Anyone who dont like tubes

firearm12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
1,103
Points
113
Location
noida
I have heard a lot that tube amps preamps dacs are immensely musical over ss and generally noticed that in many cases audiophiles move over to tubes in due course of time and find the ultimate audio nirvana. Whats your opinion about it. Do such audiophiles exist who dont actually like tube sound, curious to find what would be their percentage.
 
In my limited experience, every tube amp depending on circuitry sounds different, and then it again sounds different with different tubes. So there is no one universal tube sound. Just like all SS amps don't sound the same. But I do like the tube sweetness in mids and treble.
 
Yes, every amp is different, as @newlash09 says above. But a generic question still deserves a generic answer. Speaking for myself, I enjoyed the hybrid sound with tube pre for three years. But over the past few months, I am getting weaned off the tube sound. I am discovering the advantages of pure SS sound and it is growing on me Especially the improvement in PRAT and reduced mid bass bloat as well as the truer tonality. Am I saying, “I don’t like tubes?” No. But I don’t crave them any more.


I have heard a lot that tube amps preamps dacs are immensely musical over ss
I am not sure about that. What’s your definition of musicality here? If it includes aspects like timing, attack/decay etc. generally SS scores in those aspects over tubes. Tubes add a certain roundedness to the mids which makes them more appealing, but not necessarily more musical.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, every amp is different, as @newlash09 says above. But a generic question still deserves a generic answer. Speaking for myself, I enjoyed the hybrid sound with tube pre for three years. But over the past few months, I am getting weaned off the tube sound. I am discovering the advantages of pure SS sound and it is growing on me Especially the improvement in PRAT and reduced mid bass bloat as well as the truer tonality. Am I saying, “I don’t like tubes?” No. But I don’t crave them any more.



I am not sure about that. What’s your definition of musicality here? If it includes aspects like timing, attack/decay etc. generally SS scores in those aspects over tubes. Tubes add a certain roundedness to the mids which makes them more appealing, but not necessarily more musical.

With musical i meant having a sound that sounds more attractive and satisfying, many people say tubes give the ultimate pleasure once they move over to tubes. SET amps and high efficiency speakers, many people consider 300b the holy grail. In many forums its promoted as a general view that once you move to tubes it will be the end of the journey. I. Was wondering whats the fuss all about. There are very less people who talk bad about tube equipment, for solid state you will get many bad reviews
 
Last edited:
I currently have only a tube pre from Lyrita; finicky box sometimes.
But sounds very good. The holographic image and depth can be addictive.
Have not heard tube power amps in 2 decades though.
I do find them more musical even though they don't measure well, are inefficient, cumbersome, etc

Cheers,
Raghu
 
Yes, every amp is different, as @newlash09 says above. But a generic question still deserves a generic answer. Speaking for myself, I enjoyed the hybrid sound with tube pre for three years. But over the past few months, I am getting weaned off the tube sound. I am discovering the advantages of pure SS sound and it is growing on me Especially the improvement in PRAT and reduced mid bass bloat as well as the truer tonality. Am I saying, “I don’t like tubes?” No. But I don’t crave them any more.



I am not sure about that. What’s your definition of musicality here? If it includes aspects like timing, attack/decay etc. generally SS scores in those aspects over tubes. Tubes add a certain roundedness to the mids which makes them more appealing, but not necessarily more musical.

I guess it just boils down to a sound one prefers. A generally wrongly held notion is that tubes don't do PRAT or deep right bass. Both of which are wrong assumptions in my own experience. I run KT88 tubes in my tube amps, putting out 100W at 8 ohms. If one were to listen blind, they would assume that they are listening to 100W class A amps. The bass is solid as well the pace is frantic and true to the original rhythm. But If I switched to EL34 tubes in the same amp, the mid range would be the sweetest possible , below a SET amp, but the bass and treble would be rolled off, with less bass control. So as I said, it is what one likes.

Detail and resolution are very hifi and very impressive in first listen, but musicality always wins for me, even at the cost of detail resolution.. at least that's the path Iam on. And having gone from class D, to class AB, and class A and finally to tubes. There is definitely no going back for me, with my musical tastes and my ears. But everyone likes theirs own poison. So no generalisations here
 
I was once reading an article which said that the chassis and heatsinks in a ss amp contribute to 1/3 of its sound because of resonance effects. One of the reasons why tube amps may seem to be better is they dont have heat sinks. people do seem to like tubes whatever the reason.

One thing seem to be synonymous with tubes which almost everyone agrees, tubes can be good but they can make all kind of music sound same.
 
I have lived with Tube and SS components for more than 12 years now and to be honest I really cannot define what is the real tube sound is and what is SS sound ! Many manufacturers do make the sound "tubey"for their tube designs because thats what the average buyer wants Eg Unison Research but then there are others who make it "Solid Statesy" eg Audio Research. The same can be done with SS as well.

In the end you are not hearing the tube or transister, but a design and there are >100Watt tube amplifiers as well as < 20Watt SS designs.

For an amplifier, it is very much based on the design of the Speaker. if you have vintage speakers, you will find they might respond better to older tube designs because thats what they were voiced for and the newer speakers may jut do better with modern tube designs.

Each of us would have also made our own assumptions based on again limited experiences for those of use in india but as in all things audio keeping an open mind is helpful and this is a topic discussed and fought to death in several audio forums for so many years

Given that, based on my limited experience, I would generally prefer a tube in my phono-stage and a SS design for my DAC but again open to options

I am not sure about that. What’s your definition of musicality here? If it includes aspects like timing, attack/decay etc. generally SS scores in those aspects over tubes. Tubes add a certain roundedness to the mids which makes them more appealing, but not necessarily more musical.
Hi Sachin,
For the ones in bold tubes, and SS , both can either do these excellently or really badly depending on the design. There are tubes which add " Roundedness' because thats what some amps were designed for since thats what many tube buying consumers want. That does not mean there are no tubes which cannot do that either. If you listen to any tube based equipment by Audio Research you might never figure out there a tube in it.
 
I have lived with Tube and SS components for more than 12 years now and to be honest I really cannot define what is the real tube sound is and what is SS sound ! Many manufacturers do make the sound "tubey"for their tube designs because thats what the average buyer wants Eg Unison Research but then there are others who make it "Solid Statesy" eg Audio Research. The same can be done with SS as well.

In the end you are not hearing the tube or transister, but a design and there are >100Watt tube amplifiers as well as < 20Watt SS designs.

For an amplifier, it is very much based on the design of the Speaker. if you have vintage speakers, you will find they might respond better to older tube designs because thats what they were voiced for and the newer speakers may jut do better with modern tube designs.

Each of us would have also made our own assumptions based on again limited experiences for those of use in india but as in all things audio keeping an open mind is helpful and this is a topic discussed and fought to death in several audio forums for so many years

Given that, based on my limited experience, I would generally prefer a tube in my phono-stage and a SS design for my DAC but again open to options


Hi Sachin,
For the ones in bold tubes, and SS , both can either do these excellently or really badly depending on the design. There are tubes which add " Roundedness' because thats what some amps were designed for since thats what many tube buying consumers want. That does not mean there are no tubes which cannot do that either. If you listen to any tube based equipment by Audio Research you might never figure out there a tube in it.

So essentially it does not make much difference whether tubes are being used or not. Even ss can be made to sound like tubes and tubes can be made to sound like ss. That explains alot, thanks. But then if tube sound is liked a lot then why dont more ss makers make their amps sound like tubes.
 
@arj
I agree to your assessment. There are SS amps that can voice out like a tube amps and vice versa.

@firearm12
One immediate difference I hear in SS vs tubes is "depth of stage".
It is more pronounced when there is a tube component in the chain.
Even a simple tube buffer gets this trick done.

At home, I have an AKSA55 (kit amp built out of Hugh Dean's design).
Have compared this amp to the others in my chain with the DAC/preamp being the same.
It is an SS design, but it produces a perceptible depth to the way sound is rendered on the same set of speakers.
Somehow, this sound signature is very relaxing without losing out on any of the PRaT stuff.
When Lyrita Pre is introduced in the chain, the depth becomes more pronounced.

I have heard a few tube preamps that just turn the music into "mashed potato". Definitely not for me.
The channel tubes in Lyrita DHT are 4P1L and these are really lively tubes.
They do HF presence/sparkle quite well without being harsh. Bass and vocals are lovely too.

A poorly designed or compromised tube stage (pre/power or component) can make the sound too "gooey".
In SS designs, I personally don't like overly "analytical/neutral/cold" components.

Cheers,
Raghu
 
I have heard a lot that tube amps preamps dacs are immensely musical over ss and generally noticed that in many cases audiophiles move over to tubes in due course of time and find the ultimate audio nirvana. Whats your opinion about it. Do such audiophiles exist who dont actually like tube sound, curious to find what would be their percentage.
Hi Sachin,
For the ones in bold tubes, and SS , both can either do these excellently or really badly depending on the design. There are tubes which add " Roundedness' because thats what some amps were designed for since thats what many tube buying consumers want. That does not mean there are no tubes which cannot do that either. If you listen to any tube based equipment by Audio Research you might never figure out there a tube in it.

@arj (and also replying to @newlash09) when we characterise any group we look at properties that are associated with most individuals in the group. But of course there are sub-groups and/or individuals within who are exceptions to the group’s defining characteristics. That goes unsaid.

Foe example, when one says North Indians are adventurous and South Indians are conservative, it only characterises the overall groups. Of course it’s not rare to find a conservative Sardar and an adventurous Tamilian. But still, characterisation has its own purpose. It helps us make sense of the world around us or put experiences into perspective, as long as we don’t rigidly apply it to individual cases when the evidence is clearly otherwise.

@firearm12’s queries in the post were about tube amps and SS amps as two groups. And hence replying in terms of general characteristics that are representative of the two categories is neither wrong, nor misguiding. And your pointing out the exceptions adds further nuance to the generalisation. It has its own value too.

Further, would you agree that SS amps that sound tubey or tube amps that sound solid-statesy generally cost much higher? The cheapest products by Audio Research would cost close to $10000! It’d help many of us if you can illustrate either of the above in sub 1 lac budget.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have used SS amplifier (Sony vintage/ Denon HT/ Beta-22) for 20+ years and tube amp for around 7 years now. If ii had not liked tube sound i would have not taken a new tube amp built project especially when a SS amp could have been built at 1/4th the cost. In my case, i cannot listen to a SS amp for more than 15 minutes and i start to get listening fatigue. Maybe it could be my full range speakers which are more suitable for a tube amp and SS amp suits more for a multi-way speakers. But again that's my own opinion and others can choose to completely disagree.
 
My experience has been if 10 watts or less, I prefer SET or OTL. If speakers need 30-60 watts, I prefer push pull or class A SS or OTL. If above 75 watts, I would go with SS.

Matching the speaker with an amp of the correct wattage is more important than the topology of the amp.
 
@firearm12’s queries in the post were about tube amps and SS amps as two groups. And hence replying in terms of general characteristics that are representative of the two categories is neither wrong, nor misguiding. And that you pointing out the exceptions adds further nuance to the generalisation. It has it’s own value too.

Further, would you agree that SS amps that sound tubey or tube amps that sound solid-statesy generally cost much higher. It’d help many of us if you can illustrate either of the above in sub 1 lac budget.

Hi Sachin the point I was making is that tubes need not sound all tubey or Solid state as ..whatetver we classify them and designers make them so for the market. As it is tube based components are more expensive than SS maybe because they need really well designed transformers specific to the design and not usually fit into a PCB with standard modules.
I really l do believe this is like Occams razor and the solution is simple and SS/Tubes etc are just components of a design and manufacturers manufacture to a market need ( it market demands tubes to be such and such and price point we are classifying because we have an inherent need to classify and hence classify.

if you look at the smaller boutique designers- Wilson pass, Quicksilver, EMIA, berning etc etc their components go beyond SS/Tube. they sound as per how they wanted it.

Now if you want a low power high current SET, perhaps the simplest solution is via tubes hence tubes are a choice. for other choices like OTL maybe Mosfets are the right choice etc.

So it is about what amount of power your speakers needs than anything else

So essentially it does not make much difference whether tubes are being used or not. Even ss can be made to sound like tubes and tubes can be made to sound like ss. That explains alot, thanks. But then if tube sound is liked a lot then why dont more ss makers make their amps sound like tubes.
tubes are more expensive and usually only a niche market prefers them ..how many folks are really audiophiles :)
 
I've owned a range of tube and solid state components over the years. I would agree with @arj above on there being limited consistency. I'll quote a few current examples: the Schiit Saga+ is not voiced like conventional tube components (the Lyrita DHT is); my Soekris DAC is warm/laid back despite not having any tubes; the Lampizator I owned in the past didnt share these characteristics despite having tubes.

With power amps or integrated amps, its very much a question of speaker matching. With the Lowther based Rethms I used to own, the low damping factor of tubes worked well and they only needed about 10w to sing. With my current Harbeths, the high damping factor of solid state is needed, as is 100w or more of power.

The one area where I find tubes tend to do very well is preamps. Even here, system matching is a big issue due to the relatively high output impedance of most tube preamps. The other issue is noise - making a tube preamp dead quite is not easy - especially with more complex designs (the Schiit mentioned above is very good at this; exceptional if you consider the modest price point).
 
So seems like if it was not for money and heat, lot of people would having heaps of tubes

My experience has been if 10 watts or less, I prefer SET or OTL. If speakers need 30-60 watts, I prefer push pull or class A SS or OTL. If above 75 watts, I would go with SS.

Matching the speaker with an amp of the correct wattage is more important than the topology of the amp.

This might be due to limitation of tubes in some context, gives impression that if they catered to high wattage needs, you would always have preferred them.
 
if you look at the smaller boutique designers- Wilson pass, Quicksilver, EMIA, berning etc etc their components go beyond SS/Tube. they sound as per how they wanted it.

Speaking of which, how’s been your journey from the lush, thick sound of the Leben to the clean sounding Quicksilver? Was there any mental adaptation needed?
 
Firearm12, only low powered DHT tubes are linear. Generally high powered tubes aren’t. So using tubes in high powered application at least to me doesn’t make sense. Not to mention the heat generated and the high DC voltage requirements.

The DHT tubes I like and find linear are 45, 2A3, GM70, 6c33c
 
One more thing i could sense, tube people are more fussy and choosy about tubes, ss people dont have option dont even know what transistor is used :)
 
JFet sound different from Mosfet which sounds different from SIT. So it all depends on the user as to whether he or she wants to get into that much detail. People who use tubes I guess are more evolved or more finicky, I don’t know which ;)
 
A beautiful, well-constructed speaker with class-leading soundstage, imaging and bass that is fast, deep, and precise.
Back
Top