Rogue Audio Sphinx V3 Review (Tube Amplifier)

[SIY]

Why tubes?
Seriously?
Nostalgia

Yes. And the "universals" cited before are a reflection of sociology rather than sound. Tubes are glowy, warm (temperature), retro, and can be fun. And part of the "fun" for many is the story-telling.

Tube sound as a concept is bullshit. No politer word. Amps are competent (i.e., make a small signal larger without audibly changing them) or not. Both categories encompass amps made with nearly every conceivable active device.

 

[gsp1971]

They are "rogue", they go against the grain. They "challenge" the status-quo by being innovative with a clear eye on the glorious past... when tubes ruled audio.

Where is the innovation?

a "rogue" amplifier is modern, efficient and powerful: It uses class D but feed it with "organic", "warm" signals ... to mitigate class d inherent dry, cold and and aseptic sound...

'organic', 'warm', 'dry', 'cold', 'aseptic' - Am I still on an ASR forum or did I just join www.audio_stereotypes_revival.com?

 

[Gorgonzola]

Honest questions:

Why tubes?
Seriously?
Nostalgia or veiled belief that .... ???

With all due respect to @Gorganzola ... In what objective way would the LF1 be superior to say a Topping Pre90? I bet the upgrade to SE is likely to cost more than the Topping Pre...

Again .. Why tubes? At all?

Similar to use a Intel 386 because .. one can ...

Since you ask, yes, the upgrade of the Sonic Frontiers Line 1 will cost a good deal more than the cost of a Pre90 +Ext90. Will it sound "better"?

It will sound different, whether the difference is better or worse largely depend on personal taste. The Topping will have more detail and slightly better dynamics, but will lack the attributes of tube sound I mentioned earlier. As for measurement, doubtless the Pre90 will test better.

 

[thefsb]

At the risk of offending people, I don't see the reason why this site even reviews tube equipment.

To gain a scientific understanding of what professional audio equipment reviewers like.

 

[FrantzM]

Yes. And the "universals" cited before are a reflection of sociology rather than sound. Tubes are glowy, warm (temperature), retro, and can be fun. And part of the "fun" for many is the story-telling.

Tube sound as a concept is bullshit. No politer word. Amps are competent (i.e., make a small signal larger without audibly changing them) or not. Both categories encompass amps made with nearly every conceivable active device.

Love the answer.. Recently bought a bunch of "filament", Edison-style .. smartlights... for similar fun factor..

 

[SIY]

It will sound different

Uh huh.

 

[peanuts]

to be fair every tube amp i have owned has had distincitive "tube-sound". its no placebo

 

[lordhumungous]

Why do people buy tube gear, then?

Some distortion can be pleasing to the ear. That's my take.

 

[Helicopter]

Thanks for the review Amir. Looks like it accomplishes a couple objectives, one being a sound signature. Really to make one of these hybrids worthwhile, they should be using chips to get the platform really small, or super powerful 400W+ modules to get power that is normally beyond reach for tubes.

I would agree with that... however, I wouldn't ever be in the market for this amp because if I'm looking for tubes and willing to sacrifice transparency for that cause... then I want to see the tubes, and I don't want class-D amps doing the heavy lifting. Maybe I'm in the minority there, but to me the greatest reason for going with tubes is because of the aesthetics. The sound has always been objectively bad on almost everything that employed them (at least that's even remotely in my budget). If I'm paying for something that looks just like any other SS amp... then I expect the same performance as well.

I agree completely. Seeing the tubes is more than half the point for me. I can hardly imagine getting something brand new that has them hidden inside. Also, for pre-amp tubes, give me some big beautiful 6SN7s or similar. If I am buying a tube amp, I want tubes for the power stage, a rectifier for the preamp stage, a nice pretty layout with the tubes arranged symmetrically if practical, and hopefully some meters showing me VU, plate current, or a combination... and no LEDs, except maybe for the meters. The only way I would consider combining a tube preamp with SS power amp is separates, but even then, I really prefer a tube-only system, with possible exceptions for power tube rectification.

 

[Blumlein 88]

to be fair every tube amp i have owned has had distincitive "tube-sound". its no placebo

Maybe you could ask j_j about that. As an undergrad he ran a test. A reputable ss Amp and a vacuum tube Amp. Testees were to listen and describe how each sounded. Everyone heard the difference. Only the tube amp wasn't connected. I think it was broken only the filaments lit up. Only one test taker, an EE professor, figured it out.

Don't under estimate the power of placebo to change what you hear.

 

[SIY]

to be fair every tube amp i have owned has had distincitive "tube-sound". its no placebo

Uh huh.

 

[gsp1971]

Thanks for the review Amir. Looks like it accomplishes a couple objectives, one being a sound signature. Really to make one of these hybrids worthwhile, they should be using chips to get the platform really small, or super powerful 400W+ modules to get power that is normally beyond reach for tubes.



I agree completely. Seeing the tubes is more than half the point for me.

A couple of candles either side of a nice NCore amp, would that do?

 

[Mart68]

to be fair every tube amp i have owned has had distincitive "tube-sound". its no placebo

I can think of at least a couple that don't, possibly/probably because they use very good output transformers. The 'tube sound' is basically odd bass response due to using poor quality transformers. The other supposed attributes are conjured up by the mind.

 

[brandall10]

One explanation is people like it because of the distortion, not in spite of it. I'm not claiming this, but logically it fits.

OTOH, people letting sight of the marketing touting tubes and all the claims like it for what they think they are hearing rather than what they are hearing. That logically fits as well.

We here on ASR of course know what is needed to pick between the two hypothesis above.

Right, as someone who has owned a fair number of headphone tube amps, it's about the 'pleasing' distortion. There is this idea that tube amplification creates a more lifelike presentation of music (same thing w/ NOS DACs)... I remember at the time the thought of a wire-with-gain type amplification and sigma delta was they were too much of a blunt instrument.

So you take that thing recorded in a studio pushed through gear like this to end up with something more akin to a live presentation. It's kinda silly on its face but I believe that's the general mindset.

 

[PuX]

class-d and tubes is such a strange combination.

 

[raindance]

This is the guts of it:

All that crosstalk comes from the twisting of the cables traveling from the input selection PCB at the rear to the volume control at the front. Shielding works way better!

 

[Helicopter]

class-d and tubes is such a strange combination.

It only makes sense to me if it saves space or money, like tubes + op amps in an $80 headphone amp, tubes + chip amp in a $150 power amp, or tubes + class D modules in a 400+WPC power amp. This thing, with its 78WPC, tubes you can't see, and >$1k price, is pointless to me.

 

[JoetheLion]

The image below are the real talking point here IMO. How can a device with so high noise and distortion get so good reviews? Do the audiopress have such poor setups that they need to listen through electronics with a veil that hide their flaws? Or are we talking either placebo or "a friendly review" to please the brand? Either way, it's certainly disturbing.

I think one reason is: there is simply something else being evaluated. A Lamborghini looks much more streamlined than a Porsche, but the Porsche still has a much better drag coefficient. That is measurable. Is that why people are more likely to buy a Porsche than a Lamborghini? They can't use the maximum speed with either (not even here in Germany). Some millionaires simply like a Lamborghini better, the sound, the look. It's twice as expensive as a Porsche, but no one who buys it will complain afterwards about bad measurement results. It's the same with tube amplifiers: most people know that the measurement results are bad. But if they feel that they sound better, why not?

 

[Bob from Florida]

Tube amps and solid state are both valid solutions. Competent design applies to both. Good tube amps have more expensive parts - good output transformers are a good chunk of cost. The impedance curve of the speaker will affect tube amps more than a solid state - assuming the solid state amp has a power supply capable of high current demands. On the other hand a bad design is a bad design.....

 

[gsp1971]

It's the same with tube amplifiers: most people know that the measurement results are bad. But if they feel that they sound better, why not?

Are you sure that they know that the measurement results are bad? Perhaps many of them feel that in order to be called an 'audiophile' you must have an expensive turntable (because digital is not audiophile) and an expensive tube amp (because solid state is not audiophile). Audiophile peer pressure ...