Tube Equipment: Gimmick?

Maybe someone can correct me here...

The vast majority of SS amps obtain those low distrotion measurements (note my careful choice of words) by using a significant amount of negative feedback. Sure, this negative feedback makes an amp measure well with a pure 1KHz sine wave, but how does that negative feedback make music sound? I have my opinion...what's yours?

Isn't the negative feedback that makes SS amps measure well actaully "distorting" the music? My AES Sixpacs are configured for 0 db of negative feedback - but I can apply 10 db of negative feedback if I choose to make my amps measure better. However, I choose not to.

There are some SS amps that use zero global negative feedback in their designs (Ayre comes to mind). I have not had an opportunity to audition any of Charles' SS designs, but they do intrigue me.

I always had SS equipment, always was SS guy (did not know any better).
But bad thing happened to me, I heard good tube equipment on audio show (Lamm, Hovland, others), and behold the best ML or mbl gear just sounded like canned music. Spectral was different, powerful but very unmusical.
Now I know how inferior SS equipment is, and do not like it. It is not a good filling. SS guy should not listen to good tubes it can ruin their world view.

Holy shee-ott, look at all these new posts! This is getting far too intellectual for my dumb ass. I'm going back to fixing tits.

So much partial or misinformation.
ALL amps start to distort immediately. There is always some sonic degradation all you can do is keep it to a minimum.
Tube amps tend to produce even order harmonic distortion which is more musical sounding. It is more musical because it is an even multiple of the note or an octave difference. That always sounds better to the ear. That being said they tend to get canceled in the output transformer anyway on push pull designs.
SS amps tend to produce odd order harmonics which do not sound as musical as it isn’t a perfect multiple, it is considered a 1/3 or an integral of a third.
Personally I like tubes for everything above 250hz and use solid state for everything 250 and below.

It is a very good point that opinions should be weighed against one's experience. My experience with SS has been limited to mostly very expensive boutique systems using the likes of ML and Krell amplification, thoughtfully assembled with good wires in decent listening rooms. To some of those systems I've had pretty extensive exposure. I have minimal experience listening to more esoteric SS gear though. My impressions of the better SS systems I have heard have suitably impressed me enough to keep my mind open, in spite of my recent humorous rant to the contrary (which was intended purely for entertainment). The more extensive experience I've had with an all ML system as well as a bi-amped Krell system has left me suitably impressed, but ultimately I found myself not nearly as engaged as with some of the better tube sytems I've heard and owned. I find my modest SET tube system at home more engaging than my friend's $50K Levinson system (which is no slouch by any means and has some really impressive merits). He also is more impressed by my far less expensive tube system and may switch over to tubes in the near future. His system is a master of detail and impact, but lacks the air, holgraphy and gentle grace of the SET system I prefer. I did not find his system fatiguing after prolonged listening and I have listened to it many times extensively. I've also recently owned a Pass Labs Aleph 5 which I enjoyed very much, but again, the qualities I did like about it are better expressed by tube gear. That said, in spite of being in this hobby over 20 years, I'd have to say that, considering all that is out there, my listening experiences have been quite limited in the range of possibilities. Therefore I hesitate to pass judgement so readily. Ultimately I still maintain, to each his own.

As far as film vs. digital I'll make sure to ask the next "good photographer" I meet to enlighten me on the subject.

Marco