Tube, solid state, or digital amplification?

DVV · « **on:** 16 Mar 2004, 10:45 pm »

I think it's time we reviewed our age long discussion, because there's a new kid on the block, and he's punching heavy.

Before, it was tube versus solid state; now it's time to make it tube vesrsus solid state versus digital.

No quarter asked, no quarter given.

Let me start by saying I still believe the best overall results can be obtained with solid state. Of course, using that particular technology is no guaranteed way to make it, also true of any other technology ever devised by man.

What say you?

Cheers,
DVV

Marbles · « **Reply #1 on:** 16 Mar 2004, 10:56 pm »

It's not the technology, it's the implementation

nathanm · « **Reply #2 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 12:06 am »

They all suck. Victrolas 'til death!

I would be more eager to use a solid state amp if:

A) It had a "tube emulation\modeling" circuit in it in case I don't like the sound of straight up SS.

B) It looked as cool as tube amps do. There's just gotta be glowing glass gubbins sticking up from it dammit, it's just how it is... I don't care if you can design the world's greatest amp in an IC the size of a postage stamp - it's just boring, ya know?

SS amps usually either look excessively utilitarian or like an unfinished aluminum billet. Heck, let the blind decide what truly sounds best, the rest of us cannot help but be influenced by our eyes says I. Oh, and blown art glass vacuum tubes would be a nice progression too, if possible.

Practicality and objective superiority isn't always very much fun; hence the survival of archaic, outdated old crap like tubes, vinyl and silver halide film.

Newer doesn't always mean better, just different.

rosconey · « **Reply #3 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 12:14 am »

blown art glass vacuum tubes -
didnt tommy chong go too jail for selling those

WerTicus · « **Reply #4 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 03:36 am »

digital is just a progression of solid state really..

for the purpose of this discussion I will refer to digital as DSS and solid state as ASS. (this wouldnt be funny if Americans could spell)

Now if you have a nice piece of ASS im sure you would be very happy with it. But I see potential for DSS to take over soon enough as its going to preserve the imformation better untill it goes to your speakers.

But just like people with nice tubes, people with nice ASS's are going to be happy with what they have got and there will always be bad examples of DSS for sure!

Jon L · « **Reply #5 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 04:20 am »

After everything is said and done, it will still remain that no one will definitely be able to prove anything to everybody.

Even within digital amps, you have debates regarding class D, class T, ICE, digital switching power supply only, all-digital path, partial digital, different sampling frequencies, PWM vs bitstream, etc, etc. Not to mention the new "Class A/AB digital" about to be brought to market by Odyssey Audio.

Within solid state, you got the hotly debated mosfet vs. Bipolar, Jfet, classA, AB, B, sliding bias, blackgate vs the rest, differential, balanced, bigger caps better vs. "distributed node" small caps, etc.

Not to neglect tubes. Push-pull vs SET, 300B vs 2A3/45, triode vs. Ultralinear, solid-state rectification vs tube rectification, battery bias, best driver/phase-splitter, DRD, Ultrapath, then there's Tom Evans stuff. Not to mention the Allen Wright tube amps that are doing some interesting things.

I've probably heard both great and bad sounding amp in each technology niche, so what's the point. Pretty much any of the above can be made to sound great if one knows what he's doing. Then there's the grand question of the listener's "tastes." The trick is to correctly identify your own tastes and biases, figure out an amp that will synergize with the rest of your system, then pick a price point you can live with. Some can live with $40K price point, whereas some will only feel good with the Panasonic.

markC · « **Reply #6 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 05:18 am »

I am leaning more and more towards tube/fet hybrid design. What I hear in the particular design that I am currently living with is tube highs and SS lows-best of both worlds if you will. I have been making the rounds to several audio shops to listen, and I feel that this design is the way to go for the sound that I am after.

JLM · « **Reply #7 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 01:10 pm »

Each can be good, but digital being new has the most potential into the future and it fits best into a computer chip domained world.

At the current state of the art, I agree that implementation is the biggest factor and I would include speaker matching as a vital part of the implementation picture.

_scotty_ · « **Reply #8 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 01:32 pm »

The very best high speed mosfet based SS designs sound very similar to good digital designs and both sound different than tubes. Which one will sound more appealing is in the ear of the beholder. To me, the the DIY amp I built
sounds quite real. The most recent high speed SS I have heard sounds as good and even better in some areas. I suspect that I will prefer a future implimentation of digital over analogue SS at some point. I am looking forward to continued improvements on the digital front.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #9 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 08:23 pm »

Quote from: WerTicus

for the purpose of this discussion I will refer to digital as DSS and solid state as ASS. (this wouldnt be funny if Americans could spell)

I don't gett it.

rosconey · « **Reply #10 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 08:44 pm »

you guys watch your selfs with bad words

children might be reading this

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #11 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 11:23 pm »

I'm in DVV's camp on this, despite nathanm's spirited (as always) reply.

I've found the feathery softness, etherial 'presence' and overemphasized midrange (to the detriment of bass and treble) of tubes to be more objectionable than the harsh, strident, and oft fatiguing sound of solid state. Despite, I continually find solid state to be a truer representation of the recording and live.

I finally had opportunity to listen to a lot of digital amplification at CES in January, and I really have to say there is something very intoxicating about them, in general. It took us 20 years to get analog-like sound from CD playback (at SOME cost), using much of this and implementing in digital amps could find us all with great sound in a very few short years.

Stan Warren told me two years ago not to buy an expensive amp in the next couple years, once digital is fully digested, there might be less of a divide in camps, ss vs. tube, than we ever possibly thought.

His words are ringing true for me now....

Marbles · « **Reply #12 on:** 17 Mar 2004, 11:35 pm »

Quote from: ooheadsoo

Quote from: WerTicus
for the purpose of this discussion I will refer to digital as DSS and solid state as ASS. (this wouldnt be funny if Americans could spell)

I don't gett it.

You are an ARSE than

PhilNYC · « **Reply #13 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 12:45 am »

I'm partial to hybrid amps...

Jon L · « **Reply #14 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 05:02 am »

Quote from: TheChairGuy

I'm in DVV's camp on this, despite nathanm's spirited (as always) reply.

I've found the feathery softness, etherial 'presence' and overemphasized midrange (to the detriment of bass and treble) of tubes to be more objectionable than the harsh, strident, and oft fatiguing sound of solid state. Despite, I continually find solid state to be a truer representation of the recording and live.

I finally had opportunity to listen to a lot of digital amplification at CES in January, and I really have to say th ...

I hear what you are saying, and I would agree most of the time. But here's the thing. I once had a Spectron digital amp. I eventually went with my VAC push-pull 300B amp instead b/c it was the Spectron that had the "feathery softness" and "ethereal" sound compared to VAC (fully tweaked with great tubes). The VAC has enormously more etched detail, clarity, treble sparkle than my digital amp or a very good solid state amp I have on hand (Marsh, which is a detail champ also).

Then again, I used to have a 45 SET tube amp that had that "softness" worse than the other amps. Then again, it had some inimitable qualities.

The other day, I listened to a BEL 1001 Mk 5 SS amp that had ZERO amount of "harsh, strident" sound. A very nice amp indeed, one I can live with.

You are right about the bass of most tube amps at least. I get around the issue by using SS amp for 140 Hz down via active crossover.

Seems to me various camps are all reaching a pinnacle of sorts, best examples of each camp REALLY sounding great. Wish someone would design an amp with a sledgehammer tube input/driver stage, maybe a 6SN7 input/300B driver-->Digital output section. I could certainly go for this...

DVV · « **Reply #15 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 07:58 am »

I'd say tube amps can be very seductive because of their softness and rounded-off sound, but some also have an enviable degree of precision thrown in (e.g. some Audio Research models). But overall, they remind me of women, somehow neither here nor there, hard to get.

Solid state can sound very harsh, occasionally even scream at you, but I feel it has indeed come a long way. It has more precision and decision, even authority than tubes, but by and large lacks some warmth.

The digital I have heard to date, and I must admit that's prescious little, tended to have resolution to die for, but was somehow composed of three distinct ranges - bass, mid and treble. Bass was stunning, like Krell but even more detailed, mid was so-so, treble was below par with even better solid state designs. With the prices taken into account (these were expensive products), I would not have paid their prices even if I had the money.

But to be fair, we can't seriously expect a new technology to catch up with decades of evolution overnight, this will take time.

Overall, I am still in the solid state camp for the time being. Not perfect, but I feel the best overall compromise.

Cheers,
DVV

Occam · « **Reply #16 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 02:06 pm »

John L,

Its a pleasure to read your well reasoned comments. The VAC Ren and Bel amps are also among my own reference ideals. Your willingness to enter into this circle jerk is a tribute to either your knowedge and character, or an extreme degree of masochism....

Many thanks,
Occam

Tbadder1 · « **Reply #17 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 04:57 pm »

Tubes done right are awesome. Solid state done right is better, but more difficult to do right. Digital, to me, is the future. I've owned a Bel Canto which was 90% of my Levinson at half the cost. And my little 150 dollar Sharp which is 80% of my Bel Canto. That's scary! Eventually digital is gonna get it right and we'll be able to forget ss vs. tibe. I mean I can't believe my inexpensive Sharp/Moth/Zu Cable set up. I really believe you'd have to spend 5/6 grand to equal what cost me 1100. But then again how can I be sure? Every Tom Dick and Harry makes similar claims, and I agree with whoever intimated that the issue is too complex to understand fully, but I do know my little bedroom system gives me so much pleasure that at times I'm giddy.

BUT, having said all that, if I was forced to choose--I'd go solid state, and I'd go with an integrated amp. Done right, Levinson, Rowland, Ayre, sound better, TO ME, than any separates. Peace Love Dope

Dan

lcrim · « **Reply #18 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 05:40 pm »

I have two systems. Digital and SET. I have a mostly HT system with a Sony STR DA3000 digital receiver and a system built around a Decware Select Triode. The Sony drives a mostly Sonus Faber speaker setup and the Zen drives Parker Audo 95 MKII's. The two system have very different characters and do certain things better than the other.
For analog listening, I really prefer the Zen, it just matches up better. But for digital, the Sony receiver, which has gotten just terrible word-of-mouth on the audio sites, really does that stuff (CD,DVD) better. Neither is my favorite and they both were about equal in cost.
My stuff is relatively inexpensive but cost no object which would I choose? Probably a digital system,that keeps the sound of SACD or DVDA digital all the way to the speakers, like what is possible w/ some of the Meridian gear now but which might trickle down into the mainstream.

nathanm · « **Reply #19 on:** 18 Mar 2004, 06:39 pm »

Is there some kind of FAQ somewheres for digital amplification and how it works? Cause I can't quite fathom how an amplifier can be "digital" in the first place.