Another 2,000 Speaker Question

To everyone who has responded, I can't tell you how much I appreciate all of your help in this. I am very intrigued by what you've said about tubes, so maybe that should be the first consideration. I take it that this means the Maggies are out if I choose tubes! Do tubes do well with faster paced music or intricate rhythms? Also, I mentioned the room size as 15 X 20; I forgot to tell you that it has cathedral ceilings; will tubes still be an option? I guess I would have to match them up with speakers that don't require so much juice? Or would I go with a monitor-type speaker with the tubes and then get a powered subwoofer for the bass (or does that result in an uneven tonal presentation)? Sorry if these questions are basic in nature.

No need to apologize, some of us are still asking these questions after years in this hobby! As far as Maggies and tubes, I have not heard them with tubes, but there are internet sites of the many extremely happy Maggie owners which may be of assistance to you; perhaps someone here can give the net address. Another alternative is to use a solid state amp but a tubed preamp; I know many Maggie owners who use that combination. If you go all tubes, they will do well with intricate and fast-paced rhythms. They generally may not have the instant-on/instant-off dynamics you can get from solid state, but I feel they have a more natural portrayal of real-life dynamics that you'd hear at an unamplified concert. Keep in mind I'm a tube fan, though! The size of the room and the ceilings won't be a problem, although you may want to look for efficient speakers that don't need a lot of watts to play loud (there are very powerful tube amps out there, though). On subwoofing, we all have our opinions, mine is that most well-designed tube amps will give you good bass down to about 40-50 hz, and the quality of that bass is excellent. If most of the music you listen to does not have substantial bass content below that frequency, go with a speaker like those noted in the above posts which have reasonable bass extension, then get a subwoofer later only if you think you really need it. Integrating a subwoofer is not as easy as we'd like, and you are better off doing it at a lower frequency than a higher one, as a general rule. Hope this helps a little; I'm sure there will be helpful posts from our other members on your questions as well.

Thanks, rcprince! I am confused about ss vs. tubes, frankly. What do you feel like you gain vs. give up with tubes? Are they difficult to maintain? It does sound like tubes may be the way to go, maybe matched with some Reynauds maybe (several have suggested these, and other reviews on the net seem glowing -- no pun intended). I am also interested in the speakers you're listening to as a match with your tube equipment.

Despite horror stories from some, tubes are not at all difficult to maintain in most cases. Just remember that electronics until the late 60's were all tube. And much more of the transmitting equipment at radio/tv stations than people realize is STILL that old equipment. Some solid state people will tell you that there is some type of magic to being able to operate tube equipment. Believe me, there is not. My father has a piece of tube equipment down at our shore house that has used the same tubes since he bought it(never even touches it). And that was AT LEAST 27 years ago. Yes, you will have to learn to bias your tube power amp. But, you will only do that once in a while, or when you replace output tubes. And if you can turn a screwdriver(literally), you can bias many a tube amp. Tube amps will drive a reasonably efficient pair of speakers in your room wonderfully. Just remember that pre-WWII, VERY low watt tube amps provided the sound for places like movie theaters, etc. What tubes do well is the midrange(most instruments and the human voice). To many of us out here, it becomes incredibly more real and alive than with a solid state amp. Now, you will not usually be able to run with ss in the deep bass or far treble, but depending upon your speakers, there is a good chance you may not even care about it. And by the way, my feeling is that you get the speakers first, and worry about amplification somewhere down the road. You have a nice list here. Coincident, Dunlavy, Reynaud, Soliloquy, and Triangle. You may also want to look at Vandersteen. Although they didn't match up with your initial list, you never know...

Trelja's post is, as usual, on the mark. I'm not the world's most technical guy, but I've had no trouble dealing with my Audio Research and now Jadis tubed equipment since I was weaned from solid state about 12-13 years ago. There is obviously more maintenance involved, as you eventually do have to replace tubes, and you may have to adjust bias (although some tube equipment is self-biasing). The sonic trade-offs with solid state are pretty much as Trelja states; there are also a lot of threads on this topic you could take a look at here, as you will see it is a never-ending debate. To me, tubes just do a better job of conveying the soul of the music, rather than the technical strengths and weaknesses of the recording itself. As far as what speakers I use, that wouldn't help you much, as I have a four-piece system which is not yet, to its designer's chagrin, commercially available, where I use tubed amps for the satellites above 200 hz and solid state amps for below 200hz (I listen to a lot of full scale orchestral and organ music, so I need the last octave of bass). I'd still prefer a tubed amp for below 200hz, but finding one that will handle 20 to 40hz is difficult and expensive. Trelja's also correct in that you should probably focus on the speakers now, just keeping in mind the possibility of tubes for the future. Too many choices at once can lead to audiophilia nervosa, or something like that!