Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible difference

[Flint]

The November issues of AudioXpress has a great article about the audible differences between Tube and Solid State amps, as well as a good summary of the history of trying to prove any two high quality amps will sound different.

http://read.uberflip.com/t/9964#

The author summarized several well known studies and papers and reach pretty much the same conclusions I have shared on this and other forums to the dismay of the audiophiles who insist that one $5000 amp sounds completely different than another $5000 amp.

Ultimately, if the frequency response and noise levels are comparible, and amps are running well below clipping, the audible differences between any two amps are not likely to be perceived by anyone.

 

[DIYer]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

^ "To access your audioXpress digital edition, please enter your username and password below." :angry-cussingwhite:

 

[Dennie]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

^ "To access your audioXpress digital edition, please enter your username and password below." :angry-cussingwhite:

Just use the "Free Preview" button. :confusion-shrug:




Dennie bscene-drinkingcheers:

 

[Rope]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

If there is a sonic difference between two comparable SS amps, it's because someone is twiddling with the volume control.

As for tube verses SS, there are audible sonic differences.

Rope

 

[Flint]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

The evidence suggests otherwise.

Some tube amps high THD or drift far enough from amplitude linearity to sound different from amps without those attributes. But, in all cases, simple & basic measurements have proven to accurately depict what an amp will sound like. If the frequency response, THD, and noise are similar, the sound quality has proven to be indistinguishable between them.

The article (pick up a copy, it is worth the read) points out that there has been a $10,000 prize for anyone who can prove in a A/B/X study to hear the difference between a well designed tube amp and a well designed SS amp which is not driven to clipping.

SET amps don't generally get to participate in the test because they don't offer enough power to not be pushed into clipping at average levels (and thus generate high even order harmonic distortion).

 

[DIYer]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Just use the "Free Preview" button. :confusion-shrug:

Uh.., which page is it on? :confusion-confused:

 

[Flint]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

The article mentions and quote studies and papers I've mentioned and even referenced in the many long discussions over at S&V in the past. It is reinforcement of what many have said for decades.

Recently I've seen an increase in the popularity of the concept that several good amps which measure nearly identically will sound significantly different to users. This is why I am posting this.

I recommend anyone truly engaged in this topic to purchase a copy of the November issue of AudioXpress. My local Barnes & Noble carries it.

 

[DIYer]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Recently I've seen an increase in the popularity of the concept that several good amps which measure nearly identically will sound significantly different to users.

Those typically come from vendors of amps.
Here's something to chew on. http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm English translation is through software and not so good.

 

[TitaniumTroy]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

I like the article on the history of ribbon speakers, better. Thanks for the info, will try to pick up a copy.

 

[Rope]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

First of all, let me disabuse you of the notion that The Audio Critic is there to “help [you] save tons of money on audio purchases.” We’d have to review hundreds of products at each price point to do that successfully. No, The Audio Critic is there to point out what’s important and what’s unimportant in audio. Big difference.

As for amplifier topologies, the sensible answer is, “Who cares?” Any amplifier, regardless of topology, can be treated as a “black box” for the purpose of listening comparisons. If amplifiers A and B both have flat frequency response, low noise floor, reasonably low distortion, high input impedance, low output impedance, and are not clipped, they will be indistinguishable in sound at matched levels no matter what’s inside them. Of course, some of the new “alphabet soup” topologies do not necessarily satisfy those conditions.

I really believe that all this soul-searching, wondering, questioning, agonizing about amplifiers is basically unproductive and would be much more rewarding if applied to loudspeakers instead. For various reasons that I have discussed in the past, people are more willing to change amplifiers than loudspeakers. That’s most unfortunate because a new and better loudspeaker will change your audio life but a new amplifier will not.

:text-link:

—Peter Aczel, Editor & Publisher

 

[Deleted member 133]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Thanks Flint. I've been preaching the same for decades as well. I do take it a step further: I believe that the purchase of an amp comes down to a very simple calculation in almost all cases: Watts per dollar. After all, if they sound the same, that's pretty much all there is to distinguish between them from a buyer's choice. (Yes size, quality of build, and the odd feature can come into play, but assume we're talking about comparable amps - physically and feature-wise - that are going to sound the same because they spec the same.)

 

[Dennie]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Just use the "Free Preview" button. :confusion-shrug:

Uh.., which page is it on? :confusion-confused:

For me, it is right next to the "Submit" button on the first page of the link.



Dennie :eusa-whistle:

 

[DIYer]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

For me, it is right next to the "Submit" button on the first page of the link.

I meant, which page is the article about the audible differences between amps on? Because I couldn't find it.

 

[Botch]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Was reading the latest issue of Home Theater, a review of the new Pioneer Elite SC-68, and their description of the "sound difference" between the reviewer's two AV receivers made me think of this thread. Enjoy! :laughing-rolling:

If these receivers were statues, the D3 model would have more muscle over a more substantial skeleton but just a little less refinement in the bone structure of the face; while the Class AB model would have more soulful and communicative facial features but less muscle definition and bone density below the neck. Weighted in terms of importance on a scale of 1 to 10, the top-end characteristic is a 2, while the mid- and lower-frequency characteristics are together an 8. In other words, the mid/low beneath-the-neck stuff makes a bigger difference and to me is well worth the trade-off.

 

[BrianZ]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

wait, so it's ok if i just keep using my H/K 3480 receiver?

 

[DIYer]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

^ As long as it's not clipping.

 

[Flint]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

The biggest difference between receiver amps and good stand alone amps is typically the noise floor (s/n) and distortion at real world levels (like less than 1W).

 

[BrianZ]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

^ As long as it's not clipping.

no, not even close. 120wpc is a good deal more than i ever use.

 

[BrianZ]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

The biggest difference between receiver amps and good stand alone amps is typically the noise floor (s/n) and distortion at real world levels (like less than 1W).

hm, ok. maybe someday i'll look into an amp upgrade but that's a little ways off. took some negotiating just to get that cheap Dayton sub you guys recommended me this week.

 

[Flint]

Re: Tube vs. Solid State Amps: history of the audible differ

Any amp is better than no amp, and speakers are still 100x more influential to the sound than any properly functioning hifi amp, so I wouldn't worry too much about it now.