Tubes - better or just a different sonic flavor than solid state?

Browntrout · « **Reply #200 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 05:52 pm »

This thread seems alright to me and I'm very sensitive.

The truth is solid state may well come on leaps and bounds if the devices become available to our very highstandards of performance.
I read a study on the affect of background radiation upon the operation/reliablity of semiconductors and have no doubt in my mind that this could certainly be addressed in the pusuit of better sound. In the aerospace industry this has been a problem and is more or less solved by radiation hardening. The affect of ionizing radiation upon a transistor is not small and, I have no proof of this, there is the possibility that these effects could actually be heard. I don't know if anyone has built an amplifier using these radiation hardened devices but it would be interesting to note any difference. It could also be possible to sheild the device with lead to limit the ionizing radiation from disrupting the material layers in the device. Even if the difference in sound was not detectable the device would operate closer to stated specifications for longer, that much I know.
The transistor itself may not be at fault. It is more likely that the valve has itself stopped the further development of the transistor in the very specialised world of highend audio.
If the transistor was purpose built like a valve then it may well sound as good as or even better, we wont know until someone does it.

toobluvr · « **Reply #201 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 07:08 pm »

Some of you guys are just waaaaay too sensitive and take this shit waaaaaay too seriously!
Who cares what someone else thinks, what they believe, or how they word their post?!

Get outside....get some fresh air......get some exercise......get laid.......get a life.....and find something more important to get so upset about!

Now.....back to something important....like the Masters!!

turkey · « **Reply #202 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 07:41 pm »

Quote from: bunky on 12 Apr 2009, 11:50 am

My VTL MB-100 Monoblocks were designed by David Manley and i really like them.I have not heard any VTL or Manley tube amplifiers made after David Manleys departure so i cant make any comparison.Why In your view do you firmly believe that VTL and Manley are not the same since David Manley stepped out of the picture ? thanks....WCW III
[/quote]

David Manley always felt that tubes were superior, but he was very sensible about it. He use refined versions of classic circuits and built them well. His gear was always a reasonable value too.

I didn't and don't really care for tubes, but I have a lot of respect for David Manley.

Since he left, both VTL and (especially) Manley have gotten more into "high end" expensive tweaky tube stuff.

I've also talked to some of these people at shows, and they are just not as clever or well-informed as David Manley is.

turkey · « **Reply #203 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 07:44 pm »

Quote from: Browntrout on 12 Apr 2009, 02:18 pm

Turkey here are the words from the Naim website.........

'''To avoid the compromises implied by the use of multiple sets of output devices, either in totem-pole or parallel configurations, the search was on for a very special output transistor. A bipolar transistor with a specification combination of very high current, power rating and bandwidth was needed, far in excess of anything available to Naim before. A suitable output device was eventually developed after six years' collaboration with a semiconductor manufacturer. '''

So now you know that I have not been 'marketed' and much more importantly you have learned something about stereo.

Doesn't sound to me like they went to a manufacturer and asked for a "better sounding" BJT. Sounds like they wanted one that performed better in specific ways.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #204 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 07:47 pm »

Thank you, toobluvr

I took all of 10 seconds to think of the name of this topic....and there was no editor to confer with.

If it offended sensibilities - it wasn't meant to. It says exactly what I wanted to know, yet I can understand how the phrasing might be taken incorrectly by a few sensitive types. I tend to be direct rather than diplomatic in communicating...something I am aware of. I'm forthright and kind (and honest), rather than nice/pleasant...something I am also aware of

I thought the information and or opinion throughout, by tube or solid state participants, was solid and with a minimum of rancor. There is some good stuff throughout this topic....it would be a shame to have it mothballed but for a few (consistently at Audio Circle over time) overzealous/ oversensitive, malcontents like macrojack

Quote from: macrojack

Then TCG is ready to step up and bludgeon them with unassailable evidence that they have made the wrong one.

This is the dang Tube Circle...where folks that dig tubes can express their devotion to it. It's a haven where mildly insensitive general subjects should be tolerated...otherwise, there is no place for the circle at Audio Circle.

Sheesh - lighten up and enjoy the candidness of the topic without getting all bent out of shape over it. It's not life, it's just audio.

John (the OP)

turkey · « **Reply #205 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 07:52 pm »

Quote from: macrojack on 12 Apr 2009, 04:57 pm

Subject matter aside, I think this topic appeared with a birth defect. It's very wording implies disbelief that a sizable portion of our membership could possibly prefer solid state. That, in and of itself, is divisive. Yes, it is the tube circle but I should think that means a place to go if you want to read about or discuss tube topics. I get that concept and applaud it as a subset of the overall site.

When I saw the proposal about this circle, I planned on not reading it or posting here. I was glad that the tube people would have a place to hang out and not bother me.

Then I saw the title of this thread and it was worded as a challenge. So I posted.

Quote

Then TCG is ready to step up and bludgeon them with unassailable evidence that they have made the wrong one.

I ignore TCG. Ever since he tried to match wits with Dan Banquer.

Sorry John, you seem like a well-intentioned guy, and I know you give a lot of your time for free to AC. I just don't agree with the way you approach audio.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #206 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 08:01 pm »

It's cool, turkey

...one needn't agree nor even like or respect everyone.

I thought your posts were good and thought provoking...and I wasn't in the least offended offhand

I'm more perplexed (not angered at all) about the line 'the way you approach audio'

My thoughts tend not to be linear, but they are always zeroing in on a finale despite their random looking pattern. Is that what you mean?

John (probably ADD but never diagnosed as such

)

Wayner · « **Reply #207 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 08:22 pm »

I just switched over to SS now. Again, the sound is very close. I think it truely matters which speakers are matched to which amp. Of course, not all tube or SS amps are made equal. A poorly designed tube amp won't win any favors here, nor a grainy SS. Right now I have 2 1/2 of the best systems I have ever owned. It certainly is interesting going back and forth between the 2. I have 2 preamps, 3 amps and 3 speaker systems in my studio and I can pretty much combo anything I want, but have a preference right now by pairing up speakers with amplifiers. That pairing almost never changes.

Just more dribble on my part.

Wayner

*Scotty* · « **Reply #208 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 08:46 pm »

Browntrout,I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the best sounding transistors have been glass encapsulated in metal cans. These cost more to produce and in most cases have been discontinued by the manufacturer. Part of tubes sonic advantage comes from the glass dielectric and the vacuum doesn't hurt any either. Any purpose built transistor for audio will have to be glass/metal can construction instead of plastic. Another hallmark of tube circuit design is that it is usually conservative in how many stages there are involved in amplification. Tubes are expensive and the more of them you use the more your product costs and the larger and more expensive your power supply has to be. Successful transistor circuits generally share this attribute, fewer transistors in the signal path means more information arrives intact at the end of the chain. My current preamp exemplifies this design approach,it has one active device in the signal path. The same less is more philosophy applies to the use of ICs. Even one more IC in the signal path does damage. Daisy chaining several together one after another needs to be avoided. The practice of suming the differential output of DACs to achieve a better looking noise figure looses you more than you gain because you added the summing amplifier to the chain. To equal the or surpass the very best tube circuits sonic qualities takes very clever design and the best possible utilization of the least number of parts.
Scotty

zybar · « **Reply #209 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 08:52 pm »

A friend is auditioning a pair of Pass XA100.5 amps and if he buys them, he would bring them over to my place at some point to compare to my Atma-Sphere MA-1 tube amps on Vandy 5A's.

I think this will be a very interesting comparison as each amp is pretty much universally praised for its performance and they are roughly the same price. Both are also pure Class A designs.

George

woodsyi · « **Reply #210 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 08:57 pm »

This is should be the answer that ends this thread because it is the right answer.

Are there really folks that prefer solid state sonically?

Yes, there are.

Finis

P.S. You can continue to talk about how you feel about tubes or solid state but the question has been answered.

zybar · « **Reply #211 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 09:01 pm »

Quote from: woodsyi on 12 Apr 2009, 08:57 pm

This is should be the answer that ends this thread because it is the right answer.

Are there really forks that prefer solid state sonically?

Yes, there are.

Finis

P.S. You can continue to talk about how you feel about the tubes or solid state but the question has been answered.

Woodsyi,

You don't think the Pass amps have a shot at topping the Atma-Sphere amps in my system? aa

George

woodsyi · « **Reply #212 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 09:04 pm »

Quote from: zybar on 12 Apr 2009, 09:01 pm

Woodsyi,

You don't think the Pass amps have a shot at topping the Atma-Sphere amps in my system? aa

George

It may or may not, George. What I do know from reading all these pages is that there are really folks that prefer solid state sonically. I am being very literal to the original question.

BTW, I heard an all MBL (electronics and speakers) system over the weekend and it sounded awsome. Actually the source was a reel to reel tape from Tascam that has been modified.

Browntrout · « **Reply #213 on:** 12 Apr 2009, 10:26 pm »

I give up.
I can't understand how someone can read my last couple of posts and missunderstand them so much. Quite frustrating. So here is a poem.....

'''Where true Love burns Desire is Love's pure flame;
It is the reflex of our earthly frame,
That takes its meaning from the nobler part,
And but translates the language of the heart.'''
_{Samuel Coleridge}

I hope you don't mind. It's just that words can be so beautifull.

_{I had to write something to counter the ''go and get laid'' post written earlier.}
.

ServerAdmin · « **Reply #214 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 02:24 am »

Quote from: JakeJ on 12 Apr 2009, 04:31 pm

PS - In the future I'll have my first cup of coffee before checking in on AC.

This is the beginning of the slippery slope of Facilitator burnout. Ditch the thread is my advice. You have no need to justify it, and even if you did, your circle guideline clearly states (and has since the beginning) "Please, ladies and gentlemen, no arguments about tubes vs. solid-state."

JakeJ · « **Reply #215 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 03:19 am »

Well, I thought maybe I was being too sensitive. IMO there has been some clearly argumentative statements made but no out and out name calling, except maybe FULLRANGEMAN's judging people's sanity. However I don't feel burnout just extreme disappointment in this thread. The tone of it looks a lot a like graph of the stock market over the past 8-10 months.

The English language is complex and has so many ways to be interpreted, so many inflections, so many words with more than one meaning. TCG's original question was loaded and I should have squashed it right from the get go. Sorry, buddy, you're a great guy but lets face it you're a marketing major not an English major. The fact that you could not see that when several members pointed it out makes this quite clear. No offense meant.

Ultimately my sincere hope was that some member would step up to the plate and propose a solid-state circle. Too much to wish for. It's funny how, in general, people have the ability to focus on the minutiae, but lack the ability to pull back, zoom out, look at the big picture. Tolerance of others beliefs is a necessity of life, even more so as the planet's population slowly evolves to a single society with a multi-cultural foundation.

That's my .02

Cheers,
Jake

doug s. · « **Reply #216 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 03:54 am »

what i find so ironic and funny about it all, is that tcg prefers s/s preamps over tubed preamps!

if there was only one component i could have w/tubes in it, it would absolutely be the preamp.

ymmv,

doug s.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #217 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 10:29 am »

I went back and changed the title of the topic....as well as all 8 or 9 of my replies in it.

As mentioned a few pages ago, I took all of 10 seconds to think of the original title...and I didn't have an editor to confer with. English was a fine subject for me in school....it was that elective course in Diplomacy that I got a C+ in

I happen to partly agree with someone's post a few pages ago....tubes may be not a whole lot more than euphonic coloration. But, for whatever reason, placement in the sonic chain seems to improve sonics. Where they are placed, how many are placed in the chain is open to varied opinions. I've found minimal tends towards better for me....the final elan of euphonic coloration works best in the last stage....as tube (preferably) monoblock amps.

I have little (fully updated) Bell 6V6 tube integrated monoblocks (circa 1960) that sound stunning

to me - their 10 watts are fine to drive my 87db speakers to dizzying volume in my size room - but I find all tube all the time to be too soft for vinyl listening (and a bit noisy, as Frank van Alstine mentioned a few pages ago).

They do sound really compelling with CD....seriously so

John

cityjim · « **Reply #218 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 11:59 am »

I will never revert back to solid state . My personal experience I've had a buddy loan me his pair of Ayre MX-R monos (cold and sterile) , Halcro DM 58 (sterile and boooring) , Adcom 5802 (better than the previous two , richer ) , Pass Labs XA 100.5 (sweet SS gear, nice sound) and finally out of my price range was a loaner stack of 600 watt Krell Evo's (best SS out there by far) .

More tube gear I add , the better more enjoyable sound I get . What ended my SS journey was me trying a Cary 300 SEI tube integrated . Let's just say I was hooked on tubes from then on .

cityjim

JakeJ · « **Reply #219 on:** 13 Apr 2009, 12:48 pm »

The title is still loaded. A better way to word it would have been, "Tubes or Solid-State - Which Do You Prefer and Why?". Far more neutral from an emotional standpoint.

Well...it's off to work for a 12 hour day. I'll see how things have progressed when I get home.

Have a nice day and play nice.

Jake