I know my room is capable of that sound stage because my tube amp accomplishes it. I used a Sansui Au 7700 solid state amplifier....and i have a front to back listener inclusion....The complete sensation to be in the soundstage while listening many good recording... But 2 years ago it was not the case at all.... The room acoustic control was the reason in my case of this improvement ... I think that tube amplification resist more to acoustic limited or not optimal conditions...It is the only way i can explain to myself your experience...Anything "analog" resist more to non optimal acoustical control or lack of control....Digital could store more potential information but suffer more if the optimal acoustic did not help it.... But i am not a specialist of these questions.... It is my interpretation only... Others more experienced than me may have better answers.... I am curious about others people answers.... |
The distance your speakers are from the rear wall can affect the soundstage from front to back both in a real and perceived manner. |
Question: Is it typical of solid state amps to have less of a front to
back sound stage than tube amps? Do they vary in this regard? Yes and yes. If the solid state amp is properly designed it should exhibit depth as good as a tube amp. |
Question: Is it typical of solid state amps to have less of a front to back sound stage than tube amps? Do they vary in this regard? Yes and yes.
If the solid state amp is properly designed it should exhibit depth as good as a tube amp. Interesting coming from a specialist.... Then there is less well designed S.S. amplifiers on the market than we may think? And my acoustical pledge is not all there is then and the only reason for this back-front depth , certainly the amplifier design must play his role... i will trust the specialist.... thanks.... |
My tube amps produce front to back depth that any solid state amp that I have owned could not match! |
@atmasphere Thanks, Ralph. FYI, your tube amps are my aspirational goal down the road. Would you mind naming a couple solid state amps you have found to be capable of sound stage depth equal to tube amplifiers?
@rh67 My speaker placement is optimized. The issue here is that sound stage depth is varying despite the fact that speaker position is not changing.
@mahgister I agree about the importance of the room and have done a lot of work to optimize that. This is no longer a question about the room, only about the way gear performs in a given room. I |
My tube amps produce front to back depth that any solid state amp that I have owned could not match! Very interesting post ..... Thanks.... The most back to front depth possible experience may include the listener itself and create some effect like in headphone... It is my experience WITH a solid state amplifier, then acoustical control indeed play a great role... My Sansui is a good amplifier BUT not the best in the world then acoustic explain my experience... And tube amplifier resist more to bad acoustical environment than most S.S. if someone think that i am wrong i will listen to him...I am absolutely not a specialist.... this question thread is interesting .... thanks to the O.P. My best to all... |
@hilde45 -- I had a similar problem when I went from ARC GSi75 to Luxman 590AXII. The soundstage width offered by the Luxman was just as wide but I felt the depth, while decent, was not as good as ARC.
In my case, adding acoustic panels behind (lower front wall) and right besides the speakers (lower side walls) helped greatly with improving the soundstage depth. I still need to replace the painting on the front wall with more panels at some point though. You can checkout my system pics in virtual systems.
P.S.: The depth is still not quite on par with the ARC amp though. IMO, the tube amps provide a better illusion of palpability which possibly translates into better soundstage depth perception. I'm hoping adding more panels on the front wall will take it up a notch or two. |
Then there is less well designed S.S. amplifiers on the market than we may think? IMO, yes. In solid state amps in particular this is all about how well their feedback system is designed. Most of the time though the problem is the amp simply lacks enough feedback; you need over 35dB to really get the job done right. Most have less- 20dB is common. When you have a low amount like that the feedback itself makes distortion- and the amp is often unable to get the phase relationships from front to rear completely correct. I placed a more in depth post on this topic on another thread today about distortions. |
Then there is less well designed S.S. amplifiers on the market than we may think? IMO, yes.
In solid state amps in particular this is all about how well their feedback system is designed. Most of the time though the problem is the amp simply lacks enough feedback; you need over 35dB to really get the job done right. Most have less- 20dB is common. When you have a low amount like that the feedback itself makes distortion- and the amp is often unable to get the phase relationships from front to rear completely correct. I placed a more in depth post on this topic on another thread today about distortions. My deepest thanks for your toughtful explanation....Useful for all.... |
Many solid state amplifier manufactures and reviewers boast about having a tube like sound. When is the last time that you have seen a tube amp manufacturer boast about having a solid state like sound? I wonder why that is? |
Many solid state amplifier manufactures and reviewers boast about having a tube like sound. When is the last time that you have seen a tube amp manufacturer boast about having a solid state like sound? I wonder why that is? Very astute observation... I bought my Sansui AU 7700 7 years ago after reading an article about the Sansui original designer and their desire to reproduce EXACTLY their best tube amplifier in solid state.... It takes 20 years.... They make a public test to compare the sound and there was no distinction.... this was the main reason i bought a Sansui instead of any other vintage legendary design....I never look back.... |
Many moons ago a had a Sansui TU-919 tuner. It was one of the best tuners that I’ve owned! |
@arafiq I’ve done extensive room treatments including some fairly elaborate things to deal with reflections. These have helped create the depth I’m enjoying with my tube amps and why I feel that the difference in depth must be due to the only variable changing— the amplifier.
@atmasphere Thanks for the reflection about how feedback may be at work in my solid state. I don’t think Frank publishes much about his process but if anyone sees what he does vis a vis feedback, please share. |
I’m experiencing a wide and deep soundstage using an Atma-sphere 30W amp with an Audio Note linestage. The 3D image is often holographic. Don’t dismiss the effect a preamp contributes to deep imaging.
I also have absorbion panels on the side walls near the front wall (in the area of the speakers).
Now having said that, I owned a Sunfire 300 which was capable of 3D imaging through the front wall, equal to or exceeding the tube amps I’ve owned.
|
@yogiboy
Many moons ago a had a Sansui TU-919 tuner. It was one of the best tuners that I’ve owned! Cool. I was a big Sansui amp and tuner fan too, had the AU/TU717 decades ago, held on to my TU-9900 FM tuner ’til a year ago. Replaced it with a modded MD-102 Magnum Dynalab FM Tuner years back. Listening with a 6SN7 triode tube preamp and dual mono KT150 tube amps with dual triode input section right now. With OCC interconnects the sound stage is at or just behind the front wall and to the sides of me in 3D. And crazy thing is, it’s just FM and some times I prefer it over streaming - believe it or not! Makes it difficult to want to listen to alternate DACS or Amps any more. Smacking hand, saying "just leave it the hell alone and don’t mess with it any more", sounds fantastic :) |
I never really thought the type of amplifier would affect soundstage. Speaker position, reflections, the recording I would think has more to do with soundstage. The one thing that isn't controlled by those is SPL at listening position. See if increasing the volume helps. Is that SET amp low watt? It might clip before it gets as loud as the other amps. Other than that I have no idea why. |
@djones51 So far, the consensus is that amp type affects soundstage a lot. So far, if I'm paying attention, only the Sunfire 300 amp has been given props for an amazing soundstage.
The SET 400 is 225 wpc into 8 ohms. |
|
Speaker position, reflections, the recording I would think has more to do with soundstage. djones51, I absolutely agree. Also the design of the speakers. I spent many listening sessions adjusting speaker position to get the optimal imaging. Toe-in and rake-angle helped fine tune the soundstage. Using absorbion or diffusion on the front wall between speakers can tighten focus. Furniture or a large rack between the speakers can reduce depth. In my room, which is a living/listening space, I discovered the room was too damped and needed some areas of reflection. But ultimately, I think the amp and preamp have to be capable of presenting a wide and deep soundstage. |
Regarding an amp or any other electronic gear upstream’s relative ability to do imaging, it’s generally about achieving low distortion and detail retrieval. That is needed to best deliver the spatial cues that enable imaging captured in a recording completely. Then how the recording is made is the other in big factor.
Then of course the speakers setup and room acoustics determine exactly how those cues are rendered and imaging and soundstage actually produced.
The best soundstage depth Ive ever heard by a huge margin was an all mbl system with SS amplification set up in a highly customized showroom. With master recording R2R as a source you could easily identify exact location of individual orchestra instruments both front to back and side to side in a large tapered rectangular area. That was at now defunct United Home Audio in Annapolis Junction, MD several years back. Nothing else I’ve ever heard comes close on regards to precise 3-d soundstage and imaging depth. Totally holographic. Same setup by same vendor was just OK at local shows in more conventional and less optimized room setups.
In my system, holographic soundstage and imaging took a big leap forward when I introduced the Bel Canto ref1000m Class D amps to my Ohm Walsh speakers. It was totally disorienting at first until my ears latched on to what was happening. Night and day from prior Class A Musical Fidelity SS amp. |
Regarding an amp or any other electronic gear upstream’s relative ability to do imaging, it’s generally about achieving low distortion and detail retrieval. That is needed to best deliver the spatial cues that enable imaging captured in a recording completely.
Then of course the speakers setup and room acoustics determine exactly how those cues are rendered and imaging and soundstage actually produced. That makes sense the files in the above link I posted are to test the imaging of your system. |
Totally holographic. Same setup by same vendor was just OK at local shows in more conventional and less optimized room setups.
Very interesting post mapman... For sure it takes a very good amplifier first but like you said and i said, ACOUSTIC is important on the same level at least... |
Are the SS amps fully burned in? I find that a 600 -800 hour burn in helps bring out subtle details in imaging.
The other thing I'm thinking is resonance and vibration. Tube amps are more resistant to this factor. So if not already used, good isolation devices will help. The best in my experience are those from critical mass systems, which will take your audio to a whole new level.
Best wishes |
Skimming through other’s input I think there is another aspect that hasn’t been touched upon and that is the source recording quality. I’ve got a BAT VK-600 heavy duty solid state amp coupled with the BAT VK-5i tube amp with my Apogee ribbon speakers and I’ve found that more often than not recordings have excellent left to right, but truly great imaging that also have deep front to back complex spacing require a top quality recording engineer using the right equipment (particularly analog) and this is much rarer. This is particularly a challenge with rock recording roughly around the 80’s era. Once I hear really excellent dynamic recordings such as, for example, many of Jan Garbarek’s (ECM generally as well), Radiohead - King of Limbs, Trifonic - Emergence, just to name a few, I don’t soon forget them and I find myself returning to them like sirens as the years pass!
|
There is lot more involve reproducing sound stage depth. First and foremost is the recording itself. Audio chain cannot reproduce "depth" if it not encoded in to the recording. Most of my classical music recordings have excellent depth or front-to-back layering.
Speakers, placement, listening room, and listening position/height play a huge role reproducing this perceived depth. Amplifier comes next. I cannot comment about tube amps being better or worse reproducing depth. My Thiel 3.6 speakers are driven by SS amps (Mark Levinson 23.5 and Krell KST 100) and I cannot be more happy with the results of reproducing front-to-back layering. I use tube preamps (Cary SLP 03 and VTL TL 2.5) with NOS tubes. But I know friends who got similar results with SS preamps as well.
I also find that my LPs have more depth than some of the CDs. Past weekend, I was listening to Gustav Mahler's 6th symphony by Jascha Horenstein conducting Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra. This is a 2 LP set and front-to-back layering in addition to left-to-right imaging was excellent. The Big Sound by Johnny Hodges and the Ellington Men is another LP with excellent left-to-right imaging and front-to-back layering of musicians. My rock albums have some of the worst reproduction of depth including Beatles albums. So it is not just one thing, but a combination of many factors.
|
good topic, worthwhile discussion @hilde45
i agree with those who have stated the degree of quietness/blackness and low distortion of ss amps helps them fully develop the stereo image and soundstage ... this is the case with hegel pass ayre imo... that ultra deep dark background helps imaging depth and specificity
that been said, i think tube amps (at least very good ones, with power, damping factor and good s/n) expand/magnify the sense of imaging - this i believe is from how they handle harmonics (aided by harmonic distortion) and differing decay of notes (thus you get a sense of bloom and air around notes) which aids in their developing the illusion of soundstaging depth - audio research ref and vac renaissance amps do this, as do the lta zotl and to some degree the carver crimson in my experience
lastly, of course, recording quality is key... the info needs to be there |
Amplifier design is critical for achieving, or not, really good imaging/soundstaging.
It has nothing to do with tubes or SS devices! It has to do with design and execution. You can have a flat wall soundscape with either tubes or transistors. It’s not the device that determines it. It’s completely about the amplifier design. |
I think tubes amp manufacturers do especially when it comes to bass control and transient speed yogiboy3,968 posts05-10-2021 10:30pmMany solid state amplifier manufactures and reviewers boast about having a tube like sound. When is the last time that you have seen a tube amp manufacturer boast about having a solid state like sound? I wonder why that is?
|
There is lot more involve reproducing sound stage depth. First and foremost is the recording itself. Audio chain cannot reproduce "depth" if it not encoded in to the recording. Most of my classical music recordings have excellent depth or front-to-back layering. I listen mostly to symphonies and concerti. Well engineered recordings capture a wide and deep soundstage. Minimal mic techniques result in a sense of space in all directions whereas modern multi, close mic'd recordings lose that imaging. The soundstage may extend beyond the speakers, but 3D imaging is lost. There are some classical labels and certain concert halls which today reproduce a deep soundstage. This is a genre which proves depth is in the recording. |
@djones51 https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.phpThank you so much for this webpage. I'm going to make good use of this. Really looks great! I've added photos to my system — which is still very much in "proto type" aesthetically and cord management-wise, but which is measuring and sounding quite good. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9064@mapman @lowrider57 @parker65310 @pwerahera Agree that it's a combination of many factors, including how the recording is made, speakers setup, and room acoustics; yes, these *all* determine "exactly how those cues are rendered and imaging and soundstage actually produced." That is why I am comparing exactly the same *very, well done and rich sound-staged* recordings. (I'd have to be using good recordings otherwise what would be the point of trying to compare amps?) Also, these are being played on the same streaming service, in the same room, with the same speakers, in the same position. The interconnects are all the same. The power conditions, the room, etc. are all the same. *The* thing changing is the amplifier. As a friendly reminder, I'm trying to frame a precise question with stable conditions in order to isolate a single factor and elicit information about just that factor. The Bel Canto and Ohm combination sounds interesting. A similar Bel Canto would run, say, $6k right now? That's almost 3x the price of the AVA, but knowing that a SS (Class D) CAN produce such impressive soundstage says something about the original question. Mbl's are much more, I understand. @aubreybobb obb The SS amps are not at 600 -800 hours yet. Maybe 100 hours, at the most. As for resonance and vibration, I've never heard that "tube amps are more resistant to this factor." I always thought they were LESS resistant, because of the glass tubes. That's a startling claim and I have never heard that before. @jjss49 I wish I had those other amps for comparison with the AVA. I know that Pass voices his amps, and Paul McGowan has spoken about this extensively. I don't know if he still believes this, but Van Alstine has said (14 Sep 2006) "I have no clue about "voicing" an amplifier. It is NOT a musical instrument. It is not supposed to "sound good". The best it can do is to not screw up the information presented at its inputs and drive whatever load is connected to it without interacting with or being modified by the load….We will leave "voicing" to trumpets and tubas and such, and keep doing basic evaluation of circuit electronics…..We did not spend any time "voicing", only refining our engineering knowledge and the application of that." [Source: https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76587.20 ] That's a surprising thing to hear from someone who makes good gear. Surely he listens to what his customers say, he goes to shows, listens to gear, etc. He may have said this as some kind of retort to someone else's overly-mushy (from an engineer's standpoint) statements. But without that kind of charity for him, it betrays an unenviable bull-headedness. @wolfie62 may be right when saying, "Amplifier design is critical for achieving, or not, really good imaging/soundstaging." If it is the case that tube amps do this quite typically but solid state do not, it may NOT be attributable to the kind of device at work but results speak the loudest, I suppose. Maybe it is merely that fewer solid state designers focus or try to accomplish a sonic objective that tube designers do. That's an important difference for some, but probably not for the end user who wants a rich sound stage. |
The position of your speakers and your room treatments are optimized for your tube amp. Have you considered the possibility that they might need to be changed to obtain maximum performance from the ss amp that you swopped in? No one expects all makes and models of loudspeakers to perform optimally in the same position in a given room; perhaps this notion should be extended to amps. |
The distance from back wall is bunk..at least Fremer thinks so, I tend to agree. If the recording does not have much depth, then there is none. However, there are some recordings that contain such. |
I went from PrimaLuna integrated to Bel Canto Ref600M's (class "D") and believe sound stage improved. Still breaking in but happy so far. For reference I am using a tube preamp. |
Great question and good discussion. I have a Freya + preamp that allows me to choose between solid state and tube front end. The difference is very clear between the two with a good soundstage left to right for both modes, but the tubes add depth. As others have stated, the recording matters as well, but I am assuming you have some good test tracks. Maybe try a tube preamp in front of the SET 400? |
most probably have already seen it but the related current topic 'why do want distortions' has an ongoing discussion that has bearing on this one... esp. the contributions by ralph of atmasphere |
So far, if I'm paying attention, only the Sunfire 300 amp has been given props for an amazing soundstage. I've heard some class D amps that do very well too.
"I have no clue about "voicing" an amplifier. It is NOT a musical
instrument. It is not supposed to "sound good". The best it can do is
to not screw up the information presented at its inputs and drive
whatever load is connected to it without interacting with or being
modified by the load….We will leave "voicing" to trumpets and tubas and
such, and keep doing basic evaluation of circuit electronics…..We did
not spend any time "voicing", only refining our engineering knowledge
and the application of that." [Source: https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76587.20 ]
That's
a surprising thing to hear from someone who makes good gear. Surely he
listens to what his customers say, he goes to shows, listens to gear,
etc. He may have said this as some kind of retort to someone else's
overly-mushy (from an engineer's standpoint) statements. But without
that kind of charity for him, it betrays an unenviable bull-headedness.
I can't agree with this. Frank's comments are spot on and I feel exactly the same way. Voicing an amplifier is likely to simply result in some sort of synergy with some other equipment and ultimately, any audio product has to stand on its own merits and not rely on another's to sound right. IOW designing for synergy or 'voicing' is likely going to result in more distortion. |
@twoleftears Perhaps a different positioning for a different amp is called for — that’s why my question included "Or, perhaps, am I failing to do something -- such as re-position my speakers?" That said, I’ve done measurements regarding impulses (first reflection, distal reflection, further reflections) and I don’t see much of a measurement difference between them regarding the kinds of timing that contribute to sound stage. I suppose just moving the speakers around would be an easy experiment. Thanks for that idea!
@audioguy85 I did a lot of movement of my system and back wall distance proved very important, both for SPL and for imaging. My guess is that rooms are very different, and my 6.5 ft. ceilings are a factor which probably you (and Fremer) don’t share. Possible crucial difference.
@zlone Wow, that’s a very controlled experiment and interesting result. Yes, I use great test tracks and yes, I’m using a tube preamp in front of both amps. With NOS Valvo 12ATs in it.
@jjss49 I’ll look at the distortions discussion.
|
@atmasphere I appreciate the clarification. I suppose I should have just asked the question about what is meant by "voicing." I'm just a hobbyist and consumer; I listen and read, and I hear some engineers such as Paul McGowan talk about "voicing" an amp. I guess I don't really know what that term can mean or how to interpret his comments vis a vis others. I didn't mean disrespect to Frank. |
No doubt different amps will have different transfer functions that could result in the parts of the signal that determine imaging and soundstage, many of which are very low level, being reproduced differently.
A linear transfer function is generally what is desired on paper but it’s likely the case that no two amps have exactly the same transfer function be it linear or not so linear. Transfer functions that emphasize the lower level parts of the signal that determine soundstage and imaging could even be artificially emphasized in a way that increases soundstage and imaging even if that is less linear. I would expect that amps that soft clip where dynamic range is compressed (many tube amps) and that also feature very low noise floors could excel in soundstage and imaging. Even if an artificial artifact of the amps non linear transfer function when soft clipping it might be regarded as a desirable effect.
In that context, my Bel Canto ref1000m amps also do soft clip but effectively never do in that they are 500 w/ch into 8 ohm doubling into 4 ohm. However, they are also absolutely dead quiet so together the effortless dynamics and low noise floor combine for quite exceptional soundstage and imaging (also dynamics) I would say with a very linear transfer function. Nothing artificial there. |
The term "voicing" tends to carry over more from Guitar amp designers and modders looking for particular tones, overtones, and/or feedback designed into the circuit looking to achieve a particular sound result.
With professional and home audio, it seems many audio engineers focus primarily on specs and limiting distortion alone. Some others, changing component values, adding components, removing components, adding gain stages, or even adding complete circuits like negative feedback working to achieve a particular sound. Agree or not, likely adding distortion in what they deem as "in the right places", also loosely referred to by some as voicing, fwiw. Results and opinions vary of course.
A set-tube audio buddy likes to say, "at the end of the day, it's just your stereo", I'll add, call it whatever you want, you are the one listening to it.
|
I guess I don't really know what that term can mean or how to interpret his comments Well that makes two of us. If 'voicing' is trying to get the most linearity out of the circuit than we do that. But we're not listening to it when we do that- we're measuring it. The listening only comes in after it seems OK on the bench. So far the listening hasn't revealed anything we couldn't see on the bench in the last 45 years... @decooney makes a good point with regards to guitar amps where you have to be careful to not allow the circuit to play bass and to use the proper cheap parts that give you that 'sound' when overdriven. Entirely different kettle of fish! |
@atmasphere I think I remember Paul McGowan saying they build the amp, then go play it in their IRS5 room and then go back to the bench to change it. In other words, they want they amp to "voice" in a way that they deem to be "musical," and those adjustments are not based on measurement but on listening. That's at least how I remember him explaining it. And that seems to be exactly what Frank was saying he doesn't do. But I remain confused. |
That's at least how I remember him explaining it. And that seems to be
exactly what Frank was saying he doesn't do. But I remain confused. @hilde45 All amps make distortion; if you understand how the ear interprets distortion than you don't have to do much if you understand how the topology of the circuit design affects distortion (for example, how single-ended circuits express a 2nd harmonic through a quadratic non-linearity). Put another way, this stuff is knowable and responds to math. If you did your math homework there won't be too much tweaking needed on the bench. |
@atmasphere Got it. Thanks. I don't know why McGowan does it, then. Maybe he's the only one who doesn't do his math homework! |
|
From twoleftears;
"The position of your speakers and your room treatments are optimized for your tube amp. Have you considered the possibility that they might need to be changed to obtain maximum performance from the ss amp that you swopped in? No one expects all makes and models of loudspeakers to perform optimally in the same position in a given room; perhaps this notion should be extended to amps."
The above is the only post in this whole thread that can help the OP.
|
Furniture or a large rack between the speakers can reduce depth.
Your correct this is the biggest killer for depth, there should be nothing between the speakers as far back as possible, even the wall should go, and leave small 1mt sections behind the speakers for bass loading. My setup, and I have depth of image out into the garden https://ibb.co/VTRJ0WhCheers George |
@georgehifi I think I read that comment of yours from another thread a while back and have done all possible to eliminate height between speakers.
I will play with positioning as per the suggestion. That helps the practical problem. The page from @twoleftears from Pass may resolve the theoretical difference between voicing (McGowan) or no voicing (Van Alstine).
Viz., Pass: "Of course the concept of a sweet spot depends on having an idea what of what constitutes the best performance. It could be that you want the lowest measured distortion, a particular mix or phase of harmonics in the distortion waveform, the greatest efficiency, greatest power or simply the best subjective experience when you listen to it. The sweet spot is whatever you want – after all, you are the designer....If you have a distortion analyzer, you could simply run through the range of combination of values and select the result you like best. If you simply want good measurements, you might be able to stop there. If you are looking for better subjective performance, you might find this a good place to start your listening." |
Your correct this is the biggest killer for depth, there should be nothing between the speakers as far back as possible, even the wall should go, and leave small 1mt sections behind the speakers for bass loading. My setup, and I have depth of image out into the garden https://ibb.co/VTRJ0Wh
Too simplistic and too drasctic in a way and not enough drastic in another way.... My speakers are near the wall and even one is few inches included in a corner wall, on my desk, with dac amplifier and computer screen between speakers... Guess what? my depth imaging is very good in TWO listening positions, and my sound fill my room... Why? Not only passive material treatment with a good balance between reflecting, absorbing and diffusive surface but ALSO a grid of Helmholtz resonators to activate my room and tune it.... |
