• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Are tubes more musical?

Status
Not open for further replies.
yes, it has its charm.

I bought it by chance: my friend the shopkeeper understood that to make me buy he has to give me devices that I can take home and listen to calmly, now he always tricks me.... he knows I can't resist, and for every two devices, I keep one!!!
Anyway, I was immediately impressed.... so much so that I'm looking for the two mono ones, of the same brand, slightly more powerful; my speakers are difficult, but in a small room the result is very pleasant for me...

Atta boy!

Don’t let the silicone monsters take your soul!

An audio pal of mine finally abandoned tubes after many years for the ease of solid state amps. I have to constantly remind him that now his system lacks
midrange liquidity.”
:D
 
Plenty of audiophiles like to think about and fiddle with gear, whether that’s reading about gear, measuring their own gear or other gear, fiddling with their system to try and get it exactly as they want, learning to build or repair gear, diy speakers and amps, music servers… tube amps … and whatever. we’re going to find a way of still thinking about the gear (even if it’s posting on an audio forum about it ) and fiddling.

In this case, someone may simply prefer playing with tube amps and different tubes (and turntables and cartridges..) to fiddling with DSP, which doesn’t give the same experience.
Sorry but that's a bastardization of the term "audiophile", audiophool may be more appropriate.

"The term "audiophile" comes from the Latin word audīre, which means "to hear", and the Greek word philos, which means "loving".
Audiophile-grade equipment and recordings are designed to reproduce music without distortion or coloration. "

Even AI knows that. LOL
 
Sorry but that's a bastardization of the term "audiophile", audiophool may be more appropriate.

"The term "audiophile" comes from the Latin word audīre, which means "to hear", and the Greek word philos, which means "loving".
Audiophile-grade equipment and recordings are designed to reproduce music without distortion or coloration. "

Even AI knows that. LOL

Maybe you can get your point across without being rude.
 
Maybe you can get your point across without being rude.
My apology but you will find the term used everywhere for some who refuse
to learn the science of audio and it's advancement over the decades.
Engineers and other learned designers have sweated for decades and decades to get us to
the point we are today.
 
Maybe you can get your point across without being rude.

Let me know if you make any headway with that request. Otherwise, I have that member blocked. :)
 
Atta boy!

Don’t let the silicone monsters take your soul!

An audio pal of mine finally abandoned tubes after many years for the ease of solid state amps. I have to constantly remind him that now his system lacks
midrange liquidity.”
:D
I solved it with two systems!!

60 kg monster on one side, in a large room, and small tube delight on the other, in a small room!! the second is the low volume one, which I use late at night, otherwise my wife sends me to a hotel!! I must admit, however, that I use the solid state system with the speakers that in my opinion are the most musical thing I have heard... the fearsome Epsilons!! every time I press play I am left speechless...
 
It’s like a photographer saying to the painter: “ why don’t you just take a photograph?”
Completely wrong analogy.
The listener is not a "painter", and it's more like someone going round the Louvre in a pair of rose tinted glasses and commenting about the nicer skin tone on the Mona Lisa.

Um. That's also a bad analogy. But it does sort of make my point.
 
I solved it with two systems!!

That’s one way of doing things. I semi solved my scenario by hanging onto my Thiel speakers instead of selling them when I got my Joseph speakers, Whenever I want, I can switch the speakers. Though I do that sparingly.

I also have a bit of a dual system for pre-amplification: I ended up keeping my Conrad Johnson premier 16 LS2 tube preamp, which I originally thought I might replace when I bought a Benchmark L4 preamp. I ended up running my CJ preamp through my benchmark preamp so that at the switch of a remote button, I could switch between using either preamp.

This has been great for comparisons of the two, and making it super easy to choose, whichever I want in the chain.

However, I think I perhaps made it a bit too easy, which can lead me to fiddling between them to see which one I want to use. Therefore, I think I might go back to just using the patch cables to switch between each preamp. The added work will tend to put out quick switching from my mind.

I must admit, however, that I use the solid state system with the speakers that in my opinion are the most musical thing I have heard... the fearsome Epsilons!! every time I press play I am left speechless...

Nice. I’ve heard of the epsilons, but I’ve never heard any models. I don’t know what their general reputation is about.

What amplifier do you use with them?

And what speakers do you use with your tube amplifiers?

(When I am in speaker buying mode, I prefer to audition speakers using solid state amplification, to ensure neutrality and so that I know I’m listening to what the speakers can do, and not a possible colouration from a tube amplifier. I approach it as “ if I find the speakers enjoyable using solid state, I’ll love ‘em on my tube amps. And that has always been the case).
 
View attachment 414468

this little guy made me fall back into tubes.

In my system it has found its permanent place. I made a couple of adjustments: I bypassed the volume potentiometers, it can also be used as an integrated, but I discovered that even in “direct” function the signal still passed through the volume.

I changed all the tubes, nothing exotic, but only its corresponding ones, new, and I soldered the output connectors on the transformer on 4 ohms, having the internal option 4,8,16, and using 4 ohm speakers.

What can I say: it is truly musical!!! not that the other amplifiers I have at SS are not, but it is subjectively very pleasant.
So much so that my main system has been sadly off for a couple of months.
Call it pleasant distortion, call it tube warmth, call it musicality, call it visual effect, whatever you want, but when I turn it on and then I don't want to turn it off I can certainly say that to my ears like my system so composed!
im doing a bunch of re organizing and im waiting on a 36" wide stand to come out of anodizing. its messy now but ignore the mess.

my setup has 36 tubes rocking some serious heat. keeps me warm in my office.

PXL_20241217_022105713.jpg
 
No. In terms of "sound character", it is.

This is the blurb on the development of the Stereophile "simulated loudspeaker load": https://www.stereophile.com/content/real-life-measurements-page-2
This is what happens when a tube amp tried to drive that circuit: https://www.stereophile.com/content/air-tight-atm-1-2024-edition-power-amplifier-measurements
And it can get much worse: https://www.stereophile.com/content/zesto-bia-200-select-power-amplifier-measurements

These are what you hear when you listen to a normal, everyday speaker driven by a "boutique" tube amp. The dips in response at certain frequencies, coupled with the peaks in response at other frequencies can easily amount to a 2-or-3 dB relative difference.
That's going to be audible. It will sound "different". Not necessarily better or worse, but "different". Different from your solid-state amp, different from your friends' amps. The peaks will stand out as dominant. Your cognitive bias will kick into high gear, and those peaks will sound artificially as if they had "clarity".
But within a period of time, your brain will acclimate ... it will adjust. Then, the so-called "clarity" will lessen or disappear.

Then what? Time for new tubes? Time for a new amp? If you have vinyl, maybe time for a new cartridge? :rolleyes:
How about getting a system that is as neutral as you can afford in the first place, and if you want frequency response deviations, do it with DSP. Then disable the DSP if there's a recording for which you find it less than useful.

Then you can concentrate on the MUSIC instead of the equipment!
i get years of use on my tubes before they die out.
 
I solved it with two systems!!

60 kg monster on one side, in a large room, and small tube delight on the other, in a small room!! the second is the low volume one, which I use late at night, otherwise my wife sends me to a hotel!! I must admit, however, that I use the solid state system with the speakers that in my opinion are the most musical thing I have heard... the fearsome Epsilons!! every time I press play I am left speechless...
you have a ayon?
 
Completely wrong analogy.
Different point.

The analogy was correct for the point I was actually making.
:)

I was addressing the idea of somebody telling somebody else “ There’s a better way to do that. Why don’t you use it instead?”

In which such a suggestion seems to ignore what the person may be enjoying out of their chosen method.

So it’s like a photographer coming up to somebody sitting in front of an easel in the park, carefully painting a tree in front of her, and the photographer says “ If you want to capture the image of that tree why don’t you just take a photograph? It’s more accurate and less hassle.” (“and if you want, you can add a filter afterwards to get the effect you want.”)

Clearly that photographer is not taking into account what the painter is getting out of her chosen activity. Surely she knows about photographs, but has chosen to paint instead. It might not be as accurate, but putting her own bit of flourish on the image is part of the point. Or even if she was indulging in photo realistic painting, taking a photograph instead still wouldn’t fill all the things she gets out of painting. She likes using paint brushes, likes working with paints, the effort it takes to paint… some of the very features the photographer may find a time-consuming hassle the painter enjoys.

In other words, individuals like doing things different ways.

This is what I’ve had to point out many times when people keep suggesting “ why don’t you just use a fully neutral system and add an equalizer or some sort of DSP plug-in?”

Because that’s not the same experience as what I get out of using a tube amp.
 
Different point.

The analogy was correct for the point I was actually making.
:)

I was addressing the idea of somebody telling somebody else “ There’s a better way to do that. Why don’t you use it instead?”

In which such a suggestion seems to ignore what the person may be enjoying out of their chosen method.

So it’s like a photographer coming up to somebody sitting in front of an easel in the park, carefully painting a tree in front of her, and the photographer says “ If you want to capture the image of that tree why don’t you just take a photograph? It’s more accurate and less hassle.” (“and if you want, you can add a filter afterwards to get the effect you want.”)

Clearly that photographer is not taking into account what the painter is getting out of her chosen activity. Surely she knows about photographs, but has chosen to paint instead. It might not be as accurate, but putting her own bit of flourish on the image is part of the point. Or even if she was indulging in photo realistic painting, taking a photograph instead still wouldn’t fill all the things she gets out of painting. She likes using paint brushes, likes working with paints, the effort it takes to paint… some of the very features the photographer may find a time-consuming hassle the painter enjoys.

In other words, individuals like doing things different ways.

This is what I’ve had to point out many times when people keep suggesting “ why don’t you just use a fully neutral system and add an equalizer or some sort of DSP plug-in?”

Because that’s not the same experience as what I get out of using a tube amp.
i like how you can change out the power rect tube, phase tubes, preamp tubes and power tubes and it always sounds a bit different. i can get slightly more rounded off sounding tubes and softer tones with a whole set of specific combinations of tubes with some more musicality at lower volumes.....of i can load up very snappy and crisp sounding tubes with more brightness and shimmer and snare drum boom - with a whole different set of tubes. i mean sure you can use a eq with solid state but its only similar but not the same. same same, but not the same. this makes a huge difference when you start say with a phono tube section and making a selection for those, then you can select a preamp, and select a poweramp selection. this is like applying three finely tuned eqs in line that isnt always as easy to get that warmth with just applying a eq right before the poweramp.

ive heard a couple expensive good solid states. i have to add that the remainder sounded a bit neutered. ill stick with tube boom for now.
 
That’s one way of doing things. I semi solved my scenario by hanging onto my Thiel speakers instead of selling them when I got my Joseph speakers, Whenever I want, I can switch the speakers. Though I do that sparingly.

I also have a bit of a dual system for pre-amplification: I ended up keeping my Conrad Johnson premier 16 LS2 tube preamp, which I originally thought I might replace when I bought a Benchmark L4 preamp. I ended up running my CJ preamp through my benchmark preamp so that at the switch of a remote button, I could switch between using either preamp.

This has been great for comparisons of the two, and making it super easy to choose, whichever I want in the chain.

However, I think I perhaps made it a bit too easy, which can lead me to fiddling between them to see which one I want to use. Therefore, I think I might go back to just using the patch cables to switch between each preamp. The added work will tend to put out quick switching from my mind.



Nice. I’ve heard of the epsilons, but I’ve never heard any models. I don’t know what their general reputation is about.

What amplifier do you use with them?

And what speakers do you use with your tube amplifiers?

(When I am in speaker buying mode, I prefer to audition speakers using solid state amplification, to ensure neutrality and so that I know I’m listening to what the speakers can do, and not a possible colouration from a tube amplifier. I approach it as “ if I find the speakers enjoyable using solid state, I’ll love ‘em on my tube amps. And that has always been the case).

I have never had a system that allowed me to make comparisons with just one click.
How many cables have I plugged in and out over the years... I would like one of those boxes that give you the real-time ability to do a, b, c...

The Epsilons have two Halcro amplifiers. A DM38 and a class D MC30. But I also use them without their external crossover, simply with just one amplifier, the DM38.

The Verdier tube amplifier, on the other hand, is a sort of crazy experiment. I am using it with the Dynaudio Special One. It all started from the need for a bookshelf speaker, because the room is 3 meters by 5. I had those on hand, knowing that I would have removed them after 2 minutes. They are still there. The 25 watts are enough to have a very satisfying result. Even if they are 4 ohms and 82 dB I do not find any particular deficits. Indeed, in my opinion it is all very pleasant. Other speakers I have from Piega, even though they have numbers that should make them easier to drive, do not have them. The sound, unlike the Dynaudio, seems harsh.

That Dynaudio are honey for my ears... I think they have all the characteristics that I subjectively like.
 
Different point.

The analogy was correct for the point I was actually making.
:)

I was addressing the idea of somebody telling somebody else “ There’s a better way to do that. Why don’t you use it instead?”

In which such a suggestion seems to ignore what the person may be enjoying out of their chosen method.

So it’s like a photographer coming up to somebody sitting in front of an easel in the park, carefully painting a tree in front of her, and the photographer says “ If you want to capture the image of that tree why don’t you just take a photograph? It’s more accurate and less hassle.” (“and if you want, you can add a filter afterwards to get the effect you want.”)

Clearly that photographer is not taking into account what the painter is getting out of her chosen activity. Surely she knows about photographs, but has chosen to paint instead. It might not be as accurate, but putting her own bit of flourish on the image is part of the point. Or even if she was indulging in photo realistic painting, taking a photograph instead still wouldn’t fill all the things she gets out of painting. She likes using paint brushes, likes working with paints, the effort it takes to paint… some of the very features the photographer may find a time-consuming hassle the painter enjoys.

In other words, individuals like doing things different ways.

This is what I’ve had to point out many times when people keep suggesting “ why don’t you just use a fully neutral system and add an equalizer or some sort of DSP plug-in?”

Because that’s not the same experience as what I get out of using a tube amp.
when i see someone say to go solid state and justy use a eq....



YARN | Same-same, but different. | The ...

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom