Tube cdp's and Tubed Output cdp's

I've heard tubed players that sound wonderful, and SS players that do as well. A tube(s) in the output stage of a CD player, does not, by any means, to my ears, make anywhere near as profound a distinction as does implementation/comparison of tubes in the amp and or pre-amp stages of a system. Perhaps I have just not heard enough tubed players(?). I don't think I'd be able to blindly identify a high-end CD player implementing a tubed output stage and consistently distinguish it from a high-end player with an SS output stage. I do, however, think I could blindly tell the differences between a thoughtfully assembled SET tube system and any comparable SS system where it comes to tubes in the amplification stage. I think what is being implied by Zosima, if I may be so bold, is that the lower priced CD players are more often prone to digital glare or harshness simply because of the economy of their circuitry and transport. A tubed output stage has the ability to take the hard edges off the output signal and therefore would occur to some as making a fairly significant contribution in that case. The more expensive SS players which tend to have a no-holds-barred design do not have the same problems with digititis as cheaper players, and in fact have many strengths to offer that are unique to their SS roots. In the case of the latter those strengths may actually be compromised by implementation of a tubed output stage. In any case the differences in implementing a tubed output in the case of the latter, would occur to me to be less profound. I don't think it is necessarily a matter of the quality of the tubed output being "diminished", but rather a case of those qualities no longer having as great an advantage. In many cases the advantages of the no-holds-barred SS may win out over tubes. I don't think it is as apples/oranges as in the case of amplification.

Marco

I own a Jolida 100A that has upgraded Electro-Harmonix tubes and a Sony SCD-1 modded to include the super clock 2 and a transport mod. The Sony is sweet sounding, has more air, better base and a lower noise floor. I originally bought the Jolida for a second system and moved to the main system when the Sony went out for repair. The comparisons were done after level matching by measuring the voltage accross the speakers terminals. It's probably not fair to compare the Jolida to a SS player costing 5 times its price, but the Sony is clearly more musical playing Redbook CDs.
Jeff

What I read from your initial post Zosima was that in a CD player above $1000, a tubed output stage was somewhat unnecessary. What you said in your second post was that you felt that adding a tubed output stage to a better digital player would not have necessarily increased your level of listening enjoyment. Let's be clear that we are now addressing to two distinctly different issues:

1) Is there a difference between the SS and tube players?
2) Would those differences necessarily effect your listening enjoyment level?

If I read you correctly, then what you're saying is that your personal preference might happen to be a SS player, or it might happen to be a tubed player, yes? Again, if this is the case, no new discoveries here, as everyone has a personal preference. All that I was saying in regards to the first issue is that in a player above $1000, a tubed outstage would render a significant--and to some listeners, a necessary--difference in the sound.

There is no way that an Audio Aero Capitole MKII is going to sound like a Levinson 39, and IMO you would have to address the tube/SS differences between them before you could even hear the baseline sonic variations between the players. Sonic differences between SS and tube in amplifiers unquestionably applies in digital players as well. They simply do not sound the same, and despite some of the very fine SS players I have heard that do many things extremely well, they still have a digital sound to my ear, and I am certain that it has everything to do with the tubed outstage. If it did not make much of a difference, then I would have to ask why modifiers such as APL, Exemplar, Modwright, RAM, and others--considered to be producing among the very best digital players available--opt to use a tubed output stage? Again, I am still discussing whether or not there are differences (issue 1), not whether or not you prefer them (issue 2).

Have I heard every last player out there? No, but I have heard many players costing anywhere from $3K to $10K and more--including Resolution Audio, Levinson, Gamut, Wadia, SimAudio, and others, and I have yet to hear a SS player that reproduced music with the same fleshy, human, palpability that the tubed players do, particularly with voice and piano. I simply disagree with the suggestion that a tubed output stage on even a $10K SS player would not make a marked difference. Because it will. The difference is not marginal in my opinion, rather it IS more like apples & oranges, to use Marco's reference. Now, whether or not you prefer that difference is another issue entirely. That's where YMMV comes in.
Howard

My audio club did a blind evaluation last year with about six or seven CDP. There was atleast one tube CDP in the bunch. Most of us picked a SS CDP when asked with player sounded most tube like.
Jeff

My wife and I recently went to a friend's home and listened to a variety of very fine audio equipment that he has in his stable. Of the three digital sources, we (my wife and I) established an order of preference. Interestingly, he could not hear a lick of difference between the three players. And they were HIS! I suggested that he keep the cheapest of the three and sell the other two.

I'm sorry, Jwin, but your 'study' is inconclusive. Some people don't hear the difference between copper and silver cables, and others could dissertate for an hour on the chasm between the two. I promise you that a sound engineer would guess right every time as to whether the player is tube or SS.

Incidentally, I was in a restaurant three days ago, with five other people, and we all overheard bits of the conversation coming from the next table. While four people guessed that our neighbors were speaking Italian, two of us recognized it as Spanish, which when spoken by Argentines often sounds like Italian. As I said, some may hear the differences while others may not. Some may PREFER the differences they hear, while others may not. Again, YMMV.
Howard