2. amps-preamps
  3. 135063-7805

Have you moved from tubed amplification to solid state amplification... Why?

I'd like feedback from those who have moved from primarily using Tubed pre and power amplification to Solid State pre and power amplification in their systems. 

Feel free to share what you found relevant to your experience. The questions below are only meant as a starting point, and reflect what I'm curious about.

- What was the initial motivation or driver that made you consider the move?

- Once you made your choice, what were your specific reasons for doing so?

- How happy and satisfied have you been with this move? Any regrets? 

- Lessons learned? Advice to share?

Thank you.


NOTE: Please, this is not about which is Better. Let's not make it about that. I like both solutions and the varied options for each. Thanks!!!

NOTE: I searched the Forums through 2013 for relevant threads...If you know of one or more that relates to my questions, please add the link. Thank you.
david_ten
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,792 posts
 

Some speakers are optimized for, or are more appropriate for use with, either a tube amp or a ss one. terry9’s Quads were used by Roger Modjeski in the development of his Music Reference RM-10 tube amp, and the pairing is to die for. That amp is, however, completely inappropriate for use with any of the Magneplanar speakers.

If one wants to avoid tubes, the smaller Pass and First Watt amps work very well with the Quads. So with that speaker, you can go either way, at a relatively affordable price. On the other hand, to power Maggies with tubes, a lot more dough needs to be spent to equal the capabilities of ss.

willemj
1,036 posts
 
Not sure what Quads are referred to, but I have always been perfectly happy with mine (first ESL57s, now 2805s) driven by first a Q303 and now a Q606-2 solid state amplifier. I have also had the privilege of being given a private comparative demonstration by Quad's Peter Walker himself, at the time when people started to argue that his earlier valve amplifier sounded better than his later solid state designs, and in particular better than the Q405 current dumper. He thought all this was absolute nonsense, and commissioned an independent research project by James Moir: http://www.keith-snook.info/wireless-world-magazine/Wireless-World-1978/Valves%20versus%20Transistor...
As I said, he gave me a private demonstration with a blind setup with his three designs, playing master tapes on a professional recorder. The comparison was level matched and blind. I thought I could just about hear slight differences, but afterwards Peter smiled: my identifications had not been better than random. All three amplifiers had simply been straight wires with gain; the only relevant difference had been that each successive generation had been more powerful than the previous one. I had learned a useful lesson.
terry9
2,333 posts
 
Pairs of Quad 2905’s, Willem.
willemj
1,036 posts
 
Great speakers. I could not have them because their top part would be in front of a huge panorama window. It would have spoilt the view, and exposed them to sunlight (so I went the subwoofer route). I have never heard any problem with the protection circuitry. I use a refurbished 2x140 watt Quad 606-2. The room is large, so Rob Flain at Quad suggested their QMP monoblocks.
terry9
2,333 posts
 
Quite agree, Willem, views are harder to come by than speakers. The protection circuit only becomes oppressive after you try disconnecting it, and then there is no going back.
More to discover