Curious to know the experience of people who’ve lived, or continue to, with tube gear. What does it give you that solid state didn’t, or vice versa?
The short exposure I’ve had at dealers and shows didn’t tell me much, which is why feedback from long term users would be informative.
That is a loaded question, IMO better to just go to a dealer, get a 30 day return policy and compare at home.Good answer.
The 1625 is a great tube similar to 807, very hi sound value for the price $5 each.
http://www.gstube.com/catalog/?key=1625&submit=Find
Thanks for the PDF link, very good info.
Does your diy tube gear greatly surpass the solid states you have, which are up there as well. Is it really worth all the added effort and future tube failures?I own a Conrad Johnson ACT2 ($13000 new) uses 4 6H30P (used paid way less, way way less)
Freo,
Thanks for the feedback and information.
Does your diy tube gear greatly surpass the solid states you have, which are up there as well. Is it really worth all the added effort and future tube failures?
Curious to know the experience of people who’ve lived, or continue to, with tube gear. What does it give you that solid state didn’t, or vice versa?
The short exposure I’ve had at dealers and shows didn’t tell me much, which is why feedback from long term users would be informative.
On the plus side - the sound is generally more laid back with a deeper soundstage.
On the minus side - sacrifice precision and detail.
I can partially answer this question. I own Bryston gear, and a couple of additional tube preamps.
The main feature of tubes is second harmonic distortion.
2nd harmonic is good, folks like it. Anytime you think your sound is a little 'dry, plopping in some 2nd harmonic can cure it.
The thing is, as the years since tubes were invented, and solid state gear arose.. Tube gear has been working to be more like solid state, and SS has become more 'liquid'.
So at this point in time, whatever you are looking for can be had with either one. It is pretty easy to warm up sound with SS gear anyway. If you work at it a little. The cubed Bryston are already nice and liquid. not tubes needed.
As an aside, I would add the more conditioning and AC work you have going the more liquid your SS gear can become.
The main downside for me in particular of tubes is tube life. Since I am now retired, and l play music at home at least ten hours a day, every day,.. Take a new Audio Research Reference 6 preamp. recommended 2000 hours on 6550WE tube, and 4000 hours on the (7) 6H30P. For me, that is less then six months to 2000, and under 13 months to 4000hrs listening.
I have been retired nine years now. that is at LEAST 15 of the one tube, and another 7 SETS of the rest... In the same time my Bryston B-26 had needed... nothing. sounds WONDERFUL.
& Seven times 7 cheapest $40 tubes is two grand for CHEAP versions of the tubes. Expensive top of the line? $14,000 for tubes...
Naturally tube folks will say nahhh you don't need to replace them every 4000 hours....
True for 12AX7/12AU7 tube based preamp tubes..
Then you got Amplifier tubes... which have shorter lives...
Added: a lot of tube hype is romance. They glow, they are 'interesting'. You can search high and low for old, 'special' tubes. Nostalgia... Romance. what is not to like.
Added tubes also help with some mediocre digital sound. Tubes can alter the HF enough to hide digital glare.
No solid state amp sounds "just like a tube amp". While designers try to get them to sound as similar as possible, they will never quite get there. I would argue that McIntosh solid state amps are about as close to sounding like a tube amp available, mostly due to the autoformer. I own two higher powered tube amps, and they definitely do not sound the same as a solid state amp. There is a difference with the midrange that is easy to pick up.
Ask any guitarist about this issue. They will tell you that their solid state emulation does not sound like their tube amp.
Serious tube heads often eschew modern tube gear and go the kit/DIY route. Contrary to what some folks think, if one uses tried and true/proven circuitry, the performance from this gear can easily exceed commercial gear.
This is because one can use higher quality parts than what is usually used in commercial gear, point to point wiring vice PCB's, and employ circuitry that uses high quality NOS tubes that are fine audio tubes, but not initially intended/designed for audio. Many commercial tube products use the 6DJ8, which was NOT intended for audio. It is a frame grid tube, used for IF stages. IMHO, the 6DJ8 is not a good audio tube. David Manley of VTL fame also hated that tube.
If DIY scares one off, another option is to get a vintage tube amp restored by a reputable outfit. Hard to go wrong with a Harmon Kardon Citation II.
Once I hear every solid state amp and every tube amp that’s out there, taking into account the permutations of preamps and cables, i’ll Get back to you.
I have first hand experience with DIY. Hagerman used to sell half kits of his Cornet series phono preamps. For your money you got a pc board a parts list and directions. And the link to his forum here on AC.
If memory serves, there was400 vac at one point on circuit and Plate voltage was 365 dc give or take 10 volts so one needed to be careful when checking voltages on first power up. The Cornet2 punches way above its class and served me well for many years. But I finally decided it was now or never for his Trumpet and sold it. Again NOS Tubes took it several levels higher than possible with modern glass.
Lots of fans of the Bottlrhead series too. And Alex Cavelli headphone circuits are dynamite. I built his original SOHA tube opamp-hybrid and it was a blast to listen to. It too benefitted with tube upgrade. I put in an Amperex bugle boy from early 1960’s and was flabbergasted how good it sounded compared to Electroharmix which in turn was far better than JJ whatever. Rolling opamps was educational. My fave turned out to be a pair of single Channel AD8610 that I had to stick on a black dog adaptor. It was surface mount stuff which was new to me then. Once you figure out the trick it goes fast and is fun
Oh, and the best wiring is no wiring. Bryston and Hagerman went to great design pains to eliminate wires and rely on gas free connections.
In my experience, the larger the transformer, the softer the sound. Small SET amps with small transformers have much more detail. OTL amps have the most detail. But it has been awhile since I owned any tube amps with the larger transformers, so that might have changed.
SET is the ONLY way to go for power to speakers, assuming you have relatively high-efficiency speakers. One caveat is that the iron or output transformers must be good quality. There are a few designers in Asia/Japan that have this down.
A misconception about tube electronics is that all it needs is a good power supply and not power decoupling. This is what sets apart tube amps that sound "tubey" and ones that sound like SS, only better. Tubes can also affect this, so picking very linear fast tubes with wide bandwidth is important. Unfortunately, most tubes that qualify are NOS and tend to be expensive and rare.
Decoupling caps are often ignored in tube preamp and amp designs because of the higher voltages and lower currents. IT's a mistake IME. I have modded tube equipment in the past and adding these caps to the power subsystem always makes a big difference. If this is done right, telling the difference between good SS and good tube equipment is harder, although the inherent linearity and lower signal voltage swing usually makes tubes superior for analog.
Steve N.
IMHO, disagree about SET being only way to go, unless you don't care about the frequency extremes in sound reproduction. Stu Hegeman, one of the gurus of tube audio, actually supported high powered pentode amps. David Manley also supported higher powered tube amps.
http://positive-feedback.com/Issue65/manley.htm (http://positive-feedback.com/Issue65/manley.htm)
Besides, the vast majority of speakers do not support a SET design. Even the speakers that do support SET are lacking in deep bass.
Mostly concur with your other observations. Your points about NOS tubes is why I selected tubes that meet the wide bandwidth qualification and were reasonably priced (6AH4, 6BL7, 1625, 8552).
Audio is mostly science, but there is just enough art involved to debate endlessly as to what is perceived as better. And that is part of the fun of this hobby.
I have no issues with frequency extremes, in fact my current 35W per channel SET drives my speakers lower and with more authority than my previous 800W per channel modded JC-1 monoblocks. The Vapor Nimbus has no problem going really low. With the Russian NOS military tubes in my input stage, I get excellent HF speed, better than the SS JC-1's and I get more of a 3-D presentation with smoother vocals. No negatives.
You only need to select the right speakers and amps, and optimally roll the tubes.
Steve N.
Nice speakers! Would love to hear them with your amp.
At 35 watts, your SET is pretty high powered for that topology. Most SET's I was thinking of are much lower powered. What amp do you use? I've always had an interest in higher powered SET's.
Can you post some information about your amp?
It's a modified version of the prototype for these (this exact thing is not available):
Arte Forma Due Volte:
http://www.josound.net/Arte_Forma.html# (http://www.josound.net/Arte_Forma.html#)
I have no issues with frequency extremes, in fact my current 35W per channel SET drives my speakers lower and with more authority than my previous 800W per channel modded JC-1 monoblocks. The Vapor Nimbus has no problem going really low. With the Russian NOS military tubes in my input stage, I get excellent HF speed, better than the SS JC-1's and I get more of a 3-D presentation with smoother vocals. No negatives.
You only need to select the right speakers and amps, and optimally roll the tubes.
Steve N.
It's all a matter of what sounds best to you. Different tube equipment sounds different.
I've used several tube preamps and buffers. I do think some of them sound good, but in the end I prefer good quality SS.
Tubes have a "sound"; I like it, but in my opinion/experience they also have disadvantages: they add a bit of background noise that good SS doesn't have, and for my taste don't sound as "clean" in playback as good SS. That's my taste, and I prefer the totally quiet background and clean sound of good SS.
People who prefer tubes have a different reaction t hearing the same thing. There is no right answer. You just have to try it and see what you like.
Hi Freo
What would be the typical noise floor of a tube preamp or amp?
james