Jump to content

Why the hell are tube amps so expensive?


SuBXeRo

Recommended Posts

I have a couple Panasonic SA-XR class D receivers that sound very good.

I owned a 300B tube amp for years and it was absolute magic with my K-horns. Bought a relatively modestly priced Pioneer receiver with class D amps and it smoked the 300B, and at 1/4 the price. It is hard to argue the price benefit ratio of modern SS vs tubes.

I quickly looked up 'Pioneer class D receiver' and found their SC-05 and 07. Then went to Amazon for a quick price check on the 05. Um.....the picture of the 'Pioneer' doesn't seem right. So, what were we talking about? Something vs something else......I forget.

http://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-SC-05-Elite-7-1-Channel-Receiver/dp/B001GBYVB6

Added to cart and wish list!

7 used from $500. They vary from Used - like new to Used "acceptable." I wonder what acceptable means?

The only issue that I see is that [that particular] "Pioneer" looks like it is high maintenance, worse than tubes.

Lol! Definitely high maintenance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I owned a 300B tube amp for years and it was absolute magic with my K-horns. Bought a relatively modestly priced Pioneer receiver with class D amps and it smoked the 300B, and at 1/4 the price. It is hard to argue the price benefit ratio of modern SS vs tubes.

Apparently NOT, since the cost issue was the original title of this thread.

Edited by ClaudeJ1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Expensive' is relative; so is 'sounds incredible.' I own a number of tube amps and a number of SS amps including a class D Pioneer Elite. They serve different purposes and different tastes. Period. One is not better than the other unless placed in the proper context.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it ludicrous? It's a good analogy and there are many more such analogies that I could give. It's just not worth the time.

How many tube amps do you think there are in existence vs steam cars right now?

So there must be an exact comparison, even regarding numbers of each still in use? Why do you consider that to be so important?

Yeah, you really should take the time to come up with a better analogy, that wouldn't didn't take

Huh? Is English not your native language? If it is, why are your reading comprehension and writing skills so poor? Perhaps you should go to an adult education center and take some remedial courses.

Solid state amps can be designed to sound just like a tube amp, and many do. Some of us like accurate sound, not euphonic sound. I want to hear what the recording engineer hears, and solid state equipment can deliver that, as can some tube designs.

I don't like euphoic euphonic sound either.

Fixed it for ya.

And I don't have euphonic sound.

I didn't say you did, but your equipment may, or may not.

And if a SS amp sounds just like a tube amp, by your reasoning, it must sound like crap too.

Not all solid state equipment sounds "good", not all tube equipment sounds "bad". I thought I made that clear. I have no use for any sort of audio reproduction equipment designed to sound inaccurate.

Shakey

Edited by Don Richard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What gives?????????????? I know the tubes themselves will vary upon make but the actual design of the amp seems so simple in comparison to a transistor amp. Any thoughts?

Yes, they sound good, but not that good. Non linear behavior with non linear speaker loads. Pleasant distortions by way of even order harmonics is what makes the "warm" sounding. Not a bad thing, but not worth the money. Been there done that with Mac, Marantz, HK Citation, Dynaco, Scott, etc................space heaters that need to have the bias babysat and tube replacment/matching. Not worth it for me, but obviously yes for others. Try chip amps.

You should listen to some modern tube designs. Nothing like what you describe.

Shakey

You should listen to even more modern solid state designs like Class D.

Listen, we can debate this tubes vs SS thing till the cows come home. You like what you like........so on and so forth.

I have heard some very good sounding SS amps in my system. A couple I could almost live with long term. But they do not have the natural tone and humanness of tubes. And I am not speaking about warmth, and midrange lushness. I heard a Marantz 7B years ago, and it would put me to sleep. So that's NOT my idea of what tubes should sound like.

One that came close for me was a Plinius SA-102. Extremely good SS amp that I used for a while on some Piega P10s. But as soon as I inserted a good pair of tube monoblocks back into the system it was game over for the Plinius.

Listen to whatever you like, but just know that there are tube amps that can compete with SS amps at what they do best. Don't paint with such a broad brush. And like I said, there are some good sand amps that can give you a healthy dose of tube goodness, but don't quite make it all the way there.

Shakey

THX Shakey, I'll stick with your "You like what you like" as my main rig has tube pre's and SS power and I'm more than pleased with them driving my 804's :rolleyes:

post-16574-0-05840000-1389295374_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I painted with a fine, pointed brush. I'd like to see a tube amp do as good of a job at driving my DTS-10's or a "wall full of 18's" using tubes. ...... If you truly want the best, you will have a bi-amped (passive or active) hybrid system. Best of both worlds, not just "tubes."

I suspect that the low power chip amps would also have a difficult time driving the DTS-10s or a wall full of 18s too as your last sentence seems to imply, different tools for different jobs can bring the best of both worlds.

I found the picture on Audiokarma posted by Sheltie Dave. His description, "I forget the exact number, but I think it was a little over 700 watts at 1 ohm, 510 at 2 ohms, and near 300 watts at 4 ohms. These Dukanes use 8 8417s and weigh too much. The power transformers are almost as big as my feet, the chokes are as big as the transformers on my Scotts." I suspect the Dukanes would drive the DTS-10s.....

'Expensive' is relative; so is 'sounds incredible.' I own a number of tube amps and a number of SS amps including a class D Pioneer Elite. They serve different purposes and different tastes. Period. One is not better than the other unless placed in the proper context.

Agreed. In general, I suspect that it really takes as much effort to engineer great solid state electronics as it does to engineer great tube electronics and that the great solid state electronics price will be somewhat comparable to the great tube electronics prices. However, I suspect that if you calculate the amount of engineering-hours spent in development of either technology today and converted them to dollars, most companies today find it hard to believe they should make that kind of investment today.

In some respects it seems that most circuits are out of the device application notes or were inspired by other working gear, whether it is solid state or tubes, and if it works, company management believes it is good enough to turn over to marketing and there is no justification to spend more engineering-hours refining and testing. There seems to be very few innovators out there today and when you find them, it costs. Take the Harmon Kardon Citation 12 as an example in that it sounded good for its time using a circut straight from the RCA manual for the device; however, look what a little innovation by Nelson Pass did with his mosfet modifications. I've listened to both and have found the Pass modifications to make an average to good amp into a great amp in my view.

When selecting gear, whether it is solid state or tube, to me it's not the function of the electronics to cover up defects in the recording or defects in the speakers and it is not a function of the speakers to cover up defects in the electronics; however, most of us realize that there are recording weaknesses and speaker weaknesses that cause problems in the electronics to sound a lot worse. I believe that in these cases the electronics may have engineering flaws that have revealed themselves.

Similar to Anarchist I have various solid state gear and various tube gear that serve different purposes in my overall system. To me it seems that a really great system, whether tube, solid state or a combination of both, involves over engineered gear that reveals enough information buried in a recording to bring across the emotion of the music. The gear doesn’t enhance the recording or change the recording; only better reveal what is already there. In the end, the poor recording can become listenable and the good recording just may sound spectacular.

post-36163-0-83760000-1389296096_thumb.j

post-36163-0-62480000-1389296112_thumb.j

Edited by Fjd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was looking at the jolida FX-10 which is a neat little amp! so expensive and a dream at the moment. I love the look of Ayon gear though and there is a guy selling his Orion for 2100!!! i wish i had the cash. Lust, Drool, Abadaabbbaa wantttt

I sure like mine Sub, it drives the dog out of my Las ;)

thats good to hear! its a sexy little amp. Can you change the color that lights the tubes? Are they LEDs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, while I respect your desire to hear what the recording engineer hears, I can't say that I agree with you. So many modern recordings sound like crap because the engineers have put in 10 db of boost at 10 kHz (as one example) that I personally find the sound awful (that thought is shared by many of the guys around here for whom I've had to provide filters to attenuate the highs so they can enjoy the music without the "ear bleed" effect that I've mentioned in other posts.) I don't know anyone who owns equipment with tone controls who doesn't crank the treble way down to make those recordings tolerable. How do you deal with such recordings? I recall a forum member stating a while back that he only buys good quality recordings. That approach is fine, but what about all of the great music out there which is recorded poorly? Anyway, sorry to digress from the original question posted.

Maynard

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall a forum member stating a while back that he only buys good quality recordings. That approach is fine, but what about all of the great music out there which is recorded poorly? Anyway, sorry to digress from the original question posted.

Maynard

Seems kind of limiting to me as there are many old 'bad' recordings, and, of course, some new 'bad' recordings that I've enjoyed that essentially don't exist in any better form. I just don't want to throw those recordings out because as they may be "bad," the music on them isn't bad. Why limit myself to only "good" recordings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was looking at the jolida FX-10 which is a neat little amp! so expensive and a dream at the moment. I love the look of Ayon gear though and there is a guy selling his Orion for 2100!!! i wish i had the cash. Lust, Drool, Abadaabbbaa wantttt

I sure like mine Sub, it drives the dog out of my Las ;)

thats good to hear! its a sexy little amp. Can you change the color that lights the tubes? Are they LEDs?

Good question Sub, not really sure of the answer though. I just fire the thing up and play it :blink:

THX Shakey, like you I love my Amadeus :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of us like accurate sound, not euphonic sound. I want to hear what the recording engineer hears, and solid state equipment can deliver that, as can some tube designs.

Euphonic sound IS accurate sound. Maybe some of you have forgotten what real music sounds like, along with the emotions good sound provokes.

Engineers listen through mixing monitors or headphones, and of course you're always at the mercy of their hearing, what's left of it. I have no interest in hearing what those clowns hear, for crying out loud, listen to the quality of the crap their putting out.

I don't know why distortion signatures are being discussed. As long as the amp isn't run into the clipping, the distortion signature is of relatively low consequence.

I'm not sure if there is anything I haven't tried. I'm going back to tubes for 2-channel because it sounds better. That's really all I've ever been interested in -- better sound. This is supposed to be an experience that brings enjoyment and pleasure. All of you guys who want "accurate", which basically means sterile, thin, flat, and makes you wince and grit your teeth -- can have it!

Edited by DeanG
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, man, don't misquote me...that was from Don Richard.

For the record, I'm with Don regarding "accuracy" up to but not including the room/speaker/audience. At that point, the specifics of the local situation trump maintaining accuracy.

Also, to get back on topic, I use a SET amp that retails for about as much as a mid-level, mainstream AVR, and could be built for a fraction of that by anyone willing to do so, or bought on the used market, as I did. Tubes are not necessarily expensive.

Edited by Ski Bum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...