Thoughts on discreet tubs, transistors vs. IC chips, op-amps.,.etc

There are trade-offs to all of them, and my guess is that the "tube sound" will continue to enthrall many, right or wrong.  But here's the funny thing: in my design career i manage to get "similar" sound out of all of them.  Don't read too much into that - i still, overall, prefer discrete solid state devices to most chips, and to tubes, but its amazing how the major design goals transcend the packaging.
Also -- don't necessarily confuse "opamps" with "chips"  opamps, after all, started with tubes in analog computers of the 1940s and 1950s.  One one can buy monolithic transistor pairs etc.  I even worked with a researcher once who had invented a solid state tube/ Really - a vacuum tube. It never when anywhere if anyone's interested.
In general, chips allow for complex designs that would be large and costly in discrete form.  They also allow for decent device matching as a side product of the monolithic process. These are good things.
On the other hand the very geometry and small size leads to compromises, and things like connecting resistors etc. must, in reality, be semiconductors -- not metal film, carbon film, etc.
I also question whether all the complexity chips allow is good for the sound.  Ok, i don't question it, I think its NOT.

In the end though, good design is good design.  I've made differential front-end amps on a  chip sound almost tube-like. Except they are quiet, have bass, and don't degrade.
By the way today's best opamps and instrumentation amps are vastly, vastly better than they were 20 years ago.  One very well respected designer int he rockies uses them at the heart of a stupid-expensive preamp. And it sounds good: i've used the same device.
Happy thanksgiving.  Everything soudns better after good wine and good food with good friends.

G

On the other hand the very geometry and small size leads to compromises, and things like connecting resistors etc. must, in reality, be semiconductors -- not metal film, carbon film, etc.

This isn't true, I use thin film smd resistors which are very easy to find and there's a much wider range of C0G/NP0 capacitors available in smd than through hole. If you look at a datasheet for an op amp the design is likely to be an entirely straight forward transistor based amplifier in a small package.

You are missing my context. I am referring to monolithic device - chips -- that contain all semiconductors, resistors etc in a package. Example - 8 pin opamp. This is true regardless of SMD or through hole.  yea, sure if we're in discrete resistor land the part selection is often BETTER in with SMDs because that's the modern packaged, designed for automated placement.

I was very clear: ( I wrote)

In general, chips allow for complex designs that would be large and costly in discrete form. They also allow for decent device matching as a side product of the monolithic process. These are good things.
On the other hand . . .

But you have to read in context! Context matters.
'later
G