solid state vs. tubes. Pros and Cons

[jrhymeammo]

I use 450 watt tetrode amps.

That's evil.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Who said anything about single ended triodes? I use 450 watt tetrode amps.

Myself, among others.

[theaudiohobby]

Who said anything about single ended triodes? I use 450 watt tetrode amps.

Well, here is a VTL reference tetrode amplfier



Now here is an SS



I hope you catch the significance of that graph, it clearly shows (even more clearly than the previous example) that the VTL has higher distortion across the whole spectrum.

I'll take the upper trace with the more linear spectra and far lower in relation high order harmonics. rw

What is your definition of more linear? it seems that you overlooked the scaling in the graph, The final distortion harmonics shown for the SET are considerably larger and it also has a higher noisefloor. as stated previously it has higher distortion across the whole spectrum.

[Resident Loser]

...redeeming virtue of tubed gear is that it will still work in the aftermath of the EMP that accompanies a nuclear explosion...Why do you think the Russians and Chinese still produce parts for this antiquated technology?

jimHJJ(...it ain't magic...)

[JoeE SP9]

A question for theaudiohobby and Resident Loser. Have you spent any time listening to tube gear in your respective systems?

[Resident Loser]

A question for theaudiohobby and Resident Loser. Have you spent any time listening to tube gear in your respective systems?

...6L6GCs, 7025s, 12AX7s and 12AT7s in my forty year-old Fender Bandmaster...and that's where they and their "musicality" belong, providing that wonderful harmonics-rich distortion...SS guitar amps (other than my original Pignose) sorta' don't cut it...

jimHJJ(...music should be musical, not the playback gear...)

[JoeE SP9]

I use them in my Ampeg B15, Fender Bassman and my Traynor YBA3. My Sunn Collesium Head is SS. I was asking have you ever tried any in your stereo? If you haven't how can you "diss" them outright?

[theaudiohobby]

A question for theaudiohobby and Resident Loser. Have you spent any time listening to tube gear in your respective systems?

Back then, I said

I will be contrarian here, and say that tubes SS divide is more an expression of preference that any inherent sound qualities per se. For example, the last tube preamp that I had in my system sounded opaque and the last SET power amplifier that I heard at length was brighter sounding than my current SS amplifier. So far, I have heard a ground total of zero tube amplfiers that I prefer to my current SS amplifier.

It is all down to preference...

[E-Stat]

What is your definition of more linear?

Linear as in a consistent slope of the harmonics. Let's also read Atkinson's specific comments about this graph:

"At high powers, the S-400's low loop feedback means that higher-order harmonics make an appearance (fig.11, tetrode; fig.12, triode), though the fact that the harmonics decrease linearly in level with increasing order works against their audibility, especially in triode mode.". I don't listen to compressed music at full power representing this particular situation. Note the term "makes an appearance". As in they are not always there.

it seems that you overlooked the scaling in the graph.

Not at all.

rw

[JoeE SP9]

Back then, I said



It is all down to preference...

Sorry I didn't mean to be rude. Can't say I disagree with you. SET's are so speaker dependant it boggles the mind. I have never been able to use them. ESL's just don't work with them.

[theaudiohobby]

Linear as in a consistent slope of the harmonics. Let's also read Atkinson's specific comments about this graph:

"At high powers, the S-400's low loop feedback means that higher-order harmonics make an appearance (fig.11, tetrode; fig.12, triode), though the fact that the harmonics decrease linearly in level with increasing order works against their audibility, especially in triode mode.". I don't listen to compressed music at full power representing this particular situation. Note the term "makes an appearance". As in they are not always there.

@85W the VTL is tested at a fraction of it's rated power, the distortion spectrum shown is typical of the amplfier at that frequency and it is an order of magnitude higher than that of Coda across the whole spectrum.

And in direct contradiction to your original post, it is pretty clear from the graphs that tube amplfiers produce both even and odd order distortion as well as high order distortion harmonics (though the spectrum is definitely circuit dependent). Audibility of the distortion is besides the point, as it cuts both ways, if the distortion produced by the VTL is inaudible, then the much lower distortion produced by Coda S is certainly inaudible by the same token.

Not at all.

Well there is no point pressing this point as the new graphs are pretty conclusive. They demonstrate the superior linearity (following your definition) of the Coda S in comparison to the VTL Reference at the measured frequencies. Like the VTL the dominant distortion harmonic is second order, the distortion harmonics fall more rapidly than that of the VTL and it is has a lower noise floor.

[Pat D]

I've listened to solid state my whole life and was just wondering what are the characteristics of tube amps. Do they sound bright or smooth compared to solid state? What type of speakers sound good with tube amps high effiency or low effiency?

Generally, the advantages of good solid state amplifiers are:

Low noise
Flat freqency response into a speaker load (consequence of low output impedance)
Low distortion
Good current capability


Generally, the advantages of tube amplifiers are . . . none of the above.

Oh, you can get tube amplifiers that do have low noise, low output impedance, low distortion, and good current capability but the ones I've heard of cost several times more than a lot of very good SS amps do.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

SET's are so speaker dependant it boggles the mind. I have never been able to use them.

The critical partnership between amp and speaker is hardly limited to SETs. I've heard numerous tube amps and many SETs. Some I liked, others I didn't. But the only amplification device that has provided long term satisfaction is a SET. And it's harnessed not to a horn or super hi-efficiency speaker but a real world design [93 db]. Far from ideal but it still makes me smile - everyday.

[JoeE SP9]

The critical partnership between amp and speaker is hardly limited to SETs. I've heard numerous tube amps and many SETs. Some I liked, others I didn't. But the only amplification device that has provided long term satisfaction is a SET. And it's harnessed not to a horn or super hi-efficiency speaker but a real world design [93 db]. Far from ideal but it still makes me smile - everyday.

I have heard some very nice systems using SET's. Unfortunately they were almost all horns. I own ESL's. I have owned nothing but panels of one type or another since 1976 and will probably never own anything else. SET's just don't have enough power for any of the speakers I like.

[Feanor]

Well, here is a VTL reference tetrode amplfier



Now here is an SS



I hope you catch the significance of that graph, it clearly shows (even more clearly than the previous example) that the VTL has higher distortion across the whole spectrum.

What is your definition of more linear? it seems that you overlooked the scaling in the graph, The final distortion harmonics shown for the SET are considerably larger and it also has a higher noisefloor. as stated previously it has higher distortion across the whole spectrum.

I have done very little listening to tube equipment, unfortunately -- except for my Behringer T1951 "tube" equalizer. So I don't presume to have an opinion as to whether tubes or SS sounds better.

Nevertheless the graphs presented by both E-Stat and theaudiohobby do not present a convincing evidence of the usual argument in favor tubes. I have often heard that tubes produce mainly 2nd order harmonics and generally less odd-order harmonics than SS.

But it is clear from both sets of graphs that the tubes are producing far more distortion overall, including 3rd and higher odd-order harmonics. In the E-Stat's graph, it isn't until you get 7th order harmonics that the SS distortion becomes higher than the tube's. At point the distortion is very low in total, although I suppose you could say it's significant. Is there any objective evidence that it is significant?

By the way, by Behringer does soften the sound, depending on the tunable "warmth" setting. Behringer is up-front about the fact that it does this by introducing distortion. The unit also sligtly reduces micro dynamics. As far as I'm concerned the tube effect in this case is useless and I only continue to use the EQ for the equalization which is certainly worthwile.

[E-Stat]

At point the distortion is very low in total, although I suppose you could say it's significant.

Have you ever heard an old Crown preamp? The IC-150 preamp had 0.05% distortion maximum from 20-20khz. Yet, it was horrible sounding. When I bought a Crown amp back in '75, the dealer talked me out of buying the ICK. It was cold, sterile and the top was much like fingernails on a chalkboard. While I cannot find a spectral graph, let's just assume the "worst" and say that ALL of it was high order.

The spectral analysis of a single frequency (50 hz at that!) is hardly a conclusive arbiter of the ten octave reproduction of music. Yes 0.05% worth of inherently obnoxious atonal distortion is evidently clearly audible!

rw

[theaudiohobby]

Have you ever heard an old Crown preamp? The IC-150 preamp had 0.05% distortion maximum from 20-20khz. Yet, it was horrible sounding. When I bought a Crown amp back in '75, the dealer talked me out of buying the ICK. It was cold, sterile and the top was much like fingernails on a chalkboard. While I cannot find a spectral graph, let's just assume the "worst" and say that ALL of it was high order.

Are you trying to infer that your experience with the Crown preamp (of 1975 vintage!) is representative of ALL SS preamps and power amplifiers.

The spectral analysis of a single frequency (50 hz at that!) is hardly a conclusive arbiter of the ten octave reproduction of music. Yes 0.05% worth of inherently obnoxious atonal distortion is evidently clearly audible!

Then how do you square these graphs( note the scaling ) at 1KHz (i.e. in the midrange)?



against this



or this



Of note in the final graph (tho' not relevant to me), is that the 3rd Order harmanic is actually larger than 2nd and it is a tube amp.

[E-Stat]

Are you trying to infer that your experience with the Crown preamp (of 1975 vintage!) is representative of ALL SS preamps and power amplifiers.

Are you trying to infer that your experience with an SET is representative of ALL tube power amps? What I am pointing out is this:

Harmonic Distortion measurements are next to useless to convey any useful information as to the musical performance of an amplifier.

Then how do you square these graphs( note the scaling ) at 1KHz (i.e. in the midrange)?

Same answer. There is not as yet a metric that weighs the human auditory's "blind spot" with quantifiying what is relevant and audible and that which is not. There are a number of amplifiers today whose measurements are worse that their earlier counterparts yet sound a lot better. This is true of Crown as well as some excellent SS models from companies as Pass Labs.

rw

[Geoffcin]

Are you trying to infer that your experience with an SET is representative of ALL tube power amps? What I am pointing out is this:

Harmonic Distortion measurements are next to useless to convey any useful information as to the musical performance of an amplifier.


Same answer. There is not as yet a metric that weighs the human auditory's "blind spot" with quantifiying what is relevant and audible and that which is not. There are a number of amplifiers today whose measurements are worse that their earlier counterparts yet sound a lot better. This is true of Crown as well as some excellent SS models from companies as Pass Labs.

rw

Let me give you some insight from my own experiences. This has to do with two SS amps. One with MUCH more distortion than the other, but both of them rated "A" by Stereophile. I regularly switch these amps out of my setup JUST so I can hone my ability to hear sonic differences between amps. (I also enjoy both amps)

To make a long story short, I PREFER the one with the higher distortion, but not because of the distortion. It's high frequency response is a tad more mellow than the other one. The difference is on the order of 1db between them, but I can hear it. With my speakers that makes a difference. The higher distortion amp is also a bit "looser" on the bottom end, which slightly adds to the apparent bass. Also more enjoyable with MY speakers. A different set of speakers and the tables might be reversed.

The point I'm trying to get across is that an amp cannot be thought of as an entity. It's part of an amp/speaker closed system and as such that's how they should be evaluated.

Probably another reason why measurments made with a simple resistor are not picking up the true measure of performance.

[theaudiohobby]

Are you trying to infer that your experience with an SET is representative of ALL tube power amps?

I never suggested such....here a link to my original post, also see my response to Joe.

What I am pointing out is this:

Harmonic Distortion measurements are next to useless to convey any useful information as to the musical performance of an amplifier.

I do not disagree with this statement as long as 'musical performance' implies your personal preference. Or are you using 'musical performance in another context'?

More importantly, why then did you say all this in an earlier post

_SNIP_ Each has its own set of advantages and disadvantages. I confess my preference has changed as I have gotten older, (hopefully) wiser, and my musical tastes have evolved. Simply put, tubes and solid state differ in the way they distort the signal. The human auditory system also comes into play because we have different sensitivities to different kinds of distortion. Quantity alone is not a good measure of musical faithfulness. It has been proven long ago that the even order harmonic distortion produced by tube amps is far less audible than the higher order, odd harmonics generated by solid state amps. Tube amps distort right in the audible blind spot so to speak. Another problem with the metrics is that they are measured with steady state signals, not dynamic musical content.

That post is totally contradicts you new stated position, in addition to the obvious inaccuracies in the former, there are too many inconsistencies between both posts. Moving on

Same answer. There is not as yet a metric that weighs the human auditory's "blind spot" with quantifiying what is relevant and audible and that which is not. There are a number of amplifiers today whose measurements are worse that their earlier counterparts yet sound a lot better. This is true of Crown as well as some excellent SS models from companies as Pass Labs.

How do you know that 'tube amps distort in the audible blindspot', when you just said that there is no metric to correlate harmonic distortion to musical performance? The graphs shown previously show that those tube amplifiers have higher distortion across the whole spectrum, so comments about "human auditory blindspot" (what is that?) are essentially moot.

Back to my original point, In direct contradiction to your original comments, tubes amplifiers produce both odd and even order distortion like their SS cousins, the spectrum of the distortion is circuit dependent. The big difference is that on average, they produce a lot more distortion that their SS cousins. The graphs that I have linked to amply demonstrate that.

[theaudiohobby]

The point I'm trying to get across is that an amp cannot be thought of as an entity. It's part of an amp/speaker closed system and as such that's how they should be evaluated.

Probably another reason why measurments made with a simple resistor are not picking up the true measure of performance.

I agree with the first comment entirely, and the second is probably self evident, though it must be said that an amplifier produces higher distortion into a resistor is unlikely to produce less distortion into an actual speaker load.

[RGA]

I've listened to solid state my whole life and was just wondering what are the characteristics of tube amps. Do they sound bright or smooth compared to solid state? What type of speakers sound good with tube amps high effiency or low effiency?

I've listened to SS my whole life too. If you want what is considered accurate -- go to your local studio and buy their Bryston and PMC (though the Bryston is actually overkill since the entry level receiver from a company calle "Quest" is every bit as capable and it runs $90.00Canadian will do the job assuming you don't crank it quite as loud.

Oh you want something that sounds good - that is an entirely different question sorry I read your post wrong -- well guess what -- you;re the only guy who is going to be able to determine what actually sounds better to you. Tube amps don't sound ver much the same at all -- and some of them sound less tubey than some SS amps. Relative High efficiency in my experience sounds better no matter what amplifier you use -- but it makes sense to use them with lower powered amps.

Everything you listen to -- the stereo and the music itself comes down to your personal preference of it. Why does one guy love Tupac while hating Mozart while someone else can't stand Hip Hop but loves Rage against the Machine.

Most people who have gone to High efficiency and tubes were people who owned set-ups like Bryston and PMC. And not the other way around. They decided that they wanted their music to sound good rather than be someone else's idea of more perfect.

"Joe Robert’s "Sound Practices" magazine had a major effect on the North American market by exposing it to schools of audio design from Japan, Italy, and France. The overseas ultra-fi fans didn’t have sour memories of the "West Coast Sound" marketing disaster, and continued to hold the classic high-efficiency theatre speakers in high regard.

Outside of the Anglo-American orbit, the design philosophies of "old" Western Electric theatre speakers, Altec and JBL studio-monitor systems, and P.G.A.H. Voight's Tractrix horns are still taken quite seriously. The appeal isn’t nostalgia; brand-new drivers and horns made from exotic materials appear on the market at prices that would astound Western audiophiles. These alternate-paradigm speakers work especially well with flea-power amplifiers using direct-heated single-ended triodes; a 3 watt 2A3 amplifier simply doesn’t work with room-sized electrostats or planars, but works beautifully with a 104dB efficient all-horn system.

To those who think amplifiers have already reached near-perfection (almost all of the AES establishment and home-theatre vendors), this embracing of archaic "foreign" technologies looks like some kind of bizarre joke. The slick high-end magazines explain away the horn/triode phenomenon as retro-chic, just another trendy example of mythologizing the past.

The flip side of this coin is the fact that the most articulate horn/triode advocates have already owned, and discarded, mainstream audiophile systems. As a fairly mainstream speaker designer myself, I can attest that raising the efficiency of conventional direct-radiators is most certainly worthwhile ... you get a significant improvement in clarity, immediacy, and naturalness, and your choice of amplifier opens up to much more interesting technologies." (Lynn Olson)

You simply have to listen and decide if what the tube set-up is doing sounds better -- it doesn't measure better -- so it comes down to the peripherals -- those two things that stick out the side of your head. I can tell you that it sure sucks not to be able to point to a graph and say see that is why it sounds better. But having had Bryston in my home and after spending time with brethtakingly good measuring gear with all the technical jargon sighting its absolute superiority -- well it ultimately sounds sterile.

Here is a fellow who owned for decades top Bryston PMC and numerous other Tom Nousaine, John Atkinson and enginnering guru's dream systems (of which I have heard as well) -- in the end you can either own what those guys think is best or what actually sounds good. http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?...45133&review=1

[E-Stat]

I do not disagree with this statement as long as 'musical performance' implies your personal preference. Or are you using 'musical performance in another context'?

If you use your amps for the purpose of generating graphs, then so be it.

How do you know that 'tube amps distort in the audible blindspot', when you just said that there is no metric to correlate harmonic distortion to musical performance?

Averaged THD or isolated single tone spectra are not particularly useful for providing a complete picture when the objective is listening to music. Individual tests, however, on tones have proven differences that would suggest a mechanism behind the audible differences.

I find one of the best measuring amps, the Halcro, to be quite sterile sounding.

rw

[theaudiohobby]

If you use your amps for the purpose of generating graphs, then so be it.

Sigh..In other words, it simply meant preference.

Averaged THD or isolated single tone spectra are not particularly useful for providing a complete picture when the objective is listening to music. Individual tests, however, on tones have proven differences that would suggest a mechanism behind the audible differences.

THD is irrelevant to the discusion. You tests obviously seem better than the single tone tests presernted here, could you reference some of them, afterall you said it had been proven long ago?

[RGA]

E-Stat

Don't want to jump in but be clear about what you are trying to argue with TAH. First don't bother arguing over technical merits of tubes with him or any arm chair or real engineer. The measurement technique was chosen long ago and favors SS and CD (over tube and Vnyl).

SS and CD have used the technical arguments for a long time because they need it to sell. Certainly the sound has not. If the sound quality did then the other two formats would have been abolished. And they will point out that VInyl and tubes are all but dead -- but that is only the mass market not the audiophile community. CD was purchased largely due to the fact that it is small - portable and recordable (which is why Tape was popular before). Laserdisc in every measurable way was superior to VHS tape but only the audiophile videophile community chose sound and video quality over features -- the masses will and always do choose functionality over quality.

So you have the up market audiophile music lover and even musicians who have adopted the "inferior measuring" and E-STAT -- with the measuring standards in place they are clearly inferior. But so what? Why argue the point. Some stuff was designed to measure in certain tests very well so they'd have something to advertise and some stuff was designed to sound good regardless of the measurements. As an example you don't buy SET because it measures good -- Even SET owners should know that. You also don't buy SET because it is cheap, or has any features, or looks good. You can't be seduced by things like big power specs or measured response, or spec sheets. In fact it has only one thing going for it -- the sound. (and even then it has to be connected to something that will not stress it out).

So I don't see why you don't resign yourself to stating this as a preference like I have done. In every measurable way the Bryston and all my other SS amps over the last 15 years is vastly superior to my tube amp -- I bought the amp that made music sound like music.

The engineering types I'm not sure of their motives -- is it to educate tube owners on this -- I doubt it because I already know the Bryston measures better? Not sure what the motive is but I have a feeling it is to satisfy their inferiority complex...I hear better and am logical because I buy gear based off the books and engineering white papers while you little moron baboons only buy tubes because you got duped into liking distortion artifacts -- I have better hearing than you as a result of this superior knowledge.

Get the picture of these folks E-Stat -- you should have learned after talking with Soundmind. He has this all down to musical taste as well. If you like Rock/Rap/Hip Hop/Pop then you sir are a BABOON -- If you like Coltrane you have no taste in quality musicianship. Not only that he has it down to individual instruments -- Piano is the absolute top of the grade because it covers the complete frequency spectrum (it therefore measures best) while an Oboist or flutist is a hack in absolute terms. Every instrument is graded from supreme quality to lowest. If you like a violinist over a pianist then you sir are a Baboon! And singers are of course rated for octave coverage and pitch -- so forget Ella Fitgerald -- dog crap vocalist compared to real singers.

The fact that anyone owns a direct radiating speaker automatically puts you into Baboon territory -- maybe a gorilla or neanderthal man if you at least own a Crown and a Bose or AR 9.