Are tubes more musical?

[solderdude]

I think it’s still worthwhile to step back and ask questions like “ why are people interested in this?”

Hobby leaning towards obsession ?
Like a moth to a flame ?

why still so much interest in the measurements?

Because not all amps/DACs measure well. Some have issues or not enough power or have issues with low impedance loads or unusually low input resistances or other unexpected issues such as hum etc.

 

[MattHooper]

Yet another topic that is not making much progress. Tubes no longer make any sense today.
A bit like the cartridges and arms of record players.

“ no longer make any sense today”

*(to you).

“ now that we have cars, why would anybody still ride a bicycle or a horse??”

 

[Soria Moria]

“ no longer make any sense today”

*(to you).

“ now that we have cars, why would anybody still ride a bicycle or a horse??”

Bicycles are cheap, can be used by children, can go where cars can't, are quiet, give you exercise, etc.
Horses are real beings you can form a relationship with and have some of the same pros as a bicycle.

 

[antcollinet]

As I indicated before, if amplifier after amplifier measures sonically neutral, at what point do you say “ OK I get it, one amp is going to sound the same as the next one within its specs?”

Well, never. Because only with the measurements, can we know that *this* manufacturer hasn't screwed up the design. It is rare but it happens.

 

[MattHooper]

Bicycles are cheap, can be used by children, can go where cars can't, are quiet, give you exercise, etc.
Horses are real beings you can form a relationship with and have some of the same pros as a bicycle.

So, despite the development of cars and the numerous ways in which they are superior, bicycles and horses still offer features that cars don’t offer, which people can still enjoy.
We agree

 

[Mulder]

as I’ve said “ musical” is not a term that I am promoting myself.

But on the other hand, whether an amplifier or Soundsystem is “ musical” depends on what somebody is meaning by that term.

A “musical” sound system could be one that reproduces sound in a way that prioritizes the enjoyment and emotional connection of a certain listener over strict technical precision or analytical detail. And in principle, the person could talk about the objective performance aspects that for him/her aid that musical connection.

Or one could talk about “musical” in one dictionary sense “having a pleasant sound; melodious or tuneful.” There has often been an association with musical as being
“ pleasant to the ear. “

In which case someone might use that term where one system may seem to better allow reproduce music to have those qualities, versus another system that may have forms of distortion that cause recordings to have a “ screetchier, harsher quality that is less “musical” .

You and I may prefer different words for such descriptions, but as long as somebody can be somewhat clear about what they are getting at… language and communication is flexible for a reason.

Musicality is about pitch (melody), rhythm and harmony. Your reasoning is not about the flexibility of the language. Expressions such as "the flexibility of language" are directly misleading, I believe, when in fact it is about a metaphor in order make a point. As I play musical instruments myself and know many musicians, I can say that most musicians are completely uninterested in the kind of qualities that HiFi enthusiasts think are important. Even in cases where they are unusually musically gifted. People who make music themselves usually listen to music in a completely different way than regular music consumers.

 

[Blumlein 88]

So, despite the development of cars and the numerous ways in which they are superior, bicycles and horses still offer features that cars don’t offer, which people can still enjoy.
We agree

I'm for anyone enjoying whatever they wish that doesn't harm others. Can you list some features that tube amps offer that other amps don't?

 

[Chr1]

So, despite the development of cars and the numerous ways in which they are superior, bicycles and horses still offer features that cars don’t offer, which people can still enjoy.
We agree

And drivers of the objectively superior cars are often less happy.
Commuters in gridlocked traffic being case in point.

 

[Chr1]

I'm for anyone enjoying whatever they wish that doesn't harm others. Can you list some features that tube amps offer that other amps don't?

A sound, that tho objectively inferior, sounds subjectively good/better.
To those that choose to use tubes.

I guess that tubes, like bicycles and horses don't really make sense objectively, but people enjoy them nonetheless. Audio, being a hobby, perhaps means that it's not always purely about maximum objective performance. It's really about what you enjoy. Which is not always logical.

 

[Jim Taylor]

This is just a guess:

I suspect that if tube gear was an equivalent price to solid state gear, and vinyl was the same price as CD or file purchases, that the criticism and discomfiture of many members here - if not most - would disappear or, at a minimum, be greatly reduced.

 

[Smaestro]

And drivers of the objectively superior cars are often less happy.
Commuters in gridlocked traffic being case in point.

I don’t know if I understand your point, as I’ll be happier stuck in traffic in a Rolls than in a Lada.

 

[MattHooper]

I'm for anyone enjoying whatever they wish that doesn't harm others. Can you list some features that tube amps offer that other amps don't?

As with choosing to ride a horse or a bike, what somebody sees as attractive features in any particular amplifier is going to vary among individuals.

Just like records versus streaming or CDs, tube amplifiers offer a different aesthetic.
In my case, I love how most tube amplifiers look, and I love the wide variety of visual designs in tube amplifiers. I find the glowing tubes very pleasing, and also conceptually pleasing in that I’m actually seeing the musical signal being amplified. (Similar to how some vinyl fans get a kick out of the fact all those little squiggles the can see when holding a record represent the musical signal. ). There’s also the retro aspect, the sense of continuity and connection a tube amplifier design has with the past history of audio. It’s just really neat to be using a type of technology that has been around for so long - a technology that represented the first practical amplifiers in audio history.

Then there is the possibility of enjoying the sound of a certain tube amplifier over a neutral solid-state amplifier in one’s system.

If for instance I am right in perceiving my tube amplifiers slightly alter the sound in my system in a way I find pleasing, then that’s another reason to own it over a solid-state amplifier. Would there be a way to emulate the exact sound using a solid-state amplifier and some additional technology? (EQ/distortion plug-ins.?). Maybe, maybe not. But… and here again is where personal proclivities come in… I’m not interested in trying to duplicate a sound by adding more complexity to my system when I already have exactly the sound I like, and which comes with all the aesthetic and haptic pleasures mentioned above, which I would not get from a solid state amp, EQ or plug-ins.

And then there is the option of tube rolling. It may or may not change the sound, but it can still be fun for some people to do it. I think tubes are just really cool in general - I find it kind of exciting to receive a new set of tubes - and they can also change the look of my tube amp somewhat, which is fun to play with.

I’m sure there are other aspects that I’ve missed out that other tube amp fans get out of owning a tube over solid state. They can offer some specific “fiddling/interacting” aspects that solid state usually doesn’t offer.

Quite a number of tube amplifiers are still being produced because clearly they are serving a niche which is not fully satisfied with strictly solid state amplifiers, for any number of reasons.

So just like when people say “ there’s no reason these days to play vinyl records” this is often someone simply projecting their own lack of interest; not understanding, or caring to understand, why the desires of other people are being served by such technology.

 

[Chr1]

I don’t know if I understand your point, as I’ll be happier stuck in traffic in a Rolls than in a Lada.

I was referring to the car drivers stuck in traffic jams relative to the cyclists who are not.
The car is objectively better but quite often not so much subjectively.

 

[Mulder]

As with choosing to ride a horse or a bike, what somebody sees as attractive features in any particular amplifier is going to vary among individuals.

Just like records versus streaming or CDs, tube amplifiers offer a different aesthetic.
In my case, I love how most tube amplifiers look, and I love the wide variety of visual designs in tube amplifiers. I find the glowing tubes very pleasing, and also conceptually pleasing in that I’m actually seeing the musical signal being amplified. (Similar to how some vinyl fans get a kick out of the fact all those little squiggles the can see when holding a record represent the musical signal. ). There’s also the retro aspect, the sense of continuity and connection a tube amplifier design has with the past history of audio. It’s just really neat to be using a type of technology that has been around for so long - a technology that represented the first practical amplifiers in audio history.

Then there is the possibility of enjoying the sound of a certain tube amplifier over a neutral solid-state amplifier in one’s system.

If for instance I am right in perceiving my tube amplifiers slightly alter the sound in my system in a way I find pleasing, then that’s another reason to own it over a solid-state amplifier. Would there be a way to emulate the exact sound using a solid-state amplifier and some additional technology? (EQ/distortion plug-ins.?). Maybe, maybe not. But… and here again is where personal proclivities come in… I’m not interested in trying to duplicate a sound by adding more complexity to my system when I already have exactly the sound I like, and which comes with all the aesthetic and haptic pleasures mentioned above, which I would not get from a solid state amp, EQ or plug-ins.

And then there is the option of tube rolling. It may or may not change the sound, but it can still be fun for some people to do it. I think tubes are just really cool in general - I find it kind of exciting to receive a new set of tubes - and they can also change the look of my tube amp somewhat, which is fun to play with.

I’m sure there are other aspects that I’ve missed out that other tube amp fans get out of owning a tube over solid state. They can offer some specific “fiddling/interacting” aspects that solid state usually doesn’t offer.

Quite a number of tube amplifiers are still being produced because clearly they are serving a niche which is not fully satisfied with strictly solid state amplifiers, for any number of reasons.

So just like when people say “ there’s no reason these days to play vinyl records” this is often someone simply projecting their own lack of interest; not understanding, or caring to understand, why the desires of other people are being served by such technology.

I think you grossly underestimate the power of marketing, FUD and expectation bias.

 

[MattHooper]

I guess that tubes, like bicycles and horses don't really make sense objectively, but people enjoy them nonetheless.

Bicycles horses, and two amplifiers all can make perfect sense, given an individual goals.

There’s nothing more “ objective” about enjoying the sound of a neutral system. Whatever system we select, we are satisfying personal goals and preferences.

 

[mhardy6647]

“ no longer make any sense today”

*(to you).

“ now that we have cars, why would anybody still ride a bicycle or a horse??”

Or wear a mechanical watch.

 

[Chr1]

Exactly. What brings joy is not always logical.

 

[MattHooper]

I think you grossly underestimate the power of marketing, FUD and expectation bias.

How so?

I’m quite aware of the power of marketing and expectation bias. I was quite careful in what I wrote.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Or wear a mechanical watch.

Or wear a smart watch, or a G-shock or don't wear one at all. As is often said, once you get down to personal preferences not much discussion is possible beyond describing what you like. So bothering to post about whether tubes are more musical by dragging out not everyone wants, needs or is rational sort of gets the discussion nowhere beyond navel gazing.

Of course no one can define what a more musical amp means. I mean people can be more or less musical by being able to play or create music. Which not all people can effectively do. Can amps take a less musical recording and make it more musical? The claim about tube amps, but beyond some ideas not much credible evidence such a thing is so. So sidestep needing evidence by hopping over to preference. It is an old tired story that goes nowhere no matter how one tries to dress it up.

 

[Mulder]

How so?

I’m quite aware of the power of marketing and expectation bias. I was quite careful in what I wrote.

So you think desire for tubes or tube-rolling have nothing to do with marketing, or the preferences for tubes has nothing to do with expectation-bias, or that the renessanse of vinyl has nothing to do with for example marketing and vinyl gurus like Michael Fremer or any other praising of the analog sound of vinyl?