible, unfortunately not the best looking component I've ever seen but who really cares as long as it works and that it does well.
Kelly

johnaec
03-12-2005, 07:47 AM
The San Francisco chapter of the AES has an interesting meeting coming up on a similar subject - analog vs. digital processes and recording:

March 2005 Meeting Notice

<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0 width=564 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width="28%">Subject:</TD><TD width="72%">Old School/New School</TD></TR><TR><TD width="28%">Speaker:</TD><TD width="72%">Paul Stubblebine</TD></TR><TR><TD width="28%">Place:</TD><TD width="72%">Coast Recorders, 1340 Mission St, San Francisco, CA</TD></TR><TR><TD width="28%">Time and Date:</TD><TD width="72%">March 22, 2005, 6-10PM




</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Join us for a tasting of two approaches to music recording. In the
large room at Coast Recorders (a Bill Putnam-designed room) a band will
be set up to record. There will be two parallel recording chains: on
one hand a bunch of outmoded old tube mics, feeding a lot of
old-fashioned gear and a hopelessly out-of-date analog recorder. On the
other hand, a lot of sleek, modern, solid-state mics, into current mic
preamps and a digital workstation loaded with plugins. Hear for
yourself as we switch between the two. (Caveat: this is just for fun.
Please, no wagering.)

Address:
Coast Recorders
1340 Mission St, San Francisco, CA 94103
Tel (415)863-6009

duaneage
03-18-2005, 08:50 PM
I never thought that the source material and music I listened to would matter much with SS or Tubes. I have heard both and prefer my SS amps. I run Yamaha M-45 amps and I like them. They are MOS-FET amps with a unique biasing circuit that runs AB up to 5 watts and Class A above 5 watts. Prevents the crossover distortion push pull SS amps are plaqued with.

For the record I think the warm sound of tubes comes from two places.

1. Overdriving the amps because they don't have enough power and we want more sound.

2. Different dampening charactoristics - tubes offer good speaker control, better than many SS amps.

One downside to tubes for sure is the danger of a broken speaker wire. An open circuit to the speaker may cause damage to the tube amp.

The MOS-FET offers tube like charactoristics, but of course there are now electronic signal processors that claim to do the same thing. Winamp has a plug in that simulates valve sound even.

"Duke" Spinner
10-05-2005, 06:20 AM
with a unique biasing circuit that runs AB up to 5 watts and Class A above 5 watts. .


That ....would be Unique .....i think you have it backwards.....:p

Ian Mackenzie
10-05-2005, 07:16 AM
Yes some amps are biased for a few watts into class A, other have a sliding bias scheme. The Sony Power Jfet amps for the best of breed for some time.

I can't stand SS amps that are not biased to some degree into classA. Class A and little or no feedback offers the best sound in imh & experience. That comes at a heft price for the consumer unless you dabble with making your own.

Fortunately the best designs are both brilliant and at the same time simple in their execution for a diy guru.

If you look at the Beta curves for a transister or a fet, they are non linear with both voltage ane current. Mosfets tend to sound fizzy and less dynamic unless biased hard at 50 c temp into class A. BJTs are just plain hard and bright unless biased hard and then have great detail and ambience.

With tubes it depends on the design and the tubes which vary tonally from one brand to another. The better amps are single ended triodes and are relatively low powered..they sound very refined and detailed with only a hint of warmth.

JBLs sound very nice with a class A mosfet or BJT imho because they bring out the micro transient details so well.

There is some very interesting Tube stuff coming out of China, cheap and well made.... could be the way to go for your horns.

duaneage
10-05-2005, 10:02 AM
That ....would be Unique .....i think you have it backwards.....:p

Just what the manual says...........:wasnt-me:

There is a switch that sllows the amp to run pure class A at all times but it does run warmer when that is used

hapy._.face
02-04-2006, 07:54 PM
The painting on the left is a faithful reproduction of a red wall. The photo on the right is of a white(?) car, near Paris(?)....

Widget ;)

Old thread, I know. But Widget- this is one of your best postings(IMO). ...couldn't stop laughing! Thanks! :p

Steve Gonzales
02-07-2006, 08:27 PM
I have lived with my system in a triamped configuration now = Yamaha SS M35 35wpc driving four 076's, a VTL model 45 EL34 based tube amp driving SIX JBL 1" throat compression drivers, 2420's on 2312's, LE85's on 800hz McCauley elliptical mouth horns and 2421's on JBL 2397 Smithhorns and a Yamaha M80 driving 1pr of LE14A's and a pair of LE14H's. I use a JBL M553 electronic crossover. The VTL is to die for!. Dead quiet, wonderful resolution/soundstage and with the electronic crossover, more than enough power to drive all of them, believe it or not, with no soft clipping at very high SPL's (that I can detect). So my opinion of tube amps is that if you can find the right one, you could be VERY happy with the results. I have to thank Dave Brink for this wonderful gift. It gave me the luxury of starting with a sweet amp and not have to do much else. I will try different EL34's like, Mullards and maybe Telefunken later. I will also search for a tube amp to drive the 076's too. I know there are diehard SS guys out there and I respect that. I say that the proof of what the right tube amp, in the right configuration, is music to my ears, Regards, Steve G.

norealtalent
02-08-2006, 08:55 AM
:o: Only my best for my best, My Friend :o:

Michael Smith
02-09-2006, 07:04 PM
Hey Widget
I nearly spilt my wine,the picture of the white car is taken in Melbourne Australia,St Kilda Road to be exact just near the Arts Centre.The car is an Oz Ford
Where did you get Paris from? Ian Mckenzie must be spending too much time at the Tardis,or he doesn't read your posts.
Thanks for the giggle
Michael

Merkin Berfel
02-13-2006, 03:55 AM
Once I learned one simple truth the tube vs SS argument was over.... All tube amps use an output transformer and transistor amps are directly coupled. The only exceptions to this rule that I know of are the early McIntosh SS amps (2105/2300) and the recent high-dollar Macs. The Macs that are considered a little less desirable are the direct-coupled models from the 80's.

I hear the difference the most in the mid-bass. When I played bass guitar in copy bands in the early 80's I could hear the bass lines more clearly on the speaker in my old black & white TV than on my stereo. The problem didn't get solved until I got my first MC2100 back in '85.

The oracle that taught me about audio had both tube and SS Macs over the course of time and he maintained that there was little difference in sound between them.

:dj-party:

hapy._.face
02-13-2006, 07:49 AM
Solid state for the bottom end-tubes for the mids and highs. Get the best of both worlds, IMO. It's a popular method because it works very, very well.

norealtalent
02-13-2006, 09:10 AM
Partial... he maintained that there was little difference in sound between them.



Still looking for WMD's, eh?
I will concede that a very high quality SS amp can be wonderful when directly compared to some tube amps. However, if I go down in my basement and break out a vintage motorola console ss amp and a vintage motorola console tube amp, so that I am comparing equitable pieces of equipment in regards to pricepoint and technology, the difference will be staggering. Tubes have advantages over SS(sound, tuneability, secondary house hold heat source), as quality SS has advantages over tubes(maintenance free reliability, excellent ballast for tall racks.) Both can be very pleasing and sometimes both will not. For a realistic comparison, equitable pieces must be used with no other variables allowed. With this as your test bed, then you can get accurate results from which to form an opinion. For my taste and from my experience, I'll take the tubes on top. Even high end SS amps cannot do what a little el84 can for accuracy, speed, transparency and depth. I love all those esoteric terms we've come up with to create BS sales techniques. Bottom line, give me tubes or give me transistors, just don't give me bose!!!:bouncy:

Titanium Dome
02-13-2006, 11:47 AM
My two FA1000.5 amps put me in the sweet spot between tube-like sound, SS reliability and power, and affordability. JFET input stages and MOSFET power outputs do a nice job, and the variable impedance-matching switch actually seems to work.

At some point, I may spend the time and money to "tube up" one stereo system, but despite all the positive comments from tube owners over the years, I've not been bitten by the tube bug. If I do go that direction, I hope to discover something better, rather than just surrendering to peer pressure.

Yes, peer pressure still exists in my mid-fifites. :D

Ian Mackenzie
02-13-2006, 11:58 AM
I think the trad tube amps like the Quads and Dynaco's are more a relaxant to the hard edge of SS from the same era. But if you compare those to the current day Cary, CJ or AR they are far less Trad Tube sounding. The problem is they also tend to be expensive and maintaining match output tubes is also expensive while the RCA input tubes are becoming rare as hens teeth.

Chas
02-13-2006, 01:42 PM
Still looking for WMD's, eh?
I will concede that a very high quality SS amp can be wonderful when directly compared to some tube amps. However, if I go down in my basement and break out a vintage motorola console ss amp and a vintage motorola console tube amp, so that I am comparing equitable pieces of equipment in regards to pricepoint and technology, the difference will be staggering. Tubes have advantages over SS(sound, tuneability, secondary house hold heat source), as quality SS has advantages over tubes(maintenance free reliability, excellent ballast for tall racks.) Both can be very pleasing and sometimes both will not. For a realistic comparison, equitable pieces must be used with no other variables allowed. With this as your test bed, then you can get accurate results from which to form an opinion. For my taste and from my experience, I'll take the tubes on top. Even high end SS amps cannot do what a little el84 can for accuracy, speed, transparency and depth. I love all those esoteric terms we've come up with to create BS sales techniques. Bottom line, give me tubes or give me transistors, just don't give me bose!!!:bouncy:

Agreed, SS can't be beat on the bottom, although I have been experimenting with the Plitron Vanderveen Specialist Series toroids for a few years. I normally run them with four KT88's per channel, no global feedback, fully balanced and with regulated power above 100-200 Hz and to my ears, they are the cats meow.

But, the odd time when I run them full range, they are pretty darn good at LF.:p The F3 at around 140 Watts is about 14Hz! Not too shabby for a couple of tube amps...:yes:

If any of you like building stuff, I highly recommend trying them.

Merkin Berfel
02-14-2006, 04:08 AM
if I go down in my basement and break out a vintage motorola console ss amp and a vintage motorola console tube amp, so that I am comparing equitable pieces of equipment in regards to pricepoint and technology, the difference will be staggering

Does the Motorola SS amp have an output transformer or is it direct-coupled? Was it meant as a serious piece of hi-fi equipment? I'm only trying to say that the debate has more to do with whether or not an amp uses an output transformer than whether it's tube or SS.

Anybody A/B'd a Mac MC275 with an MC2100?

Mr. Widget
02-14-2006, 10:35 AM
Anybody A/B'd a Mac MC275 with an MC2100?Almost.... MC240 vs. MC2100. The MC240 sounds fairly lush in the mids with a bit of a mushy bottom. The MC2100 while tighter on the bottom end has a much harsher midrange.


Widget

Harkness
02-14-2006, 05:12 PM
i noticed a dramatic difference on my old alnico 16 ohm jbl's when i went from my quad SS amp to my 1950's tube ampex monoblocks. immediately noticeable was that the bottom end was very dramatically better (smoother and more extended lows) with the tube power, even though there were less watts available. i think horn loaded low end is somewhat different than reflex loaded drivers though. less power is required, and speaker damping is different.

the monoblocks i am using are 6v6 push-pull amps designed to drive the 16 ohm JBL 12 that was used to monitor audio in the first video tape machines that ampex built in the late 50's. even with only 15 watts of clean power they shake the room incredibly. it's so transparently loud and clean that one has to try shouting to the person next to you to realize that it's as loud as it is. i also found that i was able to listen to higher playback levels for longer with the tube power, regardless of the source.


i would venture to say that anyone with horn loaded low end would definitely not need more than 60 watts of tube power/ch. if biamping. unless perhaps your listening room is 2000 square feet or more. :)


for my JBL's it's tube power all the way.

10 Watt Street
02-14-2006, 05:39 PM
If those are the 6V6 amps from the Ampex suitcase speaker, my understanding is that they have EQ built in for JBL D216.

Harkness
02-14-2006, 06:35 PM
If those are the 6V6 amps from the Ampex suitcase speaker, my understanding is that they have EQ built in for JBL D216.

those suitcase amps are not the ones i have.

the ones i have are standard 19" rack mount with a single xlr input jack and a single output tap for 16 ohms. they have a front mounted power switch and an input attenuation volume pot. as i mentioned, they were specific to the first generation ampex video tape machines, which were enormous, and phenomenally expensive. they have a lot of input gain due to the EF86 at the input stage. makes them mate well with low output preamps, like the NAIM i use them with.

found an old pic, you can see what one looks like..

scott fitlin
02-14-2006, 06:41 PM
i would venture to say that anyone with horn loaded low end would definitely not need more than 60 watts of tube power/ch. if biamping. unless perhaps your listening room is 2000 square feet or more. :)


for my JBL's it's tube power all the way.I hear what you hear. Its always been said that 50 watts tube is as strong as 100 watts solid state. I know I also hear lower powered tube amps that just defy what their ratings say.

I have also been told part of the reason tube amps are like this is because their power supplies run at much higher voltages that SS amps. A typical tube amp can have power supply voltages of 250v or more.

I wholeheartedly agree that tubes give JBL, especially older JBL comp drivers, a sound that cant be beat!

Unfotunately for me, in my system, its totally impractical to run tube amps, as my system runs many hours, in a hard enviroment, vibration and dust, and played at high SPL. But I heard a unit thats line level that utilizes 12AX7,s, and the magic coming out of the horns, and tweeters, as well as the bass was amazing! Clarity, and SMOOOTH and liquid, very natural and real. The dynamics were outstanding, drums sounded like drums, pianos had that twinkle and highs sparkle! Vocals just come into the room. And the mids have no edge to them, just smooth, realistic sound!

What I really couldnt get over, was how a little tube in the signal path makes the bottom end sound, SO BIG and detailed sounding. I was able to hear the bassists fingers on the fretboard.

Tubes got something special! They do.

:)

Aussie Pete
02-14-2006, 07:58 PM
Tube amps do sound warmer and are less dynamic, … it’s akin to putting a SS amp through a compressor http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/moon.gif (http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=6#) …….. Some people just don’t like transients and prefer the sound of a tube amp. Great for guitar/musical instruments amps where colouration becomes part of the signature sound or for some muso to play flat out and then some, but in my view for faithful reproduction you just can’t beat SS, after all the name of the game is “faithful reproduction”. These self designated “top end manufactures” are constantly on the lookout for new fads and angles to market their junk, I take it all with a pinch of salt …I’ve even seen manufacturers using de-oxygenated mains cable ………. I mean honestly what a crock of shit, the trouble is they know that 99.99% of the public possess no technical qualifications, (an interest yes but qualifications no!) to be able to decipher this crap and they get away with it unchallenged. But if you prefer the sound/colouration of a tube amp Vs a SS amp ….then no problems that’s the individual’s choice, like some people like horns and others don’t …. no big deal …. But I think when you want to argue that tube is technically a more faithful reproducer of sound than a SS amp …. Well that’s a different kettle of fish, I mean how many half baked tube amps do you see in serious recording studio’s, how many de-oxygenated mains leads do you find in these studios, how many de-oxygenated signal cables do you see in there, how many “low capacitance” monster cables do you find ….. I’ll save you the time ….ZERO!! I have cabled a quite a few TV studios in my time and a quite a few high power Transmitter sites, I speak from experience.

There are certain circuit topologies that work well and others that don’t, there is nothing startling about this fact, and I don’t know what all the fuss is about.http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/banghead.gif

Tubes have their uses and are/were great for high power (10+ Kw) TV, FM and HF Transmitters because of their ability to withstand lightening strikes better than their SS counterparts (they are a lot more forgiving) …. But this is no longer the case, almost all transmitter design today use many SS paralleled HPA’s …. The paralleled HPA (High Powered Amp) approach is more desirable because of redundancy and the fact you don’t need large messy tuned cavity’s ...ie) you may take out 1 valve with a serious lightening strike and your TX is gone off air, where as with a SS transmitter you may only take out 1 or 2 HPA’s with another 10 or so still operating, so your TX is still on air although with reduced output.

Now I know why 30 years ago I avoided a career in the audio field … I got sick and tired of the snake oil salesmen and the know everything/ know nothing bull shit artists that somehow everybody wants to listen to, I don't know of any other industry where hairs are split on an such a regular and neverending basis, where my ear is better and more well trained than yours, where imagination surpasses facts... I took up a career in TV/Radio Broadcasting … much more fulfilling where the bullshit artists are way out of their depth, although they still try occasionally.http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Ian Mackenzie
02-14-2006, 11:17 PM
Great post Pete,

I wish more could do the same.

As many valve lovers say, "If it don't Glow it don't Go!"

Technically the Tube amp probably has a much lower damping factor than the SS amp and so it will behave more like a current source than a voltage source at times. This is often noticable where there is a rapid change in impediance like the resonance peaks and dip in a reflex box and you get that mellow, warm and often extended bottom end and tappering hi end.

People tend to warm to that sort of thing so whatever suits your fancy.

Ian

Aussie Pete
02-15-2006, 03:38 AM
Ian … I suppose where I was going with this is that do people want a system that is something to brag about or something to show off or something “technically” the best or do you want something that is actually nice to listen to. I’m not knocking valve sound at all and believe me my 4435’s with 2 bridged BGW250D’s for the LF and a JBL MPX300 for the top end can get pretty darn damaging on the ears because of the transients and I have heaps of headroom to reproduce those transients. My system is totally transparent … shit in … shit out!! ….and I can see that some colouration may be useful, I have often considered buying an Aphex 720 Dominator 2 to limit things down a little but not to colour it. I have followed the “keep everything clean” approach and most times I don’t use a pre-amp …. I have a diecast box with a 47K Log pot and a selector switch, CD or DVD straight out into this box (with no de-oxygenated cableshttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/biggrin.gif ) then to an Aphex 10/4 then to the 5235 crossover and no I don’t use gold plated XLR’s eitherhttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/biggrin.gif . I have a Proton pre-amp “which I found in the shed propping something else up” I put this into cct when my ears can no longer take the high transients, It’s medioka design ….. or should I say “typical” design, lashings of negative feedback and cheap Ic’s so the overall slew rate is poor … but it has the effect of a cheap compressor ……and it doesn’t “breath”.



Everything has a use … even valves, I mean there is some professional stuff out there for recording studio’s (and I speak of real recording studio’s here with real engineers .. not some 20 or 30 something year old sitting in front of a PC running Pro Tools and employing no end of outboard toys so he can fiddle and screw with so as to get the sound right because he has no single clue on how to place a microphone properly …. And we wonder why many new CD’s sound like they have been mixed and put together by your 5 year old kid when he’s sleep walking and using his toes to adjust levels with) anyway …. I digress againhttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/blah.gif .. Yes valves in pro gear, as an example is the Aphex Tube Mic Pre-Amplifier but you won’t find tubes in studio monitoring amplifiers because of the colouration factor….. so we are seeing that you can actually take advantage of the poor dynamics of a tube, (as I exploit the poor transient response of my Proton pre-amplifierhttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/biting.gif ) great for mic pre-amps where the colouration factor and poor dynamics can be of great use to possibly provide a more natural limiting/control effect of a very dynamic singer and even enhance the tonal qualities of the voice and just to provide that “warm fuzzy” sound that for some reason people like.



I would still maintain there is no argument or example to support the statement that valves produce a more transparent sound compared to a well designed SS amp with high slew rate, I don’t care what marketing spin they put on it, or how many heat radiating, glowing valves they put in it or how many shiny knobs or gold plated jacks they have on it, (my experience is that the morons who sell this stuff have their arrogant and ignorant heads shoved so far up their backsides that if you don’t walk in with 10 grand in your back pocket then you are “irrelevant” and most of them have no idea who JBL are or they reply "oh everybody calls their speakers studio monitors"http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/biting.gif ) they have just regurgitated the wheel again and called it something else … rearranged the spokes slightly different or something, which unfortunately happens just too damn often in this audio world and so many people fall for it ….. they just exploit the weakness and fact that some humans like to keep striving for the ultimate and most humans are competitive, and some even feel intelligent and important because they have this thing that looks like it belongs out of a 1950’s TV studio in their lounge room, even though they have no capabilities whatsoever to independently verify that rearranging the spokes in this pattern makes a better wheel, the fact that they are chromed and shiny are enough for them. ……. As I said before …. In no other industry does this nonsense exist to this extent.http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/banghead.gif



BUT valves do have their uses ….. But not in monitoring!!



Please note: the reference to Pro Tools was not intended to be a negative one; this is a popular, legitimate and useful recording tool…. But it does make it easy for no nothings to enter the industry and produce “stuff”.

Ian Mackenzie
02-15-2006, 05:51 AM
Well what was a rant and rightly so!

Can I just say although good in its day the 5235 crossover is possibly leaving your system wanting. The chips in it aren't exactly everyones favourite, they were introduced in 1978

I find to pointless to be using a valve power amp (or a hifi SS amp) with a crossover like the above. Its just kills whatover the notion of audiophile/Hifi quality is about. Sorry but that is how it is.

I have slapped my gums elsewhere on this topic so I will not elaborate.

Incidentially, some of the finest amps and preamps use J fets. They do many similar things to Valves without the headaches. Sonically they sound very natural and resolve more information than an equivalent bipolar amplifier..and they are very quiet.

norealtalent
02-15-2006, 09:55 AM
… I’m not knocking valve sound at all and believe me my 4435’s with 2 bridged BGW250D’s for the LF and a JBL MPX300 for the top end can get pretty darn damaging on the ears because of the transients and I have heaps of headroom to reproduce those transients. My system is totally transparent … shit in … shit out!! ….and I can see that some colouration may be useful,... I put this into cct when my ears can no longer take the high transients,...BUT valves do have their uses ….. But not in monitoring!!

I've never experienced a live performance where "my ears can no longer take the high transients." If transistors reproduce source material in a manner less pleasing than the original while valves maintain the authentic listenability of a live performance, the obvious is clear. It seems to me that any "colouration" would be from the system that reproduces in a manner less consistent with the actual dynamics of the original performance. :bouncy:

Aussie Pete
02-15-2006, 04:58 PM
Naw Ian .... I redesigned the front and back ends some time ago using OP275's ..... I only kept the filter section .... That’s all I wanted out of the original design.:D



I always thought transients were a natural part of music …..Unless it’s through a valve amp:moon:

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 05:16 PM
I choose not to lend my 2 cents to this AGE OLD debate, but I'll leave it at this, the BEST sounding Solid State and Tube Amps will sound the same, the difference is in the design. The same goes for the age old AlNiCo vs. Ferrite debate. The material doesn't matter so much as the design of the driver. Again, nothing more will I say, this is obviously a debate with no end in site.

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 05:17 PM
I always thought transients were a natural part of music …..Unless it’s through a valve amp:moon:

Transients can be heard through good quality tube amps.

Ian Mackenzie
02-15-2006, 05:36 PM
I choose not to lend my 2 cents to this AGE OLD debate, but I'll leave it at this, the BEST sounding Solid State and Tube Amps will sound the same, the difference is in the design. The same goes for the age old AlNiCo vs.Ferrite. The material doesn't matter so much as the deign of the driver. Again, nothing more will I say, this is obviously a debate with no end in site.

About the Alnico thing try telling that to JBL.

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 05:40 PM
I think they already know that there's no difference, why else would they continue using Ferrite in their drivers?

norealtalent
02-15-2006, 05:52 PM
I think they already know that there's no difference, why else would they continue using Ferrite in their drivers?

DOH!:homer:

Aussie Pete
02-15-2006, 05:58 PM
Apologies gents … just having some funhttp://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/cheers.gif ….all I’m pointing out is “personal choice” I do and listen to what makes me feel good and I would expect others to do the same … it would be a boring world if we all thought the same and agreed on everything. I admit that I have not listened to every valve amp in the world and I’m sure somewhere out there, there would be some valve amps that would be a good or better compromise than many SS amps but I’m like everyone else making judgments on personal experience and I don’t have a hang up in being proven wrong. The end …. I promise!! And I won’t even consider joining the Alnico Vs Ferritre discussion.http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/readme.gif

speakerdave
02-15-2006, 06:06 PM
I always find it interesting when somebody lambasts every tube amp in the world and then starts listing the second rate solid state equipment they find acceptable. It's such a joke, really.

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 06:11 PM
Is that what I did? That was never my intention.

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 06:13 PM
DOH!:homer:

Am I wrong? http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=4031

norealtalent
02-15-2006, 06:13 PM
I always find it interesting when somebody lambasts every tube amp in the world and then starts listing the second rate solid state equipment they find acceptable. It's such a joke, really.

How do you spell touche'?:D Oh, thats right, JBL :applaud: :applaud: :applaud:

norealtalent
02-15-2006, 06:19 PM
Is that what I did? That was never my intention.
No my friend, I don't beleive you did and I don't believe you were wrong and don't believe everything you read around here and most importantly, don't take ANY of it personal.( And please [gently] remind me of this when you see me taking something personal!) We are all full of ourselves sometimes.:D Or is that full of shit?:hmm: :dont-know

Nightbrace
02-15-2006, 06:25 PM
Thanks, I'll be sure to do that, speaking your mind is what makes life worth living. But an opinion without any knowledge of what they are actaully making an opinion about has no merit, nor should it ever. And that's what makes me upset about some people. Don't talk about something like your an expert unless you KNOW what you are talking about. But then again thats just my opinion :).

speakerdave
02-15-2006, 07:05 PM
I've gone back and forth between tube and solid state many times. Each always provides a relief from the lacks in the other. And I've never found either entirely suitable for everything all the time. When I get done with The Ultimate Speaker Project I plan to turn my attention to the electronics, beginning along the lines of Ian's PASS labs projects.

Meanwhile I have both tube and solid state. I also find that my ability to find either one usable depends a lot on the other elements in the chain of reproduction, so when I'm putting a system together I don't look for perfection along a linear trail always tending upward; rather I'm looking for a balance that works well enough.

I also take regular refresher courses in live music. Recently I heard the Renaissance orchestra and the Monteverdi Choir doing Mozart's Requiem and Great Mass in C minor. The next day I put some classical on my tube/vinyl setup that I mostly find exquisite, and I couldn't listen to it. It's all a matter of point of reference and balance, in my view, and I don't see any purpose in being doctrinaire about it. I just don't respond well to somebody saying all people who like tube amps are deluded by con artist entrepeneurs selling a certain species of distortion and he's Mr. Clear Thinking Clear Ears always already with all the science and technology on his side.

My response may have been a little unkind, for which I apologize. I happen to own an MPX300, for example, and I think it is very good for what I use it for, basically what it is designed for, but I would never consider it a superior choice for hi fi. There are many, many other amps, both tube and solid state, that are clearly better for that purpose.

David

Harkness
02-15-2006, 09:18 PM
the system in my living room is for reproducing recorded music. as such, i am looking for the equipment that engages me in the music the most.

after using a pretty decent SS amp for some time it was clear to me that my system sounded better with tube power.

my tube amps are not esoteric or fancy, just industrial grade solidly built 1950's professional level equipment. designed to work day in and day out. i prefer to leave my gear on unless it will be unused for some days, so the fact that they were designed to be on all the time is a plus. tube life has been excellent.

i havn't been able to afford a decent tube pre to see if that would work better than my old Naim audio SS pre, but given the choice i'd rather be using a SS pre than SS power with my JBL's.

transient response from my JBL's did not suffer one bit by using tube power. i am very keenly aware of transients, as a musician and sound recording professional. transients are a huge factor in how believable the sound is. it's why i love horn loaded systems as much as i do. a speaker system can have flat response 20-20 but if it has poor transient response it won't sound like anything resembling a live performance. it will always sound removed and background. a speaker system with incredible transient response but a response curve that is not flat will still sound much more lifelike. the world is not flat. our systems don't need to be either.

i am personally more concerned with having a system that provides a musically satisfying experience than being ruler flat, or put together to the spec's of some theory. finding components that match musically is what matters, whether they are SS or tube. analog or digital. since everyones system (including their ears) is different, there can be no absolutes in this regard.