Tubes vs Solid State - Are we seeing a turning point?

KeithR said:
I think we also have to consider what kind of enclosure these newer drivers are in - if its sealed box, it is pretty much going to need big tubes or SS to begin with.

But regarding material you're right that something like a paper driver is probably going to be used in SET applications whereas some other materials take more energy to drive. That said, I've heard a lot of ceramics being driven by tube amps. Marten, EA, Kharma, Vapor to name a few.
Click to expand...


Ceramics have a different requirement vs Paper , they require complex xovers to make them work unlike paper where most are run with simple xovers , SS is better suited for complex high phase angle xovers.

Paper is a hard sell in todays Market , but IMO , paper is easily the most natural sounding material for dynamic drivers, especially in the midrange ...


Regards
 
bonzo said:
I disagree. Tubes being sloppy, mushy and muddy is same as SS being sterile, flat soundstage, and harsh. These are the negatives of both, and good products from both genres get past that. As for Zanden, Detlof from WBF and I both preferred his MSB much more to his Zanden CD+Dac, and he does not like his Zanden phono for the same reason (instead using his Lamm and Kondo M1000), and another reported the same on Zanden amps. So that is probably a house sound.

I know someone who preferred his Dartzeel to his Shindo on his high efficiency speakers.

Yet...there are too many incidences of toobs beating the sh*t out of SS on tone, soundstage, realism. KR Audio, NAT, other SETs. Joel of 6 moons, who has had tons of experience with high powered amplifiers (must be a trait of people with the name of Joe in it) prefers the Luxman M800 and the Ayon Orthos to Karan 2000w and Chord amps on Vivid G1s and Maggie 20.7. Yet some prefer the CAT Jl on Vivids. OTLs and quads are considered a dream match.

I have heard both Spectral 400s and VTL next to each other on Wilson XLF. Former was cleaner and faster, but lacked harmonics and realism. Ideally I would have chosen something midway. I have found that Spectral is best paired with a valve up the chain. Indeed Marty from WBF replaced his Siegfrieds with Spectrals to create one of the best rooms in the US. And I walked away impressed with Vitus after comparing to Kondo Kagura and M1000 on the Magicos at Rhapsodys.

Many drive my favorite speakers, restored Apogees, with Tube Research Labs. I heard one on the Duetta and it was awesome.

To get good SS quality can be extremely expensive.

In short, there is no right answer, and one can only hurt oneself being ideological. Also, I think everyone should own one Jadis irrespective of what the main amp is. It is just magic.
Click to expand...


The tube amps you are rating with some exception are SET , No ..?

One must always match amp to load and im sure there are going to be instances where one supercedes the other, due to system matching etc , but not always in absolute terms .

Spectral is a bad match for Wilson imo, wilsons works best with amps with a bit of darkness ,(Vtl) Dave voices his speakers that Way, an amp as revealing as Spectral would sound brutal on them and that has been my experience, speakers smooth and or a bit laid back will be better on Spectral gear .

Mag 20.1/20.7 can sound thin , so system match is very important ..

Then there's personal taste , listening levels, clipping charateristics , et al and all will be the ultimate arbiter in determining what we like and ultimately choose ...

With a few exceptions , Im with Mike thou in that i find most toobs sluggish and too laid back on more speakers than i care to name , well built SET's the exception ....


regards
 
I hope there isn't a turning point.I run a Vitus -025 Amp and part the year swap it out with Line Magnetic Tube Amp.I love the difference in both with equal listening pleasure....:cool:
Stump
 
I have had the opportunity to compare the McIntosh C1000P (solid state) and C1000T (tube) against various balanced sources. I was expecting that these pre-amps were very similar according to reviews and posts. They are more than subtly different! A lot can be said about source matching to one, the other or both. I had a preconception of what I thought which sources should perform better with each pre-amp but I was surprised to discover the opposite was true with some sources according to my setup electronics, mood and listening bias.

Amplifiers are McIntosh MC2301s tube driven by ECC801S, Gold Lion KT88 reissues.
The C1000T is driven by Tesla E83CC gold / Telefunken ECC803S.

Same cable comparison, typically Siltech Princess XLR all stages. All components are fully balanced except the turntable.


1. Home Theatre, Burr Brown DACs - ss pre-amp
2. Studer Analogue Tuner - tube pre-amp
3. Studer Tape R2R and cassette - solid state pre-amp for playback
4. MDA1000 DAC - definitely TUBE pre-amp
5. Vinyl, cartridge Clearaudio GoldFinger Statement. - both but need further critical listening time.
6. SACD transport, ESS sabre DAC - ss pre-amp.

Suffice to say each source has its own inherent weaknesses. My sweet spot describes holographic resolution and degree of realism.

I was expecting R2R tape with its huge dynamic range to perform better with a tube pre-amp but so far have found with solid state, tape is blacker and better. Perhaps it's because most tape software was mastered using tube amplification?

I also found that analogue radio was less holographic with solid state pre-amplification. Also unexpected. But I suppose radio in it heyday was designed to be tube driven!

Most surprising was the MDA1000 after re-configuring the C1000C to enable the C1000T balanced DA7 XLR input instead and reassigning the C1000Ps equivalent to another source. The MDA1000 is indeed a special DAC that remains relevant to this day, especially for redbook. This DAC belongs with these pre-amps and the C1000 trio was engineered with that in mind.

BTW, my loudspeakers are Scanspeak coated paper pulp drivers and Scanspeak silk dome tweeters.
 
FM Radio is very much dependent on the engineer at the time and broadcast material. Good material and an experienced engineer would surprise you very much, just how good FM can be.


regards
 
a.wayne said:
FM Radio is very much dependent on the engineer at the time and broadcast material. Good material and an experienced engineer would surprise you very much, just how good FM can be.


regards
Click to expand...


Simply love the Studer A726 FM tuner hooked up to the tube pre-amplifier on a good station such as Michael Buble's Smooth FM. To me sounds better than internet radio.

The A726 is fully balanced pro unit and is modular by design.

DAB+ of course doesn't even come close with its compression, artefacts etc.
 
Steve said:
Simply love the Studer A726 FM tuner hooked up to the tube pre-amplifier on a good station such as Michael Buble's Smooth FM. To me sounds better than internet radio.

The A726 is fully balanced pro unit and is modular by design.

DAB+ of course doesn't even come close with its compression, artefacts etc.
Click to expand...

It should. Internet radio is heavily compressed digital crap.
 
I listen since 1990 with triode amp like Be Yamamura,Audio Tekne,Fal,Shindo,Audio Note japan,Kondo and i always cannot listen Transistor amp.
Now i have Kondo M7,phono GE1 and 2 Souga and also CH Precision L1,P1,X1 and 2 A1 in mono and i can tell that now i prefer CH,that seems more natural,fast,transparent,and clean than Kondo.
This means that quality in transistor amp increase a lot in last few year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top