Questions about Preamp Tubes

Mapman, Whether it sounds different to you depends, IMHO, more on the developement of your listening skills than anything else. When the differences are very subtle they can be missed by most anyone except the most attentive and especially by those who are looking for the wrong things.

If you look for the difference in frequency response linearity, often referred to tonallity, there often is little or no difference at all. Either can be warmish, brightish, fast or dull. Although many feel that warmth is automatically obtained by getting tubes, in fact some tube pre-amps might actually brighter than some ss pre-amps.

What I hear when I listen to a tube component, as compared to a ss component, is the tube component lacks what I would call 'grain'.

I suspect that this difference is in the quality of the signal - which I see as one of 'liquidity' which I think has its origins in the treatment of rise time and corresponding decay time which are more reminiscent of live music. Especially the latter (decay). Too short a decay and the sound lacks 'body', too slow and it becomes dullish. Too fast and the signal becomes unnatural, brightish, and ultimately (to me) fatiguing.

Now some folks see this fast decay as additional resolution of detail becauce without the 'tail' you can hear the next signal as being more clean, clear, resolved. I think SS tends to err's on the lack of a more natural decay.

An analogy would be to hear live sound in outdoor open air where the notes might decay naturally but there would be no room effect from a room where we always hear music and think thats where it is most natural. This music wouldn't have much 'body'. I think of this as SS sound. Live music in a great concert hall which has great acoustics and allows a natural decay with some reinforcement. I think of this as tube sound. Live music in a lesser concert hall where its construction emphasizes or guts parts of the sound spectrum - usually to much decay or or in 'modern - show' halls too much glass or other reflecting surfaces. I think of this as either format 'gone bad'. Ever notice the difference between a live recording and a studio recording the principle difference in sound is often only exists because in one you have a audience to absorb sound and the a studio recording the effect of the audience is missing and the sound seems artificial only because we never hear it that way when we go to the hall. Or live music in an echo chamber, YUK

Hope that makes sense. It's not something I think a lot about............

Newbee,

"What I hear when I listen to a tube component, as compared to a ss component, is the tube component lacks what I would call 'grain'."

I think this is the essence of it.

But the question to me is it natural grain or artificially introduced by the recording and/or playback system? Natural grain maybe irrating, but it is what it is. If the equipment introduces grain, then that is not a good thing.

I have heard many good SS systems with just decent digital sources that do not sound "grainy". My system is one example.

Often when there is a problem, it is because the components may not be matched well or the problem may be in the recording itself (natural or introduced during the recording creation process), but I am convinced from listening experience and testing for such things that it is not in the fact that these are SS devices, IMHO.

I would not equate a technical solution like SS or tube to different natural performance venues though. These are two different factors/issues.

Live performances seldom sound perfect either. Many instruments, like violins can have a natural grain to them. Different violin designs sound different, some are considered better than others.

I think SS is inherently better at reproducing the source more correctly, for better or for worse. Tubes I think smooth over some of the rough spots (grain), which as a listener does have its appeal as well. Nothing new here....

Towards the high end of audio, I think these differences do converge and become more alike, but it costs more to achieve it via tubes in general. Even then no two SS or two tube systems will sound exactly alike. The significant differences may be more a result of designer choice regarding how they want their product to sound.

I am currently comparing two highly touted phono-preamps and to my ears it is exactly as Newbee has pointed out. There is the SS, which was raved about in all the mags, incredibly fast, delivering a mass of highly defined and detailed information, so much so, that at first listening I sat there with my mouth open, but soon I found the sound had an unnatural edge, a brightness which made me uncomfortable. On the other hand the tubed unit, where I found rise and decay in its micro timing much closer to what I am used to hear in a live event at my usual row in the hall. Where the SS unit almost explosively assaulted my ears, in perfect timbre yes, every instrument placed clearly on a magnificently delineated stage, the tubed unit did everything almost as well, just a tad less "dramatic", very liquid, but this had the SS unit too, apart from the fact that I heard practically no grain, no veil in its musical rendering, but the tubed unit had something galore, which is rare, it had bloom, it gave an idea of the aura around instruments, which you hear clearly in reality, but rarely in front of your rig. Now what we call bloom, to my mind and knowledge will only be made possible, if as Newbee has mentioned, the rendering of transients, rise and decay times are closer to the real thing, although per se it is a different kettle of fish from what we call a perfect rendering of transients, I believe.

Had not the "gestalt" of music been formed from early age on by live music for me, I would have fallen for the SS- unit. Its totally grainfree, incredibly detailed, dynamically effortless rendering of any kind of instrument, music and voices placed on an impressive sound stage is simply breathtaking. But something is wrong: You cannot say that there is no air. There is, but in a very subtle sense the music does not "breathe", one note is hardly finished and you already have the next thrown at you , perfectly carved out in absolutely perfect timbre everything, but in a very, very subtle, -exaggerated by me, however nonetheless irritating - sense. It is as if each note were somehow alone, does not properly coalesce with the next, as would be the case in the real world of music. The tubed unit does this right. Its musical rendering is much closer to my idea of the gestalt of music. But where bright lights are thrown, as if were, on the music through the SS unit, here the lights are a tad more subdued.

I won't mention names, the tubed unit his highly renowned but has never been properly reviewed, the SS unit is famous amongst reviewers. They describe it in the most glowing terms. Possibly they are less familiar with live music as the music lovers amongst us audiophiles. But then (grin) perhaps my set up is faulty, a fault most certainly kindly glossed over by the gentle and euphonic distortion of tubes......(;

Detlof,

Which two phono pre-amps are you comparing? What is the rest of the system?

Thanks for all the responses guys - you've answered all of my current primary concerns. However, I encourage you guys to continue your discussions at the tail end of this thread as I'm somewhat new to this audio hobby and am learning all the time. I'm enjoying reading what you guys have to say.

As far as specific equipment I am considering Thorman, I'm not entirely sure if I plan to buy a preamp in the very, very near future and am in a more factfinding type of stage, so I will leave that for a more pertinent time.