Tubes Do It -- Transistors Don't.


I never thought transistor amps could hold a candle to tube amps. They just never seem to get the "wholeness of the sound of an instrument" quite right. SS doesn't allow an instrument (brass, especially) to "bloom" out in the air, forming a real body of an instrument. Rather, it sounds like a facsimile; a somewhat truncated, stripped version of the real thing. Kind of like taking 3D down to 2-1/2D.

I also hear differences in the actual space the instruments are playing in. With tubes, the space appears continuous, with each instrument occupying a believable part in that space. With SS, the space seems segmented, darker, and less continuous, with instruments somewhat disconnected from each other, almost as if they were panned in with a mixer. I won't claim this to be an accurate description, but I find it hard to describe these phenomena.

There is also the issue of interest -- SS doesn't excite me or maintain my interest. It sounds boring. Something is missing.

Yet, a tube friend of mine recently heard a Pass X-350 amp and thought it sounded great, and better in many ways than his Mac MC-2000 on his Nautilus 800 Signatures. I was shocked to hear this from him. I wasn't present for this comparison, and the Pass is now back at the dealer.

Tubes vs. SS is an endless debate, as has been seen in these forums. I haven't had any of the top solid state choices in my system, so I can't say how they fare compared to tubes. The best SS amp I had was a McCormack DNA-1 Rev. A, but it still didn't sound like my tube amps, VT-100 Mk II & Cary V-12.

Have any of you have tried SS amps that provided these qualities I describe in tubes? Or, did you also find that you couldn't get these qualities from a SS amp?
kevziek
Barefooted and naked of breast, I mingle with the people of the world.
My clothes are ragged and dust-laden, and I am ever blissful.
I use no magic to extend my life;
Now, before me, the dead trees become alive.

Ten Bulls

:-)

Fire, fire, run...
6chac: Run, but not before you too, say something? Maybe I just didn't get it (although I liked it). Were you refering to the fact that this thread seems to be highjacked and there is no hope and, God, please, no more, and...Whatever the reference - you can tell us, or just me - it was a nice quote, one I wasn't aware of.

Mytho-magical shamanism aside, its true, you know. Did you intend that?
Well, Asa, I guess there's no denying that some of our brains 'Do It' more than others...

(Geez, this is beginning to resemble a Nike ad!)

To paraphrase the late Dr. Bronner (one of the only lunatic philosophers I actually have a *practical* use for, if you know what I mean - no need, I'm sure, to remind audiophiles what cleanliness is next to), Mind-Brain = All-One!

(No, this doesn't mean I don't think that there's actually an objective reality out there [or in here]; if I believe anything, I believe that. It's just that we can't know but an infitesimal fraction of it.)

Oh, and FWIW, I always do my level best to have no God(s) at all.
I don't want to get too deep into this...The the point of science is the endeavor to understand nature empericaly. The very nature of science requires one to let go of the whole in order to grasp the particulars. The mystical appraoach requires one to let go of the particulars in order to grasp the whole. I think both approaches lead to the understanding that the more we learn the more we learn how little we have learned. A balanced appraoach using both approaches will probably serve us best. This ever so elusive philosphy is called common sense.
The fool in the last card of the Tarot, 6chac,is another image for this. Got nothing to do with God or mysticism, Zaike, it is just one who does not let science devour nature empireously always and all the time, to paraphrase Unsound...hence he's a fool of course, like tubelovers..and ASA speaking in the wilderness....