2. amps-preamps
  3. 1147577347

differences between tube and solid state designs

this topic may have been beaten to death.

however, my experience attending ces shows has demonstrated to my eras that the differences between push pull tube and solid state amplifiers sound very similar.

i notice today's tube amps, e.g., contad johnson, audio research, wolcott audio, etc., do not exhibit many of the classic colorations associated with tube designs and sound a lot like solid state, especially with respect to frequency response, i.e., spectral balance.

there may be still be slight audible differences between the 2 formats.

has anyone perceived a narrowing of sonic differences between the two designs and if so if differences are slight, why buy a tube amp.

note, i have deliberately excluded class a and single ended amps, at low wattage, from this discussion. some of them have more of a vintage or classic tube sound, especially relative to bass and treble response.
mrtennis
bartokfan
664 posts
 
Tube amps are like ss amps, there are a few goods uns among the bunch.
I did not like CJ nor ARC's, nor Rogue's
larryi
3,922 posts
 
Trelja,

I think you nailed it perfectly describing what tubes can do better than solid state. I do enjoy systems based on solid state amps, but NONE can, so far, deliver what a good tube amp can deliver.

Unfortunately, there are a lot more BAD tube amps than good tube amps. I don't know why people buy those huge, high-powered tube amps that attempt to deliver the kind of power that can more easily be delivered by solid state when they give up all of that "breath of life" that tubes deliver (note: I am not referring to OTLs).

I think that the "convergence" a lot of people talk about has to do with the taming of the obvious negative qualities of solid state sound (brittleness, edginess, etc), but, to me, what is left is sound that is flat and lifeless compared to low-powered triodes.
drjjpdc
78 posts
 
I have had SS and now I have tubes. I recently obtained a pair of Quicksilver V4's and in my system and they combine the best of both. At 120w they have power but also the tube characteristics that I like. I can't wait till they break in fully.

BTW one of the things my wife laughs about most is the need to break in a multi-thousand dollar before it sounds it's best. Oh and she does admit after listening that she likes the Quickies more than my SS amp or the other tube amps that I auditioned.
biomimetic
252 posts
 
I wish a convergence revolution would happen among speaker manufacturers the way it has with tubes and SS - where quality would go up, and value would go up *not* in direct relation to price. Not that there aren't bad $10,000 speakers. There are. I know it's harder to design them, but why, WHY, must they all pretty much suck? Amps have come so far, and the output devices lag so far behind.
audiokinesis
2,733 posts
 
Biomimetic, I can't speak to loudspeaker design at a specific price point, but maybe I can point out one reason why a loudspeaker's job in general is quite a challenge.

Everything in the analog signal path before the loudspeaker deals with three domains: Frequency, amplitude, and timing (or phase).

In addition to variations in these three domains, the acoustic signal generated by the loudspeaker has directional characteristics in three-dimensional space. So the challenge loudspeakers face is at least an order of magnitude greater that that faced by components operating purely in the electrical domain, and indeed we find that a loudspeaker's deviation from "flat" pretty much anywhere in that three dimensional space (including on-axis) is at least an order of mangitude greater than an electronic component's deviation from "flat".

Duke
More to discover