Tubes vs Solid State - Imaging, Soundstaging, 3D

It's an interesting proposition to compare high cost SS amps to low cost tube amps. I've hear various Boulder, Pass, Krell, and other SS amps and think they work really well...some of those cost more than a nice car. I've also lived with a modest factory modded Jolida tube amp that cost a fraction of some well regarded SS amps, and, to me, sounds better in every way, although this could be system dependant and due to the fact that I'm an idiot...but an idiot who saved thousands over the cost of a Boulder.

I agree; maybe I'm a idiot too. While Almarg's (and others') comments about the importance of the amp/speaker interface as the determinant of how an amp will perform are very true, to my ears, just as with analog vs digital (PLEASE! I don't want to open THAT can of worms) there are certain intrinsic sonic traits about each technology that, yes, become less and less obvious as the quality level rises, but are alway there to varying degrees.

I'm late to this thread, but:

my perception has been that the prevailing viewpoint among experienced audiophiles is that a particular strong point of tube amplification tends to be imaging and dimensionality. And that has certainly been my experience, and the experience of several of the others who have responded.

We can only speculate as to why your experience has been the opposite.

The reason solid state can seem to have sharper images in the sound field is due to the fact that generally speaking, solid state amps tend to have less low level detail (the why of this is a topic for a different thread but in a nutshell has to do with how the human ear interacts with the noise floor of the amplifier; if anyone is interested I can go into that in greater detail, if you will pardon the expression).

How this affects imaging is that without as much low level detail, the images in the sound field will seem to be in sharper relief. However upon careful listening you will find that in comparison to most tube amps, the images have a 2D/poster quality, as the air (ambiance) around the individual performers is removed; this makes the images 2D but more distinct.

Add the low level detail and the effect is more like what you find live- that there is ambiance created by the sounds of each instrument that tends to take away the stark relief but also adds a 3D quality, which of course is what it is supposed to be...

... generally speaking, solid state amps tend to have less low level detail (the why of this is a topic for a different thread but in a nutshell has to do with how the human ear interacts with the noise floor of the amplifier; if anyone is interested I can go into that in greater detail, if you will pardon the expression).

Thanks, Ralph. When you get a chance, I for one would find that explanation to be of interest.

Best regards,
-- Al

Excellent explanation by Ralph; precisely what I hear when comparing the two, and especially in comparison to live. I am always somewhat amused by the comments by some listeners about "black backgrounds" and "black spaces between instruments" in recorded sound. Those things may be appealing to some, but are not heard in live music. This is not a minor point. In much music, especially classical and most acoustic music, much care is taken by the performers to blend ( and, as instrumentalists like to say: "get inside each other's sound") as a means of "ensemble" expression or to honor the composer's intent. Most of that information exists (or existed) in the "black spaces and backgrounds"; IOW the information is lost.