I know this is an age old debate, but I need a technical explanation why one would choose tubes over solid state

[morricab]

I listened to the "tubes rule" crowd and had a tube preamp to go with my Boulder SS amp for 10 years. I learned that the tubes actually last half the claimed hours before the sound degrades, then bad sound for months. Five years ago switched to a Boulder preamp that sounded better and there was none of the "Is it time to replace those tubes? . . . How about now?"

I have been told many times over the years that a good tube amp would sound better than the Boulder 3060. I had several very high end tube amps in for audition to see if that was true. The tube amps distorted and smeared the sound. It was not subtle. If you like that sound, and many people do, that is why you buy tube gear. The Boulder SS amp has virtually no distortion/smearing. To me, the Boulder crushed them.

Which speakers were you trying to drive with these tube amps? What tube amps are they? Big push/pull amps from the likes of Audio Research, VTL, Manley etc...? Context here matters in your description.

 

[mtemur]

in 2001 i had the MA2 OTL's and the Tenor 75 watt OTL's in my system one after the other; this was right after i had the big Mark Levinson 33 mono blocks. at that time still had my Wilson WP 6.0's and ML 32 preamp. a few months later got my Kharma's and ditched the ML32.

The ML 33H monos perform better than the 33 monos, but pairing the 33H (or other ML amp) with other ML components such as the ML 32 results in a dark, lifeless presentation that no cable or tweak can correct. The effect becomes even more pronounced with the addition of the ML 30.5/31 combo. This dark character is especially evident when compared against a tube amplifier like the Tenor OTL. In my experience, only one ML component from that era should be used in a system; combining multiple ML units makes the sound unenjoyable.

Transitioning from the ML/WP 6.0 setup to a Tenor OTL with Kharma Ceramique would represent the opposite end of the spectrum in terms of musical enjoyment IME.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

The ML 33H monos perform better than the 33 monos,

i owned the 33H mono blocks first. then got the 33's. personally i thought they were different, and did prefer the more refined musical view of the 33H's, but also appreciated the weight and space and a little more flow of the big 33's. upgraded to the 33's looking for musical embrace, but not finding it there either. so moved on.

but pairing the 33H (or other ML amp) with other ML components such as the ML 32 results in a dark, lifeless presentation that no cable or tweak can correct.

yes. specifically on the No 32 i would add the word cloudy.

The effect becomes even more pronounced with the addition of the ML 30.5/31 combo.

agree.

This dark character is especially evident when compared against a tube amplifier like the Tenor OTL. In my experience, only one ML component from that era should be used in a system; combining multiple ML units makes the sound unenjoyable.

never did that but i could see it makes sense.

Transitioning from the ML/WP 6.0 setup to a Tenor OTL with Kharma Ceramique would represent the opposite end of the spectrum in terms of musical enjoyment IME.

mine were the Kharma Exquisite 1D's and found the love in that combo, i was the first to do it and many more Kharma/Tenor combo's followed.

i do still view that generation of Mark Levinson gear as all time hifi industrial art. it was beautiful and the 33's really made a visual statement sitting in my room. which obviously did not keep me using it for long.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Which speakers were you trying to drive with these tube amps? What tube amps are they? Big push/pull amps from the likes of Audio Research, VTL, Manley etc...? Context here matters in your description.

He was using a tube pre with a Boulder SS Amplifier.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

I listened to the "tubes rule" crowd and had a tube preamp to go with my Boulder SS amp for 10 years. I learned that the tubes actually last half the claimed hours before the sound degrades, then bad sound for months. Five years ago switched to a Boulder preamp that sounded better and there was none of the "Is it time to replace those tubes? . . . How about now?"

I have been told many times over the years that a good tube amp would sound better than the Boulder 3060. I had several very high end tube amps in for audition to see if that was true. The tube amps distorted and smeared the sound. It was not subtle. If you like that sound, and many people do, that is why you buy tube gear. The Boulder SS amp has virtually no distortion/smearing. To me, the Boulder crushed them.

What preamp? Clearly was not a good match for the Boulder. My falvorite piece of equipment know is a hybrid tube/class d IA by Canor.Audio No looking back at tubes or SS have the best of both worlds.

 

[morricab]

He was using a tube pre with a Boulder SS Amplifier.

And?

 

[microstrip]

I listened to the "tubes rule" crowd and had a tube preamp to go with my Boulder SS amp for 10 years. I learned that the tubes actually last half the claimed hours before the sound degrades, then bad sound for months. Five years ago switched to a Boulder preamp that sounded better and there was none of the "Is it time to replace those tubes? . . . How about now?"

Never heard about tubes having rules, but learned from experience that some audiophiles think they know it all and try to create rules in an hobby of preference ... If people prefer SS they should go for it.

In reality experience in this hobby created some thumb rules, not properly rules, that have been be challenged by time, although they helped a lot of people in the past.

I have been told many times over the years that a good tube amp would sound better than the Boulder 3060. I had several very high end tube amps in for audition to see if that was true. The tube amps distorted and smeared the sound. It was not subtle. If you like that sound, and many people do, that is why you buy tube gear. The Boulder SS amp has virtually no distortion/smearing. To me, the Boulder crushed them.

Well, If these people were considering your YG Acoustics Sonja XV IMO they gave you very poor advice - I can't find a tube amplifier I would recommend for a 88 dB/W/m speaker with such technical and sound characteristics.

 

[microstrip]

(...) yes. specifically on the No 32 i would add the word cloudy.

Although it is always a question of matching and system, I listened to "better" sound with the ML380s than with ML32. Probably the ML32 had more detail, but the ML380s had the great dark soul of the Mark Levinson of that time.

IMO the ML33 and the ML380s marked the end of noticeable Mark Levinson era. Some people say great things about the latest ML20.6, unfortunately I never listened to it.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

And?

And nothing you asked what amplifier he was using and he stated that in his post.

 

[Al M.]

Well, If these people were considering your YG Acoustics Sonja XV IMO they gave you very poor advice - I can't find a tube amplifier I would recommend for a 88 dB/W/m speaker with such technical and sound characteristics.

Yes, YG speakers are difficult to drive, according to reports. The Stereophile measurements of a few YG speakers also suggest demanding, difficult loads. Nothing that I would use a tube amp on.

 

[Al M.]

And nothing you asked what amplifier he was using and he stated that in his post.

But he also said he tried tube power amps on the YG speakers, not just tube preamps in his system.

 

[Holmz]

What do you mean you had a SET with a crystal set when you were a kid? Was that in 1925 or something?? What do you mean you had a tube amp that could switch to triode? A SET is a triode by definition. Are you then talking about some PP tube amp that has a Pentode/Triode switch? Honestly, your explanation is very confusing.

OK - but what’s the point of talking about it?
Gramps was doing radio in the was, actually 10cm RADAR and radio was before and afterwards.
He had stacks of gear in his shop.

Liking SET has nothing to do about liking harmonic distortion. It is about a distortion pattern that the ear/brain can more easily ignore due to the psychoacoustic phenomenon of masking. If distortion is masked, it is inaudible, or in other words its like it is not there at all. I realize this is hard for some people to wrap their brains around but sometimes higher distortion of a certain pattern sounds less distorted and offensive than much lower distortion of a less benign pattern, psychoacoustically speaking.

Yeah I have also read Ralphs words I and abide.

Also, the whole "Tubes are noisier than transistors" is also BS. I have speakers that are high sensitivity and my amps are essentially silent into those speakers. On my DIY horn setup, I am driving the compression tweeter directly (active crossover, so amp is directly connected to the driver) and it has a sensitivity of 110dB. The amp I use on it is a 2A3 from Silvercore (3.5 watts) and it has only a tiny bit of hiss when you put your ear close to the driver. I have hooked up SS and Class D amps to my Odeons (98dB) that had noticeable hiss at the listening position...my Aries Cerat amps were dead quiet on the same speakers. Same goes for my Horning Eufrodite Ellipse speakers (98dB)...dead quiet with Aries Cerat, Amplifon 42SE, Ayon Crossfire III, Horning SATI amp etc. The Silvercore had a bit of hum, again not really audible at the listening position but the others were very quiet on a speaker with essentially no filter.

It was the OP that was talking about noise figure.

I never said anyone needs to run a SET, however, on a compatible speaker, IMO it will sound better than running a SS or Class D amp with tube sources and/or preamp.

That is the trick that I was trying to point out…
The OP needs a speaker, and picking out a speaker first allows for any amp to be considered.

Picking out a SET means that they need some COMPATIBLE speaker.

 

[morricab]

And nothing you asked what amplifier he was using and he stated that in his post.

No, I asked what tube amps he tried that didn’t work.

 

[microstrip]

(...) I realize this is hard for some people to wrap their brains around but sometimes higher distortion of a certain pattern sounds less distorted and offensive than much lower distortion of a less benign pattern, psychoacoustically speaking. (...)

Only because the proponents of such interesting theories are never able to provide people with the proper studies and links to decent documentation on the subject that can be applied to current electronics. All we get is the usual internet rumors, poor studies or references to unavailable or non accessible literature. So the same debate will go on circular until one part gets tired of the same old arguments ...

 

[microstrip]

(...) A trip to any high end audio show, will tell you why tubes are live and kicking. 100% of the time, the rooms I stay in longest are all tube systems, SETs with Horns are at the top of the list. Wilson and D'Agostino, I am heading for the door...

Nothing against your preference, but curiously if you count the number of push pull tube amplifiers versus SET you find push pull outweighs the SET by an extremely large margin. And some the best sounding systems are sometimes push pull on Wilson ...

 

[Holmz]

Nothing against your preference, but curiously if you count the number of push pull tube amplifiers versus SET you find push pull outweighs the SET by an extremely large margin. And some the best sounding systems are sometimes push pull on Wilson ...

Can a SET power a Wilson?

 

[morricab]

Nothing against your preference, but curiously if you count the number of push pull tube amplifiers versus SET you find push pull outweighs the SET by an extremely large margin. And some the best sounding systems are sometimes push pull on Wilson ...

Not sure your count is so accurate in 2025, micro. There are a lot of SET mfg. in east Europe and Asia.

 

[morricab]

Can a SET power a Wilson?

Yes, and some models very well. Please keep in mind there are a fairly large number of medium to high power SETs out there and Wilsons are not the most difficult of speakers to drive.

 

[morricab]

Only because the proponents of such interesting theories are never able to provide people with the proper studies and links to decent documentation on the subject that can be applied to current electronics. All we get is the usual internet rumors, poor studies or references to unavailable or non accessible literature. So the same debate will go on circular until one part gets tired of the same old arguments ...

Is it a poor study for you if the correlation coefficient, r < 0.9 or something? You have to realize that in psychology studies with actual humans results are never as clear cut as in the hard sciences.

 

[chuck]

Well, If these people were considering your YG Acoustics Sonja XV IMO they gave you very poor advice - I can't find a tube amplifier I would recommend for a 88 dB/W/m speaker with such technical and sound characteristics.

I didn't say the speakers were YG Sonja XVi, my current setup. Tried tube amps with Wilson Alexandria X2S2 and XLF, too. I have been to many shows and audio stores, heard pretty much every tube amp sold driving all kinds of speakers. I know the tube sound. The YGs played great with the tube amps, the amps had no trouble driving them. The YG Sonja XVi was the best tube system I have ever heard.