My own personal feeling is that musical preference has little to do with what tubes (or, loudspeakers, amplifiers, CD players, etc.) I prefer. The best tubes, loudspeakers, amps, or whatever do best with all of the many genres of music I listen to.
I will say that personal preference does play a role. For example, many people feel Sylvania 6SN7 to be among the best of the bunch, as there is a clarity and openness there. But, for a lot of applications, I prefer the honkin' fat mid/upper bass that the RCA variants lend. Likewise, the Telefunken 12AX7 is consideres the gold standard, but I find Sylvania Triple Mica 5751 to be so much more open and beautiful, these tubes just seem to make everything bigger, and everything gets better with no tradeoffs whatsoever. Again, that holds true whether I'm listening to hard rock, classic jazz, or dusty 1950s female vocals. |
So I guess that the one thing that everyone agrees about is that tubes "color" (alter) the sound: opinions vary regarding the best color.
But I thought the objective is to reproduce sound with "High Fidelity", which means without alteration. There really is nothing wrong with altering the sound if that's what you like, but such a system should be regarded as a musical instrument rather than a reproducing instrument.
. |
Eldartford,
my point exactly. |
hi eldartford:
you made a very insightful staemnet when you referred to stereo systems as "musical" rather than "reproducing" instruments.
in fact, all components are imperfect. thus at best, all stereo systems are imperfect reproducing instruments.
doesn't it make sense to select the nature of imperfection rather than settle for whatever accrues from configuring a stereo system in an attempt to create accuracy ?
obviously tube selection may be a way to voice a stereo system to suit one's taste. |
Eldartford, FWIW, what was the HiFi enthusiast's goal in those days before the transistor was introduced to audio? All he had to work with was tubes, so I must assume his goal was unobtainable, he just didn't know it?
Now along comes the transistor based equipment and all of the great measurements regarding distortions etc. Now we have a standard, except for one minor thing. It was grain ridden, cold, clinical, and for the most part just unmusical (yeh, I know its gotten a lot better in recent years). And it certainly did facilitate the developement of power hungry speaker designs. Do you not consider the sonic distortions introduced by transistors to be a 'colorization' of the original recorded signal albeit less so in frequency response?
The goal of all audio components is, or IMHO shoud be, to collectively create a system that reminded one of a musical event being replicated in small scale in the home. The key to reaching that goal is a users recall or fantasy of what the music sounded like in the original venue. A very subjective venture, at best.
Of course we tune our systems to accomodate our sensitivities. What other alternative 'actually' exists. None I think. :-) |
Newbee...I was around in those days. Our tube equipment hummed, hissed, and produced so much IM distortion that one percent harmonic distortion was not a problem! Our goal was to improve these measurements, and I guess we were successful except for the IM distortion which still runs around one percent in many (most?) tube amps.
By the way, how would you describe "grain" and what would cause it in a ss amp? |
There is a simple answer to this arguement.If it sounds good(not impossible with so much of the "better" designs)it IS GOOD!...PERIOD!!
Tube or SS!!!....AND if anyone doesn't buy that,what can I say?
Have fun rationalizing your preferrence!!
I LOVE my own well thought out hybrid system,and have spent many dollars,and years voicing it to my TOTAL satisfaction....BUT....
I have many friends who have ALL tube set-ups,and guess what?
Those systems(very carefuly put together)sound fantastic!!
To me,it is a definite "Skill Set" that many folks have attained,over a few years of exprience(and spending money).It can easily be SS or tubes,but the bottom line is....
I've heard enough "musically convincing" systems to know "either" camp is fine....
We've heard this before..."It's the Magic of the Magician"!!
A "well educated" hobbyist can go in either direction(somehow that sounds a bit odd-:) and get superb results!
That's the bottom line!
Best |
I will top Trelja's offer. I will provide the Sovtek tube of my choice. I assure you it will be a commonly used audio tube. I will give you 2 for each "tests good, quiet tube pre 1970 from the 6922 family or "tests good and quiet NOS" 12 volt miniature double triode of the following 12AX7s, 12AT7s or 12AU7s. The offer is good until my supplies last. I will consider offers of GEC/MoV and Mullard or other NOS power tubes. Trelja I will share the bounty with you.
I would like to point out that TRELJA is not a snooty guy. He introduced me to the Sino 12AX7 9th ed. or "C" version, which cost all of 5 or so bucks each and I use them. Further he recommended I use EH tubes in an application that have been nothing short of fantastic.
I can probably get some fatter honkinger 6SN7s for him than the RCAs but he likes them, so why fight. But If I were him I would seriously consider my offer of CKR/VT-231 or civilian Ken Rad 6SN7 GTs. No N7 has better bass energy.
Rodman I know you like the Tung Sol RPs and the tall Ws above all comers. I own 3 pairs of each and still say, quite confidently, that in terms of bass alone and only, the Ken Rads are better. Overall I am happiest at the moment with the Ws and won't be trading any of those. |
Hi Mechans- I've got six KenRad bottom getter 6SN7GTs to go with my six Sylvania VT-231 bottom getters for backup power amp tubes when the RPs(drivers) and Ws(phase splitters) run out. I just bought another pair of RPs out of Australia last week, and I've got one pair of backup W's. Below 250hz(10th order), my bass is handled via Hafler TransNova 9505. But the mid-bass speed that the W's provide is hard to beat. Really the biggest difference I notice between the Syl VT-231/KR GT and CTL/CHS combos is in soundstage depth. Other than that they are very close in timbre, tone, imaging, harmonic bloom, ambience recovery, frequency extention and(of course) all four iterations are the most transparent of the family. I can live with that, should my Grails fail. I dearly wish NOS 6550's or KT88's were still available in matched quads(or octets) for less than a king's ransom and first born male child(I could afford the second part). I'm saving my pennies for an octet of EAT Diamond KT88's. |
