tubes and analog

Hmm, well I have found that using a Tube phono stage is superior to the built in, or outboard solid state phono's I have used… Tubes with a cartridge just seems like a match that makes a lot of sense.. However if your using a Moving Magnet cartridge that would be possibly where I would start to upgrade and get it all back to tube plus some.. Maybe going to a MC cart will change your views on this, they seem to be much more detailed as well as weighty with more solid foundation in my experience. Again I only used MM with solid state Phono stage, but when I went to MC and Tubes With fully adjustable Loading which is very important all things changed for the Far better. So if you want to spend money maybe switch to a super sensitive MC setup. Its just a suggestion in a direction to take without screwing with you new found match between the Zu and the Tubes you have, and excelling your Phono performance, I don't see any reason to put money anywhere else for your system right now, Cd is far tougher to live with and if you found the match for that you have 80% of the battle won! I find sometimes we just look at the wrong things to upgrade, now you need to come to a higher level of analog to compete it sounds.

IMHO it matters less if its tube or SS and more about how the component sounds and fits with the rest of the system. I use tubes for all but my components to not have the "lush" sound, more detailed like SS. My amp is matched very well to my speakers. I built a tube phono pre with passive stepped atenuators for a linestage. My goal is transparency so I picked my components for this. Also I made sure that they play well together as far as impedance matching. Cost per component was not a deciding factor just sound and system matching. As an example I do not care for the sound of CJ linestages but don't mind their amps sound. I very much like what is not added by using a passive pre but care needs to be taken in this approach. My requirements are tone, dynamics then imaging and less so for freq. extremes.

Tubes are able to retrieve greater detail than transistors and they sound more relaxed. Once detail is lost it cannot be retrieved downstream. So consider a tube phono section.

is an adjustable loading phono stage only important for future flexibilty in cart changes?

Adjustable for MC only.. MM I believe you will have one option, 47kohms… So yes if you decide to go with a better MC cart over the Rega you have which I assume is MM then it would be important. For MC you have several loading options to optimize the sound. I am guessing the stage you have now is MM only, if it is MC too I would assume it has some loading options for you already. I am not familure with the equipment you have, other Analog guys could help you out further. I think the AES is MM only?

Dear Atmasphere: +++++ " Tubes are able to retrieve greater detail than transistors and they sound more relaxed. " +++++

IMHO this statement is a little out of reality/true. The design in the audio device is critical for the sound reproduction and from that design ( it does not matters tube or SS ) we can achieve more or less " to retrieve greater detail....relaxed " sound.

I know very well your units but I would not exhibit any of your products.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Adjustabilty is useful, but in practice, a gain of 60 to 65 with most phono stages will cover most MC cartridges, except the very low .2mv of a few cartridges. That is'nt to say greater adjustabilty is'nt useful, but it is costly and may compromise performance. I too like tubes in phono stages, but you have to accept they are slightly noisier and a gain of 60 is about what you can achieve with tubes. One way round this is a tube/SS hybrid, such as the Art Vinyl reference a J Fet/tube hybrid with Lundahl transformers for MC gain. It is a lovely phono stage giving the best of both worlds IMHO

I agree 100% with Rauliruegas. One may prefer tube over SS, but stating that tubes retrieve more detail than transistors is simply misleading.

Rauliruegas and Opus111, there is nothing misleading about my statement at all and it is very easy to demonstrate at any level of cost. Raul in particular, your statement does not make a lot of sense. I have to assume that you do not know our equipment at all and certainly have not heard it.

Dear Atmasphere: Absolutely wrong: I heard it in three different audio systems.

Please don't go a head with: +++++ " there is nothing misleading about my statement at all and it is very easy to demonstrate at any level of cost ... " +++++.

I'm not against the tube technology but it is totally unfair to make the kind of statements that you do, that kind of opinion does not help to the people only confuse them because today there are many examples of SS technology that in several ways and overall are better than the best tube technology : and like you say " is very easy to demonstrate ".

Please stay calm about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I am plenty calm Raul, despite your attempts otherwise. And FWIW, my statements are plenty 'fair'... (whatever *that* means :)

I have yet to see any of the solid state that you refer to, having been doing CES and the like since 1989 I've been exposed to a lot of it, and a lot of it has been quite expensive. I also do not have to rely on opinion.

Many transistor units have higher distortion at lower output levels where low level detail exists. Tubes OTOH make vanishingly low distortion at lower levels- so low level detail is not obscured by distortion. This is so easy to demonstrate at almost any cost level that your statement would seem to strain credulity.

I have owned literally hundreds of tubes and solidstate amps and preamps (and phonostages) over the years, everything from MFA Lumi C/MC Reference, Lamm L1/L2, Airtight ATE-2/ATM-2, Counterpoint SA4/SA9/SA11, Atma-Sphere M60s, Futterman OTL3/H3A, Vendetta SCP-2B, JRDG Cadence/Coherence II, Threshold SA1/SA4e, Spectral DMC-20 NKII, Levinson ML-2/6B/7A/N0.26s/25s/20.6/380S, Marantz 2/5/7C/8B, etc, and currently have 5 turtables (EMT 930ST, Garrard 301 w/EMT 997 and SME3012R, Thorens TD124 II with Ortofon RMG212, Linn LP12 Valhalla w/ Naim Aro, and Win SDC-1) hooked up to various tube and solidstage equipments and I have owned many other turntables in the past.

I believe I am qualified to speak my opinion based on my experience, so please don't tell me I have not heard a properly set up system with the state-of-the-art analog and tube electronics.

While I prefer tube over solidstate and agree with your opinion that tube gears sound smoother than SS in general, I don't think tubes inherently retrieve more details than transistors. It all depends on the design and how competent a designer is.

You obviously have a vested interest in tubes, being a manufacturer of OTL amps and preamps (I like/admire your design a lot), and I can certainly appreciate your enthusiasm and strong belief in the superiority of tube over transistor, but stating your opnion as if it is the only truth does not earn my respect (not that you need it!).

I have heard many lousy sounding/unreliable tube equipments and the same can be said of the SS gears too. I have also heard and owned some very nice sounding tube gears and the same can be said of the SS gears.

>>but it is totally unfair to make the kind of statements<<

The truth isn't always fair.

Regards and enjoy the tubes.

I have listened to Raul's SS preamp/phono and it generated more detail and bass retrieval than my tubed CAT. I think the differences are more in the area of tonality. Whether right or wrong, by distortion or not, tubes can sometimes provide a more pleasureable tone.

Kind of off topic but....one other "problem" with my analog rig is that recordings either sound stunning or not so good. where my Digital all sounds "great". Is this again a problem with my cart and phono pre.

Dear Atmasphere: I apologize for my earlier comment which an American friend explained to me was worded incorrectly. When I said, “I know very well your units but I would not exhibit any of your products”

what I really meant was that I know your units very well, and are not mentioning them (or any other products) as an example to debate. My view is that we can’t generalize that ALL tubes or ALL ss sound a certain way, and that the individual design of the component makes all the differences.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

The big advantage tubes have over solid state is that they are *far* more linear. Their gain characteristic is many times better than a transistor or integrated circuit. They also overload in a much more sonically benign fashion, tending towards compression rather than clipping.

Most solid state amplification employs feedback (and lots of it) to cure the nonlinear gain ills. The closest you can get to a tube is by using JFETs open loop. They're pretty good, but still not in the same league as tubes.

On the other hand, most tube circuits require coupling caps. There is, as several of you have pointed out, no perfect design, and they all exhibit artful compromise.

But as Atmasphere points out, the micro details and very small signal information is better recovered via tubes. This is not just opinion, but a technical limitation of topology. The exception would be an open-loop class A gain stage using a reasonably linear active device such as a JFET.

jh

Dear Atmasphere: I apologize for my earlier comment which an American friend explained to me was worded incorrectly. When I said, “I know very well your units but I would not exhibit any of your products”
what I really meant was that I know your units very well, and are not mentioning them (or any other products) as an example to debate. My view is that we can’t generalize that ALL tubes or ALL ss sound a certain way, and that the individual design of the component makes all the differences.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Csmithbarc, nothing is off topic, its your thread!! I will say this, there is no definate answer to your recording consistency problem.. However I will give you this, I have had worse sounding recordings on LP back with less serious Phono stage and Cartridge just not compete well with better recordings.. In all honesty Yes once I made a move to a good MC cart and Tube phono stage many of the differences dissapeared and became shockingly excellent sounding original recordings..

But as with everthing, other issues changed along with this, such as putting an expensive cart on the table needed much more attention to setup, and loading with the Phono amp etc.. Which were just more flexable than using a Straight MM cart… Also the excellent recordings are Still just as good and actually far better as well, but all the lesser recordings with a sweet stylus digging deeper are much more detailed and smooth.. So you could be very happy, but it costs more money and more time to get familure with setting up and tweaking your system to your sound, you just need the tools to do it…

And really just ask yourself is all this worth it to me? Or am I pretty happy with CD and not ready to worry about it in the long run? Also for these recordings your not finding too stellar, if you have not invested in a serious LP cleaner and solutions that would be a huge start to find more out of your collection.. Again I am not an expert, but an enthusiast and I have just found in my experience these levels do exist and can be obtained, even without spending a Ton of money but it will cost some cash with no doubt.     

Hi Opus111, of course I do have a 'vested' interest, but I also stand behind what I say, IOW I try to practice what I preach FWIW. I hope that's OK :)

Rauliruegas, thanks for your explanation! No worries :)

I think Hagtech stated the matter better than I could. And I agree with him that if you are going to make a solid state phono section that does detail retrieval correctly, it will have to be some sort of zero feedback topology using FET style transistors. They are the only devices (I know of) that have linearity like that of triodes.

I for one would love to not have to work with tubes. High voltages, filament circuits, the production of tubes and the like all make transistors desirable. But so far I have yet in the 45 some odd years since they really started to appear to see them actually bring home the bacon. If they did, there would not be more tube equipment manufacturers here in the US then there was 50 years ago! The market has spoken very clearly to that.

Dear Hagtech: First my apology to Csmithbarc for this post but IMHO it is extremely important to speak about:

+++++ " The big advantage tubes have over solid state is that they are *far* more linear. " +++++

Yes, I agree with that in normal designs: in our design we develop a totally new mathematics theorem to make the transistor full linear, so that advantage dissapear.

+++++ " They also overload in a much more sonically benign fashion, tending towards compression rather than clipping. " +++++

I agree too in normal designs and in the past SS ones ( even on those times M.Levinson and Mcinthos introduce in their electronics designs a " soft clipping " stage. ). Today almost all SS designs take care about designing with very high overload levels so the clipping subject it is not an issue.

+++++ " Most solid state amplification employs feedback ... " +++++

No, more and more SS designs come with NON feedback design, as a fact the non-feedback design is the SS rule today.

+++++ " But as Atmasphere points out, the micro details and very small signal information is better recovered via tubes. This is not just opinion, but a technical limitation of topology. The exception would be an open-loop class A gain stage " +++++

It is untrue that there is a technical limitation topology, it is not: what could exist is a not so good design but there are a lot of right SS designs out there.
As a fact you state that there is an exeption: " The exception would be an open-loop class A gain stage ... " well this is one of the exeptions.

As you can see there is no single advantage from the tubes against SS, what exist is different designs ( good and bad ) in both technology sides.

You already know all the tube technology limitations, like you say almost all work with coupling caps or coupled transformers, the tubes are harmonic generators and the problem is that that harmonics does not exist in the original signal, the impedance problems are bigger too when a tube amp try to handle the " electrical speaker impedance ": almost all the tube electronics are high output impedance that when is connected to cables, audio devices or speakers change the frequency response: I can go on speaking about the tube limitations but this is not the subject. I believe that exist very good designs ( within its own technology limitations ) on both sides and we the customers have the choice.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

>>we develop a totally new mathematics theorem to make the transistor full linear<<

What kind of fluff is that? I'm not familiar with any of your designs, but coming up with some new equations on paper does not change the laws of physics. Active devices follow certain behaviors and have been well established. On one end of the scale is the triode, the most inherently linear amplification device used in audio. At the other end is the bipolar transistor (ok, maybe an IGBT is worse). In the middle are JFETs, pentodes, MOSFETs.

The bipolar transistor has a nearly perfect logarithmic transconductance. Hard to beat in that respect. But exponential is not proportional (linear). No theorem is going to change that.

If you have, however, invented some new circuit topology that does what you claim, then I suggest you patent it immediately. Silicon Valley is going to pound your door down.

>>more SS designs come with NON feedback design<<

Well, I think this is a little exaggerated. Most SS designs on the market employ opamps. Only a handful use open loop discrete gain stages. Perhaps this number is growing, but I hardly think it is dominant.

>>It is untrue that there is a technical limitation topology<<

What I didn't make clear here was the basic difference between class A and class B stages. As far as I know virtually all opamps run class AB. The output signal is driven in one direction by one device (transistor), and in the other direction by a second device. They keep handing off the signal. Only during a small crossover window do they both conduct. Making this window larger can help. Making the window full scale turns the amplifier back into class A. No device ever turns off.

In contrast, a class A stage is driven by a single device. It is always on. There is no cross over or handoff. This is the difference between a 2A3 SET and your typical SS amplifier. Why is it people will live with a flea-powered 2A3 when they can have 50 watts out of an LM3875 power opamp? Because of the micro detail. The SET is running full bore at idle. It excels at small signals and the distortion becomes vanishingly small. By comparison, the class AB amplifier excels at large signals. But it's distortion rises as the signal gets smaller. Exactly the opposite of the 2A3. That is an example of topology.

There are a lot of other topologies I can get into, but that example illustrates the point well.

>>tubes are harmonic generators<<

Yes. So is feedback. And the harmonics generated by feedback are far more insidious. They might be quite small in relative amplitude, but multiply with each pass through the amplifier, generating a lot of non-integer harmonics. That leads to the cold, sterile, and sometimes fatiguing sound of many high feedback amplifier stages.

SS stages that do not use feedback are also harmonic generators. Heck, every amplifier is to some degree. The question is, what sort of harmonics do you want to live with? I'll take a triode any day.

jh

Here are some claims/concerns about the "wonder" product they've been trying to sell in the threads but haven't addressed:

>>Claims to have an unprecedented flat frequency response from 0.01Hz to 1 mHz<<

Well that’s crap as Spectral designs and others go beyond that.

>>Claim of 150 dB common mode rejection<<

More crap. The halves of a differential circuit must be matched within one - thirty millions (the deviation is one unit for thirty million units) - while even "dual" devices, made from a single crystal, are matched within one to a hundred. There is nothing in existence to measure such deviation. For the readership, in tube designs/ matching within one to thirty is common and OK.

>>Claim they match the discrete devices a million times as precisely as the others do.<<

Obviously, this is pure BS and more BS.

>>Claim distortion of 2/10000 (two - ten thousands of a percent - i.e.) the claimed distortion is minus 104 dB.<<

More crap. This is by far impossible to measure with any equipment on the phono level because they would have to have a device with the resolution to picovolts, and such instruments do not exist.
Additionally the claimed distortion figure is over 30 dB below (!) the theoretical noise floor for an MC cartridge, and 5 times as low as the lowest noise floor from any known solid state device in existence.

For any engineer, such ridiculous claims make the design and the designers look anything but real and serious. However, it makes for great promotion which is the issue now correct?

In fact the odd-ordered harmonic generation that is a hallmark of transistors is a feature that runs counter to the rules of human hearing. We all hear the same way in this regard, and is not something that we can change.

The odd-ordered harmonic content we are talking about is used the human ear as loudness/harshness cues and occurs in vanishingly small amounts- hard to measure with conventional test equipment. But our ears are very sensitive to this type of distortion- finely tuned you might say.

Tubes do not make this type of distortion. So- in a phono stage, if you *add* this distortion, it will exist in the system right to the loudspeaker. So the phono section is the place where you really want to use tubes.

Dear Jh: +++++ " If you have, however, invented some new circuit topology that does what you claim, then I suggest you patent it immediately. " +++++

We are in this process.

+++++ " This is the difference between a 2A3 SET and your typical SS amplifier " +++++

Maybe the problem is that there is no more ( almost ) that " typical SS " topology. Today almost all preamps goes non-feedback, pure class A and discrete stages. Btw, we are using bipolars.

+++++ " Yes. So is feedback. " +++++

Like I told you almost the rule today are non-feedback designs. I think that you need some update about.

You certainly know every single tube technology limitations: very high output impedance, tubes are a noisy device " per nature ", tubes designs have higher distortions level than SS or hybrids one, tubes have heavy problems to reproduce accurately both frequency extremes specially the low bass where ( beteen other things ) does not have control over the woofers like the SS topology, tubes are untrusty: time to time ( very short time ) blow-up, tubes are not performance consistent: almost every single day sound different ( many people don't take in count because every day are in touch with their systems ). Jh you know that we can go on speaking about but this is not the subject: you and me know that there is nothing perfect in tubes or SS electronics.

Jh, the subject is that the " very old myths " about SS designs, fortunately, dissapear. Today we have very good SS designs as we can find good tube designs. The best of all is that today the customers have several choices that in the past don't.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Hmmm, Audiofeil, why don't you ask him to explain it rather than using words like crap, BS, ridiculous, etc. You're posts have been nothing but antagonistic for so long it has become tiresome.

You keep attacking Raul like he's trying to sell his preamp, but I don't see you attacking Ralph when he speaks of the virtues of his products. Is this because you sell Atma's??? Why the hypocrisy???

I love it when manufacturers like Ralph and JCarr and Raul/Jose and Hagerman discuss their designs and thoughts here. There is valuable info to be gained from all of them and I hope they all continue to post so that we can benefit from what they have to say.

Unfortunately, Audiofeil, just like Raul has probably turned off many people with his posts, you have made it clear to at least me, that even in your native language you have a lot to learn about earning the respect of others.

tubes are a noisy device " per nature ", tubes designs have higher distortions level than SS or hybrids one, tubes have heavy problems to reproduce accurately both frequency extremes specially the low bass where ( beteen other things ) does not have control over the woofers like the SS topology, tubes are untrusty: time to time ( very short time ) blow-up, tubes are not performance consistent: almost every single day sound different ( many people don't take in count because every day are in touch with their systems )

Rauliruegas, I gotta call you on this one. *None* of the above is true. Tubes are *lower* distortion than transistors, noise is a red herring (either are noisy *or* quiet- you know that), the 'woofer control' comment is right out (mythological) and frankly, dealing with the reliability of transistors in the studio the last few days: give me tubes- at least they can be serviced! If a transistor bites you you're down for the count. And finally your comment about tubes being inconsistent is just wrong. I've had the same tubes in my Neumann U67s for the last 20 years and the mics get a lot of use, often on for days at a time. In the same 20 years the transistors in my Mellotron are toast.

OTOH I find that power tubes have variation- but not day to day. Triodes will have very consistent operation right up the end of their service life, which is often 10,000 hours. Pentodes are more variable, but even they will not be different from one day to the next!

I understand that you may think that you are the exception to all this. That's great! Now put yourself on the other side of that *same* coin and realize that there are the same exceptions in the tube world.

Dear Atmasphere: A well SS design has lower distortion that a well tube design.

In my last trips to USA in three different audio systems: three tube audio devices blow up, one of them was Atmasphere.

Ralph this is not a tournament, you and me like every single music lover are looking for the same: the best quality sound reproduction, you choose to do it through tubes and that's fine other people like me choose doing through SS technology.
Ralph, I'm not against the tube technology: the subject is that till today the SS technology help me in a best way to achieve my music sound priorities, if in the future I find that the tubes ( I owned for many years tube electronics ) could help me you can be sure that I will use it, but today they can't in any way. Btw, by design we dissapear those odd harmonics.

Fortunately for all of us the tube and SS designs are " suffering " improvements over " past " designs and that fact has to be a motive of great enthusiasm for all the audio community.

Instead that we use our time speaking about the advantages/disadvantages of either technology IMHO we could use that time trying to improve our designs or better yet try to work " together " for a better future on the quality music sound reproduction.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Mab33, based upon a view of your system you appear to be one of his customers. You have a fiduciary interest in the product so your remarks are tainted.

Can you say "shill" with me?

Back to the original question:

should i consider a further upgrade to a better tube phono pre or is it simply that a change from SS to Tube amp is more "pronounced" in digital playback?

I strongly suggest to get/build a proper rack and address power filtration in its entirety. Me don't trust PS Audio...me trust Sean & Deano. Search the Jedi archives, young Padwan.

Vibrations will transform into digital jitter. This could be a major cause of digital listening fatigue. Although I'm not against tubes I am against using them to mask system anomalies. Poor room acoustics will exacerbate the jitter issue, especially around 3-4 KHz. It will sound very fatiguing. The rear wall desperately needs treatment and so the first reflection points. Bet you don't have slap echo treatments either.

Last but not least: get the sub out of the equation while you fix this. You might find out it's not necessary at all.

Look Mom, what Ralph Atma, Hagtech, Audiofeil & Raoul didn't come up with!

With psychic power and primal intensity,

Glad to see some people standing up to what are gross misleading anti-SS amp blanket statements. I am ashamed to think that some readers (with less scientific backgrounds perusing audiogon) might take some of these blanket statements at face value and go away and sell a perfectly adequate SS amp and buy a very expensive tube amp and some very expensive interconnects and speaker cables (ending up with 20K of gear & cables) to connect to their $2 K speakers with $50 mass produced drivers (all the while they might be better served by room acoustic treatment, the addition of a sub or upgrading the speakers). The hyperbole of some statements make it seem that SS amps will all sound absolutely terrible by their very nature - I strongly disagree with this belief. (BTW - I agree that tube amps, correctly implemented in a synergistic system, can sound absolutely fantastic....but this does not mean that every SS amp designs is bad - there is good SS sound too)

IMHO, blanket statements and hyperbole is what detracts somewhat from other useful and instructive discussions on these forums. I know everyone is probably guilty of these statements from time to time (including myself) but some persist in pressing their philosophies more than others....

Rauliruegas, the last time I auditioned one of your produc ts it blew up too! What a coincidence!

How about you fess up? The fact is you did not audition our gear. This sort of behaviour on your part is what gets people branded as trolls.

Dear Atmasphere: +++++ " The fact is you did not audition our gear. " +++++

This is totally untrue. Everyone that know me knows that I never ever affirm something that is untrue.

If the owner of that Atmasphere ( preamp and amp ) audio devices give me its Ok ( better yet, if he want too that he post about )I will give you all the info about. I hope he agree because now my word is in " doubt "??????

Now you are insulting me, something that I never believe/wait/spect from you.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Guys, no single device, either thermoionic or semiconductive deserves the honor of two persons confronting each other because of it. Trust me on this.

Well, at least not until diamond transistors are invented... ;)

03-25-07: Psychicanimal +++
The three manifestations of the ego are as follows:

1) I'm right. (cause I say so)
2) I'm in control (and don't want to be controlled)
3)I'm looking good (saving face) +++

Psychic, I am not going to say I am not guilty of the above, but having read one or two of your post you really need to heed your own words. Besides, many on this threads raise some very cogent opinions. Something rarely found in yours.

Kind Regards
Paul

Csmithbarc,

1. The AES's output impedance might be a mismatch for the Prima Luna.

2. The AES's output level might be too high for the Prima Luna, causing overload distortion.

Either of these is a more likely answer to your question than tubes vs. solid state.

Can you describe, in audiophile terms, HOW the Graham Slee sounds better than the AES? That might help those interested in offering helpful diagnoses or suggestions.

Best,
Doug

Audiofeil - a "shill" eh? Come on, gimme a break. Who has something to sell here and works in the industry, not me. Perhaps you should look up the definition before you use words you don't understand.

I think Doug's post above may be leading us in the right direction to explain the original posters questions. I looked up the specs on the Primaluna and found that it's input impedance is 100K Ohms which seems unlikely to be the issue, but it's input sensitivity is 270mV. Couldn't find any specs on the AES unit, but wouldn't the Primaluna be easily overdriven with a .27V input sens.?

The Graham slee unit had much more detail across the board...mostly in the lower end. Basically the Graham slee gave me "punchy" base where as the AES tube unit was very "muddy" in comparison. Further, the Graham slee SS unit did not sound dry or lean in any way.

Csmithbarc,

Mab33's discovery re: the Prima Luna's input sensitivity mirrors what I found (but didn't post, since I wanted someone else to verify it - thanks, Mab33!). There's a case to be made that it's so low that many phono preamps will overdrive it. This can lead to all sorts of audio nasties, and their character will undoubtedly depend on the source doing the overdriving. How to tell? If the sound is especially distorted or unpleasing on dynamic peaks or strong, sustained vocals, your Prima Luna's input sensitivity is probably overloaded.

On "punchy" vs. "muddy" bass...

Have you tried different tubes in the AES? You've got a 12au7 regulating the power supply (I think) and 6SJ7's as signal tubes. Rolling different tubes into either of these locations will provide substantially different sounds. "Muddy" bass is characteristic of some tubes more than others. I don't have any specific recommendations for the tube types your AES uses, but as a rough guideline, look for tubes whose internal structures appear especially robust and "stable", in an architectural sort of way. Tubes built like this tend to have tighter bass than tubes with less solid internal structures.

Best,
Doug

Pualy...thosearenotmywords...I'mnotthatsmart. Just let this guy play audiohile. He's doing good and has $$$. Dealers will love him. It's when people like him hear a system like mine when they have a bad reality check.

I always look good, most always am right yet not always in control. I did figure out big spender's audio problem--unlike the *professionals*...

***

I found myself reacting much as the first poster when I read this thread,in that cartridge change or upgrade might be your preferred path.With a Planar 9 it's well known that the Rega Exact cart rather than the Elys is the best match.Rega also have a new MC cart in their line called the Apheta now.I have always found it edifying to switch between cartridges and note how my system handled each one differently.Less expensive than switching between gear anyway.

Reading this thread over the past several days has been entertaining, to say the least. I've learned a few things from all of the technical discussion...mostly that I know very little.

Like a previous poster stated, I'd look to the tubes in the AES unit first. Some tube rolling/upgrading/replacing might be a less expensive way to attack the issue. Some Herbie's Audio Labs tube dampers would be a great tweak to try...they will help with your "muddy" bass, as well as "clean up" the sound a bit allowing the low level detail to come through.

Maybe, as some have stated, the AES and the PrimaLuna will never play nice together.

Some Herbie's Audio Labs tube dampers would be a great tweak to try...they will help with your "muddy" bass, as well as "clean up" the sound a bit allowing the low level detail to come through.

Excellent suggestion, and a very quick and easy way to determine if overly microphonic tubes are to blame for the muddy bass.

Raulinruegas, I'm not insulting you, but your description of our product just happened to be something that has not been documented in nearly thirty years of business. I had to call you on it plain and simple.

Like anyone else in the business, sure we've had failures. But not 'blowing up' on account of a tube failure! which is the context of your statement. As an OTL manufacturer, we had to face the prior legacy of Futterman et.al. who had convinced the world at that time that OTLs were unreliable. We had created a way to make them pretty well bulletproof, so that a tube failure, speaker short, open input or total overload could not damage the amp.

I'm well-known for doing stunts with the amps at shows- pulling power tubes while the amps are playing, shorting out the output while the volume control is turned up to the limit and other things- things you would expect to damage an amp if you did them.

One time I had a tube arc when I had the speaker terminals shorted during just such a demonstration. No big deal- the amp was playing as if nothing happened when I removed the quarters I was using to short out the speaker terminals.

So you chose to describe the the one thing our amps *don't* do. So of course I had to call you on the carpet. In order for these forums to work you have to stick avoiding misleading comments.

I'm friends with a physicist named Earl Geddes who specializes in acoustics and psychoacoustics, has authored books and holds patents in the field, and who not long ago presented several papers to the Audio Engineering Society on the subject of distortion perception. Earl is NOT a tube-o-phile.

Earl's research confirmed that the ear is very sensitive to low levels of high order harmonic distortion (I don't recall whether he singled out odd-order distortion or not), but very tolerant of high levels of second harmonic distortion. He also found that the ear is very sensitive to a rise in distortion at very very low power levels.

After he had completed the study, Earl made this remark to me (as close as I can remember): "Duke, now I see why you and your friends like tubes so much". He also told me that his study indicates a negative correlation between THD and listener preference - in other words, listeners were more likely to prefer the device with the higher total harmonic distortion measurement! The reason is, the THD measurement does not correlate well at all with distortion perception. THE INDUSTRY IS MEASURING THE WRONG THINGS.

Earl Geddes and Lydia Lee have proposed a new distortion metric that correlates very well with subjective listening tests, but it has not been embraced by the industry.

Anyway, my point is that in general solid state devices have lower measured distortion, but the distortion characteristic of tube devices is more in harmony with the way our ears work.

Finally, as an Atma-Sphere dealer, I have never had a customer's Atma-Sphere amp or preamp "blow up". Tube failure is not an amp blowing up, and Ralph's amps are designed so that tube failure does not damage the amp at all. In several thousand hours of listening, I have had one case of output tube failure and one case of input tube failure in an Atma-Sphere amp, both of which were easily remedied by replacing the tubes with no damage to anything. Ralph has never had a case of a customer's amp "blowing up", so I think Raul overstated his experience a bit.

Duke

Dear Audiokinesis: The problem was " more " than a simple single tube: first one tube, few minutes latter a second one and finally damage the speaker.

Atmasphere is right the amp don't suffer a serious damage, but I'm talking of a whole sale tube technology problems when used on audio:

+++++ " You certainly know every single tube technology limitations: very high output impedance, tubes are a noisy device " per nature ", tubes designs have higher distortions level than SS or hybrids one, tubes have heavy problems to reproduce accurately both frequency extremes specially the low bass where ( beteen other things ) does not have control over the woofers like the SS topology, tubes are untrusty: time to time ( very short time ) blow-up, tubes are not performance consistent: almost every single day sound different ( many people don't take in count because every day are in touch with their systems ). Jh you know that we can go on speaking about but this is not the subject: you and me know that there is nothing perfect in tubes or SS electronics.

Jh, the subject is that the " very old myths " about SS designs, fortunately, dissapear. Today we have very good SS designs as we can find good tube designs. The best of all is that today the customers have several choices that in the past don't. " +++++

and I'm talking of those tube problems only because Mr. Atmasphere " thinks " that he lives in an " island " where only exist TUBES and where the other technologies are not " up to the task ".

This is totally untrue there are hybrid and SS designs ( tube designs too ) that not only are very good designs but that outperforms the Atmasphere gear.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Amen, brothers Ralph, Jim, Duke ...

THE INDUSTRY IS MEASURING THE WRONG THINGS.

THD is a meaningless number. The ear is remarkably sensitive to odd-order harmonics - responding rather pleasantly to even harmonics - especially 2nd order.

Keep in mind that 3rd, 5th, 7th, etc. show up as very low numbers, but too much of these small numbers will chase you out of the room.

Some of these odd-order 'nasties' in minute proportions can be perceived as 'sparkle' or low-level detail - much like the trap people fall into when they mistakenly interpret speakers with elevated upper midrange / low-treble as having detail and pace.

This recognition of 'sparkle' and 'resolution' usually comes a few months before you find their latest prized piece of gear for sale on Audiogon.

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier

Dear Raul,

When you wrote:

and I'm talking of those tube problems only because Mr. Atmasphere " thinks " that he lives in an " island " where only exist TUBES and where the other technologies are not " up to the task ".

Tube problems my dear Raul are a consequence of bad design and not the nature of tubes.

As far as reliability is concerned, apart from a certain manufacturer in Ralph's home state (hint: it's not Atmasphere, but does begin with the letter "A"), all of my tube gear has been more reliable than my s-s gear.

You may argue about sonics, but tubes have it all over s-s in terms of simplicity, reliability, field serviceability, and immunity from voltage spikes.

As you know all too well, we are all in this business because we love it. Ralph, Jim, you and I don't make design decisions based on the prompting of our corporate accountants, but rather our chosen path is fueled by our passions.

You endorse your design because you love it - as do Ralph, Jim, and I.

Now, I won't deny that some behavior becomes pathological over time, but I contend that we'd be nuts to be in this business if we didn't love it. There are easier ways to pay the mortgage.

We have all in our own way landed on our own island paradise, and I consider it disingenuous of you to single Ralph (Atmasphere) out in this discussion.

As has been pointed out on more than one occasion, the number of companies manufacturing tube gear is growing and not shrinking. This is quite amazing when you take into consideration the marketing blitz from the large corporations.

The marketplace is speaking. Is the marketplace mad?

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier

This has become shameful. I'm glad Hagtech pulled out just in time.

Behave yourselves.

***

Kudos to Dr. Geddes but he has apparently rediscovered what has been the accepted wisdom in audio for probably more than 20 years. The only way to account for the fact that many folks prefer tube preamps and amplifiers despite the fact that they typically have higher measured distortion than SS devises is to posit Dr. Geddes conclusions, and many others have studied this phenomenon and no doubt also presented findings to the AES and like groups. IMO, one of the reasons why SET amplifiers have such a devoted following is that these devices tend to have a very low distortion at low power levels which increases pretty linearly with increasing power demands. PP amps, on the other hand, tend to have higher distortion at the lowest power levels, near the cross-over point, than they do further up the scale.

As far as Atma-sphere amplifiers damaging a speaker, I think it's highly unlikely to occur even if every single output tube were to go sour simultaneously. What is being said, Raul, is that the amp won't damage a speaker, not merely that it will not damage itself. I have a pair of Atmas with an aging output tube set. Consequently, once in a while one of the fuses on the output tubes will blow due to the tube arcing over (each tube is separately fused). This results in a barely perceptible decrease in power and decrease in the wonderfulness of the sound, but not even a hint of anything that could possibly damage a speaker, i.e., no pops, bleeps, ticks, screeches, etc. Nada. So, while I don't mean to infer that you, Raul, are being untruthful, I do think that whatever happened during that listening session to damage the speaker did not occur directly as a result of the amplifier malfunctioning. Something else was going on.