From tubes to solid state. What do you loose...



...if your priories are transparency, timbral acuracy, micro dynamics and soundstage? I am hesitant to give-up on my Sonic Frontiers Power 2, but buying tubes every so often can be quite expensive. The current tubes offered (Sovtek, Svetlana, EH) are short-lived and not cheap either. I will probably stay with tube pre-amp and go with the ss amps, like Mark Levinson...?
lmasino
I wouldn't give up on the SF power 2 so fast. My original set of tubes were still good when I changed them after 5 years. The entire tube set cost $290. Not bad for 5 years.
I'm agreeing with Asa and others. There is no reason to think you are giving up on tube "magic" when you switch out the tube monster amp for an ultra clean superbly designed ss amp - if you keep tubes in the front end, or pre amp. No worry, all the friendly even harmonics will still be there in the end.

hey Asa - I bought the Scintilla.
Hi Muralman. Do you like the Scintilla better? I assume the Pass 600's are eating them up. I hope you are dizzy with FUN!

Tok, we've been dancing around about this - you have responded a couple of times to my posts where I've said that tubes are superior in the best systems by saying that there is no difference in that context, attributing any difference to system matching, ie skill in matching. I respect your posts and you, so I have refrained from responding.

Tok and others, first, yes, some tube systems sound mushy, etc. because the people putting them together are still learning (or don't have the $, or just don't want to spend that much). For instance, I can't stand 6550-based amps (although I did get a hot-rodded Jadis Defy to sound alright with 4 matched Siemmens drivers, arggh!), I dumped an ARC VT100 (Mk I then w/ the Infini caps later) in three months, and would much prefer a Pass SS or post MkII Plinius to those. Similarly, I can understand wanting a Plinius MkIII vs a Rogue. But we have to be careful of mixing contexts in search of confirming our experience.

Second, yes, everything is context-dependant, but that doesn't mean that everything is equal. Although this sentiment has that warm fuzzy inclusive feel about it - its called radical subjectivism - that's not how the world works. There are hierarchies, which is, of course, why we are talking about differences.

Third, you have to be careful when you talk about "systems" to not mix in digital performance as a support for your position. When talking about tubes v. SS at the present zenith of performance, I think we understand we are predominantly talking about pre's and amps. I tend to agree with the people who say tubes are a euphonic sauve in digital applications (if no tubes downstream, a required one in many systems).

Depending upon a person's given personality, disposable income and spending inclination, type of music, need for convenience / recoil from hassle, hearing acuity and will to become involved in the musical meaning (not the same thing...), etc, all contexts, I recommend different systems.

It comes down to what Jeffga calls "magic", which a way of expressing the ineffable in words. This deep experience of listening is ineffable because it occurs in the mind before words. At deeper levels of listening, more objective qualities of sound that are more noticebale to the mind at surface levels become less important to catalyzing the listening experience. At these deep levels, the mind is more attuned to existential discontinuities - how sound moves in space symmetrically, the continuousness between source projection and surrounding space, the simulcrum of space infusing the projection and not only bounding it, the lent perception of depth proceeding infinitely, the integration of transient, core harmonic and decay, and then, all of these integrated with each other. The result is not some-thing that the thinking mind can put into language and readily communicate, but it is an experience that exists and can be replicated with the right system and a mind willing to go there.

In my experience, while SS has made many strides - at first in terms of distortion, then harmonics, then space - it does not approach a properly matched NOS based tube system in its ability to offer an integrated simulcrum that catalyzes the mind towards this deep listening experience.

This knowledge is, of course, state-specific, meaning that while I can go on like this, if you haven't experienced this then the mind that wants to stay where it is tends to deny the existence - even, illogically, the possibility of its existence - and, strangely, even though that same mind has itself developed further and further abilities to listen deeper into the meaning of the music.

There are some very wonderful SS systems - meaning pre and amp - that are progressively allowing us to experience greater meaning in music, but that, in and of itself, is not an argument for equality in systems that catalyze the deepest musical experience.

Someone said recently here that he didn't care if a coat hanger got him there (Tok?) - matter is matter is matter - but the arrangement of matter we call a "tube" is still superior in reproducing the above existential qualities I've cited vis-a-vis SS, and to which I've alluded are inherently determitive of the ability to reach those deep levels, ie deep existential perception requires a threshold of a simulcrum of those qualities before the experience is, well, experienced.

What is equal?

We are all equal in our potential to experience music, or stereos, or flowers, or...
Yes Asa, the Scinnies are better, thanks for asking. Some quantitatively, but much more qualitatively. The Scinnies are a speaker apart.

I might do the Supra by and by. I love tubes. Thanks to the huge power reserves of the 600 I can pedal the <1ohm Scinnies to full throttle. They have reaffirmed my belief that speaker choice is the apex from which to synchronize all other components.

Don't you ever worry about the rapidly diminishing store of NOS tubes? I know new sources pop up now and then, but prices are skyrocketing. I'm having a devil of a time finding my favorite tubes. Luckily I chanced on a huge untapped personal collection of all types of tubes, that are in the hands of a friend of mine now.
Muralman, you know, I think I have an idea what you like, and I do think you'd like the Supratek. In fact, I'd think you'd love it. It doesn't have that tubey sound like many tubed pre's. I love my Joule, but it wouldn't be for you because its soft on dynamics - which I don't like myself but, personally, can live with because of other things it does and because the system is synergized with it there. The Supratek is Very Dynamic and clean - but in a good way, not sterile, but liquid, but not lush either. If you like Pass, you would love a Supratek. If you didn't like it, besides, you could easily sell it for what you paid. The wait is a bitch to get one from Australia, but that's where the cycle is right now. Bottomline: I think you'd be very happy. Glad you like the Scintillas. I would like to hear what you say more on the differences. Lots of Apogee people out there, or former ones, so maybe a thread on that?

On NOS: yea, I do worry, but much less so on a pre/SS combo. The real problem comes in when you have to match outputs on an amp, and that's where you see people balancing the ups in sound vs. the downs in hassle and glad they don't have a tube amp anymore. I see their point; my Defy was a hassle. That's one of the reasons that I have the SE amps I do, because they only have 3 tubes apiece. In that sense, I fully understand someone going the tube pre/SS amp route. Actually, on the NOS for pre's you get pretty good at scouring ebay and it turns out to be easier than you would think. For instance, on the Supra, four matched sets would probably last you well over a decade. That's a $500 investment over ten years, and given the performance increase and time span, that's chicken feed in audiophile terms. Besides, you're a savvy guy with this stuff, so you would have no problem, really. And, I would guess, would probably end up enjoying yourself.