Do you prefer SS or tube? Why?

[a.wayne]

I think the question asked in the OP is far too broad. Is the SS amp Class A or AB? Is the tube amp triode or pentode? I recently directly compared a friend's stereo pentode tube amp to my mono block Class A SS amps in my system and later that same pentode tube amp to a third friend's triode tube mono block amps. I was quite surprised by what I heard. The pentode tube amp sounded very similar in both systems and quite different from the SS Class A amps and triode tube amps while the latter two seemed to have very similar sonic characteristics in the different systems.

All of the amplifiers were able to drive the speakers to adequate levels with what seemed like low distortion, but they really sounded very different and I suspect the three listeners each preferred his own amplifier(s) to the others. I would now like to compare the SS Class A amps to the powerful tube triode amps in the same system to hear how different or similar they sound. That might also be quite surprising given the comments here about how different SS and tube amps are supposed to sound.

It is all quite fascinating and why one should probably hear a particular amp with his speakers before buying it.

Disagree , its a basic simple question , which do your prefer and why there's no right or wrong answer, just one’s opinion ...


Regards

 

[PeterA]

I'm a newb getting back into high end audio after a 40+ year hiatus. Just wondered if there's a clear cut favorite? I'm especially interested to hear why one is chosen over the other.

Are tube amps generally considered superior or do they just sound different? It seems to me that high end audiophiles prefer tubes. But I've also read that there have been many improvements to SS amps making them the relative equals of tube amps.

I prefer solid state amps in my own system. I have preferred those to the tube amps that I have heard in my system, though I have not heard many alternatives. I have also heard some tube amps that remind me of solid state amps, and visa versa in other systems, though those "typical" characteristics are becoming less apparent to me.

Based on some recent experiments, I find it difficult to generalize about each typology having a characteristic sound.

I don't know which type is generally considered superior. I guess it depends.

 

[PeterA]

That reminds me of a blind test with a switch box that I heard demonstrated in a store in the Netherlands in the early Nineties. They demoed SS amps, a few Japanese amps and a Rotel. While all amps probably had low distortion figures on paper, they sounded radically different, and the Rotel far and away sounded the most natural. It's not just simplistically about a "topology", you have to hear an amp in your system for yourself.

It reminds me of my own blind test where the participants wore sleeping masks. They swore the tube amp was SS and the SS was tube. The comments were pretty funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's interesting. The two comparisons to which I was referring were nothing like blind tests. The listeners knew exactly which amp was which and there was no "black box" switching capability. No one swore that the tube amp sounded like SS or the SS like the tube, nor were there funny comments made after the comparison.

The amplifiers simply sounded different, and in surprising ways, to me at least. They were easy, fun, and educational experiments which were primarily about determining whether or not my friend's stereo pentode tube amp could drive the two pairs of Magico speakers and whether or not the amp produced a "synthetic" sound in those particular systems. I think we all learned a lot.

 

[PeterA]

Disagree , its a basic simple question , which do your prefer and why there's no right or wrong answer, just one’s opinion ...


Regards

Ok, I see your point. I prefer SS class A amps if the speakers can not be driven adequately by low powered SET tube amps. If the speakers can be driven by low power amps, then I prefer low powered SET tube amps, at least in the specific systems I have heard.

 

[Anatta]

Compare 1st watt distortion a story emerges ...

You mean this story?

Same SS amp @

1W into 8 Ohm

100W into 8 Ohm

Any corectly biased amp will have lower distortion at 1W than at higher powers.

 

[a.wayne]

Nope apples and oranges

 

[a.wayne]

Now examine the distortion of well designed toob amps at mW levels its very low , this first watt is very important , this is where toob amps are better than SS , they dont need high NFB to generate low levels of distortion at mW outputs ..

SS amps are better on the gallop , where high powered drive is necessary , unfortunately a good one is a rare beast today ..

BTW ,

SS amps should be matched to the speaker load with the same effort used by tooby guys ..

load first then amp to drive the load ...

 

[a.wayne]

Ok, I see your point. I prefer SS class A amps if the speakers can not be driven adequately by low powered SET tube amps. If the speakers can be driven by low power amps, then I prefer low powered SET tube amps, at least in the specific systems I have heard.

Agree for the most part here ...

 

[Anatta]

Now examine the distortion of well designed toob amps at mW levels its very low , this first watt is very important , this is where toob amps are better than SS

Oh really?

Well wouldn't you know that particular SS amp is of the zero global feedback variety.

Now compare to toob amps @ 1W, that first W sure looks so clean lol

 

[Anatta]

And here is another toob amp @ 1V into 8 Ohm (125mW).

Impressive!

 

[a.wayne]

That SS is running Feedback and btw degeneration is feedback ...



regards

 

[a.wayne]

Cherry picking graphs does not a picture make , you have to look at global measurements to decide load and drive application ..

 

[a.wayne]

Oh really?

Well wouldn't you know that particular SS amp is of the zero global feedback variety.

Now compare to toob amps @ 1W, that first W sure looks so clean lol

Have you designed or built amps before all feedback is essentially global , so you can leave the market hype like full CLass A and no NFB at home ...

The story which emerges is that all well built tooby amplifiers have very low distortion when operated in the mW range, there is no disadvantage and since most underpower their hiFi systems they end up comparing clipping characteristics , here the tooby amp is less offensive
And why many consider them over SS amps..


Thats my observation...

 

[Anatta]

all feedback is essentially global

Afraid to ask but, what do you mean? Are you one of the zombies out there chanting the Feedback is evil mantra btw?

The story which emerges is that all well built tooby amplifiers have very low distortion when operated in the mW range, there is no disadvantage.

No, the story that emerges is that no toob amp, irrespective of cost, can be as clean as a good SS amp even at mW power level (as if that has any relevance anyway in the real world).

 

[Anatta]

Cherry picking graphs does not a picture make , you have to look at global measurements to decide load and drive application ..

Only thing that upward distortion graph shows is that the distortion is above the noise.

A downward distortion graph doesn't mean the amp has more distortion at low power, but that the noise covers the distortion (it's a THD+N measurement) and as you lower the power, that noise becomes a larger part of the signal.

The graph bellow shows that the distortion level is under the noise floor right until clipping. But if you do an FFT measurement @1W and @100W, the amp will be cleaner @1W than @100W, despite the apparent higher distortion @1W in the THD+N measurement.

 

[atmasphere]

@atmasphere you said and repeated over the years that a priori tube amps produce less high order distortion than SS and that is the reason they sound better (your personal opinion); like a fatality in which, even if the tubes wanted to produce high order distortion, they wouldn't be able due to their nature and SS wouldn't be able to get rid or lower the high order distortion to values less than tubes due to its nature. Thats BS statement.

My opinion is that those who prefer tube amps like them exactly because they produce much more distortion (level and order wise) which adds body to the music, make's it sound organic, real, harmonicaly rich whatever. It's the same with vinyl and NOS DACs preferences.

Here are some SS amps with their 50Hz spectrum measured

View attachment 25313 View attachment 25314 View attachment 25315

and some with their 1kHz spectrum

View attachment 25316 View attachment 25317 View attachment 25318


Compare them to whatever tube amp you want.

I have maintained over the years that the reason tubes sound smoother (not better) has to do with distortion. BTW, for the graphics to be useful, they should be 50Hz signals as seen but going up to 10KHz, not 1 KHz; these graphics have the same problem as I pointed out to you about the Stereophile measurements. As well they lack validity when divorced from the equipment that they might represent.

Since you mentioned Soundstage measurements, here is your MA1 Mk II.2 amplifier compared to some SS ones.

MA1 Mk II.2

vs Benchmark AHB2

vs Bryston 4B3

vs Luxman M-900u

vs Mola Mola Kaluga (class D no less)

Any corectly biased amp will have lower distortion at 1W than at higher powers.

Regarding our amp, it appears that when Bascomb did the measurement, something in his measurement rig was causing one speaker terminal to be at ground. This causes the amp to make a lot more distortion, starting with the 2nd harmonic (this is on account of the fact that the output section is floating with respect to ground, and the drive becomes unbalanced when one speaker terminal is grounded). Normally the amp's main distortion component is the 3rd (typical of fully differential amplifiers), and in our current lineup that is the primary component, yielding a THD of around 0.5%, not bad for a zero feedback design. In addition we found that when Bascomb made the measurements, he neglected to correct the line voltage. You'll note that he claimed that the amps only made about 100 watts when we rate them at 140 watts. I was curious where the additional power went and it was easy to see. We measure the line voltage at the amplifier IEC connections (120VAC) and he measured it probably on the AC meter of his variac. There was a voltage drop across the power cord; turned out that was where the missing 40 watts went. Power cords apparently have an audible and measurable effect

Regarding your comment about a 'corectly biased amp' [sic] the statement is false. Just look at the distortion curve of most amplifiers and you will see that the distortion has a certain minimum level, below which the distortion increases. This is a phenomena common to many tube, solid state and class D amplifiers. But that first watt is important, just ask Nelson Pass or anyone owning his First Watt products (BTW his little VFET re-imagining of the old Sony circuit is excellent). SETs are some of the very few amplifiers in which the distortion linearly decreases to measurable as power is decreased. It is difficult to build a push pull amp that shares this property but they do exist.

 

[atmasphere]

Afraid to ask but, what do you mean? Are you one of the zombies out there chanting the Feedback is evil mantra btw?

Read Norman Crowhurst.

 

[Anatta]

I have maintained over the years that the reason tubes sound smoother (not better) has to do with distortion. BTW, for the graphics to be useful, they should be 50Hz signals as seen but going up to 10KHz, not 1 KHz; these graphics have the same problem as I pointed out to you about the Stereophile measurements. As well they lack validity when divorced from the equipment that they might represent.

Yes, tube amps sound smoother due to more distortion, not less. Why the 50Hz graphs should go to 10kHz when the harmonics don't even reach 1kHz? How is it of any relevance the specific amp models? But if it helps you:

for the 50Hz: 1st Benchmark AHB2, 2nd Boulder 2150, 3rd Audionet Max
for the 1kHz: 1st Benchmark AHB2, 2nd Audionet Max, 3rd Musical Fidelity AMS100

Regarding our amp, it appears that when Bascomb did the measurement...

Now you're blaming the measurement and the power chord?

Regarding your comment about a 'corectly biased amp' [sic] the statement is false. Just look at the distortion curve of most amplifiers and you will see that the distortion has a certain minimum level, below which the distortion increases.

Yes, if and when the distortion raises above the noise. If not, you'll just have a straight downward curve right until clipping. Any amplifier, tube or SS, SE or PP, has less distortion at low power than at high power.

 

[a.wayne]

Only thing that upward distortion graph shows is that the distortion is above the noise.

A downward distortion graph doesn't mean the amp has more distortion at low power, but that the noise covers the distortion (it's a THD+N measurement) and as you lower the power, that noise becomes a larger part of the signal.

The graph bellow shows that the distortion level is under the noise floor right until clipping. But if you do an FFT measurement @1W and @100W, the amp will be cleaner @1W than @100W, despite the apparent higher distortion @1W in the THD+N measurement.

Tell me something i don’t know ..

John usually post graphs which is distortion only vs frequency less the noise and i Don't usually care which topology is being used if it gets the job done ..

BTW, whats odd about that graph you posted ...?

Clip much ...

 

[a.wayne]

Any amplifier, tube or SS, SE or PP, has less distortion at low power than at high power.

Why is that ...?