[TheChairGuy]

I really am trying hard to like tube gear...whether it be front end or amplification, but I find it doesn't sound like music to me.

I'm realllllly not trying to stir up trouble with this post, but you guys that dig tubes in various flavors and in various spots in the audio chain...what is it that you hear, and apparently love, that I am not getting?

I really am quite open minded to the issue, I just don't currently understand the adoration that tends to accompany tube gear in audiophile circles.

I've only owned a Dynaco PAS-3 and PAS-4, not exactly the best representatives of the breed I'm sure, but have attended events (off and on) for over 20 years.  It's the same no matter where or where the tubes are placed....irregular sounding midrange (tho voices often are sometimes 'honey'ed' and flavored nicely), plumpy bottom that lacks definition and treble that lacks extension (where I find a lot of excitement in my music).  And instruments, of various kinds, do not sound quite real...in fact, often, it sounds like nothing I've heard before.  To make matters worse, they are sometimes paired with ribbon speakers often; that lack dynamic impact to start and made worse by, yep, tubes.

There is no genre of music that I have found improved by tubes anywhere in the chain.  I have now heard quite a few digital /Class D amps and their hybrid and Class T cousins, and while each has their attributes, every single one of them has sounded more consistently real than any tube gear I've heard.  Solid state is more hit or miss..there are excellent and not-so-brilliant sounding gear out there - overall, still preferable to tube gear all in all for similar money.

I truly am not wanting to be hazed, tarred, feathered and have this post tossed into The Fight Club....I just don't know what all the fuss is all about.  Tubes are a giant step backwards in audio reproduction, as I hear it.

So, what is it I may not be hearing tube lovers ...despite the bashing your bottles have just taken, I am very flexible about many subjects.  But, I haven't found good reason to love those lava lamps yet.  

 

[audioengr]

I can relate.  I have modded some really good tube gear and here is what I found:

1) The depth of image and detail is often better with tubes than SS
2) The dynamics rarely match SS
3) The bass is almost always a bit wooley or out of control
4) Cheap tube designs hardly ever sound as good as expensive ones
5) Even if tubes dont sound particularly dynamic or focused, they still can sound musical.  Not so with SS.

The best tube DAC that I have ever heard is a DAC4.1X with EA mods.  Really close to my P-3A DAC, but slightly less bass control and HF extension.  This puppy is really expensive.

[Red Dragon Audio]

I think it takes lots of time and exposure to more than just a few systems.  Currently I have a digital amp in my system but it's not forgiving like most tube amps.  I think that is what makes them so attractive is that they are not always hyper analytical or etched.

Synergy is a big factor here too; pair up low sensitive speakers with low impedances and tube amps are not happy (well some are fine but they are big massive tube amps that I have never heard).

However, if you get a nice speaker of higher sensitivity, not too low impedance (or just an Autoformer to raise the impedance) and you should have a pretty nice combo.

Not all tube amps have flubby bass; the ASL Ki22 FOX I used to own was anything but slow sounding down low.  22 watts of SET power coming from 6C33 russian MIG fighter tubes.  It certainly didn't sound like the so called syrupy tube amp some describe, in fact it was rather neutral with excellent detail, enough power for my De Capos and tight, nimble bass.

I think it's all in the design of the amp and the proper matching of speakers.

Have you been to CES, T.H.E. Show or the Stereophile HomeEntertainment shows?  You will find many systems to listen to and perhaps some tube setups that surprise you...others that might not.

Synergy.  

Just like I would say not to pick a hyperdetailed speaker to go with a digital amp.  More than likely it will just be unlistenable for long periods of time.

 

[Jon L]

I think one important fact goes unsaid too often, hinted by the engineer.

It's VERY expensive to make good tubed equipment, especially amps, especially if higher power.  

It's good that there are lots of inexpensive tubed gear out there now, most from China, etc, but it takes real genius to make reasonably-priced tubed equipment hit that magic spot IMO.  Very, very rare to have truly great sounding affordable tube amp, much rarer than some reviewers may lead you to believe.  

My personal bias leans toward push-pull over SET, but this is even more expensive due to a lot more parts involved and even more complex design parameters.  

Most systems I've heard over the years, tube or SS or digital, don't sound much like the real thing, but if I was a betting man, I still bet on tubed equipment to create that connection one can feel with live music.

[warnerwh]

" Tubes are a giant step backwards in audio reproduction, as I hear it. "

I have the exact opposite feeling. My ARC LS 16 pre has all the dynamics and extension of the Krell it replaced yet is grain free and more rich sounding. Some people claim ARC tube gear sounds too much like SS but I think it's just the right touch to make sound seem more real.  There are many tube products that have dynamics and extension but they are quite expensive. I know I can't afford a tube amp that has the power I need. The annual tube replacement alone can easily be 500-1000 bucks.  Until you get to hear various conditions of systems using tubes and then without it's too hard to call.  Find someone with some tube gear in their system and then maybe swap in your preamp or amp and see what you think.  This only counts for the better made stuff, not the low end tube gear as it costs alot of money to build high quality tube gear.  The 400 dollar specials will not compete with Cary, Conrad Johnson, ARC, BAT, etc etc.  One last point, there are varying degrees of "tube sound" from different designs.  Some are syrupy and some are very neutral like ARC.  As a matter of fact I doubt if you didn't see it you couldn't tell some systems with tubes had tubes in them!

[byteme]

Interesting thought.  I think, like SS gear there is some pretty crap tube gear out there that play on the fact that it is tubes so it should have some cache or something.  But, there is also some crap SS gear.  Adding to the complexity is the whole tube rolling bit.  The rule of thumb is that stock tubes suck and you should spend 25% of the retail cost of your item on new NOS tubes.  Hmmm, sounds a lot like keeping another cottage industry alive huh?

On the other hand, when you hear a piece of really well put together and thought out tube equipment in your system, whoa daddy, there it is, everything you've (I've) been looking for, dynamics, soundstage, realism, emotion.  Makes things fun again!  Listening to enjoy rather than to critique your own system.  There is something to be said about turning things on and just losing yourself in the music rather than having to worry about - is this cable burned in yet, or are these the best tubes or could I get to "here" by changing "this".

In the end, I haven't heard a $3k SS preamp, but I have heard a $3k tube preamp, and it's so damn good I'm not looking anymore.  Tube amps are another thing all together and I've only heard one,  but I'll tell you this, it was in the best system I've ever heard:  at Audiojerry's place.  I still use that as the reference for what I'd like to hear out of my system.  I do know though that I won't be dropping $5k on an ARC tube amp to get there!  But dang, it was all about the music.

[Red Dragon Audio]

Chairguy....

go read this post and review over http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=14463.msg125135#125135">here


It's about a new hybrid that is totally unique and one of a kind.  Very interesting article.

[Mad DOg]

TCG,

it's about different strokes for different folks...nothing wrong w/ not liking tubes...

however, having said that...just like there's bad ss gear, there's bad tube gear and just like there's good ss gear, there's also good tube gear. as long as it sounds good, i've found that i like both...

[TheChairGuy]

Hey guys, thanks for not burning me at the stake for my comments....these are exactly the kind of responses I hoped to hear back.

So, if I can summarize some of the thoughts expressed so far about tubes:

* Image depth (something I am not well attuned to or have been listening to too much non-tube gear) is superior; dynamics and bass control is most often lacking

* Synergy, as with so much of this hobby, is critical.

* Higher sensitivity, higher impedance speakers are key to getting synergy issue right (that would cerrtainly answer why ribbon pairing seems the worst tandem of all I have heard)

* One needs to prepare to spend $2 K+ for a good tube amplification component to 'hear' things in the right perspective

Heavystarch - Yep, I've attended CES/T.H.E. (audioengr and I met there) several times, ditto Stereophile Show (when I lived on East Coast), worked in an audio store 20 years ago (part time) and have had one or two locals dealers in the past 20 years that have let me hear a range of products in their showrooms for extended periods.

As an aside, do those autoformers really work?...I have read some things about Paul Speltz's autoformers.

I know I have not heard the much acclaimed Butler, nor (I think) hybrid designs from Van Alstine, Counterpoint, Anthem, Musical Fidelity, others.  Perhaps that would be a more proper toe-'n-the-water approach for the future.

I am receptive to understanding that the mind can play tricks on you and tamper with my rationality/neutrality on a subject.  I think in more than one instance hearing all-tube gear (some at stratospheric pricing) was that I looked at the gear, made note of how large it was, that it needed room to breathe and the fact that it is not rack mountable, etc, etc.....and reality set in; no matter how much the sound was appealling, it would never fit in my small listening room (never bigger than 12 x 15 in 20 years and a few houses).  So, I may have turned off and scoffed at the sound before I really gave it a chance.  Perhaps I'd best lighten up and listen instead of rationalizing.

I have swapped tubes in my Dynaco's and found that was a losing proposition mostly.  I ended up liking the Sovtek 6922's in the linestage (of my PAS-4), with a mortite 'hat' and Herbie's tube dampers on them over some pricier NOS Russian 6H23's (from Upscale Audio....too damn plumpy all around I found), Phillips JAN and a couple others.  My preferred configuration made it sound like SS, but not as good as good SS.  But, I think it may be the platform (PAS-4) I started with was flawed to begin with...as it was indeed oneof those $600 specials.

Hell, I even tried old Telefunken's 12ax7's in phono and didn't like that either.  Again, maybe the messenger needed to be shot; not the message  

[dsockel]

I think it also has something to do with your tastes in music.  I operate at the lower budget levels here (less than $800 per piece) and found that for 50-60s Jazz which I listen to 90% of the time, tubes sound better.  Maybe because that music was mastered with tubes, or the acoustic nature of the instruments themselves.  I think that for Rock from the 70s on, SS sounds better.  I can't afford a big enough house or rig to get classical to sound good.

[meilankev]

TheChairGuy,
Everyone has personal preferences in audio (and every other hobby as well).  You have every right to state how based upon your experiences, tube gear just doesn't do it for you.  Who in the world could possibly dispute that??  I admire your willingness to come here and post your findings - particularly when you know they might be unpopular with many other AC members.

And it's true I would never dream of "rack mounting" my tube gear.  The monoblocks sit on the floor next to the speaker they drive.

Actually, I'm posting to respond to a couple of things said by warnerwh and byteme:

warnerwh,
While I'm sure there are amps out there that burn through tubes at the rate you quote ($500-$1000 per year), I don't want "younger" members to read this and think this might be the norm.  So, as "balance" to this, I'm going to relate my experience.  My monoblocks are almost 3 years old now.  I never turn them off - they are on 24/7, and all tubes are still going strong.

More importantly, there are 16 output tubes (6AS7G), and the total cost to replace them is less than $250 - and that includes "matched pairs".  So tube amps don't neccessarily have to be some kind of financial drain on folks.

byteme,
You state that "stock tubes suck", and buyers expect to spend 25% of the cost of the amp on replacement tubes.  While I guess this might happen in some extreme cases, this kind of quote might also turn a "younger" member into a tube-phobe.  And I don't really think this is the norm.

Again, my amps have been running on stock tubes for almost 3 years straight.  When I asked the designer what kind of tube-rolling works best, he informed me that no other tube manufacturer will improve upon the stock tubes - and they would only prove to be much less durable.

As for your 25% figure for replacement cost, when I am forced to finally replace my output tubes, it will cost me less than 4% the cost of my monoblocks.  If that occurs every 3 years, this will be under 25% if I keep the amps for 18 years.

To summarize, please be careful when quoting "rules" - you never know who you might be mis-informing.

Kevin

[Kim S.]

I agree with Dsockel, it depends on the type of music listened to.  For rock music, my SS system wins hands down.  For older jazz and accoustic, my much less expensive tube based system gets the nod.  Listen to "The Beatles at the BBC" late at night on it and you'd swear you were sleeping in an appartment in 60's London!  I too thought the reason for this is due to the way the older music was recorded.

[Lost81]

SS amps may also have hidden replacement costs down the road.

During the period when I was lusting for the Aleph series of Pass amplifiers (I no longer do. Thanks, Hugh ), I downloaded the manuals to the Pass Aleph amplifiers and read that the owner is to expect the Mosfets to fail between 10 to 15 years after initial use.

Now when I later found out that the Mosefets are matched within 0.25% at the factory...


-Lost81

[cjr888]

...but I find it doesn't sound like music to me....what is it that you hear, and apparently love, that I am not getting?

What I hear, and what I love is the exact opposite of what you have found.
To me, it sounds like music.
I say as a blanket statement without a need to pick apart the audiophile descriptors.

I also say that in regard to the good amplifiers and matches I've heard, but certainly not all tube amplifiers.   I've heard both horrid and amazing tube amplifiers, old and new, and ones that would be considered 'good' but don't meet my tastes, or the 'magic' that I assume you are looking for.  I've also heard plenty of SS amplifiers that sound or are 'good' at the art of reproduction, but where the outcome still isn't natural.

As with anything its a combination of everything combined as a finished product -- the tubes and circuit mean plenty, but so does the iron and the system matching.

Regarding the descriptors -- things are dimensional, tone sounds right, body sounds right, and for lack of a better description, things sound...natural.

Tubes are a giant step backwards in audio reproduction, as I hear it.

To me, there haven't been all that much in the way of major steps 'forward' or 'backwards' in regard to the tubes vs. SS realm of things unless you are purely speaking of things such as power utilization and size, but not necessarily the final result.

I feel as if there was a good thing and it took two steps back for a few decades with SS.  For those few decades, people have continued to try and polish the turd.  A few people really succeed in creating something different, something that's a step forward, but certainly not the majority....  

With the digital amplifiers, it seems like a realization that you can only polish a turd so much, and a totally different approach might be the better approach.  Those in this camp are making steps forward...but from a starting point a couple steps back.  Will audio finally advance past its roots?  I think so.  But I think things look more like a sideways running stock chart -- some false hopes, some blunders, the increments and decrements are apparent, but in the end its all an opinion, and the thing in the background hasn't varied all that much.

[byteme]

byteme,
You state that "stock tubes suck", and buyers expect to spend 25% of the cost of the amp on replacement tubes. While I guess this might happen in some extreme cases, this kind of quote might also turn a "younger" member into a tube-phobe. And I don't really think this is the norm.

Again, my amps have been running on stock tubes for almost 3 years straight. When I asked the designer what kind of tube-rolling works best, he informed me that no other tube manufacturer will improve upon the stock tubes - and they would only prove to be much less durable.

As for your 25% figure for replacement cost, when I am forced to finally replace my output tubes, it will cost me less than 4% the cost of my monoblocks. If that occurs every 3 years, this will be under 25% if I keep the amps for 18 years.

To summarize, please be careful when quoting "rules" - you never know who you might be mis-informing.

    Uh, do you actually read what's written or stop when something makes you react?

That "rule of thumb" isn't my rule, it's just what I've been told on more than one occasion.  And, if you would have read what I wrote I would think you'd have picked up on the fact that I did mention that may not hold if you buy something that actually costs a couple bucks.  I've got no need to retube my preamp because deHavilland's stock tubes are as good as it gets.  It sounds like whatever you own the manufacturer is also supplying quality tubes.  I also stated at the end of the paragraph, which you would have seen if you had read that far, is that it sure sounds like a cottage industry is being propped up by that rule - which would indicate that perhaps I didn't put a whole lot of stock in that rule of thumb.

On the other hand, how much really high end gear comes with crap chinese tubes?  PLENTY.  Depends on the manufacturer.  I've known people to spend $1k on tubes for a $4k amp and $300 on tubes for a $1k preamp - huh, let's do the math...

So, to summarize, please read before reacting, you never know when you're going to mis-inform yourself.     I guess I didn't know that a representative from the Tube Gear Defamation Society was lurking...    

[audiojerry]

Chairguy wrote:

So, what is it I may not be hearing tube lovers  ...despite the bashing your bottles have just taken, I am very flexible about many subjects. But, I haven't found good reason to love those lava lamps yet.

If bottles don't do it for you consider yourself lucky. I'm stuck on tubes, but I wish I weren't. Too much heat, too much energy usage, too costly to replace tubes, although my ARC tubes have over 2 years of steady use. I'm hoping one day I will find a SS or digital that will satisfy me musically, so I am always willing to try something new.

As far as cost goes, I believe it's just the opposite. I believe nice sounding tube amps can be gotten much cheaper than SS. Outside of Odyssey, I have not heard an excellent sounding SS under $5k, and usually they are a lot more than that. Van Alstine, on the other hand, builds a great hybrid SS/tube amp that I liked the sound of - just not enough to pull me away from my ARC. I will be auditioning the AKSA this week, so I am looking forward to finding out what the rave is all about.

Tube preamps, on the other hand, are not a problem, as tubes can last thousands of hours, and you usually are only looking at a coupla 3 tubes to replace at most. I have found tube preamps to be superior to any SS designs that I have tried. Has anyone found the opposite? If so, what?

PS: thanks for the compliment Byteme.  

[djbnh]

Tubes v. SS...system synergy...budget concerns...what I like hearing.... Hmmmmmm. I use an Odyssey Stratos (SS) amp, mated to an Odyssey Tempest preamp (again, SS), and enjoy what this combination has to offer. I also note I use a Jolida JD-100 tubed CDP, and a Fisher 800-B Receiver manufactured in the early 1960s as my tuner (My dad handed me down his Fisher, which has 22 tubes, all original and operational, you tube aficionados!).

This combination of SS and tubed components in my very modest system seems to give me the positive attributes of both SS and tubes. I attest that my system's sound responded well to tube rolling in the Jolida (though perhaps my wallet didn't fare as well!). [I note I am also contemplating running a bedroom system with the Fisher as the main unit, and would be interested in comments/system links for readers who also use the Fisher 800-B. FYI - I can't afford The Fisher Doctor's upgrade - yet.]

Thus, for me, the question is not tubes v. SS, but rather, the answer, in my system for my ears, is tubes + SS, or is that SS + tubes?

In parting, I also note that I find a wonderful asthetic in the warm, comforting glow of multiple tubes radiating in the Fisher's uncabineted chassis. That is something that SS components to date just can't give me.

[Rich Carlson]

Interesting discussion, guys.  I'm a solid-state guy myself (PS Audio, Bryston, Forte), but I've heard some respected tube stuff (e.g., Audio Research).  While I was glad to get back to my solid-state equipment each time, I agree (at least for my taste, in my system   ) that it depends on the type of music - for acoustic jazz and small chamber groups, the "tube sound" I heard was seductive.  But for big orchestral stuff and rock and roll ... (again, for my taste and in my system). And I've got to admit that some of the tube amps I see in the mags are awfully pretty ...
Rich

[JohnR]

I'm realllllly not trying to stir up trouble with this post, but you guys that dig tubes in various flavors and in various spots in the audio chain...what is it that you hear, and apparently love, that I am not getting?

Well, to me, tubes tend to make things more "palpable," more real-sounding. They lack the coloration that solid-state generally has which results in either a flat washed-out kind of sound or a hard gritty kind of sound (I'm exagerating of course but you get the idea).

Having said that, I guess that one's perception is governed by the road that one has already traveled. I gave up on solid state a while ago. These days I'm happy with my AKSAs, but I don't think I could ever put a solid-state preamp in a two-ch system again, especially when a good tube preamp is so simple to build. FWIW I heard the XR45 (stock) and thought it was awful. Oh well

[Hantra]

All depends on the implementation much more than the topology.  I used to say "I just don't get ribbons".  Now I own some ribbons, and they are among the best speakers I have ever heard.  But they do have a different implementation, and are unlike any ribbons I have heard.  

The best amplifiers I have ever heard would have to be the Halcros, which are solid state.  Second best would probably be the Butler class A monoblocks.  This one has a tube, but it's not typical tube usage.

I don't like the JM Labs tweeter in the JM Labs speaker.  But I'll be damned if it don't sound good in the Wilson Sophia!!!!  Again, it's implementation. . .

If I have learned anything from audio, it is to NOT be exclusive toward anything.  Listen to everything you can get your ears on.  When you try to limit yourself based on topology, driver type, or anything really, you may miss out on some really, really special gear.