Can tube preamps be as 'detailed' sounding as ss?

There are a heck of a lot of adjectives that are applicable in the audiophile world. And, based on a previous thread, a few that are not at all relevant (such as self-effacing).

I can go with just about any description, but the one adjective I can't let pass is "accurate".

My experience has proven to me that no audio component can aspire to that description, and to paint an entire group of audio components (be they solid state, tube, digital, analog, planar, electrostatic, dynamic, copper, or silver), is something that I could not disagree with more. What one thinks is "accurate" is just as likely to be considered flawed by the next person.

I've been party to various demonstrations of a company comparing live music ala a piano or bass guitar to recorded music through their component to prove how "accurate" their product it. While I was impressed the first few times, eventually I learned that if you hand them a CD containing music in another flavor, it was soon apparent how "accurate" that component no longer was.

In all these years, I'm still waiting for someone to build "accurate".

And, for the record, in my opinion, tubes can often sound MORE detailed than solid state. Though, for preamps, I'm just as likely to be OK with a solid state as a tube preamp. Passives can be an option, but can oftentimes also not be the answer. Every preamp, tube or solid state, that I have tried has proven inferior to running no preamp.

Well I obviously had no intention to start a pissing contest. I was merely trying to find out if it is 'theoretically' possible for tube preamps to present all the detail on the recording. It seems that the answer is probably yes, and I will need to audition several of the suggested pres in my system to find the sound that I (and only I) find most enjoyable. It's interesting that people get so worked up about A vs B whether its audio or astronomy equipment (another hobby of mine) and likely other things too. I appreciate the discussion and suggestions for some models to try. I do agree that trying out different components is a fun and interesting way to enjoy this hobby.

Zaikesman, I agree that topology has much to do with performance- that it is not just tubes/ss. There is a bit of a strawman going on in your post though, as I was commenting on the fact that audiophiles often interpret brightness as detail (although they don't always like it, thus the term 'clinical').

I admire Nelson Pass's designs as an example of the sort of work that is actually advancing semiconductor-based amplifier technology, and I've been watching the class D stuff evolve for several years too. I am also a big believer in price perfomance curves and their significance.

The bottom line is that I believe what I preach and I try to practice it to the best of my ability. In this way I stand behind my word. I hope you are not taking me to task for that, but if so I have no worries -its not as if I've been trying to hide anything- after all my moniker is atmasphere :)