Tubes vs Solid State - Imaging, Soundstaging, 3D

Mechans - I am using an Octave V40se with Svetlana Winged C EL34s. The Gold Lions were reissues in a Cary SLI-80 signature.

Newbee - While I might not have broad based listening skills that it may take a decade or more to develop, I have owned 20+ good speakers (1-5k) and just about as many amps/integrateds (1-5k). I'm really interested to find out how a tube amp could bring me the clarity and realism I sense from SS gear. When I switch from tube to SS, I often experience a relief, as if the sound is coming into focus.

Islandmandan - I plan to try some Svetlana Winged C KT88s which I have heard are a great match with Octave. Perhaps I just haven't heard enough tubes. I will say that the EL34s are very smooth and easy to listen to. I also would not say that I could recognize a "tubey sound" but when I switch back to SS, I definitely sense a change (that I happen to like).

Well, thank you for the overwhelming amount of information. I did not mean to start a controversial discussion but I suppose that is inevitable when the topic of tubes versus Solid state comes up. What I have gathered from the discussion is that the overwhelming sentiment feels that tubes provide equal or better imaging, spatial cues and dimensionality than solid state. It appears that my first job will be to explore rolling these smaller tubes.

In all but a few cases I was comparing integrated amplifiers of the tube and solid-state variety although in one case I was using a set of solid-state monos. My impression of low level listening is that tubes provide the most information but as volume increases I find that solid-state is more expressive. To draw a comparison from the video world, I would say that tubes are like a glorious standard definition Blockbuster displayed on a CRT screen where as solid state comes across as a much crisper 1080 Blu-ray film. In my experience solid-state amplifiers have the tendency to grab and hold my attention for longer than tubes do. I think this is because I visually listen to the music and am constantly trying to figure out where a guitarist is standing, how close the singer is to the microphone, how many microphones were used for the drums, etc.

My experience seems to be the same as everyone else's on this thread except for the fact that I have my amplifier technologies reversed. Hopefully time will tell what the missing variable is. I have indeed optimized my speaker positioning in the room quite painstakingly. I have had quite a few speakers that are popular on this site, many of them being monitors or many monitors which are famous for pinpoint imaging. Dyn c1 sig, focal utopia be, harbeth shl5, maggie mmg, 1.6, 1.7, pas imagine b, bw 802n, bw 805n, bw 805d, usher tiny dancer, metlin tsm mmi, sf cremona auditor m, selah monitors...

With my solid-state electronics I truly feel like spoken voices are coming from a definite pinpoint in space. When using tubes on the same speakers I feel the image is more general and not as pinpoint. Also when using solid-state I hear something that is akin to a Hall effect that you might find on an A/V receiver which makes the room sound bigger. While I am not doing this via digital processing, this is one of the things that I would attribute to a three dimensional soundstage. Also using solid-state I feel that I can judge distances between instruments front to back, side to side better.

I will say though that it has happened that I have turned on my solid state gear in the morning and just recoiled at the way that it sounds. Something about my hearing early in the morning craves tubes. I hope it is a coincidence that I cannot hear very well in the morning and my hearing gets sharper throughout the day as I wake up.

I am surprised at the lack of support of solid-state in this thread. However, everyone gets a vote and the voices seem pretty unanimous so I will have to keep my ear is wide open for what I have not been hearing.

Thank you to everyone that has commented on this thread.

Regarding solid state missing low level detail, does that then mean that tube amplifiers offer more subtle details which thereby produce a more complete amplification of the source material? I have been under the impression that tube amplifiers introduce distortion that is pleasant to the ears which is the hallmark of their signature sound. I am fully open to and happy to be wrong on this! I would like to know if tube amplifiers offer more information (more detail), less information (obscured by pleasant distortion), or simply different information (to each his own ie no technology is more accurate).

If solid-state amplification achieves its sharp details through the omission of low-level information, leaving a sharper contrast with the silent background, would this not be a plus for imaging as it allows sounds to be more readily located? Also, is this not an inherent quality of three dimensionality as the purpose of 3D is to stand out in relief to a background?

Re: A rebel? Perhaps. A businessman first and foremost.

I hope I never become so ravaged by this hobby that I am openly hostile for the sake of attention as this poster. It looks like pasture time...