Why Tubes Sound Better than SS

ZLS · « **Reply #40 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 04:29 pm »

I can speak about the fact that given the choice I would rather have soft and mushy than hard and edgy.

I can speak about how I respectfully disagree with Rajacat and enjoy tube rolling to add and subtract different flavors to the musical presentation.

The truth is I like the way tubes look. The Fire Bottles. Late at night, when I turn off the lights and listen to my system, part of the enjoyment is seeing those tubes glow!

Yea, I said it, and that is Audiophile heresy.!

EDS_ · « **Reply #41 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 04:30 pm »

Quote from: DTB300 link=topic=66447.msg611593#msg 611593 date=1238164333

Quote from: Tyson on 26 Mar 2009, 07:40 pm
But we always come back to the "there's something magic" about the sound of tubes.
There is nothing "magic" about tubes and it seems only the tube people want to use this term as a qualifier to justify their preference. Just an opinion here and not to be taken as an insult. To me "magic" sounds like a marketing statement or ploy.

If one likes the sound of Tubes and have listened to them over time, then their preferences and likes will be tilted toward that sound - same with SS. It is not better, it is not the way, it is just what you like, not others. I have great respect for people that KNOW what they LIKE and do not use one technology over the other basing their choice on what OTHERS think.

Each technology offers plus and minuses to the end user to like or not. Each technology is different, not better, IMO. I have heard both and have been impressed and hated both.

Magic as applied to tube listening is just a descriptive term and to me it has some merit. In my opinion it sort-of goes like this. Dollar for dollar tubes tend to beat SS gear. Especially if the listener enjoys his tunes are low to moderate volume levels. With a few exceptions SS gear seems to loaf a bit at low volumes, maybe this is related to the very interesting comments about power and negative feedback a number of posts ago.

And one of the points made early in the thread is why do so many long term audiophiles turn to tubes or turn to tubes and leave but return later? I have a kilo-buck SS based system up front that sits idle 99.97% of the time. My little office rig with an unmodified Cary SLI-80 is run daily for hours - and its has become my "go to" rig for serious listening too.

I think triode output SE or PP tubes simply come closer to emulating strings, voices and the piano than SS gear, I will also stipulate that Nelson Pass SS amps sidestep this issue - maybe he has some magic too?

rajacat · « **Reply #42 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 04:44 pm »

Zack,

I roll tubes too.

However the goal of my tube rolling is not just to "flavor" the music but to try obtain greater resolution and come closer to how the music would sound live. I don't want to add my personal tastes to the work of art. That would be like going to a museum with some paint and adding various colors to the Rembrandt.

-Roy

stereocilia · « **Reply #43 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 04:57 pm »

I haven't heard enough tube amps to say I like them better; in fact I may be in the minority here in saying that I would not be surprised, based on my experiences so far, to find that I prefer the sound of solid-state amps. Maybe it has to do with a sense of more impact and energy from solid-state amps, I'm not sure. I'm always willing to be proven wrong.

I don't buy that there are both pleasing and irritating types of distortion, and I think less distortion is always better. But, my understanding is that much more distortion of one type (even-order harmonic distortion close to the fundamental, for example) is very benign where even a very tiny amount of distortion of another type sounds horribly bad. In other words, the kind of distortion matters more than the amount, but it's all bad.

I've always wondered, do the non-linearities of the cochlea align more closely with the way tube-amps distort? For example, if two different frequencies are presented to the cochlea at the same time, it will respond back with energy at 2F1-F2 -- this is the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE). I don't know enough about amplifier distortion to know if tube amps distort in the same way as the ear whereas solid state amps do not. Just a thought.

ZLS · « **Reply #44 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 05:00 pm »

Quote from: rajacat on 27 Mar 2009, 04:44 pm

Zack,

I roll tubes too. However the goal of my tube rolling is not just to "flavor" the music but to try obtain greater resolution and come closer to how the music would sound live. I don't want to add my personal tastes to the work of art. That would be like going to a museum with some paint and adding various colors to the Rembrandt.

-Roy

Well put Sir, and I stand corrected.

Paul Hynes · « **Reply #45 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 05:26 pm »

On balance I have to agree with Roy. I have been involved with live music for most of my life and this is how I want my music system to sound. Like there are real musicians out there in space having a good time.

Regards
Paul

Watson · « **Reply #46 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 05:40 pm »

Quote from: stereocilia on 27 Mar 2009, 04:57 pm

I've always wondered, do the non-linearities of the cochlea align more closely with the way tube-amps distort? For example, if two different frequencies are presented to the cochlea at the same time, it will respond back with energy at 2F1-F2 -- this is the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE). I don't know enough about amplifier distortion to know if tube amps distort in the same way as the ear whereas solid state amps do not. Just a thought.

You'll find some of the answers in Cheever's Master's thesis at MIT:
http://w3.mit.edu/cheever/www/cheever_thesis.pdf
His main argument is that tube amps distort in exactly the inverse to the human ear's sensitivity curve for distortion (i.e. the optimal behaviour).

There are some controversial elements in this thesis, but it does build nicely on the work of others.

I agree with others. Tube amps generally sound more like real music. Though I'm not a big fan of excessively "flavoured" tube amps (e.g. single ended flea power amps driving speakers not designed for that)... those are more listenable than bad solid state, but go too far in the other direction.

Edit: looks like the bookmark is dead... I know it's available elsewhere online though. Don't have time today to search.

ricmon · « **Reply #47 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 06:07 pm »

This is a seriously boring thread seeing as this topic as been discused to death on every audio forum whether it be electronic or print. However please don't take my statement as a insult it's just if you hang out on these forums long enough I guess you start to get the feeling that you've read this about a hundred times. Get over it. Technology today is such that these isn't much difference in the sound of well engineered tube or SS equipment except for maybe the psychoacoustics.

rajacat · « **Reply #48 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 06:16 pm »

Quote from: ricmon on 27 Mar 2009, 06:07 pm

This is a seriously boring thread seeing as this topic as been discused to death on every audio forum whether it be electronic or print. However please don't take my statement as a insult it's just if you hang out on these forums long enough I guess you start to get the feeling that you've read this about a hundred times. Get over it. Technology today is such that these isn't much difference in the sound of well engineered tube or SS equipment except for maybe the psychoacoustics.

So what! Please don't be a wet blanket. This is a civil discussion and perhaps others haven't explored the subject as much as you have. Nobody forcing you to read the thread.

-Roy

werd · « **Reply #49 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 07:23 pm »

I think it can be addressed again, leaving the topic alone isnt justified especially with the engineering thats SS amps are achieving atm.
I think the biggest difference between tubes and ss are they way they clip. Tube amps tend to slope at a more gentle angle at the point of clipping where SS, when it starts clipping... yuk it starts clippings. These new amps by bryston have so much headroom and they sound so good at extreme low volumes that clipping with SS is now more of system mismatch than anything. I would put my 4bsq up to any low or medium powered tube amp anyday for comparison. However i cant see SS taking over tubes in the realm of guitar amplification anytime soon.

Zero · « **Reply #50 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 07:30 pm »

What I find deliciously ironic about this thread is that the majority of so called tube amps in the market are actually hybrid amps that rely on solid state operation in the input stage of the power supply. Very few actually employ tubes at this part of the design, though popular examples would include most Lamm amp's, the McIntosh 275... etc.. Not that it really means a thing at the end of the day! It's just fun to mention, is all.

werd · « **Reply #51 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 07:33 pm »

Quote from: ZLS on 27 Mar 2009, 04:29 pm

I can speak about the fact that given the choice I would rather have soft and mushy than hard and edgy.

I can speak about how I respectfully disagree with Rajacat and enjoy tube rolling to add and subtract different flavors to the musical presentation.

The truth is I like the way tubes look. The Fire Bottles. Late at night, when I turn off the lights and listen to my system, part of the enjoyment is seeing those tubes glow!

Yea, I said it, and that is Audiophile heresy.!

Tube rolling and tubes glowing is

stereocilia · « **Reply #52 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 07:50 pm »

Quote from: Watson on 27 Mar 2009, 05:40 pm

Quote from: stereocilia on 27 Mar 2009, 04:57 pm
I've always wondered, do the non-linearities of the cochlea align more closely with the way tube-amps distort? For example, if two different frequencies are presented to the cochlea at the same time, it will respond back with energy at 2F1-F2 -- this is the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE). I don't know enough about amplifier distortion to know if tube amps distort in the same way as the ear whereas solid state amps do not. Just a thought.

You'll find some of the answers in Cheever's Master's thesis at MIT:
http://w3.mit.edu/cheever/www/cheever_thesis.pdf
His main argument is that tube amps distort in exactly the inverse to the human ear's sensitivity curve for distortion (i.e. the optimal behaviour).

There are some controversial elements in this thesis, but it does build nicely on the work of others.

I agree with others. Tube amps generally sound more like real music. Though I'm not a big fan of excessively "flavoured" tube amps (e.g. single ended flea power amps driving speakers not designed for that)... those are more listenable than bad solid state, but go too far in the other direction.

Edit: looks like the bookmark is dead... I know it's available elsewhere online though. Don't have time today to search.

Sounds like an interesting read. If it's true, then that would explain everything: why tubes measure "worse" but subjectively sound better. I'd like to read over-a-Cheever's thesis. I apologize for that pun. It was the best I could come up with on short notice.

geezer · « **Reply #53 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 07:56 pm »

Quote from: Zero on 27 Mar 2009, 07:30 pm

What I find deliciously ironic about this thread is that the majority of so called tube amps in the market are actually hybrid amps that rely on solid state operation in the input stage of the power supply. Very few actually employ tubes at this part of the design, though popular examples would include most Lamm amp's, the McIntosh 275... etc.. Not that it really means a thing at the end of the day! It's just fun to mention, is all.

I haven't ever done a careful comparison between a good tube amp and a good SS amp, so I'm not qualified to contribute to that issue. But I have a question to tubers: What do you think of tube/SS hybrid amps? (I'm not talking about the kind of 'hybrid' mentioned above having SS devices only in the power supply. I'm talking about hybrids that amplify the voltage signal with tubes, then use SS in the output stage.) How do these hybrids compare to 'pure' tubes and how do they compare to 'pure' SS?

Thebiker · « **Reply #54 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 09:03 pm »

An question earlier in this thread inquired why some of us would settle for solid state in our HT rigs. My answer is pretty straight forward. Yes, the sound tracks would probably benefit from the introduction of tubes, but movies are not music. Yes, they have musical soundtracks, sometimes very good soundtracks, but ultimately most movie are noise: explosions, shooting, the sound of traffic, the sound of rain and dialog. Early in my HT rigs, my wife actually got up, walked to the slider to the deck to see if it was raining....the storm was on the soundtrack

. She has yet to live that one down. But it also comes down to dollars & cents to me: I don't want to spend tube amp money for noise. But that's how I roll, YMMV.

I would rather spend my tube money on my 2 channel gear, but that's just me.

Walt

werd · « **Reply #55 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 09:04 pm »

Quote from: stereocilia on 27 Mar 2009, 07:50 pm

Quote from: Watson on 27 Mar 2009, 05:40 pm
Quote from: stereocilia on 27 Mar 2009, 04:57 pm
I've always wondered, do the non-linearities of the cochlea align more closely with the way tube-amps distort? For example, if two different frequencies are presented to the cochlea at the same time, it will respond back with energy at 2F1-F2 -- this is the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE). I don't know enough about amplifier distortion to know if tube amps distort in the same way as the ear whereas solid state amps do not. Just a thought.

You'll find some of the answers in Cheever's Master's thesis at MIT:
http://w3.mit.edu/cheever/www/cheever_thesis.pdf
His main argument is that tube amps distort in exactly the inverse to the human ear's sensitivity curve for distortion (i.e. the optimal behaviour).

There are some controversial elements in this thesis, but it does build nicely on the work of others.

I agree with others. Tube amps generally sound more like real music. Though I'm not a big fan of excessively "flavoured" tube amps (e.g. single ended flea power amps driving speakers not designed for that)... those are more listenable than bad solid state, but go too far in the other direction.

Edit: looks like the bookmark is dead... I know it's available elsewhere online though. Don't have time today to search.

Sounds like an interesting read. If it's true, then that would explain everything: why tubes measure "worse" but subjectively sound better. I'd like to read over-a-Cheever's thesis. I apologize for that pun. It was the best I could come up with on short notice.

Hi Stereo

I think i can answer your question "why tubes measure "worse" but subjectively sound better". I am sticking my neck out here. The reason why tubes sound better (because i believe they do also in many setups), is because there are too many lousy SS designs. We see them every where... box stores, recievers and such. We all know what i am talking about. These designs are notorious for making Guitars that were originally played with through a Marshall stack(lets say), in playback sound like a 1980's SS guitar amp(crap). What tube amps do very well is they reintroduce those qualities back into playback very good. They also take lousier recordings and again reintroduce the qualities of percievable tubes back into playback. They dont need to measure well to do that.

My post up above regarding Bryston among other real good SS amps, they dont need to color the sound of a guitar recording. They will make a marshall stack sound like a marshall stack. Ok i will quit babbling.

Tyson · « **Reply #56 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 09:41 pm »

So, if SS amps are bad for producing music (ie, guitar amps), why would they be any better at reproducing it?

pjchappy · « **Reply #57 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 09:54 pm »

Quote from: Tyson on 27 Mar 2009, 09:41 pm

So, if SS amps are bad for producing music (ie, guitar amps), why would they be any better at reproducing it?

SS guitar amps aren't necessarily bad for producing music. Many jazz players and others who want a straight up clean tone, use SS amps. It's when you want distortion / overdrive is where tubed guitar amps shine. The tone that the overdriven tubes create is what many guitar players seek.

rajacat · « **Reply #58 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 10:28 pm »

How do you SS guys have any fun with no tubes to roll?

It's funny but most musicians I know prefer tubes in their home audio systems.

werd · « **Reply #59 on:** 27 Mar 2009, 10:32 pm »

Quote from: Tyson on 27 Mar 2009, 09:41 pm

So, if SS amps are bad for producing music (ie, guitar amps), why would they be any better at reproducing it?

Hey Tyson

Thats kinda the $64K question. I thinks its because most other instruments fair pretty well with SS electronics. Playback is embodiment of all the recorded instruments so its really only the guitars that can poison the well in my view, and we all love our guitars.

I think there are probably alot of good sounding SS guitar amps, but are they not just trying to mimick a tube amp. And while a SS home stereo amp is not trying to create a guitar sound but just reproduce it.

This is all imho.