Trade- off, power SS vs tube magic.


As everyone knows, tubes are expensive. Can a higher power SS substitute for this "subjective" magic. One reviewer said he made the transition and did not miss the tubes. What do you say? Let's try to keep the speaker variable out of this.
orpheus10
It's nice to be among geniouses (is that the proper plural for more than one genious). I know that P = E x I, and several other formulas for "watts". But what I don't know is how to substitute "tube watts" for "SS watts"; and I would appreciate it if no one told me "Watts is watts".
So rather than actually state what speaker/amp you're currently using and asking for a comparison/comment to the BAT amp you instead ask a vague question about solid state vs. tube amps. Then you compound it by getting snippy with those who point out your fallacious premise. If you don't like how the thread has evovled, you have no one to blame but yourself. A direct question based upon factual info would have gotten you better responses.

BTW, a watt is a watt. A tube watt a millisecond after clipping can be different than a solid state watt under the same circumstances. But again, much depends upon the specific speaker load.
Orpheus10 I have audio valve challangers and jeff roland model 6 mono's;my 2 sets of speakers are soundlab m2's and usher rw729's.I listen to both combos when I feel like moving gear around and the tubes seem to me in my enviroment to present a more lifelike/realistic presentation of the source material;however the rolands do sound very tube like as well but I still prefer the tubes.
My taste in music run from jazz,vocals,easy listening,acoustic,and pink floyd even drops in now and then.