• Check out the Annual AK Secret Santa exchange Program, signup before November 23rd in the AK Charities & Christmas forum!

Tube amps vs solid state

I thought all tube amps had a tube like sound until I got a Jolida 801A, it was a fine amp but the fact it didn't fit what I recall as a tube amp from my younger days meant it was more like a SS amp to me.

I couldn't cope with the lack of controls which is ironic as I don't use the tone controls in my SS amps I also couldn't cope with the heat that it put out.

To me it's the design that dictates the sound not the fact that it's tube or SS.
 
I own and enjoy both SS and tube gear. The only thing that really matters to me is that purty sounds are produced.
 
so many myths, so many opinions.......
many seem to disagree, but for me, good audio is good audio whether it is delivered by tubes or solid state.
Quiet is quiet whether by tubes or solid state.
I would guess it has to do more with what type of gear someone has found that fits their needs best and matches up well with the rest of their system on what they believe to be better.
When I first hooked up a Conrad Johnson preamp I bought, my audio world was transformed. For me it was not so much the detail, clarity etc as my ss pre (Pioneer Spec 1) gave me all of that, but the sound stage, depth and just plain life like sound coming from my speakers made me believe that tubes were the ONLY way to go. My search was over and audio nirvana was mine. No doubt in my mind tubes were by far the best.

Problem is, I was wrong.

It just so happened that particular piece of gear fit in well with my system and I could be wrong on this, but probably just a notch up from what I had been using, hence the difference.
I still love that preamp and still smile every time I listen to my stereo, but as many do when getting a new piece of gear, I immediately jumped to the conclusion it was because it was a tube preamp and by golly, from now on it was all tubes for me (my speakers still needed the power of ss amps tho).
Looking back on my old posts, it is often embarrassing to me how I proclaimed a truth or held such a stalwart opinion on many things that time and experience later changed my mind ..... and tubes are no different.

Good gear is good gear be it tubes or solid state. I do have a shaky, not so firm belief that especially on preamps, tube may get me where I want to go a tad cheaper, but as soon as I took a firm stance on that, no doubt I would run across a less expensive solid state preamp that fit my needs better.

Just my opinion but it really is not very difficult or expensive to put together a system that will give you great detail, clarity and most things associated with a nice system. For me and my system, the tricky part was getting the depth, sound stage and those little nuances to where I was really happy. It does not have to necessarily be expensive to get there as one can always keep an eye out for excellent used gear, but as you move up the price ladder, I feel this is what you are paying for - and often those small nuances are what makes some gear more expensive, be it tube or ss. Some think that if a piece of gear costs twice as much, it should sound twice as good - I'm afraid it does not work that way. What it comes down to is how much someone is willing to pay to squeeze out that little extra depth or whatever.
For some people, it is worth a whole bunch of money to be able to notice say Rick Danko is standing about 4 feet to the right and a little bit in front of Robbie Robertson.
Others would think they are crazy and maybe because they did not notice any difference on their system now firmly believe it is just flushing money down the toilet and people only spend the extra money for ego reasons.

There is a reason they call it a system - in order to get the best sound possible from any level of stereo, it all has to work together well. It can actually be very difficult to do because you usually do not know how something will fit in until you try it - which is why I believe pretty much everyone goes through a ton of gear until they finally settle on the direction they are going.
Yet it makes no difference if you get there with tubes or solid state. A good stereo is a good stereo. Obviously the listener should not even know what they are listening to - not really easy to do, but in the end the goal is to have the system just get out of the way and let the music through (good luck trying to achieve that - those that do try are the ones who are buying the realllly expensive gear)
So verbose as it is, point is to try not to hold on to any belief that tube or ss is better - it just comes down to how good a piece of gear it is to begin with and how well it fits into your system.
Just so happened for me, a tube preamp was just the ticket. But I could have bought a different tube pre that I did not like as much or fit in as well and if I drew any conclusion from that I would be back to using a ss preamp.
Tis all good and makes no difference how you get there. Tubes can do it or silicon can do it - often people will end up using both.
 
BillyB said:
Seems like a good discussion is going on here.

I like the idea of a 3D soundstage and I REALLY LIKE ADJUSTABILITY
Click to expand...


Well, I get a great 3-D soundstage from a Threshold SA-3, as well as a Threshold 400A. They have both been restored, and provide incrdible, life like sound.

For two channel, I use a McCormack LD2, and for multi channel, a Classe SSP-300, connected to Thresholds (S200, two S300's, and a SA3) proved five channels of very clear, 3-D, life like sound.

Having said that, also have a second audio only system that uses a Eastern Electric 40 WPC tube integrated that also sounds incredible, 3-D, and life like. The key is to match the amps with speakers that provide a optimum transfer function.

The take away is: Both tubes and solid state can provide a life like music experience.
 
I've had both. For my tastes the best set-up was a hybrid system wherein I used a tubed preamp and SS amps. (Anthem preamp and a pair of Adcom 555, bridged to mono, driving my Vandersteen 2Ces.) Right now, I'm 100% solid state, although I'm about to launch a tube headphone amp project.

Dave
 
donberry said:
so many myths, so many opinions.......
many seem to disagree, but for me, good audio is good audio whether it is delivered by tubes or solid state.
Quiet is quiet whether by tubes or solid state.
I would guess it has to do more with what type of gear someone has found that fits their needs best and matches up well with the rest of their system on what they believe to be better.
When I first hooked up a Conrad Johnson preamp I bought, my audio world was transformed. For me it was not so much the detail, clarity etc as my ss pre (Pioneer Spec 1) gave me all of that, but the sound stage, depth and just plain life like sound coming from my speakers made me believe that tubes were the ONLY way to go. My search was over and audio nirvana was mine. No doubt in my mind tubes were by far the best.

Problem is, I was wrong.

It just so happened that particular piece of gear fit in well with my system and I could be wrong on this, but probably just a notch up from what I had been using, hence the difference.
I still love that preamp and still smile every time I listen to my stereo, but as many do when getting a new piece of gear, I immediately jumped to the conclusion it was because it was a tube preamp and by golly, from now on it was all tubes for me (my speakers still needed the power of ss amps tho).
Looking back on my old posts, it is often embarrassing to me how I proclaimed a truth or held such a stalwart opinion on many things that time and experience later changed my mind ..... and tubes are no different.

Good gear is good gear be it tubes or solid state. I do have a shaky, not so firm belief that especially on preamps, tube may get me where I want to go a tad cheaper, but as soon as I took a firm stance on that, no doubt I would run across a less expensive solid state preamp that fit my needs better.

Just my opinion but it really is not very difficult or expensive to put together a system that will give you great detail, clarity and most things associated with a nice system. For me and my system, the tricky part was getting the depth, sound stage and those little nuances to where I was really happy. It does not have to necessarily be expensive to get there as one can always keep an eye out for excellent used gear, but as you move up the price ladder, I feel this is what you are paying for - and often those small nuances are what makes some gear more expensive, be it tube or ss. Some think that if a piece of gear costs twice as much, it should sound twice as good - I'm afraid it does not work that way. What it comes down to is how much someone is willing to pay to squeeze out that little extra depth or whatever.
For some people, it is worth a whole bunch of money to be able to notice say Rick Danko is standing about 4 feet to the right and a little bit in front of Robbie Robertson.
Others would think they are crazy and maybe because they did not notice any difference on their system now firmly believe it is just flushing money down the toilet and people only spend the extra money for ego reasons.

There is a reason they call it a system - in order to get the best sound possible from any level of stereo, it all has to work together well. It can actually be very difficult to do because you usually do not know how something will fit in until you try it - which is why I believe pretty much everyone goes through a ton of gear until they finally settle on the direction they are going.
Yet it makes no difference if you get there with tubes or solid state. A good stereo is a good stereo. Obviously the listener should not even know what they are listening to - not really easy to do, but in the end the goal is to have the system just get out of the way and let the music through (good luck trying to achieve that - those that do try are the ones who are buying the realllly expensive gear)
So verbose as it is, point is to try not to hold on to any belief that tube or ss is better - it just comes down to how good a piece of gear it is to begin with and how well it fits into your system.
Just so happened for me, a tube preamp was just the ticket. But I could have bought a different tube pre that I did not like as much or fit in as well and if I drew any conclusion from that I would be back to using a ss preamp.
Tis all good and makes no difference how you get there. Tubes can do it or silicon can do it - often people will end up using both.
Click to expand...

Great post - you had me on the edge of my chair. :D

Dave/ChairSpud
 
Clean&Tight said:
As am I, age wise. My experience is with "modern" and Vintage tube equipment (of the Audio variety). Many many pieces of high quality Vintage Solid State as well.

Yes, tubes do wear out, just like tires on a car. We're talking overall equipment reliability. The fact that tubes wear out, just like tires, still doesn't make a machine less reliable. Just means there MAY be a higher cost of maintenance over said machine's service life. Not to mention that tube gear is a heck of a lot more serviceable friendly than Solid State.

Then we can talk about all the Solid State equipment (good sounding equipment by the way) that uses Darlington Power Pack STK type devices, differential pair drift, DC on the speaker taps and on and on. And one can never forget that with Vintage Solid State you are frequently faced with the prospect (and costs) of service "work arounds" due to other part's obsolescence to keep things up and running. As just one example those pesky STK type devices. All but the most esoteric of tube designs can be kept in good working order in most instances with readily available "off the shelf" parts if need be.

You can't say that (generally speaking) for Vintage Solid State and you can almost forget it when it comes to 1970s era FM receivers when the MPX chips go bad (and they do). These are just examples of things I factor into my thinking when discussing reliability. ALL machines eventually need service. I give a lot of weight to just how easily that service can be accomplished.

Solid State catastrophic failures are also more likely to cause speaker damage as well.

Good sounding Solid State is just that, but it sure as heck has more than it's fair share of problems too, and in my mind nothing to cause me any anxiety over having to replace a tube, or few, every 5 to 10 years. And I'm talking equipment that gets used.

I own more than several 45+ years old pieces of tube equipment, amps, receivers and radios, all of them still enjoying 85-90% of their original tube compliments and performing beautifully.

To keep any gear at maximum strength there is maintenance involved. Unfortunately most end users don't know this, or don't do it. They just use it until it breaks.

Your comparison to early era televisions is irrelevant, apples and oranges. Too many circuit differences between early televisions and Audio, not to mention differences in specific designs and build qualities.

I considered all of the above and much more when I made my decision to go tubes all the way. The one exception I do enjoy is my Solid State Op-amp based outboard phono stage I use with my moving coil rig. And I had to have the chips in that replace when it was barely 5 years old! (lost a channel).

I stand by my original statement.

Thomas
Click to expand...

Hi Thomas, lots of good discussion here. I usually hang out mostly in the turntable forum. I think your apples to oranges argument may also apply to tubes and tires but I get your point, I just happen to see it differently.

To me tubes wearing out albeit to be expected is a reliablitly issue. I agree with your point about tube gear being easier to service and wonder if the simpler tube designs have a something to do with their sonics with fewer components to each alter the original signal a bit.

By the way the 6bm8's in my ASL Wave monoblocks were originally designed as audio tubes for those old tube televison sets we remember.

I think it's rare I don't have at least one piece of tube gear in my system and like it that way. Like DIY and kits, tube gear gives me another measure of hands on control over the overall sound and tube rolling is easier and as much fun as swapping turntable cartridges.

Dave/ChairSpud
 
ChairSpud said:
Hi Thomas, lots of good discussion here. I usually hang out mostly in the turntable forum. I think your apples to oranges argument may also apply to tubes and tires but I get your point, I just happen to see it differently.

To me tubes wearing out albeit to be expected is a reliablitly issue. I agree with your point about tube gear being easier to service and wonder if the simpler tube designs have a something to do with their sonics with fewer components to each alter the original signal a bit.

By the way the 6bm8's in my ASL Wave monoblocks were originally designed as audio tubes for those old tube televison sets we remember.

I think it's rare I don't have at least one piece of tube gear in my system and like it that way. Like DIY and kits, tube gear gives me another measure of hands on control over the overall sound and tube rolling is easier and as much fun as swapping turntable cartridges.

Dave/ChairSpud
Click to expand...

No, I don't think you did entirely (my example). Certain vehicle types go through tires more frequently than others, but that has nothing to do directly with the vehicle per se versus a vehicle that is easy on tires. This is most often because the vehicles under discussion are being asked to do a different job along with a different set of conditions.

They all have to have them replaced sometimes, some just more often than others due to the nature of the given beast.

Like an old tube television set versus an open architecture audio amplifier or pre-amp.

All of my observations made with regards to amps operating in top form.

I'd be willing to bet than only a very few Vintage Solid State examples are.

If we judge reliability by how often and how much a piece of gear needs an investment in either time or money to maintain TOP performance as designed, tubes win in my mind.

It's good though that the choice is available; whatever turns you on.

I've owned plenty of Solid State that I've enjoyed very much and it sounded just fine, but to me it's like women, girlfriends versus the marrying kind.

If I have to marry one (and I did) it's tubes all the way.
 
Last edited:
You can get 3D soundstage from solid state. I freely switch back and forth between tubes and SS. I've found the preamp to have as much to do with it as anything, though currently I'm using an older McCormack passive linestage...which is giving me even more of a 3d image. But I run it with what I call the mostly-Dynaco amp. Now, my Levinson 432 can throw an AMAZING soundstage, depending on the preamp attached to it. But it doesn't sound quite as natural while doing so, as the lowly Dynaco. I wish I knew what my friend did to this Stereo 70, as I think he could market it..amazing how care taken in rebuilding a slightly modifying it can make it into something really special.

Class-A solid state into full ranges ESLs is a great substitute for tubes, BTW. But it'll cost you as much or more than a good tube setup.
 
Clean&Tight said:
No, I don't think you did entirely (my example). Certain vehicle types go through tires more frequently than others, but that has nothing to do directly with the vehicle per se versus a vehicle that is easy on tires. This is most often because the vehicles under discussion are being asked to do a different job along with a different set of conditions.

They all have to have them replaced sometimes, some just more often than others due to the nature of the given beast.

Like an old tube television set versus an open architecture audio amplifier or pre-amp.

All of my observations made with regards to amps operating in top form.

I'd be willing to bet than only a very few Vintage Solid State examples are.

If we judge reliability by how often and how much a piece of gear needs an investment in either time or money to maintain TOP performance as designed, tubes win in my mind.

It's good though that the choice is available; whatever turns you on.

I've owned plenty of Solid State that I've enjoyed very much and it sounded just fine, but to me it's like women, girlfriends versus the marrying kind.

If I have to marry one (and I did) it's tubes all the way.
Click to expand...

This was my thinking following your example, if we had a solid state vehicle the tires would never wear out necessitating replacement like on a tube vehicle but both might be subject to failure or damage from abuse or poor maintenance.

I have to admit curvy glowing tubes are much prettier to look at than transistors. :D

Dave/ChairSpud
 
JohnVF said:
You can get 3D soundstage from solid state. I freely switch back and forth between tubes and SS. I've found the preamp to have as much to do with it as anything, though currently I'm using an older McCormack passive linestage...which is giving me even more of a 3d image. But I run it with what I call the mostly-Dynaco amp. Now, my Levinson 432 can throw an AMAZING soundstage, depending on the preamp attached to it. But it doesn't sound quite as natural while doing so, as the lowly Dynaco. I wish I knew what my friend did to this Stereo 70, as I think he could market it..amazing how care taken in rebuilding a slightly modifying it can make it into something really special.

Class-A solid state into full ranges ESLs is a great substitute for tubes, BTW. But it'll cost you as much or more than a good tube setup.
Click to expand...

Someone throw me a bone and suggest a stereo tube amp for $500-$1000 that sounds killer and will be we representative of its breed

I moved this post to the tube section and I should have left it here. Much better posts.
 
Last edited:
ChairSpud said:
This was my thinking following your example, if we had a solid state vehicle the tires would never wear out necessitating replacement like on a tube vehicle but both might be subject to failure or damage from abuse or poor maintenance.

I have to admit curvy glowing tubes are much prettier to look at than transistors. :D

Dave/ChairSpud
Click to expand...

Solid state output devices expire all the time, for any number of reasons.

They wear out as well as fail catastrophically. They may not wear out as predictably or as frequently as tubes (and that's all circuit/bias dependent) but still, they most certainly do.

If you have ever restored a very high mileage Marantz "22XX" series or elderly Pioneer with fresh output devices you'd know of what I speak. Your ears will give you all the "proof" you need.

Simply because something is functional doesn't mean it's "right" as in performing up to intended design criteria or anywhere near it's performance levels when new.

But back on topic, the way in which something exhibits the fact that it is tired and worn out has NOTHING to do with the overall reliability of that said machine. Power output devices all get tired and eventually fail.

Caps get tired and fail too, and they don't care whether they are in a Solid State design or a Williamson.

That's why I chose the tire analogy; guess it was the wrong choice.

The mythical "Solid State is more reliable than tubes" belief is the product of very successful marketing at the dawn of the Solid State era. It's practically wholesale success with the general public proved very beneficial to manufactures. That the public at large bought into it made many millions more in profits for manufacturers, if for no other reason than the tremendous savings realized in shipping and freight costs.

Another thing to think about: point to point construction which was standard during the Golden Age versus the typical cheap PC board implementations. At least earlier on PCs were all through mount, now we are in the area of cheap ass, wave soldered surface mount "lead free" junk. You want to try and convince me that today's electronics are more reliable?

No amplifier of either type is any more reliable than the quality of it's design and execution.

I've wasted enough breath on this one; believe what you will.

I was only taking issue with the original assertion that Solid State in general was more "reliable" than tube designs in general. In my life experience that is simply not the case and I do not think I am alone in this.

Just enjoy the music! :yes:

(besides, EVERYONE knows that tubes sound better! :D )

Thomas
 
Last edited:
Clean&Tight said:
I was only taking issue with the original assertion that Solid State in general was more "reliable" than tube designs in general. In my life experience that is simply not the case and I do not think I am alone in this.
Click to expand...

Ease of service/maintainability and reliability aren't the same thing.

I'd certainly agree that plugging in a new set of tubes is easier than soldering in a new set of transistors, but that doesn't necessarily make tubes more reliable than transistors.

We can all cherry pick examples to support our respective points but, in general, I'd still have to say SS is more reliable than tube. Resistors and capacitors, well, wash them across the board. Tubes wear out and can fail due to other component issues or user issues. Transistors don't wear out, afaik, but can as well fail from other component issues or user issues.
 
Last edited:
whoaru99 said:
Transistors don't wear out
Click to expand...

If you believe that for one instant ...........wow :worried: ........I'm speechless :headscrat

I don't know how to respond to a statement like that :dunno:

Like the kids say; whatever :saywhat:

I'm out of here with this one, wasted too much time already

Carry on :wave:

Thomas
 
Last edited:
I thought SS meant Super Sport, like my old Chevelle, or stainless steel, like my wife's new 'fridge. :butt2:
 
BillyB said:
Someone throw me a bone and suggest a stereo tube amp for $500-$1000 that sounds killer and will be we representative of its breed

I moved this post to the tube section and I should have left it here. Much better posts.
Click to expand...

There bunches to choose from in that price range, most of which are probably exceptional if working properly. You should decide how many watts you need probably for starters and see what's out there and keep researching and asking more specific questions. Eventually you probably will be drawn to something or other for various reasons.
 
whoaru99 said:
Ease of service/maintainability and reliability aren't the same thing.

I'd certainly agree that plugging in a new set of tubes is easier than soldering in a new set of transistors, but that doesn't necessarily make tubes more reliable than transistors.

We can all cherry pick examples to support our respective points but, in general, I'd still have to say SS is more reliable than tube. Resistors and capacitors, well, wash them across the board. Tubes wear out and can fail due to other component issues or user issues. Transistors don't wear out, afaik, but can as well fail from other component issues or user issues.
Click to expand...

Well put!
 
I'd still have to say SS is more reliable than tube.
Click to expand...
I want to generally agree with this without necessarily taking a side as i don't think there's an accurate blanket generalization here. I think efficiency and thermal cycling probably play a role here.

While i've seen heat output mentioned, i haven't really seen much discussion regarding "thermal cycling". IMO, the amount and depth of thermal cycling is probably the biggest contributing factor to the longevity, or lack thereof with either tubes or SS.

I've seen output tubes that have lasted decades when treated properly, and i've seen some very hifi SS stuff that due to thermal stress require refurbishment well before one would expect from semi-modern high end gear. I think we can find several exceptions for any proposed rule.

Just my .02........................
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom