Class "A" solid state vs. Tube amp.?

Yes Joe I would say if current limiting isn't a factor due to an impedence dip caused by the loudspeaker load (thiels and several panel designs), the power supply limitations would be the primary factor that would cause audible compression in a tube amp. Again matching the amp with the speaker is important. What else would cause a change in tonal character? I have heard this effect more with solid state than tubes. I’m sure a ss amp on the order of a big Krell or Classe would not exhibit these characteristics with virtually any type of load; maybe the Apogee Scintilla’s? On the other hand I am aware of no tube amp that can drive a <1 ohm load. The issue isn't brute force so much as having the reserve to provide effortlessness during dynamic, demanding musical passages. It certainly doesn't hurt bass performance either. Even when a tube amp does clip it doesn’t exhibit the type of compression that solid state does when it clips, which is most audible. I really am curious as to what tube amps you have listened to in your system? And if you still have the Silverline Sonata speakers with their 93db efficiency rating I can't imagine you hearing what you are describing concerning a tube amp, even an 20-30 watt SET if not the flea flicker 3-7 watters.

This is the typical give and take exchange from the two camps. Experienced listeners will decide for themselves. But I will repeat my often stated and unoriginal recommendation. If the goal is to replicate as closely as possible the original experience, then the criteria should be that type of experience. And to be best prepared for that process, one should listen extensively to live acoustic instruments and voices. As to tube or ss; most here are aware that there are so many mitigating and depreciating variables involved in the audio reproduction chain that generalizations are difficult and unreliable to make. Tube gear with certain ss qualities is admired. SS gear with certain tube qualities is admired. Etc., etc., etc. Once you are confident in the qualities you want to have and can reliably recognize those qualities for yourself, then complete the process by making a considered decision. It's normal to see more in what we don't have and that continued striving is a key aspect of the hobby for many. It's also clear that many of us are as much or more involved with the hardware the the raison d'etre for that hardware. That is a valid interest in and of itself. However, once you discount the hardware factor and select entirely on the basis of what you hear and not how others are impressed, I think that music will be enjoyed alot more and there will be much more funding available for software. The key to audiophile satisfaction is in not requiring external approval for what you like. Too much ambiguity for a simple question? Perhaps. Take it for what value it gives.

Waldhorner I say to you, well stated. However in matters of reproduced audio ambiguity abounds as do opinions. The purpose of this forum is to provide insight from different camps insofar as reproduced music is concerned. As to which camp is right is not the issue. What is more paramount is that the less experienced develop through the various insights a sense of what they may be personally looking for. Nothing is a better substitute than listening to live music however I could sit next to you at a live concert that we both might enjoy immensely and yet if we listened to a recording of the same event on two different systems we very well might come to two different preferences. We all must find our own path and the only way for that to be fully realized is as you said through personal experience, not external approval.

My experience with tubes has been more limited than my experience with ss, because I prefer the latter. Just to restate, at equivalent price points, I have ALWAYS found ss to be more satisfactory. Granted, a $30K Atmasphere does not break-up when reproducing complex passages, almost regardless of what it's driving, but neither does my $2K Marsh, for the most part. I fond that most $2K tube amps I have auditioned do break-up in such cases. Second issue, tonal accuracy. Yes, I do not like the sound of most tube amps when they reproduce complex passages compared to similar price-point solid state. I do not think it is a question of power in reserve alone. But there I plead ignorance to any technical explanation and perhaps my ears are indeed deceiving me. In any event I appreciate all your patience and well though arguments. Maybe one day I'll change my mind.

Tubegroover; Thanks for your feedback. Regarding tube amps driving 1 ohm loads: A recent evaluation of the Mac 2000 indicated that the big tube amp put out 107 watts into 1 ohm (although not rated for 1 ohm). If I were to consider glass amplification, the Mac would be one of the first which I would audition.(I do have old Dynaco tube gear which I occasionally use for fun. But it is certainly not my gear of choice.)