Electroslacker, I do not know if you would want to buy the Mullard 10 military 12ax7 nos tube, it's rare and known as the very best money can buy, the going rate is $500.00!, and the 12au7 10m nos I believe is around $250.00!, very musical,warm, incredible resolution, great bass,said to last 10,000 hrs |
My experience has been that tubes are just more musical and pleasing to listen to. I have owned a lot of both. My Exemplar Exception integrated contains the best of both. Pre-section with tubes and the amp section SS. Simply stunning. However, if I had to pick one and live with it I would go TUBE AUDIO. |
Electroslacker, tell me more about the Gold lion reissue's, that could be a cheaper alternative for me to want to listen to, and keep for good back up tube's, the mullard 10m tube's are very exspensive and hard to find, although that is what I have plan's to use in my cd-player. |
Audiolabyrinth, once again, I find your posts confusing. Are you currently using Mullard 10M tubes or not?
You claim they are 'musical bliss', and that they are the 'best money can buy', then you mention that those are the tubes that you "plan" to use.
Are you claiming they are the best (we all know that there is no best) from personal experience, or from what you have read on the internet?
Remember, just as with all things in audio, there are no absolutes, no "best".
Folks have their own personal favorites, just as they have their favorite music.
However, just as no one song can be dubbed the "best", no one tube can be labeled the "best" either. |
you are correct John, their is no best tube, these just get most votes as most liked, that's it, there you go, cheers. |
Audiolabyrinth, I'm not a big tube roller, so my perception may be narrow compared to others.
The Gold Lions replaced TungSol's in the line stage of the original VAC Avatar. I had been sniffing around the McIntosh offerings and noticed a pattern of users swapping out the factory tubes for the Lions, and a consensus of improvement. I was curious.
At first, I thought the top end sounded brittle, and I had lost some bass. This changed after just a few days of burn. The first new thing I noticed was a sustained organ note as a track faded out, when before it had gone to black.
Holistically, the sound seemed more liquid. Things moved in and out of the sound-scape with a sense of holding a water balloon instead of a basketball. The oddest thing was standing in front of the amp with speakers to the side and having a sense of much more music surrounding the speakers, instead of just projecting forward. Strange.
Specifically, on something like Roy Orbison singing, "Only the Lonely," the backup singers were clearly delineated by number and voice, which greatly increased the pleasure of the performance. I always thought the Janis Ian album, "Breaking Silence," was really good in terms of sound and craftsmanship, even though Janis's voice is soft. With the Gold Lions it becomes spectacularly good. Finally, I played trumpet, and the Empire Brass sound more metallic in the right way.
All this could be device/circuit dependent, so YMMV and all that, but this is kinda/sorta what I experienced. |
Electroslacker, Thankyou, that was a comprehensive well said post, I like the old Roy orbison too, though I admitt, it's been a long time, I do not own any of his recording's any more, my mother played Roy alot, I was alway's fasinated by how good he sing's, your despription of the Gold Lion tubes sound's good to me,where did you get them? |
Jmcgrogan2, what is your like's for the 12au7 and 12ax7 tube's? |
Amazon. Resistance is futile. $35 each. |
I see, I need to look into this, amazon did not reveal the actual dealer you bought from? |
I bought Gold Lion 12AX7 reissues from "thetubestore" with matched
and balanced sections for a fraction of whatever dealers want for exotica like the
Mullard 10ms, and they are simply great sounding 12AX7s for my tastes
anyway...I like NOS Mullards of course, and have a pair 6201s on their way from
Upscale as I was smitten by their price and gold pins (my trusty 4024s are still
fine and will be given a rest). I think that the success of New Sensor with their
KT120s and 150s, Gold Lion reissues, "Mullards," (my Burriss class A
guitar amp uses, as stock, Mullard reissue 12AX7s as the designer loves those
things), and other stuff is an interesting success story and unique in tube-
ville...I've never had one blow up (yet) and considering the volume of stuff they
crank out they seem to be making some great AFFORDABLE glass items, and I
hope they continue. |
So are you currently using the Mullard 10M tubes or not Keith?
While I have not specifically heard the 10M, I have owned and still do own quite a few Mullard tubes. Very sweet and musical, but not resolving enough for me. They may work better with more resolving equipment. I prefer the Amperex Bugle Boy pinched waist 12AX7's. To each their own though. Cheers. |
Hi John, No, I do not own the 10m yet, however, these are my must do bucket list for my tube cd-player, I have been spending money on outlet's currently that are exspensive too, I have heard many good thing's about the Amperex Bugle Boy tube's in general, I have researched and talked to many tube lover's for nearly two year's, as far as the 12ax7 tube, it's the same answer over and over, the 12ax7 mullard 10m is it if you can afford one and find it from a reputible dealer, alot of fakes out there. |
It's a shame you can't listen for yourself Keith, as that is really the only way to know what you like best.
I have tried many Mullards, Amperex, Telefunkens, Siemens, as well as current production tubes from Psvane, Gold Lion, etc.
Just as you won't be able to tell what food you will like best by reading a description, the same goes for tubes, fuses, cables, and just about everything in audio. Also, a lot of it depends on synergy too. I have heard Mullard tubes sound "best" with some gear too.
Self experimentation is half the fun.
The journey IS the destination. ;) |
Hi John, yes, it's a work in progresse, starting from scratch 2012 is over whelming by way of financial part of it all, cable's are good to go, outlet's are good to go, amp is, getting to tube's ect... speaker's, you know, this take's a while, then you can buy and sale and get half your money back and build away, under my circumstance's, I'm doing very good, actually, better than I projected. |
Good words of wisdom John |
|
"Stereophile
Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary
J. Gordon Holt, July 1993"
..."solid state sound That combination of attributes common to most solid-state amplifying devices: deep, tight bass, a slightly withdrawn brightness range, and crisply detailed highs."
..."tube sound, tubey That combination of audible qualities which typifies components that use tubes for amplification: Richness and warmth, an excess of midbass, a deficiency of deep bass, outstanding rendition of depth, forward and bright, with a softly sweet high end."
! Moderators, How about making this a sticky?:
http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/bbs/stereophile_audio-glossary.html |
In chef terms:
lean chicken salad or soup with greens (nutritious vitamines)
vs.
Texas Roadhouse steak dinner -- Fort Worth Ribeye with mushrooms and salad (STRENGTH!).
make ur pick |
All depends on the system built around them. Tubes or transistors alone can't make any sound.
The best of both tend to sound more similar than different at least when not distorting. Its when they distort that things become different, but we wouldn't want any of that now in any case would we? |
^^ Actually Mapman this is not entirely true.
Because tubes usually are more linear you can often build lower distortion circuit with them- and often without feedback. That is a lot harder to do with semiconductors!
Most power transistors incorporate a non-linear capacitive aspect into the junction of the device that is part of the price of building the junction in the device. The capacitive aspect is magnified by the amount of current put through the device, and in case some don't know it, current is a big deal with semiconductors. This capacitive aspect contributes to higher ordered harmonic distortion and is part of the semiconductor signature that is very hard to eliminate! Some semiconductors take advantage of this capacitance- for example most modern FM radios are tuned by the use of a varactor diode, which changes capacitance as the voltage applied to it changes.
Tubes have a similar capacitance but it is far less significant, lacking the non-linear aspect and mostly is an interaction between the input capacitance and the source driving the tube and is known as Miller Effect; IOW can affect bandwidth if not managed.
Further, distortion at clipping can play a much bigger role in the sound of many stereos than you suggest. Musical transients are where the action is- and if for whatever reason the amp is forced into clipping for an instant it can have audible effects. There are a number of threads on this forum asking about the difference between tube and transistor power as for some reason tube power seems to be more profound than transistor power.
The reason for this is how the two distort- when a transistor amp clips its instantaneously audible- when a tube amps clips it may not be audible until the amp is clipping fairly hard. Instead, it will make more higher ordered harmonics that interacts with the human ear/brain system in a way that will make the sound seem to be louder than it really is.
In a nutshell this makes the tube amp seem more powerful than a transistor amp of the same power as the outright clipping of the transistor amp seems to describe a limit that the tube amp does not seem to have. Its important to understand that this has a lot to do with how we perceive loudness and that the tubes play into that in a way that transistors don't.
The difference of course is revealed as soon as you put a sound pressure meter in the room- then it will be seen that both amps are playing at the same volume.
Anyway, the result of this is that the common wisdom is that if using a transistor amp you need a lot more power to avoid audible clipping.
But I agree, avoiding clipping altogether is preferable :) |
"Actually Mapman this is not entirely true."
How many things are when it comes to good sound?
I'll agree avoiding clipping altogether is always a good goal. Things will still not sound the same but if things are done even halfway well otherwise you are where you want to be to start. Otherwise, you are in a very grey place that you would be well advised to get out of before anything else truly matters. |
|
Lean Cuisine vs Porterhouse steak. |
Why would you call tubes as skim milk? Just because it is healthy?
:-) |
Healthy skim milk is pretty common american joke. |
Actually (SS=skim milk/Toobs=whole milk) Yes skim milk is better for you but whole milk taste a lot better! ;?) |
Dollar for dollar through most typical loud speakers; high quality tube amplifying devices will more likely distort frequency response more than high quality solid state amplifying devices will. |
|
Unsound, while you are technically correct I'll bet you can't identify the colorations / response deviations while listening to music. |
Ebm, but it will crush! LMAO! |
Unsound wrote,
"Dollar for dollar through most typical loud speakers; high quality tube amplifying devices will more likely distort frequency response more than high quality solid state amplifying devices will."
The problem is distortion is overrated as a measurement of sound quality. So is frequency response. Gotcha covered. Lol. Besides, we found out back in the 70s and 80s that tube amps with 0.05% THD just plain sounded better than solid state amps with 0.0005% THD. |
Raymonda,
Looks like you obviously did not get Czarivey's joke - that you really had to specify which is which?
:-) |
No I missed that one. Help me out. |
The problem here is that often the ear will give weight to distortion perceived as tonality over actual frequency response.
A classic example is the brightness of transistor amps. On the bench they might test with the same bandwidth as a tube amp but will sound brighter. Its due to trace amounts of higher ordered harmonic distortion, which the ear translates into tonality: brightness.
IOW it may be flat but it may not sound like it. Not that you can get flat frequency response out of a speaker anyway- just look at their response and you will see that getting flat frequency response is a fool's errand. |
"IOW it may be flat but it may not sound like it."
Actually it won't EVER sound flat if in fact it is because the frequency response of human ears is not flat.
See the Ear Sensitivity chart here for details and how that affects what we hear when listening to music.
http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
That does not mean that flat frequency response in the sound making system is not a good thing. It is. It means whats coming out is the same as what went in, even if not always pleasant. |
Raymoda, I do not consider skim milk healthy. It's just a part of brainwash. All ya have to do is to blend water and milk 50/50 |
Czar, you might be right about the brainwashing, but I have to admit I pay a premium for many products that I consider to be healthier mainly because they have less of the bad stuff they would have otherwise. Mostly for convenience reasons.
ALthough at home if I am not in a rush I will mix and water down things on my own in order to better fit my diet. |
Rsrex, I have already recognized lumpy frequency response in loudspeakers before.
Geoffkait, some of you may have found that, more recently others found the opposite to be true.
Atmasphere, I find tube amps to typically sound brighter than ss amps.
Mapman, flat frequency response as being discussed here is in regard to the relationship of measured input to output. |
Mapman:
Wow--what an enlightening chart. Thanks. |
I find tube amps to typically sound brighter than ss amps. Your experience here is unusual! The majority does not share it. This might have something to do with the speaker you are using- it might have a much higher impedance at high frequencies than lower down. |
GP,
I think you can still order printed copies of the chart. I have a framed copy on my main listening room wall. Its a work of art in that context to a technical nutcase like me. The interactive version online is even better.
It really helps you understand what you are hearing and why, for anyone who really cares about the facts. |
I just poured whole milk into my solid state equipment in order to make it sound more like tubes. I'll report back once the steak is done on the grill and stuffed into my speaker ports. To be continued.... |
Try hot cocoa for a warmer sound. |
Yes but use power. The Hersey syrup causes the amp to sound,err, too syrupy. |
Ralph, can a ss amp have such low distortion as to make that comparison not tenable? I suppose a better question would be, have you ever listened to a ss amp without the typical characteristics you ascribe to them? Could you be fooled in an ABX test? Sorry, I really don't mean to take you to task this way but there always seems to be a need to arrive at a defensible position when this topic comes up. It's probably just me but my perspective is borne of observation. I mean the tube guys vs the ss guys. My goal is accurate to life sound. To this end, the fine detail I hear in ss is just not there in the tube amps I've auditioned. Nor is the bottom end drive/slam of a high current ss. Mind you they have been few and far between but always not impressive and very typical sounding. I find a lot more variation among ss amps sound wise. |
Atamsphere, It's not just with my speakers and it's not just me, others have noticed the same thing for some time now; please see the my earlier post on this thread dated 03-10-15. |
Mapman, Gpgr4blou, Please realize that chart reflects how humans hear/percieve undistorted musical instruments/sound frequencies. One would not hear/perceive those instruments/sound frequencies as the chart portrays if the sound was distorted (for example; deviating from flat frequency response) before one heard it. For the purposes at hand it's merely an academic curiosity, and flat frequency response from our systems is still highly desirable. |
you'll hear the frequencies as described be it signalk distortion, whatever. Of course the goal is always to minimize distortion or at least what is perceived as distortion.
If you look at frequency response of some transducers, like certain headphones you can see some are designed to compensate for ear sensitivity at various frequencies at various DBs and some do not. Much like the old style loudness controls on vintage receivers and amps.
What sounds best is solely a matter of preference but in general keep noise and distortion to a minimum and things should sound pretty good personal preferences aside. |
^I'm sorry, but I don't understand the first sentence.
Headphones are typically an unnatural way of hearing things. Some headphones use signal processing to try and compensate for this unnaturalness.
Old fashioned loudness controls allow for some compensation of the way the human ear perceives sound at unnatural lower volume levels. Which interestingly enough, is further argument as to how the above mentioned graph only reflects human hearing/perception vis-a-vis an accurate stimuli. |
