Tube v. Solid State / Analog v. Digital

They are all subject to measurement, but what many have found out is that the measurements do not give a complete picture of what something sounds like. It looks as if a different basis for the measurements still needs to be discovered as far as our goals are concerned. Many of the basics still hold true, but as far as certain distortion levels, RMS watts and perhaps even sine wave readings, they do not seem to hold as linear a relationship with audible performance as they were once thought to. Advancement in this area will most likely involve furthering our knowledge of the human senses and the brain. Until then let your ears be the judge as these tests will only tell you what you can already hear and comprehend.

I agree with Dekay. The best uses for a manufacturers specification sheet is to see the pictures and read the physical dimensions to know if it will fit in your space.

After that, just listen with your ears and your heart. In the end you that must be happy with your choice or find that it gets turned on less and less. At that point the measurements are not much consolation, even if they appear perfect on paper.

Dekay and Albert are right on. I would just add that these topics have been heavily covered in previous threads and posts, sometimes heatedly I might say, and you might do a search for them. Good Luck. Craig.

The best way I can say it is that the goal of "audiophiledom" is transparency to the source. My question is, which source, the recording or the actual live music that was recorded? I've heard, for instance, Duke Robillard play live. There's no way his latest CD sounds like that!

I maintain that our systems should disappear when we hear music. To my ears, vinyl and tubes do a much better job of that. On the other hand, if one is after a nice "hi-fi" sound with all its brittleness and glare, pursue SS and CD's. One is technically more accurate, one is musically more accurate. Take your pick. Now, in a perfect world, accuracy is musicality and vice versa. If you want that, buy yourself a set of Sennheiser HD600 headphones and forget about the debate. The biggest dilemma to me isn't tubes or CD's, but the room interaction. Until I can make my room sound like a live concert with a speaker based system, I'm opting for the next best thing - the harmonic integrity of tubes and vinyl.

...I agree with Dekay--vacuum-tube gear
tends to more accurately portray the
voices,etc in a recording--A human voice,such
as Peggy Lee, seems to sound more
like a human voice thru tube electronics than
thru solid-state playback equipment.--An engineer
in the 1950's once said:"If it measures
bad and sounds bad, it is bad..but if it
measures bad and sounds good,then perhaps
you're measuring the wrong things.."(paraphrased)
john c.

I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but, it's all subjective. The way a system sounds is completly dependent upon YOU. Hey, it's your brain. There is no "BEST" system evaululated over a time span. We all know that our systems sound good, better, best, depending on lots of variables. I say, be bullheaded and pick some general type of components and enjoy. Spend your money on software, not on never ending componet changes. Enjoy the music.

I would agree with all the above, Especially Biz!. This is your system in your room. Do you listen 5 hours/month?, /week?, /day?. If you like it you will use it.

Getting back to the measurement stuff: lets remeber that most measurements are taken on a bench w/ a sine wave or white noise signal. Music is MUCH more demanding!, the dynamic swings and the frequency changes presend a -dificult to measure at least to virtually imposible to model test scenario. Additionally though nobody talks about it there are VERY few devices that do not have hysteresis, which changes as the material changes....
in other words, Your ears are the best measuring device for your system.
Happy listening.