No and no.
It's about musicality.
Tube Vs. SS Preamps
Oddly in +25 yrs in the hobby, I’ve never really owned a tube preamp. Can you comment on what the differences are in general sonic terms? I want a really fatigue free sound with lots of body (I run class A and class AB solid state amps).
Do you find SS preamps to be fatiguing typically, more so on average than tube ones? Or is it simply the added bloom that's appealing with tube preamps?
- ...
- 65 posts total
@fuzztone 's pithy reply is well stated imo high level solid state is not fatiguing at all, if well matched through to the speakers but top tier tube gear gives a degree of bloom, palpability, richness of tone, and expansiveness of imaging that can sometimes be elusive for all solid state systems |
I’m 73. I started with tubes, went to SS, low powered SS Receiver, then powerful McIntosh SS Amp and SS Pre for inefficient speakers for a few years. Returned to tubes and efficient horn speakers, couldn’t be happier. All along, I always had 30-35 wpc tubes set up as alternate. Each and every ’listen-off’ I had here with friends, everybody picked LP over CD and Reel to Reel over LP. Each and every time everybody picked tubes over SS. I sum it up as: analog gets the overtones ’right’. |
I just noticed, you are highlighting your question toward Preamps. I had McIntosh SS C28 Preamp, highly regarded by many. I much prefer my McIntosh Tube Tuner/Preamp mx110z to the C28 (or any prior Preamp). mx110z’s MM Phono (2) is wonderful, I use a SUT for MC to keep using the mx110z MM Phono. you also get McIntosh's Versatile Mode Switch, balance, loudness for low volume, ... If it died, even though they have gotten pricey, I would get another one without hesitation, ship it from seller directly to Audio Classics!
|
- 65 posts total