Tubes? Transistors? Which are better?

Elizabeth I would agree that a tube amplifier is higher maintenance and can get pricey when replacing tubes but a tube pre-amp is another matter. The tubes will last for a very long time, even when left on providing you go with the right design. I have owned 5 different tube pre-amplifiers over the last 15 years with VERY minimal problems. Yes I have had to replace caps but that is to be expected over a period of time. I suggest you listen to a good tube pre-amp (ARC are very reliable and well engineered)before you go out and buy an Adcom 750. A tube pre-amp is MUCH more like music. Try before you buy and then decide. Good solid state pre-amps cost bucks. The cheaper designs don't fare as well against their less expensive tube counterparts IMO.

Elizabeth - You are far from the only one that has had problems with Counterpoint electronics. To me they were one of the greatest sounding products available in the 80's and early 90's but they also had a notorious reputation for self destructing. Example of a design taken to the extreme limits and beyond. Don't use the Counterpoint as your only frame of reference in tube designs. They are one of the worst examples,(early Jadis also comes to mind). Conrad Johnson in addition to ARC is another well designed product. I had a PV-7 preamp where the tubes lasted over 4 years and were still going strong until I sold the unit along with a complete NOS tube set that I never needed. It is sad that many people don't try tubes because of a bad experience or what they have heard.

Well Joe the truth is that *accuracy* in reproduced music does not always equate to what sounds to me like music when I hear it live. That is one reason I am living with old tube gear from the 80's because the newer more *accurate* stuff that I have heard really hasn't justified my purchasing it. But I keep on looking. The only thing that is *accurate* to these ears is real and everything else I hear regarding recorded is an opinion and taste. Tube sounds more real to me and solid state sounds more real to you. Guess what, we're both right! When you find the real truth (that is reproduced that is as real) please let me know.

Khrys I don't wonder at all whether what I am hearing sounds like the original, I know it doesn't. Real unamplified acoustic music is my reference. It is THE ABSOLUTE SOUND PERIOD!!! And the ultimate enjoyment for me is my passion for live music, not audio. The line is when it sounds real. Sorry if I’m a dreamer and always use real as my reference. Is it too much to hope for? That said I feel quite confident that those Genesis 200’s in the room of my dreams might get me a bit closer than I currently am. Performance, interpretation and the like aside the point Waldhorner is making has do with the ultimate emotional connection one gets from a live performance that is missing in reproduced audio. Tell me Khrys, do you really enjoy listening to reproduced audio in the same way and get the same enjoyment that you do from a great live performance? Or is it a compromise that you are currently content with? If you do, all I can say is I envy you. I say this because I see from your posts that you are a music lover also and not just an audiophile. Don’t tell me they are two different experiences. Let’s face it we wouldn’t be spending all this dough if we didn’t hope that we could connect better with the music, would we? So why did you spend 10K on your Vandy 5 (right?). To get closer to the real thing. Sounds to me from your post that you are a little more satisfied than I am at the present moment that’s all. It will probably change. That is one thing for certain about audiophiles, our moods and perceptions change like the weather. My discontent (it happens almost every time I go to a concert) arose over my recent attendance of a great concert consisting of a great orchestra performing a great piece of music and topping it off with a great performance. Damn, I hate that when it happens. Now I have to get that great performance out of my mind and get on with life. It is really hard listening to Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto after that. It puts me in an “upgrade” mood. I don’t like it when that happen either. Just spending money on a little improvement that gets me about as close to the realness of that performance as voice lessons will get me closer to being a great singer. “How you going to keep em down on the farm after they’ve seen Parree?” Waldhorner I sure hope the reason for the hi-end industry is for the ultimate truth and accuracy in reproduced audio. If not we’ll be in the same place 20 years from now talking about the same things. Maybe the latest power cables from the transformer to the service panel will be the new fav.

Khrys The ultimate truth is dealing with a bigger issue, the obvious differences between real and recorded. The fundamental stuff like, harmonic integrity, and timbre accuracy and dynamics. The stuff that jumps out at you. Audio with all its inherent colorations and limitations obsures the realness of music, it masks it. It doesn't take aural memory to differentiate between the truth and reproduced. It is as obvious to me as the difference between a cat and dog. No I certainly don't have ANY problem with studio recordings, rock and alternative etc. that are altered through mix downs, overdubbing and the like to get a particular sound. That type of music is not my reference nor should it be a reference at all. The fact is if you get real unamplified acoustical instruments to sound real, everything else will fall into place. Isn't The Absolute Sound the ultimate objective or are settling for less because a. It will never happen or worse, b. it really doesn't matter?

Hi Bob good points. A poor recording will bring more attention to its faults with a high res system rendering it less enjoyable overall. I am finding that out to a greater degree as the resolution of my system improves in the quest for musical enjoyment on the level of the live event. On the other hand the great recordings have more of what I find in real music that the lesser res system veils. How do you balance it, two systems? I still buy poor recordings of music that I like regardless. Got to take the good with the bad in matters of reproduced music, there are no easy solutions. For the reason you stated I'm really not too sure I want much more res than I have although there are areas that can be improved for overall enjoyment. I just wish I could enjoy my system more and analyze less after hearing a good live performance. It takes a few days for things to get back to normal.

Doug you just made me remember my Yamaha DSP-1 signal processor with matching M-35 4 channel amp that I used in the same configuration as you are currently using. There are 2 ambient channels for the front and 2 for the rear. Can keep the volume low enough that it never became obtrusive to the sound while offering ambience extraction to dry recordings. I haven't used the thing for 9 years since I moved into my current room but it really improved matters on less than stellar recordings.

Boy Craig you sure are a tough nut to crack! What's it gone to take with you? The things that tubes definitively do better IMveryHO MUCH better,is lower volume listening, that is preserve the natural ambient detail, air and dynamics of the music yet retain the bloom. With ss I have to crank it up. This is most apparent on acoustical and vocal music. I throw my hands up. You are a ss guy and that's all there is to it. BTW what pre-amp are you using?

You know Doug I think maybe it comes down more to taste and what’s important to the individual listener. I remember back when I owned my last ss amp, a Threshold S300. Within 2 years of purchasing that amp, I bought a used pair of McIntosh MC-60's which stock were OK but still notably more palpable in the midrange than the Threshold. The Threshold revealed more of the detail at the frequency extremes and probably even in the midrange but it didn't have the tube magic. My wife heard it as well, right away most notably on vocal recordings. I was using a CJ all tube pre-amp at the time. Then I had some quite extensive mods done to the Macs including new filter caps, wiring, star grounding, changed a few resistor values to improve the highs and the sound improved another few notches notably in the bass and highs. Less classic tube colorations yet no loss of midrange magic. I have listened over the years to many different ss amps and everytime I listen regardless of make or model or what they do well, they have less of a "thereness" or "palpable presence" as Sam Tellig likes to say. This effect may be more or less important to some. I equate it to more real. Whether it be a coloration or rounding of the sound is not important to me. I am less analytical when listening to music and go with what makes the music more involving. Tube amps as well as pre-amps makes music come alive to a greater extent than the detailed sound I hear with ss. I feel quite certain I could live with a ss amp for a while. I further suspect after a period of time if I put a tube amp back in the system I would end up in the same place I am now. Anyone want to lend me their Levinson or Boulder to prove my theory? What is better, vanilla or chocolate?