3 interesting articles from AES, Journal of Elect Engineers, Eric Barbour

[300A]

Three articles, one from the Audio Engineering Society, one from Eric Barbour, and another from the Journal of Electrical Engineers:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tubet1.html

http://www.dwfearn.com/tvst1.htm

[mtrycraft]

Three articles, one from the Audio Engineering Society, one from Eric Barbour, and another from the Journal of Electrical Engineers:
http://www.dwfearn.com/tvst1.htm

A 1973 AES article on SS?

[300A]

So what has changed in SS devices?

[mtrycraft]

So what has changed in SS devices?

I am sure a few things have, you think?

[300A]

I am sure a few things have, you think?

What changes have occurred in SS? Lower distortion, distortion products changes? Tell us, be specific. No assumption now.

Prove it, that is what you have told us to do. Now you do it.

[mtrycraft]

What changes have occurred in SS? Lower distortion, distortion products changes? Tell us, be specific. No assumption now.

Prove it, that is what you have told us to do. Now you do it.

Check the specs on th eold and new. Easy, not hard. Even you can do this, if you are interested.

[mtrycraft]

[QUOTE=300A]Three articles, one from the Audio Engineering Society, one from Eric Barbour, and another from the Journal of Electrical Engineers:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tubet1.html

Highly personal opinions only in the second link about the disadvantages of SS. Too bad I couldn't reprint it here.

You need to get better stuff to support your like for tubes, or, actually, you don't need any for you to like tubes, only when you make testable claims for it.

[300A]

[QUOTE=mtrycraft]

Three articles, one from the Audio Engineering Society, one from Eric Barbour, and another from the Journal of Electrical Engineers:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tubet1.html

Highly personal opinions only in the second link about the disadvantages of SS. Too bad I couldn't reprint it here.

You need to get better stuff to support your like for tubes, or, actually, you don't need any for you to like tubes, only when you make testable claims for it.

First off, the AES reviews the content of articles before printing. I am sure the Journal of Electrical Engineers also do the same. Don't want to soil their reputation.

Secondly, transistors haven't changed in their spectral distortion problems, or quantity. It is inherent. They are very similar to tetrode and pentode tubes in distortion products. Triodes are unique. I believe Eric Barbour clearly shows the spectral distortions of different devices, both tube and SS as does the AES article.

Thirdly, the reason for all those SS part numbers is that when manufacturing transistors, IC chips, the variations in hfe are so varied, they didn't want to throw them away as being out of spec. So they assigned different numbers to them.

Granted most of the population isn't that concerned with audio and replacing tubes every so many years. They just want music of reasonable quality, no hot spots for a child to get burned on and energy efficiency (bills are getting high).

[RGA]

First off, the AES reviews the content of articles before printing. I am sure the Journal of Electrical Engineers also do the same. Don't want to soil their reputation.

Secondly, transistors haven't changed in their spectral distortion problems, or quantity. It is inherent. They are very similar to tetrode and pentode tubes in distortion products. Triodes are unique. I believe Eric Barbour clearly shows the spectral distortions of different devices, both tube and SS as does the AES article.

Thirdly, the reason for all those SS part numbers is that when manufacturing transistors, IC chips, the variations in hfe are so varied, they didn't want to throw them away as being out of spec. So they assigned different numbers to them.

Granted most of the population isn't that concerned with audio and replacing tubes every so many years. They just want music of reasonable quality, no hot spots for a child to get burned on and energy efficiency (bills are getting high).

SS Amps are largely the same...the difference is that the measurements have changed to put the newer technology in the best possible light. Wow and flutter on a cd player sure impresses people even though it's worthless as a measurement for cd players.

Speakers on Axis at 1 meter tells you little to nothing of how it actually sounds.

People say the high end has an agenda to get people to spend more money...which may be true. But the large conglomorates selling cheap junk have the BUCKS and they have an agenda as well. The reality is most people are not "into" audio and thus wouldn't it be cheaper for the conglomorate to press the notion that a $200.00 complete stereo system from Costco is as good as it can possibly get. Companies spend money to make buyers feel good about products.

There is an assumption that being a skeptic makes you right. Thus if I write a skeptical magazine then I'm suddenly a more objective magazine.

If all amps are indistinguishable and all cd players are indistibguishable and we go by CR as to what the BEST speakers on the planet are...then basically we may as well take those Bose speakers and connect it to a JVC cd player receiver all in one - and this will obviously be better than the the guy running a B&W or Paradigm set-up with his Rotel or ASL gear.

Where is CR's PROOF - where is the scientific FACT. They are making a claim...they are saying those speakers are BETTER. PROVE it. Prove to me that it will SOUND better to me.

This does not validate the so called "regular magazines" but if there is no listening involved then it's meaningless.

Validity: These people simply don't want to look it up. Even Floyd Toole has STATED that his tests apply to the testing envoironment ONLY. A little thing that very Subjective objectivisists don't mention. Toole knows that the test is not entirely valid...hence the notation of only in the testing environment.

And even then - Hi Fi Choice measures in a room at a listening position - which is why the measurements coincide with the subjective listening experience. If the two don't match - then you MEASURED wrong. period.

Which is not to say everyone is going to agree with Hi-Fi choice...they base it off a panel of listeners blind. They mention that several members didn't like a particular aspect of the sound but others did. On the whole they may give it a 4/5 for sound - but it depends who YOU are. Half may give it a 3 half give it a 5 and think it's the best product going. Another product may get a 5 consensus but 3 of the panel still might have liked that first unit that got an overall 4 stars better.

It's going to depend on you the listener. Interestingly, Michael Colloms is one of the formost experts on audio and he's not so brain dead to rely on testing only. Hi Fi Choice listens in a panel BLind level matched for ALL componants. Interesting that some amps get 3 stars for sound and others get 5. All sound the same - the measurments are not the same either. B'ahh.

Engineers are not scientists. So why would anyone care what an engineer has to say about scientific testing of humans. Engineers can stick what they know...fiddling with gadgets and designing circuits. And even then - The Sugden A21a from the 1960s is still the same now as it was then. In the blind listening session at hi-fi choice it came out on top. In the subjective reviews it comes out on top for the money.

Your article was from what 1973 a good 5-6 years after the Sugden came out...so yes indeed, what has changed so dramatically since then in SS amps to make them better. Most of the AES articles on amps being produced is of a 1980 test of ONE GUY, with his Tanberg(notice they didn't last). No one has said all amps sound different, paying more doesn't ensure it. If I sat in Front of most SS amps even not blind and not level matched they sound the same

[mtrycraft]

First off, the AES reviews the content of articles before printing. I am sure the Journal of Electrical Engineers also do the same. Don't want to soil their reputation.

Secondly, transistors haven't changed in their spectral distortion problems, or quantity. It is inherent. They are very similar to tetrode and pentode tubes in distortion products. Triodes are unique. I believe Eric Barbour clearly shows the spectral distortions of different devices, both tube and SS as does the AES article.

Thirdly, the reason for all those SS part numbers is that when manufacturing transistors, IC chips, the variations in hfe are so varied, they didn't want to throw them away as being out of spec. So they assigned different numbers to them.

Granted most of the population isn't that concerned with audio and replacing tubes every so many years. They just want music of reasonable quality, no hot spots for a child to get burned on and energy efficiency (bills are getting high).

The AES Journal was published in 1973. He must have had a conference presentation first in 1972.
Your other two links is not peer reviwed.

Why not measure some of the tubes and SS today. And, then do some DBT listeing to see if anyone can differentiate between comparable ones. SETs by definition are just another audio joke.

[RGA]

SETs by definition are just another audio joke.

I gather you have 100% of this statement. Al;l people will think they sound worse is that correct?

This is a claim...where is your proof?

[300A]

"Why not measure some of the tubes and SS today. And, then do some DBT listeing to see if anyone can differentiate between comparable ones. SETs by definition are just another audio joke."

First off, DBTs are not reliable, not proof. No scholar I know of will mentioned the results are fact, period. There is obviuosly a sonic diffence between amps and preamps.

Secondly, Who said SETs are the ultimate? I sure didn't. What about PP?

Thirdly, who says the specs measured today are ALL the specs necessary to measure?? You?? Do you have any proof that is true?
I want to see your proof, no sneaking around trying to wiggle out of it, ok.
I want to see you state that there isn't one more spec necessary to explain the sonic differences between components than that already given. And I want to read the reason why not.

[mtrycraft]

I gather you have 100% of this statement. Al;l people will think they sound worse is that correct?

This is a claim...where is your proof?

Is that what I said? Or you are reading what you want to read that is not there? That is what you are doing, speculating.

[Pat D]

I gather you have 100% of this statement. Al;l people will think they sound worse is that correct?

This is a claim...where is your proof?

Sorry, but mtry did not make a claim as to what people will like.

[newbsterv2]

From an engineering standpoint the answer is quite simple. All an amplifier should do is AMPLIFY the input signal. Period. People who are looking for an amp to warm up their speakers, or bring about this magical glow, are looking for equipment that is not only amplifying but making music of its own. Too many times people will purchase a speaker that is way too prominent in the treble or sibilant and look for a tube amp that rolls off earlier than a well designed solid state amp will. Just go to the soundstage website and look at the figures. Some of these tube amps have an erratic frequency response with an actual load connected and have distortion figures in the teens when driven at full power. It's absolutely amazing how certain manufacturers of tube equipment are basically selling us ditortion boxes for astronomical prices and people don't realise it.

Multi thousand dollar amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...reference_99a/

$650 Amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...s/anthem_pva2/

This is quite funny. The $650 dollar amp has 0.02% distortion at 100W!
The overpriced tube amp is showing 50% distortion in the low frequency region and 15% distortion on the high end!! There's your magic!! It's distortion!!!

[RGA]

From an engineering standpoint the answer is quite simple. All an amplifier should do is AMPLIFY the input signal. Period. People who are looking for an amp to warm up their speakers, or bring about this magical glow, are looking for equipment that is not only amplifying but making music of its own. Too many times people will purchase a speaker that is way too prominent in the treble or sibilant and look for a tube amp that rolls off earlier than a well designed solid state amp will. Just go to the soundstage website and look at the figures. Some of these tube amps have an erratic frequency response with an actual load connected and have distortion figures in the teens when driven at full power. It's absolutely amazing how certain manufacturers of tube equipment are basically selling us ditortion boxes for astronomical prices and people don't realise it.

Multi thousand dollar amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...reference_99a/

$650 Amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...s/anthem_pva2/

This is quite funny. The $650 dollar amp has 0.02% distortion at 100W!
The overpriced tube amp is showing 50% distortion in the low frequency region and 15% distortion on the high end!! There's your magic!! It's distortion!!!

that argument is not valid because measurements are skewed by the people who make and want to SELL you the equipment they can build at far reduced cost to them but not far reduced costs to the buyer.

Tube amplifiers have a subjectively superior form of even order distortion when it does distort.

Stereophile's latest issue measured a tube amplifer which is claimed to be more linear than any solid state amplifier ever built or some such argument.

There have been amps subjectively preferred that had 80% distortion according to UHF. Distortion that doesn't just hack off notes and create some resmblence of the initial signal is prefferred by many and not preferred by many.

Generally most people prefer the type of distrotion exhibited by tube amplifiers which is why so many people who own the likes of Krell and Bryston dump them for tube amplifiers and not very many you will find ever go the other way. Funny thing that is - people don't like to be nausiated by fatiguing bright systems.

[newbsterv2]

that argument is not valid because measurements are skewed by the people who make and want to SELL you the equipment they can build at far reduced cost to them but not far reduced costs to the buyer.

Tube amplifiers have a subjectively superior form of even order distortion when it does distort.

Stereophile's latest issue measured a tube amplifer which is claimed to be more linear than any solid state amplifier ever built or some such argument.

There have been amps subjectively preferred that had 80% distortion according to UHF. Distortion that doesn't just hack off notes and create some resmblence of the initial signal is prefferred by many and not preferred by many.

Generally most people prefer the type of distrotion exhibited by tube amplifiers which is why so many people who own the likes of Krell and Bryston dump them for tube amplifiers and not very many you will find ever go the other way. Funny thing that is - people don't like to be nausiated by fatiguing bright systems.

The Anthem amp isn't clipping off any notes 100W on down. We can argue about clipping all day long but if your system has enough power and the speakers are efficient enough then the amp shouldn't clip. I'll agree that when most SS amps are driven overboard they square off the waveform making the music unlistenable. I don't know about you but my SS amp doesn't even come close to doing that.

[RGA]

The Anthem amp isn't clipping off any notes 100W on down. We can argue about clipping all day long but if your system has enough power and the speakers are efficient enough then the amp shouldn't clip. I'll agree that when most SS amps are driven overboard they square off the waveform making the music unlistenable. I don't know about you but my SS amp doesn't even come close to doing that.

But we're looking at distortion measured at full power...You can buy a sub $1000.00 Antique Sound Labs AQ1003DT at full power will have a rating of 3%. Bad by SS standards but unheard and more pleasing at full power than the solid stater clipping at full power. The resto fo the time the amp is aroun 1%(unheard).

No one is arguing the numbers that Solid State manufacturers measure. They measure those things that make their products look better to the unsuspecting. Wow and Flutter on cd players for instance are FAR superior to turntables and so it would be prominant on the spec sheet to get consumers to buy cd players rather than a tape deck or turntable. The fact that Wow and flutter has next to nothing to do with cd players and Jitter numbers are totally left off is not surprising. One can argue the merrits of audibility of jitter but it is there in the audible spectrum and many are unflattering numbers. In a sense the number that matters is left off.

Where is linearity of Solid state amps? Why were older SS amps showing distortion etc at full power when that was where they performed their best? At lower volumes they sounded far worse...but you never saw normal listening levels. Tubes at full power get worse than at normal levels. So the numbers get skewed to making one look better than the other(or a lot of half truths).

I'm not a tube guru by any stretch, btw. My 2 favorite integrated amps under $2500.00 are SS amps. Depending on the speakers though, tubes can sound very good and plenty of others leave their Brystons, Krell, Levinsons, for tube amps.

Interestingly the Anthem Amp 1 is a tube power amp that is considered by many including me to be superior in sound to their solid state cousins. If however you need a LOT of power then 40Watts or so may not be enough...but usually 40 Watts is more than enough to drive 95% of the speakers on the current market.

I'm not saying one should buy tubes over solid state, not at all, but people do "LIKE" current tube amps better often times than similarly priced SS amps. One can say the SS has better numbers great...but better "sound" is wht I care about whether it be a tube or SS or a hybrid of the two or neither one of the two(Sugden's headmaster is neither tube nor ss).

[newbsterv2]

But we're looking at distortion measured at full power...You can buy a sub $1000.00 Antique Sound Labs AQ1003DT at full power will have a rating of 3%. Bad by SS standards but unheard and more pleasing at full power than the solid stater clipping at full power. The resto fo the time the amp is aroun 1%(unheard).

No one is arguing the numbers that Solid State manufacturers measure. They measure those things that make their products look better to the unsuspecting. Wow and Flutter on cd players for instance are FAR superior to turntables and so it would be prominant on the spec sheet to get consumers to buy cd players rather than a tape deck or turntable. The fact that Wow and flutter has next to nothing to do with cd players and Jitter numbers are totally left off is not surprising. One can argue the merrits of audibility of jitter but it is there in the audible spectrum and many are unflattering numbers. In a sense the number that matters is left off.

Where is linearity of Solid state amps? Why were older SS amps showing distortion etc at full power when that was where they performed their best? At lower volumes they sounded far worse...but you never saw normal listening levels. Tubes at full power get worse than at normal levels. So the numbers get skewed to making one look better than the other(or a lot of half truths).

I'm not a tube guru by any stretch, btw. My 2 favorite integrated amps under $2500.00 are SS amps. Depending on the speakers though, tubes can sound very good and plenty of others leave their Brystons, Krell, Levinsons, for tube amps.

Interestingly the Anthem Amp 1 is a tube power amp that is considered by many including me to be superior in sound to their solid state cousins. If however you need a LOT of power then 40Watts or so may not be enough...but usually 40 Watts is more than enough to drive 95% of the speakers on the current market.

I'm not saying one should buy tubes over solid state, not at all, but people do "LIKE" current tube amps better often times than similarly priced SS amps. One can say the SS has better numbers great...but better "sound" is wht I care about whether it be a tube or SS or a hybrid of the two or neither one of the two(Sugden's headmaster is neither tube nor ss).

But how do you know that 1% distortion is not audible and that figure is better than the Anthem amp? The ASL 1003 is going to generate odd order harmonic distortion as well isn't it? Unless it's a SET it will. It all boild down to this. Any well designed system will never have to go into clipping. I totally agree that when a SS amp clips it sounds horrible. But when it's NOT clipping it's transparent, linear, and clean sounding. Exactly what an amp should do. Nothing except amplify. I've heard many different speakers and that's where the problem usually lies. Prominent treble. Thin bass. I say fix the problem at the source! I look at it this way RGA. All the way up to the speaker we're dealing with a 2 dimensional signal. Amplitude vs. Time. There's no reason engineers should screw that up. Speakers are different. They have to take a 2D signal and make it live and breathe. Anyway my $0.02. Peace

[300A]

From an engineering standpoint the answer is quite simple. All an amplifier should do is AMPLIFY the input signal. Period. People who are looking for an amp to warm up their speakers, or bring about this magical glow, are looking for equipment that is not only amplifying but making music of its own. Too many times people will purchase a speaker that is way too prominent in the treble or sibilant and look for a tube amp that rolls off earlier than a well designed solid state amp will. Just go to the soundstage website and look at the figures. Some of these tube amps have an erratic frequency response with an actual load connected and have distortion figures in the teens when driven at full power. It's absolutely amazing how certain manufacturers of tube equipment are basically selling us ditortion boxes for astronomical prices and people don't realise it.

Multi thousand dollar amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...reference_99a/

$650 Amp

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...s/anthem_pva2/

This is quite funny. The $650 dollar amp has 0.02% distortion at 100W!
The overpriced tube amp is showing 50% distortion in the low frequency region and 15% distortion on the high end!! There's your magic!! It's distortion!!!

I agree that the tube amp isn't very good in my opinion. But there is more to the story than the simple measurements told. Let me discuss some better designs and some problems with SS amps.

First, the distortion of the tube amp may be less than SS amps at one watt. One watt is what one uses most of the time. Transients can easily clip even a 100 watt amp, although the 'idiot" lights usually show the average. A tube amp may only have .005% distortion at one watt, while the SS amp may still have .02% or even higher at one watt.

Secondly, if the SS amp clips by only a watt or two, the distortion may rise to 10%.

Thirdly, the order of distortion makes a difference, and is noticed inversely as the order is increased. Thus 5th order is worse than 3 order, and 9th order is even worse than 5th order.

Next we have distortion caused by global feedback, which gives the low distortion figure using a simple sine wave. A simple sine wave, when fedback will result in a simple sinewave, even if it takes time to feed through the amp and then is fed back. The phase may be changed, but the distortion analyzer won't register this problem.

Music is complex with lots of different frequencies and their natural harmonics. The time it takes for the complex signal to feed through the amp and then feed back to the input doesn't coincide with the original input signal. By the time the input signal arrives at the output and is fedback, the input signal has changed. The higher the frequency, the more pronounced this problem is. But harmonic distortion is measured using a simple sinewave, not a complex signal, thus is useless when measuring this kind of distortion. And harmonic distortion figures are better with global feedback, even if they don't simulate real music.

Another problem is that frequency response can be artifically inflated when global negative feedback is used. You would be surprised how limited the frequency response is without feedback in many SS amps. However, the more feedback because of poor open loop response, the more "timing" problems you have.

So the specs given don't tell the whole story, actually not much of the story.

[newbsterv2]

I agree that the tube amp isn't very good in my opinion. But there is more to the story than the simple measurements told. Let me discuss some better designs and some problems with SS amps.

First, the distortion of the tube amp may be less than SS amps at one watt. One watt is what one uses most of the time. Transients can easily clip even a 100 watt amp, although the 'idiot" lights usually show the average. A tube amp may only have .005% distortion at one watt, while the SS amp may still have .02% or even higher at one watt.

Secondly, if the SS amp clips by only a watt or two, the distortion may rise to 10%.

Thirdly, the order of distortion makes a difference, and is noticed inversely as the order is increased. Thus 5th order is worse than 3 order, and 9th order is even worse than 5th order.

Next we have distortion caused by global feedback, which gives the low distortion figure using a simple sine wave. A simple sine wave, when fedback will result in a simple sinewave, even if it takes time to feed through the amp and then is fed back. The phase may be changed, but the distortion analyzer won't register this problem.

Music is complex with lots of different frequencies and their natural harmonics. The time it takes for the complex signal to feed through the amp and then feed back to the input doesn't coincide with the original input signal. By the time the input signal arrives at the output and is fedback, the input signal has changed. The higher the frequency, the more pronounced this problem is. But harmonic distortion is measured using a simple sinewave, not a complex signal, thus is useless when measuring this kind of distortion. And harmonic distortion figures are better with global feedback, even if they don't simulate real music.

Another problem is that frequency response can be artifically inflated when global negative feedback is used. You would be surprised how limited the frequency response is without feedback in many SS amps. However, the more feedback because of poor open loop response, the more "timing" problems you have.

So the specs given don't tell the whole story, actually not much of the story.

Most of the tests done by reputable reviewers run a square wave through the amplifier. Is it incorrect to assume that an amplifier that is passing a sqaure wave intact with no ringing is also playing all frequencies evenly across the audible sprectrum? And as far as the phase distortions you claim are utter nonsense. Do you realise what kind of phase shifts even the best of speakers have? Frequency response is what is important. Even a 1st order x-over is going to have a 90 degree shift. It's very simple. An amplifier with zero feedback is going to have extremely soft bass and a rolled off treble. If you like tube amps that's no problem. But please don't try and tell me that from an engineering standpoint that tubes are superior.

[300A]

Most of the tests done by reputable reviewers run a square wave through the amplifier. Is it incorrect to assume that an amplifier that is passing a sqaure wave intact with no ringing is also playing all frequencies evenly across the audible sprectrum? And as far as the phase distortions you claim are utter nonsense. Do you realise what kind of phase shifts even the best of speakers have? Frequency response is what is important. Even a 1st order x-over is going to have a 90 degree shift. It's very simple. An amplifier with zero feedback is going to have extremely soft bass and a rolled off treble. If you like tube amps that's no problem. But please don't try and tell me that from an engineering standpoint that tubes are superior.

I guess the first, and last comment I will make is to listen to a well designed tube amp with a properly matched speaker system. Much more inner detail, no black zone behind the instruments, no grunge, no harshness/zing in the highs, no brittleness when cymbals clash. Truly natural sound.

True, some use square waves to look at the phase response, but we are looking at the basic "fundamental" waveform, not what happens down to the noise floor, which a scope won't display.

If we want to check the basic response to, say 50khz, we need a square wave to only about 5khz as this will give us the phase response to 50khz. 2khz if we only want to see the phase response at 20khz.
Good tube designs give better, more natual highs than SS ever will. I don't think you have ever listened to a good tube amp or preamp.

"An amplifier with zero feedback is going to have extremely soft bass and a rolled off treble."

I don't know where you got this idea, but it is false in many tube designs. I see tube amps with responses to 80khz and more, so the highs are there.

As far as soft sounding bass, it depends on the speaker, the power supply design, and parts quality. Electrolytics "loosen" the bass because they don't charge and discharge properly.

Most speakers made nowadays, for SS amps, need low output Z amps because speakers are not damped properly. They underdamp them so the response goes lower and need high damping to quell the boom. A properly designed speaker, they are out there, doesn't need a low output Z as it is self damping.

One can do a simple battery test on ones own speaker by, first disconnecting the amp, and simply switching on a 1.5 volt battery across the speaker and then switching it off (open load on the speaker when switched off). The woofer should give the same clicking sound when connecting and disconnecting the battery. But what you will usually find is a "click" when the battery is connected and a thud or boom when disconnected, a sure sign the box isn't designed properly for the driver.

As far as speaker crossovers are concerned, many now use phase correction to limit this problem. But the caps are often times worse than the cure. Go figure.

Yes, there are alot of poor tube amps out there that have limited frequency response, high distortion, and claiming the "midrange" magic. But I have come to dislike those, just like you do. They miss so much of the music that one aspect won't cover all the losses from other areas of the music. So now I listen to PP amps.

I guess the last comment I will make is to listen to a well designed tube amp with a properly matched speaker system.

[RGA]

I guess the first, and last comment I will make is to listen to a well designed tube amp with a properly matched speaker system. Much more inner detail, no black zone behind the instruments, no grunge, no harshness/zing in the highs, no brittleness when cymbals clash. Truly natural sound.

True, some use square waves to look at the phase response, but we are looking at the basic "fundamental" waveform, not what happens down to the noise floor, which a scope won't display.

If we want to check the basic response to, say 50khz, we need a square wave to only about 5khz as this will give us the phase response to 50khz. 2khz if we only want to see the phase response at 20khz.
Good tube designs give better, more natual highs than SS ever will. I don't think you have ever listened to a good tube amp or preamp.

"An amplifier with zero feedback is going to have extremely soft bass and a rolled off treble."

I don't know where you got this idea, but it is false in many tube designs. I see tube amps with responses to 80khz and more, so the highs are there.

As far as soft sounding bass, it depends on the speaker, the power supply design, and parts quality. Electrolytics "loosen" the bass because they don't charge and discharge properly.

Most speakers made nowadays, for SS amps, need low output Z amps because speakers are not damped properly. They underdamp them so the response goes lower and need high damping to quell the boom. A properly designed speaker, they are out there, doesn't need a low output Z as it is self damping.

One can do a simple battery test on ones own speaker by, first disconnecting the amp, and simply switching on a 1.5 volt battery across the speaker and then switching it off (open load on the speaker when switched off). The woofer should give the same clicking sound when connecting and disconnecting the battery. But what you will usually find is a "click" when the battery is connected and a thud or boom when disconnected, a sure sign the box isn't designed properly for the driver.

As far as speaker crossovers are concerned, many now use phase correction to limit this problem. But the caps are often times worse than the cure. Go figure.

Yes, there are alot of poor tube amps out there that have limited frequency response, high distortion, and claiming the "midrange" magic. But I have come to dislike those, just like you do. They miss so much of the music that one aspect won't cover all the losses from other areas of the music. So now I listen to PP amps.

I guess the last comment I will make is to listen to a well designed tube amp with a properly matched speaker system.

Basically I think people need to get out of their house and out of their chair reading books and go and listen.

One of the best set-ups I have ever heard for sane money was my speakers connected to the SET soro integrated amp(~11watts) with AN cd player. Set-up properly I'd run this set-up against any system you care to name at double the money. Which is why the heck I bought the speakers after four long years of trying to find something. Since the AN system with its set amp will put out more bass response than any other standmount I have heard and presents an easy load and high sensitivity the fact that that the amp can't reach 2hz is irrelvant since speakers don't hit down there.

It is about system matching and if you've tuned your speaker for such amplifiers you're not going to have problems. The AN's use almost no damping in their speakers because the box itself is part of the sound, one reason that their loorstanding AN E produces deeper and more realistic bass at a list price of ~2500.00(assuming it sounds 80% as good as the same designed better parts AN E Sec) than the N801 at more than $10,000.00 even with Bryston Monoblocks with their 1000 watts.

This is not to say youwon't want or even NEED Bryston amps(I like them myself very much), but it is not required to get good sound. I run my Audio Notes with a non tube amp. Incidentally I bought the amp over the old AQ1003DT tube amp(though I never heard the AQ1003 with my speakers as they had sold their demo amp and I already had the Sugden by then). Still for the CDM 1NT and the Studio 100 the Sugden was better largely because of the bass response, and largely because these speakers have harder to drive dips etc. The AN Soro SET stomps my amp however. That is unfortunate, it may not loo technically as pretty as some graphs might state...but sound wise you'd have to be deaf not to know which one presents life from 2d and the one that merely gives you a sense of soemthing more than 2d. Unfortunately the Soro also has a price tag for "life" that is well beyond my current means. And the Sugden is a valve like ss amp. Intereting how so many ss amps like to try and create the tube sound. Those engineers seem to know where the best sound is, so they attempt to emulate it. Even Bryston's B60R has made an attempt to 'tube up" their high frequencies in the reviews I've been reading on them.

And now McIntosh's top end gear is no less than tube gear. They switched because of insensitive lousy speakers, now that speaker makers have gone to H/T they have made thier speakers easier to drive because their faced with terrible receivers as amplifiers. So in a way hme theater has made speakers easier to drive so tube amps and low powered class a solid state amps can come back and start selling.

In the end There are good and bad examples of both. As for power amps I would probably prefer a Solid state unit. Integrated's it depends and preamps probably a tube. The reason I would take a SS power amp is that if you own speakers that are power suckers they probably were not built for tube amps. Chances are I would not want the power sucker speaker - Heavy damping damps out the life of the music IMO just from the speakers I have heard. Maybe exceptions.