question about ss or tubes

Mark, thanks for sharing your experience. ill bet your analog is so very detailed. It's sounds very interesting. I wish I could hear it. The whest combined with the Delos. I had my eye on those whest's awhile back and wondered about them pretty seriously. I can tell your digging on it. Cool table to. I've only read about those pieces. Ive heard some Audio Research gear and I thought it was also pretty detailed. Are you by chance using any warmer tube brands? Again thanks and I'm still open to a ss pre, and I think which direction I end up going will depend on how the system sounds with new eml's and the flavor it gives. Those Tom Evans pre's sound like a possibility for the ss side of the fence. What I'm most worried about ss is it won't sound natural but that may just be a silly cliche. 

I just had an opportunity to demo a (well broken in) Sutherland 20/20 that a friend loaned me while I was waiting for a Manley Chinook to arrive.  The 20/20 was a nice step up from several phono stages around the 1k mark (Heed Quasar, Sutherland Ph3D, Croft RIAA Phono).  It had more detail and better decay and high frequency extension.  However, the Chinook was a gargantuan leap forward (in my system, of course).  Yes, the sound stage was much bigger, the details were more natural, and the bass depth was better, but most importantly I stopped thinking about the sonic characteristics of the phono amp and started thinking about music.  The Chinook was the single biggest improvement I've made to my system.  

it is always fun to read ss vs tube debates. I don't believe there is a right or wrong in the discussion. There are some wonderful ss devices and also some wonderful tube devices.
I do agree with Atmosphere's advice. However, I would alter that slightly to say that the best place to place the nicest, cleanest equipment is as close to the source as possible. 
 I guarantee that if one picks equipment within their particular price point, ss and tube and compare them, there may be differences, but you will find they are both great.
If you are using a CD player and/or DAC as a source, and that device does not have a tube output stage, then you are already using a solid state device.  Everything else in one's system can be tube, but if the source is ss, then there you have it. You have already "corrupted" your signal with ss anyway.  But, the amazing thing is that is still sounds great, doesn't it?  I wonder if anyone makes tubed DAC output stages?  Hmmm.
My point is that if there is one transistor device in the signal path, then, well.....ss is already there and it sounds wonderful anyway.
Most people are upgrading/changing one piece of equipment at a time(which unfortunately tends to lead to other upgrades as well, such as wires), and therefore, as I mentioned, pick a price point that you can afford and find the best in that price point range, both ss and tube and demo as best you can in your home.
But apples to apples comparisons are fair.  All others are not. One can't honestly discuss the differences between a $500 ss pre-amp and a $5,000 tube pre-amp and honestly say tubes are better.  Same is true of the opposite. 
So, whenever, I read about people harping about how great tubes are vs ss or visa versa and they don't mention the equipment compared, or the price range of the equipment, I take it with a large grain of salt and think, here we go again.

Someone is trying to sell you something.  Either their opinion ( I love ss or I love tube and the other is crap), or they literally are trying to sell you something.

But, when a person is saying that "they are missing some detail", well, that really opens a large can of worms doesn't it?  Source?, interconnect cables?, power cables? power conditioning? speakers, amps, pre-amps, tube vs ss, or, here a very big one.....The room itself.  I still having figured out how to correct for that. 

One can't simply demo dampening or room acoustic equipment in your home and return it if it doesn't work.  Experts coming to your home costs lots of money also.  Room correction is a tough one. At least to me.

enjoy

I have a sign that says "no experts allowed" outside my front door, so that solves that issue…although they do sneak in from time to time and I have to fumigate...Room correction issues can be messed with by using one of the room correction gizmos (officially called Electronic Nannys) in the signal chain, although I personally refuse to allow somebody else's bass attenuation/compression formula into my sanctuary (let alone my listening room). I find that a small flock of sheep trained to avoid blocking my speakers from reaching me at my sweet spot does work, but cleanup is bothersome and they're often noisy. I go through a "too live" room thing every time I mix a concert where the venue is empty during the sound check…I've considered filling the room with the aforementioned sheep (same issues as before), fully dressed wax figures or manikins, or simply quiet people who don't mind sitting through the sound check and then getting the hell out of there until showtime. More to the point (what was that point anyway?), I don't care who likes or doesn't like tubes but I do know tubes are more fun. That is a fact.

Nice coming home to read the above responses. Thanks guys. Smrex13 that was just the first hand experience between those units I was looking for. Very sweet. It seems and I'm just thinking out loud, that I see more chinooks on the used market than I do the Sutherlands and I would love to know why that is. 
Minori, I'm with ya I'm not in an either or frame of mind myself, yet. As I learn about what's important to me it seems those qualities come from tubes. But that could change to. I'm really attracted to quiet black backgrounds and great stereo separation with units that are dual mono like the whests and liberty's, et al., both of which seem to be great strengths on the solid state side. 
WolfG, cool job dude. I'll trade ya.