Quote Originally Posted by tube fan
You are confusing lateral imaging and sound stage depth with the three-dimensional realism of each instrument or singer. I already pointed this out, but I guess you just missed it.
I don't think I missed anything but a bunch of esoteric mumbo jumbo. When audio engineers talk about three deminsionality, they are talking about the ability of a images to be projected widely(laterally) and with depth(which means both in front of the baffle of the speaker, and deep behind as well).

At any rate, yes, no ss amp can reproduce this sound as both JA and JV found in the lastest issues of Stereophile and Absolute Sound. Here is a fuller quote from Valin:

"I don't mean perspectival (front-to-back, side-to-side) clarity, which is another Maggie strength. What I do mean is that the image of a voice or a violin coming off the 1.7s' screens can sound rather the way it would look if it were projected ONTO those screens. In other words, it can sound a bit flat and two-dimensional, particularily with solid-state electronics.
This is exactly the esoteric BS that I was talking about. The very idea of talking about any projection onto a screen refers to the ability of the sound images that have depth, clearly a front to back perspective much like 3D video. What he was saying based on this has nothing to do with SS amps specifically, but what happens when a SS amp is paired with the 1.7, it can sound flat and two-deminsional. Notice he is commenting on the 1.7's, and he says WITH SS amps it can sound, not that all SS amps can sound a bit flat and two-deminsional. There is no way any smart reviewer would make such a definate analysis like this unless he was profoundly prejudiced against SS amps, which would make him a not so credible reviewer.

I talk about image volume in my ARC Reference 5 review (elsewhere in this issue), and it is not, inherently, one of the 1.7s' strenghts. The funny thing here is that these slightly flattened, seemingly 'projected' images don't want for natural richness of color or detail or power or even body, in the sense of natural tonal weight; they just don't seem as filled-out, as three-dimensional as voices and violins can sometimes sound with cone speakers. IT's RATHER AS IF YOU ARE GETTING A SLICE OFF THE FRONT OF THE INSTRUMENT INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE ENCHILADA.

There is a partial cure for this problem, however. Tubes. Particularly ARC tubes."

Without this added diminesional fullness, you never get the feeling that the singer or the instrument is IN your room.
This is all just opinion, bias, and esoteric nonsense. This smacks of personal bias plain and simple, much like the title Realistic sound = tubes and analog.

I think you have already stated a preference for tubes and analog, but you have to keep in mind - your preferences are just yours. They are not scientific, transferable, not fact, but they are your opinion and you have a right to voice it. I also have a right to accept it for what it is - your personal opinion.

If tubes are so wonderful, how do you reconcile with a tubeless recording chain?