2. amps-preamps
  3. 1073273002

Tube Equipment: Gimmick?

I recently had a mechanical engineer (who has no interest in audio equipment or the industry) express amazement when I told him about the high prices of tube gear. His amazement, he said, stemmed from the fact that tubes are antiquated gear, incapable of separating signals the way (what we call "solid state") equipment can.

In essence, he said tubes could never be as accurate as SS gear, even at the height of the technology's maturity. This seems substantiated by the high-dollar tube gear I've heard - many of the things that many here love so much about the "tube sound" are wonderful - but to my ears, not true to the recording, being either too "bloomy" in the vocal range or too "saturated" throughout, if that makes any sense.

I have limited experience with tubes, so my questions are: what is the attraction of tubes, and when we talk about SS gear, do we hit a point where the equipment is so resolving that it makes listening to music no fun? Hmmm..or maybe being *too* accurate is the reason folks turn from SS to tubes?

Thanks in advance for the thoughts!
aggielaw
warnerwh
539 posts
 
I believe I read that John Curl said that tubes are more linear than transistors. Transistors are not superior in every way, especially if you want music to sound real. Van Alstine will also tell you why he uses tubes in the input stage of his power amps on his webpage, because they do some things better than transistors. The Audio Research tube preamp I use helped more than I could ever have imagined, even using a Krell pre.
gunbei
2,327 posts
 
Well..where are the other 92.7333333333% of audiophiles out there that have yet to post in here so we can look better than them lawyers?

I am immature and I am underdeveloped. And I have such an incredible build up of ear wax that if one looked close enough you could see the lifelike figures of Captain Jiwitn and his crew of solid state Romulans standing at their stations on the bridge of the Starship Krelluranus. Yet despite those flaws I can still discern enough detail to appreciate the warmth and lifelike presentation of tubes.

Now where's that Queen Borg? She's got the sexiest teeth this side of the Queen Alien...or my production manager.

Here Slappy, Slappy...
jiwitn
10 posts
 
Distortion, I initially chimed in on this thread because I knew it would be an amusing one. However, I have also raised an interesting question. G_M_C's system consists of tube equipment and Nautilus 805 speakers. I have quite a bit of experience with the B&W line of speakers. The Nautilus speakers are very accurate and revealing (and the finest speakers I have ever heard). Why would someone build their whole system around a tube-like sound, and then add very accurate speakers? Again, if this were my setup, I would have chosen solid state electronics and a less accurate pair of speakers (possibly even the B&W Matrix series speakers). I sometimes think audiophiles enjoy the tube equipment because of its nestalgic qualities instead of its fidelity.
vegasears
1,173 posts
 
Jiwitn:

Sold my Krell FPB for VTL mono blocks and never looked back. The VTL's are a better match for MY ears!
distortion
571 posts
 
Jiwitin, Thats a respectable point of view and you're right, this is an amusing thread.

I agree, B & Ws can be very revealing. Here's where we dont agree. You assume tubes are inaccurate. Not that the inaccuracies are illegitimate, they are just minimal. Just as many SS pieces fall into a "categorical" inaccurate bunch as tubes, or maybe even more. Furthermore, tube gears sound can be altered simply with a tube change. Which can enhance its appeal. I guess Amandarae said it best, "To each, his own!"

FWIW, I have been considering a small tube integrated for another system. God help me I cant quit.
More to discover