solid state vs tubes

The m4.0t I had did very well with Magnepan mg1c speakers for years delivering a lot of tube-like attributes in the sound. Most notably, zero fatigue....the longer you listened, the longer you wanted to listen. I cannot go so far as to say the sound was indistinguishable from the tube amp it emulated since I never did that comparison. My perception was it did what it said it did pretty well and I'd leave it at that.

However, it failed miserably when I went to the big OHM 5S3 speakers I currently run. It was a high power 360w/ch amp but had relatively low damping factor and did not deliver much current. Bass was weak. It was never spectacular on the Maggies either, but I attribute that more to the speakers than the amp. The bass on the OHMs is rock solid now with a suitable high curren, high damping amp, the BelCanto ref100m Class D IcePower monoblocks I currently use.

If you perceive the peaks as less loud because that is how people hear, that would seem to infer that the dynamic range is affected, at least as perceived, since the peaks do not seem as loud anymore, just as those nasty loudness cues due to negative feedback that you are focused on make you perceive things as louder as you describe.

Mapman, that is true but is not the same as real dynamic range. I don't think it is a good idea to promote a practice of intentionally distorting the loudness cues in order to make something sound louder than it really is. A lot of amps do that though, and is why they sound loud and shouty, as in: "Turn that !@#$%^ down!!"

IOW, if your system has the ability to sound loud, the loudness cues are being distorted. It is possible to build a stereo that does not seem to play loudly, so that even 105 or 110 db is comfortable. I'm a fan of being able to play the system to life-like levels, that is not possible if it also messes with the loudness cues!

IMO/IME in about 90% of the conversations that audiophiles have about dynamics, the word 'distortion' can safely be substituted without changing the meaning of the conversation. It is the reason I avoid using 'dynamics' except in for this context.

Atmas,

Darn, I thought I submitted you on this topic.

Oh well...

So another way to look at it then is the soft clipping approach distorts the loudness cues by reducing them to make them more digestible to human ears.

OK, but real sound in the real world is what it is. There is nothing there to process the loudness cues in a more digestible manner. Not to say that may not be desirable in an amp.

Distortion and dynamics might be used interchangeably in discussion, but they are clearly two different things albeit often related despite what people might say or think.

Mapman, I agree, the problem is this: distortion, in the form of exaggerated 5th, 7th and 9th harmonics (compared to the original sound) **masquerades** as 'dynamics'.

A simple way to tell that a system is lacking this distortion is that you can't tell how loud it is, until you find that you are shouting to talk to someone sitting right beside you.

Oh, and FWIW, soft clipping does not reduce the loudness cues. Its just more likely to not distort them as much. However clipping in any form is to be avoided, so we are talking about how the loudness cues may or may not get distorted when the system is not clipping at all.

I always chuckle when i here the great tube verses S.S. debate . The choice is simple , as long as you haven't made up your mind on one or the other . Bring home and try as many of both as you can , the one that sounds the best is the one . Its not the means its the results that are important to the true music lovers , I thought we all new that by now . MAX