2012 California Audio Show

[tube fan]

I was just kidding. I'm glad to know there is a world other than AN.


Arguably, his *best* amp is the 10 watt SIT-1 single ended design using custom made VFETs.

I gather MC was nowhere to be found. Like that of mainstream hi rez recordings.

RGA clearly does not hate digital and ss as much as I do. I'm in the Michael Fremer camp when it comes to digital: it makes me physically sick. BTW, the SIT 10 watt SET amp will not even play the MBL speakers at background levels. Clearly, we all have different reality triggers as wine drinkers have their own personal preferences. If you love inefficient speakers, and high power ss amps, and digital sources, go with it. I'll take my low power tube and analogue system.

[E-Stat]

RGA clearly does not hate digital and ss as much as I do.

Hate? Boy, that is a strong sentiment!

I can certainly relate to the raw sounding SS gear of the 70s when I began my audio journey and that of early digital of the 80s. I just don't find that to be universally true today.

My mostly SS vintage system is easy to listen to for extended periods of time - even if does not provide the level of realism delivered by the main tube system. Its sins are largely of omission. The Manley DAC uses a simple 12AU7 based analog output. The modest NAD preamp does a fine job with the Ariston/SME/Shinon table. The Threshold amp is free from global feedback, uses no protection circuitry, has a stiff 105 joule power supply and runs class A for the first 10% of its output. It uses a shielded aftermarket power cord to minimize RFI and all other components are run through a power conditioner for the same objective. Since I enjoy the outdoors, I actually listen to that system more often that the "big" one.

With your penchant for (single) blind testing, to what SS gear have you compared your 80s vintage ARC gear in your own system?

edit: BTW, did you realize there are not one, but TWO Texas Instruments TL071 op amps in the signal path of your D-70? You may need to sit down and take a powder!

D70 schematic

Look at U1 and U2

[Worf101]

Hate? Boy, that is a strong sentiment!

I can certainly relate to the raw sounding SS gear of the 70s when I began my audio journey and that of early digital of the 80s. I just don't find that to be universally true today.

My mostly SS vintage system is easy to listen to for extended periods of time - even if does not provide the level of realism delivered by the main tube system. Its sins are largely of omission. The Manley DAC uses a simple 12AU7 based analog output. The modest NAD preamp does a fine job with the Ariston/SME/Shinon table. The Threshold amp is free from global feedback, uses no protection circuitry, has a stiff 105 joule power supply and runs class A for the first 10% of its output. It uses a shielded aftermarket power cord to minimize RFI and all other components are run through a power conditioner for the same objective. Since I enjoy the outdoors, I actually listen to that system more often that the "big" one.

With your penchant for (single) blind testing, to what SS gear have you compared your 80s vintage ARC gear in your own system?

edit: BTW, did you realize there are not one, but TWO Texas Instruments TL071 op amps in the signal path of your D-70? You may need to sit down and take a powder!

D70 schematic

Look at U1 and U2

I'd be REALLY impressed with your dissertation if'n I knew what language you was a speakin'! LOL! Honestly I had to re-read your post a couple of times to get the gist of it. Thanks all for educating me on the merits (?) of Tubes and Analog over SS and digital..... I think. But as a poor slob who cannot afford a dedicated 2 channel system, my CD player and AV receiver will have to make due till my "ship comes in".

Worf

[E-Stat]

I'd be REALLY impressed with your dissertation if'n I knew what language you was a speakin'!

LOL!

The tube fan doth protest too much, methinks!

I really hope I didn't ruin his day with the realization about the TI op amps in his beloved amp.

[Jack in Wilmington]

LOL!

The tube fan doth protest too much, methinks!

I really hope I didn't ruin his day with the realization about the TI op amps in his beloved amp.

I think the rest of us are hoping you did.

[Feanor]

...
edit: BTW, did you realize there are not one, but TWO Texas Instruments TL071 op amps in the signal path of your D-70? You may need to sit down and take a powder!

D70 schematic

Look at U1 and U2

Oh horrors

I still think the opamps get a worse rap than they deserver from some quarters.

If U1 and U2 are socketed, maybe Tube Fan could swap those '80s opamps for something more modern, say OP627's or OPA2134's. Or I'd be willing to take the D70 off his hands for a couple of hundred bucks.

[E-Stat]

I still think the opamps get a worse rap than they deserver from some quarters.

Oops, false alarm. My bad. It seems they both are power supply related.

Tube Fan can breathe a sign of relief.

[RGA]

RGA clearly does not hate digital and ss as much as I do. I'm in the Michael Fremer camp when it comes to digital:

Maybe - but Fremer hates SET and loves 1000 watt amps.

Fact is people are not all in one camp. If SS does the job then I will say so - this is nothing new - I have liked plenty of SS amplifiers from Pass Labs, Sugden, Heed Audio, Technical Brain and others. It's not my preference because the speakers I own don't require their power.

And I think the MBL system would be better with vinyl and tubes. Since I don't play that loud and I would not need to fill that space - I would really like to hear their speakers on a very well built robust tube amplifier - even some of the bigger watt SETs or maybe something like the Carver amps.

I hear the potential in those speakers.

[Feanor]

Oops, false alarm. My bad. It seems they both are power supply related.

Tube Fan can breathe a sign of relief.

Just curious but what part would an opamp play in a power supply?

[E-Stat]

Just curious but what part would an opamp play in a power supply?

A closer look on my part reveals both are used in the regulation circuitry and are not in the signal path per se. You'll note other semiconductors used in the B+ supplies as well (all those blocks labeled with a "Q" as opposed to a "V"). Some may argue, however, that since an amplifier is really just modulating the signal via the power supply, you could say that in an indirect way, it is in the path.

Those tube purists draw a distinction between a "pure tube" design that solely uses tubes not only in the circuit path, but in the power supply rectification and regulation stages as well. Even some Audio Note amps contain SS components in the power supply.

By comparison, VTL and Conrad-Johnson products use SS power supplies exclusively.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

LOL!

The tube fan doth protest too much, methinks!

I really hope I didn't ruin his day with the realization about the TI op amps in his beloved amp.

Boy do I agree with this. I can understand having a taste for a certain thing in audio, but I just cannot understand why anyone would want to live in a audio box.

As far as the lack of MC, it would be VERY difficult to do with the size room I saw demo's in last year. Unless the system used mini monitors, there would be no way to optimize in those size rooms.

As far as all of this vinyl sounded great, and all digital sound bad. Me thinks bias played more of a role than truth does. Either that, or the exhibitors did not pay as much attention to the digital playback as they did to their analog. Hell, I can make DXD sound really bad if I wanted to, especially if my taste leaned towards heavy salt and pepper on my audio.

[Feanor]

A closer look on my part reveals both are used in the regulation circuitry and are not in the signal path per se. You'll note other semiconductors used in the B+ supplies as well (all those blocks labeled with a "Q" as opposed to a "V"). Some may argue, however, that since an amplifier is really just modulating the signal via the power supply, you could say that in an indirect way, it is in the path.

Those tube purists draw a distinction between a "pure tube" design that solely uses tubes not only in the circuit path, but in the power supply rectification and regulation stages as well. Even some Audio Note amps contain SS components in the power supply.

By comparison, VTL and Conrad-Johnson products use SS power supplies exclusively.

It doesn't mean a think of course, but I've never heard of an opamp in power supply circuit, so I'll have to study this further to fathom what's going on.

I'd need a lot more persuading to believe that the power supply is some how in the signal path. Power is a commodity and only needs to be abundant and clear. What's wrong with s/s rectification and regulation?

Obviously there are a lot of reputable tube designs that rely on s/s power supplies. My former Sonic Frontiers preamp was one of those.

[RGA]

It's not that CD sounded bad - it just sounded like CD. Bob Hodas is one of the best recording engineers on the planet - they played tapes - they destroyed CD. They were however marketing the sale of Tapes called the Tape Project but a $200ish tape machine was embarrassing a very pricey CD player.

I am not sure why you are SOOOO anti-vinyl. Surely as a recording engineer you should know that the recording not the playback medium is MORE important. You take an exceptionally well recorded vinyl and you play it on a top flight "spared no expense" type rig versus this week's flat sounding CD recording and the myriad of crappy Jazz CDs where they just dumped it over on CD and of course the vinyl is going to beat CD upside the head.

I brought very well recorded HDCDs and system tester CDs and it was startling to me that some 1950s LP embarrassed them. Life got sucked out of the recordings along the way and a lot of otherwise fine new artists are sounding pretty sterile and frankly artificially doctored in comparison.

It's like the way CGI looks good and smooth but also often looks fake in comparison to the solidity and reality of models.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

It's not that CD sounded bad - it just sounded like CD. Bob Hodas is one of the best recording engineers on the planet - they played tapes - they destroyed CD. They were however marketing the sale of Tapes called the Tape Project but a $200ish tape machine was embarrassing a very pricey CD player.

Just because the CD player was pricey, does not mean it was set up optimally.

I am not sure why you are SOOOO anti-vinyl. Surely as a recording engineer you should know that the recording not the playback medium is MORE important. You take an exceptionally well recorded vinyl and you play it on a top flight "spared no expense" type rig versus this week's flat sounding CD recording and the myriad of crappy Jazz CDs where they just dumped it over on CD and of course the vinyl is going to beat CD upside the head.

First Richard, I am not anti vinyl. I realize the compromises vinyl does when compared to the original master tapes or file. Unlike you, I do not compare apples with oranges that your example presents. When I have made my comparison back in the mid 90's, I compared the original master 35mm tape to the CD and vinyl quality check. The CD sound more like the tapes than the vinyl did, and by a pretty wide margin. YOu example puts the CD at a disadvantage, and puts the vinyl in its best light. This shows the weakness of your argument. Level the playing field a bit here. Let us compare the original tapes to a 24/192khz digital encode against the vinyl. That is a far more fair comparison.

I brought very well recorded HDCDs and system tester CDs and it was startling to me that some 1950s LP embarrassed them. Life got sucked out of the recordings along the way and a lot of otherwise fine new artists are sounding pretty sterile and frankly artificially doctored in comparison.

Once again Richard, you are comparing the mid fi Redbook format again vinyl with your biases intact. I prefer a more objective perspective than Tube fan and yours.

It's like the way CGI looks good and smooth but also often looks fake in comparison to the solidity and reality of models.

Another very poor comparison. CG is made up in a computer, and CD is a copy of the original master tapes.

[E-Stat]

I'd need a lot more persuading to believe that the power supply is some how in the signal path.

Think of it this way: the power supply (along with upstream power cords and power conditioners) most certainly affect sound quality.

I've proven that lesson to myself many times over. In 1976, I owned a Dynaco PAT-5 extensively massaged by Frank Van Alstine. Aside from his mods using higher performance active devices and passive parts, he has always been a fan of big fat hairy power supplies. Do you remember the "Double Dyna 400"? He added so many banks of filter caps, they had to outboarded in a separate box! Dynaco endorsed both sets of changes and put them into their own production with the PAT-5 BiFET and ST-416 with optional C-100 "energy storage unit".

At the time, I was using a sweet 100 watt/channel Audire amp driving Magnepan MG-IIs. To its existing bank of 30,000 uF of storage, I similarly added another 80,000 uF in an external cabinet. I was 19 and thought, "why not?" I also replaced the bridge rectifier to a 30A unit so as not to melt the original upon power up. Result? Added transparency, bass impact and dynamic power. The sucker would play on for almost a minute when switched off.

The aftermarket power cords, conditioners and power supply used with the Touch I use today definitely open up the top by filtering RFI grunge. At first blush, however, the resulting sound is seemingly darker and rolled off. Then you realize what is missing is the haze and a purer top end emerges.

Obviously there are a lot of reputable tube designs that rely on s/s power supplies.

You betcha.

[E-Stat]

As far as the lack of MC, it would be VERY difficult to do with the size room I saw demo's in last year. Unless the system used mini monitors, there would be no way to optimize in those size rooms.

I agree entirely, but isn't that pretty much the case with two channel systems using any number of large speaker systems? I know that my three foot wide speakers that need to be 6-8 feet out from the back wall would be far from optimum in a hotel room. And, conversely, why speakers optimized for smaller rooms like the ANs work so well? I'm glad I'm not faced with a 12 foot wide room like Art Dudley.

If MC music isn't presented, then how can anyone develop enthusiasm over the format? I'm thinking that the Best Buy sales guy won't be promoting their HT systems using 2L recordings.

[RGA]

Your arguments are fair but I am not sure what you mean by set up the CD player optimally. How exactly do they set-up CD improperly?

As for apples and oranges - well that is kind of a given if you are remotely interested in music playback rather than JUST sound playback.

If I have 10 LPs that have no master tape in existence and all the CD copies sound worse than the LPs what am I to do - try to offer some practical advice for once.

I really don't give a rat's ass whether tape SACD, DSD or vinyl or mini-disc is superior technology as a sonic reproduction format.

What anyone who is remotely interested in listening to MUSIC gives a crapola about is getting the best music reproduction of their favorite music.

Tape sounded the best - great - but I can't get any music on that format and I have to deal with the pain in the ass of using the tape. Vinyl is bad enough for pain int he ass factor but at least there are hundreds of thousands of albums on the format and they cost next to nothing (in many cases nothing) to acquire.

If the vinyl sounds better than the same album on CD which is often (though not always) the case then vinyl it is. SACD and DSD probably don't even have the option for purchase. And even the Tape project is a system where you can buy something like 10 tapes per year for over $3000 and basically you take what they put out with a few opt outs.

Miles Davis or Ray Charles on 45rpm versus CD/SACD and the few Blu Ray music discs I've heard is embarrassing.

Conversely I have CD and vinyl of the same album where the CD easily wins.

I am not a slave to format - I really couldn't care less about formats or their technical prowess - I care about the result. I think everyone agrees that vinyl is weaker than digital in a technical sense and it may sound worse. Tape is great - no albums. CD for the first decade sucked and now it's compessed to hell. DSD had little to no presence at a show geared to people who care about audio reproduction. Wish I saw it. I want to get into computer audio - looking at several players but what music is available?

The discs I used in my sessions (other than G&R and McLaclan stuff were 24/192khz. My current CD player is also 24/192khz. And my planned computer player is likely going to be using the Sabre ESS Technology 9018 32 bit DAC chip with zero jitter.

I'm simply stating what I heard at the show - tape and the black discs in every room they were in sounded better even against some stellar discs. 1950s pressing were killing German made best CD can get CD and the SACD discs played in the SACD players (that were being used).

I think if you want to sell people on superior sounding technology I am opened minded enough to accept that - but I want it to be demonstrated to me in a real life situation. Once it is demonstrated to me that it is superior - I will say so. Demonstrated me in room listening session - not providing white papers and anecdotal personal experiences.

And while you seem to get frustrated with me - I am one of the few reviewers you will find that is willing to drop vinyl in a second if I like something better. Some reviewers are pretty entrenched on that format. I am not. If I can replace my favorite LPs with a better sounding version on download - my vinyl collection will head to the used shop immediately. Indeed, if it was close and LP only had a slight edge I might just save me the bother. But apples to oranges or not when I use a great CD recording and a guy puts on an old Chet LP and it KILLS a newly recorded SOTR even if it is CD played on a Chord CD player on heavy stands there is no way anyone could walk out of there saying they liked the CD better. And that CD got a huge number of compliments from a number of people saying to me how great it sounded.

But if I can get Loreena McKennett, Sarah McLachlan, Jackson Browne kind of music on DSD - then you have my interest. If all I can get is Mahler, Mozart - bah - don't care.

[E-Stat]

What anyone who is remotely interested in listening to MUSIC gives a crapola about is getting the best music reproduction of their favorite music.

What Rich just said. Greenie time.

Except that even if magically I could get equivalent hi-rez downloads of my vinyl library, I'm not sure that today I would drop several thou just for the convenience and marginal improvements.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Your arguments are fair but I am not sure what you mean by set up the CD player optimally. How exactly do they set-up CD improperly?

If you don't know by now, you will never never know. I should not have to explain this to you Mr. Reviewer.

As for apples and oranges - well that is kind of a given if you are remotely interested in music playback rather than JUST sound playback.

Come on Richard, don't be stupid. Whatever format is playing music, it is music playback. A PA system would be sound playback. Please don't stupidly assume that I don't know the difference.

If I have 10 LPs that have no master tape in existence and all the CD copies sound worse than the LPs what am I to do - try to offer some practical advice for once.

Here what you do. You realize that you would rather listen for euphoria rather than accuracy and trueness. In other words, you like your audio well seasoned, and have no idea what accuracy(which IS musical) really is. Here is another piece of advice(and this is practical), go hear some hi rez audio. Live with it if you can stand it(rolls eyes), then come back and let's talk.

I really don't give a rat's ass whether tape SACD, DSD or vinyl or mini-disc is superior technology as a sonic reproduction format.

No you don't. You don't care about anything but AN, and listening to and through cooked audio.

What anyone who is remotely interested in listening to MUSIC gives a crapola about is getting the best music reproduction of their favorite music.

Then get a grammphone then if it is all about the music. I think this is a BS copout. Anyone who loves music should want to hear it sound as close to the source that recorded it, not some cooked replication of it.

Tape sounded the best - great - but I can't get any music on that format and I have to deal with the pain in the ass of using the tape. Vinyl is bad enough for pain int he ass factor but at least there are hundreds of thousands of albums on the format and they cost next to nothing (in many cases nothing) to acquire.

So it is not about the music, it is about your budget. The fog is clearing now.

If the vinyl sounds better than the same album on CD which is often (though not always) the case then vinyl it is. SACD and DSD probably don't even have the option for purchase. And even the Tape project is a system where you can buy something like 10 tapes per year for over $3000 and basically you take what they put out with a few opt outs.

So far we find out the basis or your arguement is not what really sounds best, but what you have the most access to, and your budget.

Miles Davis or Ray Charles on 45rpm versus CD/SACD and the few Blu Ray music discs I've heard is embarrassing.

Mile Davis can be found on HDtracks in high resolution, and it can be found on SACD and CD.

Conversely I have CD and vinyl of the same album where the CD easily wins.

]I am not a slave to format - I really couldn't care less about formats or their technical prowess - I care about the result. I think everyone agrees that vinyl is weaker than digital in a technical sense and it may sound worse. Tape is great - no albums. CD for the first decade sucked and now it's compessed to hell. DSD had little to no presence at a show geared to people who care about audio reproduction. Wish I saw it. I want to get into computer audio - looking at several players but what music is available?

Why don't you get off your azz like I did and look instead of having somebody look and tell you. By just getting on the internet and typing in high resolution downloads, your question is easily answered.

The discs I used in my sessions (other than G&R and McLaclan stuff were 24/192khz. My current CD player is also 24/192khz. And my planned computer player is likely going to be using the Sabre ESS Technology 9018 32 bit DAC chip with zero jitter.

What disc did you use that can hold 24/192khz audio? The only one I know of is the Bluray disc. Your current CD player may have 24/192khz DAC's, but what the hell good is that if you only listen to Redbook CD? And please don't tell me it upsamples, because that does not add more information that improves quality, it just moves the brick wall filters.

I'm simply stating what I heard at the show - tape and the black discs in every room they were in sounded better even against some stellar discs. 1950s pressing were killing German made best CD can get CD and the SACD discs played in the SACD players (that were being used).

All this tells me is that they did not pick the best digital sources, but did so with the vinyl ones.

I think if you want to sell people on superior sounding technology I am opened minded enough to accept that - but I want it to be demonstrated to me in a real life situation. Once it is demonstrated to me that it is superior - I will say so. Demonstrated me in room listening session - not providing white papers and anecdotal personal experiences.

As many shows are you go to and you have never heard a DXD demo. I heard one at the CAS two years ago. You have never heard a well recorded(not upsampled) 24/192khz audio? Two years ago I went to the Rocky Mountain audio fest and heard quite a bit of well recorded high resolution audio. PLENTY of it. So it is rather obvious you only go to shows were deaf old people that enjoy cooked audio go. What a shame.

And while you seem to get frustrated with me - I am one of the few reviewers you will find that is willing to drop vinyl in a second if I like something better. Some reviewers are pretty entrenched on that format. I am not. If I can replace my favorite LPs with a better sounding version on download - my vinyl collection will head to the used shop immediately. Indeed, if it was close and LP only had a slight edge I might just save me the bother. But apples to oranges or not when I use a great CD recording and a guy puts on an old Chet LP and it KILLS a newly recorded SOTR even if it is CD played on a Chord CD player on heavy stands there is no way anyone could walk out of there saying they liked the CD better. And that CD got a huge number of compliments from a number of people saying to me how great it sounded.

Another damn vinyl CD comparison. This is like a broken record......Wise up fool, you cannot compare to incompatible recordings. A recording of one thing, compared to a recording of a completely different thing proves absolutely nothing.

But if I can get Loreena McKennett, Sarah McLachlan, Jackson Browne kind of music on DSD - then you have my interest. If all I can get is Mahler, Mozart - bah - don't care.

You can get Jackson Browne on DVD-A that carries both a 24/192khz track, and a 24/96khz surround track. The reviews on Amazon say it sounds far better than the LP/CD. Sarah label is on Arista Record label, and they have never been known for quality recordings IMO. They also do not support high resolution formats.

While you may enjoy these artists, they are niche artists who do not have enough sales to justify transfering anything on to SACD.

When you look up SACD on Amazon, you find 7,539 results. I am sorry that out of more than 7,000 titles, you cannot find one thing you like. I also think you are not looking either. Richard, you (like another individual that comes to mind) are a wordy BS artist - one of the best I have ever come across.

[Feanor]

Think of it this way: the power supply (along with upstream power cords and power conditioners) most certainly affect sound quality.
...
The aftermarket power cords, conditioners and power supply used with the Touch I use today definitely open up the top by filtering RFI grunge. At first blush, however, the resulting sound is seemingly darker and rolled off. Then you realize what is missing is the haze and a purer top end emerges. ...

Don't get me wrong: I wasn't saying power supply is unimportant. I did say that power has to be "abundant and clean".

All my components have at least some RFI/EMI filtering ahead of them and I use a shielded AC cord for key components, e.g. my class D amp.

[tube fan]

Hate? Boy, that is a strong sentiment!

I can certainly relate to the raw sounding SS gear of the 70s when I began my audio journey and that of early digital of the 80s. I just don't find that to be universally true today.

My mostly SS vintage system is easy to listen to for extended periods of time - even if does not provide the level of realism delivered by the main tube system. Its sins are largely of omission. The Manley DAC uses a simple 12AU7 based analog output. The modest NAD preamp does a fine job with the Ariston/SME/Shinon table. The Threshold amp is free from global feedback, uses no protection circuitry, has a stiff 105 joule power supply and runs class A for the first 10% of its output. It uses a shielded aftermarket power cord to minimize RFI and all other components are run through a power conditioner for the same objective. Since I enjoy the outdoors, I actually listen to that system more often that the "big" one.

With your penchant for (single) blind testing, to what SS gear have you compared your 80s vintage ARC gear in your own system?

edit: BTW, did you realize there are not one, but TWO Texas Instruments TL071 op amps in the signal path of your D-70? You may need to sit down and take a powder!

D70 schematic

Look at U1 and U2

Audio Research has been making hybrid amps for many decades. I like many hybrid amps, but, so far, no totally ss ones ( Krell, Bryston, Ayre, Naim, etc). Totally ss designs fail to produce palpable three-deminsional images. Audio Research has, from their beginning, tried to close the gap between typical tube bass and treble and the superior bass and treble of ss amps. They even tried to go all ss in some amps, a huge failure. I compared Audio Research's PH2 (all ss) and PH3 (hybrid) phono preamps, and, once again the ss unit, though more costly, failed to reproduce palpable sound. I brought the PH3 and continue to use it. Many ss amps have superior tonal balance to hybrid Audio Research ones (IMO, all Audio Research amps are too bright), but they fail in the production of palpable midrange images. NOS tubes help to tame Audio Research's brightness. JV has explained this in his many Audio Research reviews in TAS. Pure tube amps yield even better images than Audio Research, but their bass and treble is not accurate. Again, it's a question of each listeners' reality triggers.

[tube fan]

Maybe - but Fremer hates SET and loves 1000 watt amps.

Fact is people are not all in one camp. If SS does the job then I will say so - this is nothing new - I have liked plenty of SS amplifiers from Pass Labs, Sugden, Heed Audio, Technical Brain and others. It's not my preference because the speakers I own don't require their power.

And I think the MBL system would be better with vinyl and tubes. Since I don't play that loud and I would not need to fill that space - I would really like to hear their speakers on a very well built robust tube amplifier - even some of the bigger watt SETs or maybe something like the Carver amps.

I hear the potential in those speakers.

Perhaps the main problem with the MBL room was that they played everything FAR too loud when I listened. I hear that they do this at almost all audio shows. Very loud sound impresses the naive, so maybe it's sensible market-wise.

[E-Stat]

Totally ss designs fail to produce palpable three-deminsional images.

I see. You've never listened to any in your own system under single blind conditions.

[YBArcam]

OP's point of view on ss and digital just seems way too overzealous and unbalanced. At least RGA, who may not be the biggest fan of those approaches, understands there are good examples of each and doesn't let bias totally cloud his POV.

I have gone from one ss/digital system to another with a big improvement in timbre and tone, where music just feels real and alive, with a nice sense of space around each part. While perhaps tubes and analog would do this better it's pretty much guaranteed that they'd also do some things worse. I want my system to be well rounded, to be able to play everything that I throw at it convincingly. And I'm proud to say that it can do this for a very modest sum of money relatively speaking. This change convinced me that I didn't have to spend more to get better sound, and it definitely shows that one ss amp and CD player doesn't sound like another (OP seems to think they all sound the same and it's the same way they sounded back in 1986).

I also happen to believe that, as long as a piece of equipment is well made, it can sound good. Just because you hear an amp or speakers sound poor doesn't mean that they would sound as bad in another system, in another room, and set up differently. Were the proper things done to maximize the performance of a system when you heard it? I think my Naim gear sounds incredible, however two of the three demos in which I've heard a Naim system sounded very poor! Kind of bright, seemingly lacking in the lower frequencies needed to give warmth and foundation to music. That's not how my system sounds at all.

All that said, I'm going to try a tube amp this fall/winter. And I actually just purchased a tube phono stage (the Synthesis Brio, with two 12ax7 tubes). Not a pricey unit at all, but I gather nicely designed and built (in Italy) and 12ax7 tubes are supposed to sound quite nice. So yes, I do spin vinyl and while I need to do a bit more on that front to get the setup up to snuff, I've never had a better sounding source than my CD5X.

[tube fan]

I see. You've never listened to any in your own system under single blind conditions.

I fail to see how anything I have posted indicates that I have done no blind listening tests of ss amps. NOTHING! Oh yes, it's another incorrect assumption/conclusion.