MrT:
That was not your original question.
Which is it? |
Well, there is no question that live acoustic music does not sound like any particular amp technology, so I am one who agrees that I want to hear the music, not the technology, in my system in general. If the technology used becomes too apparent, I would not consider that a good thing.
My opinion on tubes is that they are cool looking and they bring back fond memrories of days yore but I prefer to not have to use them because they are a pain in the rear otherwise which is why they are a niche technology these days. |
Its a good question. I'm interested if more chirp in saying they have heard both sound the same or similar.
I have not done a/b comparison, but I know that tube amp systems I have heard helped set the reference standard I was shooting for in putting my current system together.
It uses an ARC tube pre-amp with a Bel Canto ref1000m Class D icepower monoblocks running OHM Walsh speakers.
I have heard my turntable and cart on a similar system substituting a Rogue tube power amp and PSB synchrony speakers. There are a lot of similarities between the two. Other than the distinctive soundstage of the OHMs, I think I would have difficulty telling which was the tube and which was the SS amp, though the SS Class D amps in my system have an absolute firm grip on the bass that might give it away. |
My understanding is that the thing that is inherently different about tubes and transistors is the manner in which they clip. You need a lot of SS power and often current in order to take offensive clipping out of the picture with SS amps, especially to drive many modern speaker designs optimally. Tubes clip in a more ear friendly manner as I understand it. Therefore, tubes as a whole tend to sound more appealing than SS, despite the fact that they are still technically clipping and distorting, just in a less offensive manner.
Once the clipping factor is addressed however, I think the inherent difference in sound between the two becomes more subtle and other factors in the amp design more determine the resulting sound. Either is capable of producing the kind of sound I like I believe if assembled in a proper manner to deliver that sound. |
Key point regarding amp match to speakers by Magfan.
For example, in my case, my system and amps are geared towards optimizing performance with the OHM Walsh speakers.
I might be more receptive to tube amps if I were gunning to optimize other speakers that are more tube friendly.
Optimizing the amp to best drive the speakers is a way more important consideration than picking ss versus tube in my opinion. That and matching speakers to teh room may be the two most important things to get right when building a system in order to best assure top notch performance.
As a corollary, if tube sound is what you seek, then start with a good tube amp and then find the right speakers that can be run optimally from that.
There may be others, but Merlin is one high end speaker maker that cleverly provides optional tweaks to their speakers that enable optimal matching of tube amps as well as SS to the same speaker (their RC network tweak, which is apparently geared to provide a better impedance load for tube amps to drive in addition to other things). It would be cool if OHM did something similar, but I do not think tube amp affectionados make up a significant enough part of their customer base to bother.
In general, I believe speakers that do not have widely varying impedance curves at various frequencies should work well with either tubes or SS, but tubes may have the overall edge here still in regards to overall tonal balance in general in that I do not think most SS amps these days are voiced for this scenario in that most speakers do not fall into this category. Many modern speaker designs do not meet this criteria and many manufacturers do not provide a lot of info regarding their speakers compatibility with tubes versus SS. They just want to sell their speakers to anyone who might like them and not make things too complicated or restrictive.
Bottom line: Top notch results can be had with either technology if the amp is matched by design to optimally drive the speakers. A great amp can sound lousy running the wrong speakers and vice versa. |
MrT,
What SS amp specifically produces the treble issues?
I'm seeing that tube amps and maggies are not a bad combo these days, especially with a sub thrown in the mix if desired. My favorite dealer runs this combo these days in his top system room. Maggies are not inherently "muscle" speakers in regards to the low end, not requiring high damping or high current to be driven well from my experience (though they do need SS power to go loud), so I think more moderate powered tube amps can do them well.
I wish I still had my old Mg1Cs. I'd like to hear how they sound off my current Bel Canto Icepower amps. I ran them off a Carver m4.0t (a 360w/ch Ss amp voiced to sound like carver's Silver Seven tube amps) very nicely for years. No top-end fatigue there. The more you listened, the more you wanted to listen, as it should be with Maggies (no fatigue). Maybe that answers the question about SS amps sounding like tube amps, at least in regards to the top end and no fatigue, at least with older Maggies? I did prefer the maggies running with a separate powered sub however in order to get a more muscular low end. My current OHM 5s replaced the Maggies (no sub needed with these). |
the bel canto ref 1000m monoblocks i am running might be worth a try. very non fatigu
ing, even running triangle monitors which can be more towards the hot and analytic side of things, way more than maggies when i had them. |
Yes, tube in the pre-amp and/or source along with good SS amp is a practical approach. That is where I have landed. I use the tube pre-amp and IcePower Class D amp with SS dac and phono. I have a similar tube dac also but that is not needed and used in my second system to give it just a dash of tubishness in an otherwise all SS setup as well. I have heard some veryy good tube amp setups, but have achieved a comparable sound with minimal # of tubes and associated pains, so I can recommend my systems as decent models for achieving tube amp-like sound without a tube amp. |
Unsound,
Yes, I recall that. It was a CJ amp that the Carver m1.0t was emulating I think?
I had a Carver m4.0t with silver seven transfer function to sound like Carver's statement tube amp for years. It did sound more like a tube amp than most SS amps perhaps and put out 360 w/ch to boot. It worked very well with Magnepan mg1cs, conveying a lot of typical tube amp strengths and weaknesses. |
aTMAS,
Aren't 4 ohm loads more problematic for tube amps in general? Isn't that part of teh reason why you advocate 8 ohm or higher speakers for use with your tube amps?
I will gladly try the zeros if someone wants to loan me a pair. If I ever experiment with a SET amp down the road, the zeros might come in handy. |
Well, Mr. T, looks like you're doomed then.
I suppose it depends on how much distintive tube sound you relish. Probably true SS will never emulate the distinctive sound of some tube amps if that is what you want. The thing you have going though is the premise if you buy into it that some good tube and SS amps tend to sound more similar and less "tubey", which is the basis for my suggestions. |
From what I have read about the line, my impression is that CJ gear is not a line that can be emulated practically by SS in that it has a distinctive signature and less neutral tube sound. My impression of VTl is similar but perhaps not to the same extent. |
Wolf,
I'm largely with you in regards to my view of tube and SS amps.
Class D is a godsend for getting the most cost effectively out of most recordings in particular modern ones which can tend to be more challenging due to loudness levels applied with modern speakers that tend to be less efficient and are often difficult to drive to the max properly.
I've found Class D is like one of the last missing pieces I needed for getting good sound all the time out of my system.
I think many who complain about the sound quality of modern digital recordings need to get with the times and give Class D a try perhaps. Or continue to just live in the past and complain about anything that is new or different.
I want the best of both worlds. Class D helps more people achieve that.
|
Atmas,
Assuming providing 16 ohm loads is not more costly, which seems to make sense to me, where can I buy or try the tweak that does it inexpensively without dropping big bucks on something fancy like the zeros up front?
An inexpensive solution would seem like a natural thing for a company like yours to offer in order to enable your amps to drive a larger assortment of common speaker designs better? |
I think Atmasphere's assertion regarding higher ohm speakers is one of those things that is probably accurate in a technical sense but in practice does not always determine what will sound best to an individual.
Still, I do think there is something to it and would love to do the test if there were a way to do it cost effectively and with no risk up front in case it does not pan out for me. |
Unsound,
I think speakers are generally voiced to sound a particular way with certain kinds of amps and vice versa. I suspect tweaking the impedance load in any given case would change the sound and present a better opportunity for the right amp to now deliver better sound. I doubt that in practice though this would always necessarily be the end result. Its all about amp/speaker synergy which can be achieved via many combos, warts and all. Providing a technically better playing field as a higher impedance likely does does not necessarily assure better results. |
Maybe.
In general, I believe higher ratios of input impedance on a device downstream to output impedance of the device upstream to always be a good thing, all other things aside.
Of course, in reality you can't just conveniently focus on on e factor and push all others aside, so who knows in any particular case. No one ingredient alone makes for good soup. |
"The break down rate on the tubes was only slightly higher retubing for my preamp was $ 550. per year , my power amp $2200. per year"
Wow, that's scary.
The tubes in my ARC sp16 are coming up on 2 years with a lot of play. I have had minor noise issues that I have alleviated by shuffling existing tubes, but I think the time is coming to replace all. From ARC, the cost of doing that is about $30 a tube or $180 dollars total for 6 12AX7s.
I really like the ARC but if I were shelling out hundreds a year just to retain the good sound, it would probably be out the door and back to all SS for me. |
Mr T.
That's fine I think you need to state the question as might your speakers sound tube like with a ss amp. Nothing else really matters if that is what you seek.
I personally think it is possible with some SS amps, maybe even the better Class Ds. You might want to through some tube gear up front in the pre-amp or source in order to keep things leaning more towards the pure tube sound, but I'd be willing to bet you can do it with a SS pre-amp and maybe no tubes at all.
I would not hesitate to suggest trying the Carver m4.0t that I used with mg1cs for years with no real tubes. A used one would only cost a few hundred. Or maybe even a m1.0T which is the amp that was voiced to sound like the CJ reference amp. My only reservation with this combo was that a sub was needed for the low end to be competitive with truly top notch systems in that regard. |
Dev,
In your case those mbls would pretty much dictate SS amplification.
BTW you are a lucky guy. Nothing does 3-d imaging of large scale classical recordings as holographically as the larger mbls I have heard. |
"i will repeat, i am not looking for tube-like per se, but rather to be unable to detect the difference between a ss and tube amp, driving a pair of planar speakers."
I don't think anybody can tell what you will or will not be able to detect. Only you know what you hear and like.
All I can add and then I'll check out is that good sound is good sound, regardless of the technology used to achieve it. And only you know what good sound means to you. So don't be hung up on it must sound like this technology or that. Just do your homework, try some good SS amps and hear for yourself. If you really want to ditch the tube amps bad enough, I am certain you will. Otherwise just live with the tubes for better and for worse. |
Rtn,
The problem with that is a lot of audio other than clearly audible distortion or noise, most of the rest is subjective. Otherwise, in the end, the owners opinion is really all that matters.
Of course its still always possible to discuss what one hears civilly in that almost everyone still has something that they can learn. |
Atmasphere,
Does what you say about loudness cues, our ears and how amps are designed apply mainly in regards to how amps distort?
Loudness cues conveyed by certain harmonics is a natural occurence, correct? What if say a SS amp conveys these cues accurately as they would be if heard live? That may not be as pleasant as them not being conveyed accurately say as a result of tube amplification, but that does not make it wrong, does it? If not clipping/distorting, what if a good amp just conveys what's there accurately, and measurements support that this is what is occurring?
If an amp is not clipping and is fast enough to deliver transient peaks accurately, some might perceive that as a good thing I would think rather than relying on the amp to filter or transform the sound in a manner that makes it more pleasant or digestible. That does not occur when listening to things live. The sound and the harmonics that comprise it are delivered without benefit of amplification or filtering devices to shape it into something more digestible to our ears, for better or for worse. |
Swamp,
It seems much of the argument revolves around how amps distort, in particular how they distort when clipping occurs.
My understanding is that no amp should normally be run in a manner where clipping occurs. If it does occur, then a different and better suited amp for teh application is needed.
What happens when clipping is effectively taken out of the equation with SS? It seems to me that most issues I detect with GOOD SS amps sounding harsh or distorted can be attributed to clipping occurring or some other abnormal operating scenario that perhaps affects transient response, not a normal one. |
There is a technique in image processing called contrast stretching. Essentially it means if you clip off the extreme bright and dark extents of the image or picture, you can then stretch out what remains and often show subtle contrast details that are otherwise not apparent. Seems to me soft clipping as found with many tube amps and even some SS, operates similarly. Peaks are clipped in a softer manner that is more digestible to the ear. That allows volume to increase to higher levels than otherwise. Now more subtle variations can be heard in the rest also.
Now take clipping out of the picture by using an amp/speaker combo capable of achieving this at realistic listening volumes. Peaks go louder sooner (though are not cliped or distorted necessarily) and, ouch loud things can hurt now perhaps sooner rather than later because, hey those peaks are loud as they should be. But you now may need a really good ss amp with excellent resolution and detail in order to actually hear the subtle details because, hey things are not louder overall now so subtle differences in teh sound are harder to discern, especially if you do not have good ears and or a very quiet listening environment where what is played can be clearly heard.
Am I off somewhere in describing things this way? |
As a corollary, here are a few factors that might push one into the stereotypical (no pun intended) soft clipping/tube amp camp rather than the stereotypical SS one.
1) recordings must be played too loudly in order to hear subtle details (increasingly common these days compared to past with many modern loudness wars recordings)
2) hearing/ears not what they could or used to be (typical as we grow older)
3) too much background noise to discern the low level details that might be heard otherwise
Please not that I do believe that, as Bob Carver seemingly demonstrated, SS amps can tweaked to sound like a tube amp if you have a way t accurately measure the differences and you have tthe knowledge to know what amp parameters or characteristics need to be changed to accomplish the goal.
As a consumer, the trick then is to do you homework and find a SS amp that plays better in this scenario than most S amps, and more like typical tube amps. |
Hmm, not sure I see a consensus that use of negative feedback is always categorically a negative. It seems to be debatable at best.
The soft clipping characteristics of tube amps in general seems to be pretty widely accepted. Soft clipping means that dynamic range is restricted to some extent as I understand. That means loudness cues are reduced relatively, all other things aside, as well, right? |
Hifi,
Yes, I think each person has their own goals and motivations that determine the right solution for them. Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses with considerable overlap possible.
In my case, my speakers are the determining factor. My OHM speakers are the key ingredient in my system that cannot be easily replaced by other designs cost effectively. In lieu of using a separate sub perhaps, these speakers require SS amps to get everything they are capable of out of them. That dictates my course. The results satisfy me when I compare them with the best reference systems I have heard, which includes various systems run off tube amps.
So its worth r-iterating again that it is hard to focus on switching just one component (a tube for SS amp) and delivering similar or better results. USually a major change like this will have ripple effects that require other changes to go along with it to achieve the desired results. You should be prepared for that if you make a major change to a system you already like, regardless of teh technologies applied. If you are not ready to potentially have to start all over again, then stay put. |
"It is true that the soft clipping of tubes means you will get less of the odd-ordered harmonics, but this has nothing to do with dynamic range."
Less loudness cues perhaps then. 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. Two different things causing perhaps opposite effects in regards to how loudness cues are "perceived"? Only one is adding and one is subtracting. I suppose the truth lies somewhere in the middle then when negative feedback is applied appropriately to not produce the undesired side effects. |
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. |
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. |
Can anybody tell me a pair of speakers that sounds the same well with either tube or SS amplification?
I can think of different speaker/amp combos, some SS and some tube amps, that sound very similar, but I cannot cite a case where a tube and SS amp sounded the same with the same speakers. They will almost always sound different with different resulting sonic strengths and weaknesses, the the listener must decide which is better.
Unless you are Bob Carver and your goal is to emulate one amp with another. I do not know any vendor whose busines is based on that these days. Each quality vendor typically does their thing well, be it SS or tube amps or both. Choice of amp will determine choice of speakers or vice versa.
I think this is the bottom line. Build your system to meet your needs. Use tubes or SS as desired, but do not expect touse either to the same effect with the same speakers. |
MrT.,
yes, no doubt either might sound good with any good speaker design, not just electrostatic.
What I was wondering was do two different amps, much less a SS and a tube amp, ever sound the same. They can sound different and both good in different ways. That's different than sounding "the same".
If any two amps sound the same, then I suspect in most cases the speakers may be the limiting factors. I would expect most high end speakers to not sound the same with two different good amps, even if both were tube or SS, but even more so if one is tube and one is SS.
Unless of course Bob carver or equivalent designed the two to sound the same up front. |
So to sum up, bottom line to me is that it is possible to get two amps to sound the same or at least so close the differences are negligible, but this is not likely to be the case in practice, especially if one amp uses tubes and the other transistors. |
When considering my latest amp purchase, I strongly considered an ARC SS amp in that I was very impressed with the sound of the sp16 pre-amp and I did not find it to sound overtly "tubey". HAving heard ARC tube gear but not SS, based on what I read doing research, my expectation was that the ARC SS amps would retain the basic house sound which I liked to a good degree. I ended up going Class D instead, mainly foe ergonomic reasons. If the BC refs didn't work out, going with a well received SS amp by a reknowned company like ARC would have likely been my next try. Their SS amp specs certainly indicate that in general they are designed to work with tube pre-amps well. |
