Solid state amplifiers and sound stage, especially front to back "depth"


I've been enjoying my trial period with the Van Alstine SET 400 stereo amplifier. When I'm done and have collected my thoughts, I may write up a summary.

In the meantime, a question for folks with more experience. I've noticed is that the amp produces a sound stage that is nicely defined and articulate from left to right, but not as much from front to back. (My Adcom was also unable to create sound stage depth.) I know my room is capable of that sound stage because my tube amp accomplishes it.

Question: Is it typical of solid state amps to have less of a front to back sound stage than tube amps? Do they vary in this regard? Or, perhaps, am I failing to do something -- such as re-position my speakers? (After all, I immediately get that sound stage back when I switch amplifier without moving anything else.)

If you have any experience with solid state amplifiers and sound stage -- front to back, left to right, or whatever, I'm curious.

This is not about me keeping or not keeping the amp. There are many things I already really like about it. But I'm wondering about this aspect.

Thanks.
128x128hilde45
@twoleftears Perhaps a different positioning for a different amp is called for — that’s why my question included "Or, perhaps, am I failing to do something -- such as re-position my speakers?" That said, I’ve done measurements regarding impulses (first reflection, distal reflection, further reflections) and I don’t see much of a measurement difference between them regarding the kinds of timing that contribute to sound stage. I suppose just moving the speakers around would be an easy experiment. Thanks for that idea!

@audioguy85 I did a lot of movement of my system and back wall distance proved very important, both for SPL and for imaging. My guess is that rooms are very different, and my 6.5 ft. ceilings are a factor which probably you (and Fremer) don’t share. Possible crucial difference.

@zlone Wow, that’s a very controlled experiment and interesting result. Yes, I use great test tracks and yes, I’m using a tube preamp in front of both amps. With NOS Valvo 12ATs in it.

@jjss49 I’ll look at the distortions discussion.
@atmasphere I appreciate the clarification. I suppose I should have just asked the question about what is meant by "voicing." I'm just a hobbyist and consumer; I listen and read, and I hear some engineers such as Paul McGowan talk about "voicing" an amp. I guess I don't really know what that term can mean or how to interpret his comments vis a vis others. I didn't mean disrespect to Frank.

No doubt different amps will have different transfer functions that could result in the parts of the signal that determine imaging and soundstage, many of which are very low level, being reproduced differently.
A linear transfer function is generally what is desired on paper but it’s likely the case that no two amps have exactly the same transfer function be it linear or not so linear. Transfer functions that emphasize the lower level parts of the signal that determine soundstage and imaging could even be artificially emphasized in a way that increases soundstage and imaging even if that is less linear. I would expect that amps that soft clip where dynamic range is compressed (many tube amps) and that also feature very low noise floors could excel in soundstage and imaging. Even if an artificial artifact of the amps non linear transfer function when soft clipping it might be regarded as a desirable effect.

In that context, my Bel Canto ref1000m amps also do soft clip but effectively never do in that they are 500 w/ch into 8 ohm doubling into 4 ohm. However, they are also absolutely dead quiet so together the effortless dynamics and low noise floor combine for quite exceptional soundstage and imaging (also dynamics) I would say with a very linear transfer function. Nothing artificial there.
The term "voicing" tends to carry over more from Guitar amp designers and modders looking for particular tones, overtones, and/or feedback designed into the circuit looking to achieve a particular sound result.

With professional and home audio, it seems many audio engineers focus primarily on specs and limiting distortion alone. Some others, changing component values, adding components, removing components, adding gain stages, or even adding complete circuits like negative feedback working to achieve a particular sound.  Agree or not, likely adding distortion in what they deem as "in the right places", also loosely referred to by some as voicing, fwiw. Results and opinions vary of course.    

A set-tube audio buddy likes to say, "at the end of the day, it's just your stereo", I'll add, call it whatever you want, you are the one listening to it. 

  
I guess I don't really know what that term can mean or how to interpret his comments
Well that makes two of us. If 'voicing' is trying to get the most linearity out of the circuit than we do that. But we're not listening to it when we do that- we're measuring it. The listening only comes in after it seems OK on the bench. So far the listening hasn't revealed anything we couldn't see on the bench in the last 45 years...

@decooney makes a good point with regards to guitar amps where you have to be careful to not allow the circuit to play bass and to use the proper cheap parts that give you that 'sound' when overdriven. Entirely different kettle of fish!