Yeah, I don't have a S.E.T. Tube amp, I have the brawnier Bob Carver Cherry 180M Mono blocks, the amps have 12 KT88 tubes and put out about 200 watts per channel, and my speakers are not all that inefficient, 91db.
How ever one day I would like to try out a pair of S.E.T. Amps. |
Wolf,
I guess my point in a nutshell is that all music can be done well either way if done right. Its what it takes to do it right that matters. The devil as usual is in the details. I find impedance matching considerations most important for electronic music. Most modern electronic music should sound tight and powerful, not loose and flabby. Acoustic music is a different matter. A little looseness and flabbiness there might actually sound good to some, but I am finding what works well for electronic music also works well for me with the rest. Power/efficiency matching and needs is a totally different and equally important issue. |
Implying a hifi system task distinction between reproduced jazz and whatever people call rock is really weird to me. There is every bit as much dynamic juice in jazz as rock, although rock is often more compressed and "mono-dynamic." "Flea watt" amps are never good for loudness except very nearfield (or using insanely efficient speakers) regardless of musical type...but dynamic orchestral music and well recorded modern jazz kicks it just as much as any rock, and often is much MORE dynamic. John Scofield albums can be funkier than most rock stuff and will push a lower powered amp over the edge in seconds if you think you need higher dbs...or you're drunk. If you listen to thumpy dubstep or hippity hop I doubt you own a "flea watt" amp anyway, but my 60 watt pc tube amp and 150 watt sub light up my listening room fine, be it Jethro Tull, Monk, or Mahler. And I agree that a reasonable wattage tube amp often sounds better when cranked than a SS amp because it clips warmer. |
Tubes have bass, but often characteristically different sounding than SS due to higher output impedance. More attention must be paid to matching tube gear all the way up the chain. Higher impedance speakers (true 8 ohm or higher, somewhat rare) are typically most desirable.
Also bass requires more power exponentially at lower frequencies. Large tube amps needed are big, heavy expensive, and use lots of tubes and are harder to maintain properly over time (tubes can be expensive).
The alternative is higher efficiency speakers to lower power needs. This is a good approach, But I have not yet heard a flea powered SET amp drive high efficiency speakers optimally (perhaps adequately) for rock music IMHO. I do believe it is possible, but even at shows, vendors tend to steer away from rock/pop music when demoing flea powered amps with HE speakers, probably for good reason. THis is not their forte IMHO, but I do believe it possible. Just a lot harder and maybe a lot more expensive to achieve similar results. I doubt tubes are needed to max out rock/pop due to the largely electronic nature of the music to start with, but it might make sense for fans of other forms of music and tube sound that also want good rock/pop.
Soft clipping nature of tube amps provides the illusion of better bass for fewer watts, however the amp is often clipping, just in a manner that is less offending to listeners than most SS amps. |
SS with the right set of speakers = perfect for rock. |
I love my Tubes for Metal, Classical, Space Music, vinyl, Digital, movies and TV!
I have had both Solid State and Tube, but I love the tubes over the Solid State.
I do not understand why some people think Tubes cannot have Bass, my Tube Amps, Tube D.A.C., Tube Phono stage, Tube Pre-Amp all Rock, and Rock Hard with wall shaking bass! They will sing with the vocals, and in movies explosions can be felt! Maybe I just have all the right components to make it work? Or maybe my ears are just biased?
Who cares, Tubes Rule! Down with the Solid State! |
NO. My solid state system does jazz better than my tube gear. |
Ive heard zu with a flea powered set amp fall short with rock music. More power might have done it. |
"Tubes can rock HARD (as mine do), you simply need the right amp/speaker match."
Yup.
Tubes rock with Zu Definition speakers too. And Klipshorns that I had as well. I could probably use a few more watts for my Zu's but 6 watts was plenty for 104 db Klipschorns.
I'm sure you can make this work with just a tube amp, as long as you carefully match it to your speakers. |
Triode,
Yes, maybe with Avantgarde's I suspect. GOtta hear a pair sometime. I have heard some other very good high efficiency horn based rigs that I am sure can do the job, at least with the right "tweaks". I would expect speakers like those to be quite sensitive to pretty much any change and perhaps more of a challenge to get tuned in properly than others. But once you do, and it stays there, I would expect exceptional results, though perhaps different still from most of what I am used to that sounds good to me with that kind of music in particular. |
Tubes can rock HARD (as mine do), you simply need the right amp/speaker match. |
|
Definitely SS for rock and pop.
I might go either way for the rest depending. |
I think it's a nice luxury to have both. I've been pondering a solid state integrated for awhile now. Might be auditioning Luxman and Ayre this weekend for my Harbeth's. |
Woodstock I was powered by four McIntosh tube amps.
A lot of classic rock was played and recorded through tube amplifiers.
Don't think it is as black and white as SS for rock and tubes for jazz.
My two cents. |
I agree with Mitch4t. An ideal situation. All the advantages of tube sound without all the heat from the amp output tubes, as well as the added expense. |
It all depends on your speakers. |
.
I'm a diplomat......tube preamp, solid state amps.
. |
Though there is "tubey" solid state as well and very fast extented tube designs too. |
Tubes are usually my preference for music featuring woodwinds, brass, strings and vocals. Bombastic percussion and driving rock is often better left to solid state IMO. One each is pretty nice option! |
|
