wallflower Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I've been playing around with some gear and I'd like others thoughts....<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I've got a pretty good (actually very good) solid state power amp (a new Conrad Johnson with a lot of very clean power) and I've been going back and forth between a good SS preamp and a good tube preamp. While I like the tube preamp for some things (e.g. piano, electric guitar and classical stringed instruments), I notice that for a lot of my music and for most vocals the SS preamp sounds more like a live performance (more punch, definition and presence). I'm not necessarily saying the SS sounds better than the tube, but if I really listen carefully and do some A/B comparisons, the SS just sounds more like live music, especially in the context of live and amplified music, which is what most of us hear when we go to a performance (unless of course it's a symphony or chamber orchestra). The tube amp sounds rounder, fatter and fuller and is really great for just listening to the music (and even vocals sound great!), BUT, IMHO I think if listening for a proxy of live music, the solid state sound is closer for many different contexts; especially with Klipsch Heritage speakers. I suspect a lot of this has to do with the fact that nearly all the PA systems out there, with rare exceptions, are solid state. I know this all probably sounds sacrilegious to the tube fans out there and I genuinely dont intend to offend anyone. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible Nectar Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 My comment would be to let your ears be your guide. I know many who like the SS amp with tube pre.....it seems for many that this brings a good combination of the SS "slam" wanted in live recordings while allowing for some of the "sweetness" of tubes. Much of this, also involves "synergy" of gear.....sometimes two pieces of gear work/sound better together regardless of whether or not they are SS, tube, or a combination of the two. Proper "synergy" will do a LOT for a system, regardless of topology. If you have a very good SS preamp and a "so-so" tube preamp, then it's not a surpise that the SS is better. It just might be a superior piece of gear. What kind of preamps are you using here? Just curious..... But you seem to be doing the right thing for openers....letting your ears be the judge. Keep doing that....this will serve you better than you might think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Sounds like you found a way to do a reasonable compare of the equipment you have and have some preferences between the equipment in your possession. Does you equipment represent enough of a sample for both the SS world and the tube world....don't know. But certainly use the equipment to your satisfaction reguardless of other views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted March 19, 2007 Moderators Share Posted March 19, 2007 I've been playing around with some gear and I'd like others thoughts....<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I've got a pretty good (actually very good) solid state power amp (a new Conrad Johnson with a lot of very clean power) and I've been going back and forth between a good SS preamp and a good tube preamp. While I like the tube preamp for some things (e.g. piano, electric guitar and classical stringed instruments), I notice that for a lot of my music and for most vocals the SS preamp sounds more like a live performance (more punch, definition and presence). I'm not necessarily saying the SS sounds better than the tube, but if I really listen carefully and do some A/B comparisons, the SS just sounds more like live music, especially in the context of live and amplified music, which is what most of us hear when we go to a performance (unless of course it's a symphony or chamber orchestra). The tube amp sounds rounder, fatter and fuller and is really great for just listening to the music (and even vocals sound great!), BUT, IMHO I think if listening for a proxy of live music, the solid state sound is closer for many different contexts; especially with Klipsch Heritage speakers. I suspect a lot of this has to do with the fact that nearly all the PA systems out there, with rare exceptions, are solid state. I know this all probably sounds sacrilegious to the tube fans out there and I genuinely dont intend to offend anyone. Thoughts? Which CJ SS Amp do you have. They have incredible equipment, what preamps have you tried with it so far? Travis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 "I know many who like the SS amp with tube pre.....it seems for many that this brings a good combination of the SS "slam" wanted in live recordings while allowing for some of the "sweetness" of tubes. " I know I do Audible and love it[] Synergy is the key. Oh Key[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerwoodKhorns Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 SS vs Tubes. I don't think that this has even been discussed here before. Lets see how many posts this thread gets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 SS vs Tubes. I don't think that this has even been discussed here before. Lets see how many posts this thread gets. Very interesting,tubes,hmmm......I will have to look into that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Hey, wallflower is, well a wallflower and new here. Let's be gentlemen... O, ferget it, dig in... My two cents...definitely on the right track with that "somethings sound better with this and others with that." Means you are a real audiophile and treatment, other than wall treatment, is not going to help. Terminal case. Get yourself a Niles or other safe amp switch and use whichever does it for you. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Tube amps don't have to sound 'fat and round'. They can sound any way the engineer wants them to sound. My Audio Research pre amp sounds fast and detailed. Go Figure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallflower Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share Posted March 19, 2007 The SS pre is an older Acurus RL-11, which I'm learning is a pretty darn good pre-amp. The tube pre is a Conrad Johnson PV-14L, which by most measures is a fast and dynamic tube preamp and I think most would consider it in a different league from the Acurus. Interestingly the Acurus holds its own fairly well. The Acurus is very quiet and it just gets out of the way. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> The Conrad Johnson SS power amp is a truly fantastic piece of gear. It's a brand new MF-2500A that had been sitting in the box at a store unsold. Got a great price on it. Whoever thinks La Scalas don't put out much bass ought to come and hear this combo. I'm not trying to start an argument. I'm only sharing some of my observations. And I'm not saying that one pre-amp is necessarily better than the other, just that they excel at different things. However, one thing that draws me to the Klipsch Heritage sound is the "live" effect and it seems interesting that, at least in my little world, the SS pre-amp creates the closer approximation to the live sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 It's okay. You can start a debate if you like []. This debate will go on, and on. And it needs to... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 What kind of music do you listen to, wallflower? (both live and recorded?) I've been averaging about 1.5 live shows per week for the last 15 years or so and my impressions resonate with your comments. But really, how many of the live shows actually "sound good" on an "audiophile level"? Funny how I still prefer the live show though....I think it comes down to the crazy dynamics (which klipsch + SS excels at) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallflower Posted March 20, 2007 Author Share Posted March 20, 2007 I listen to jazz, rock, classic rock, classical (actually mostly baroque), some pop, bluegrass, Celtic, country and acoustic/folk, live and recorded, and I too attend a lot of live performances and most all of it, if performed for a crowd of even minimal size (save the classical), uses some form of amplification. I also play a lot of acoustic/bluegrass music and when I play with others, and we're just jamming, and it's unamplified, that sound is more like SS too. In fact when I listen to a good recording of mandolin or guitar on my La Scalas, with the SS pre-amp, I swear I can hear the same "woodiness" that I hear when I'm in the room with those instruments. Conversely, I have yet to hear a SS pre-amp do justice to the distorted sound of a tube electric guitar amp. I think SS can do a fine job with the cleaner sound of a jazz guitar, but with distortion, SS sounds too strident and sterile. Anyone have suggestions for a great SS pre-amp that can make a distorted tube guitar amp sound good? That would be the ticket! The question about whether live music sounds good depends tremendously on the person running the board at the time. I also agree that the live sound may not be "audiophile level", but if done well it can sure sound great! My point, and I'm glad to see someone agrees, is that the live sound is much closer to a SS sound than to tubes to my ears.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 Tube amps don't have to sound 'fat and round'. They can sound any way the engineer wants them to sound. My Audio Research pre amp sounds fast and detailed. Go Figure... And the award goes too.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 Tube amps don't have to sound 'fat and round'. They can sound any way the engineer wants them to sound. My Audio Research pre amp sounds fast and detailed. Go Figure... And the award goes too.......... Me for being a total idiot? [*-)] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbert Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 What's a tube amp? [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mas Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 Time for the PWK card: [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Woooo.... The Master speaks. Great letter. I would have wanted to ask him, in regards to the "...Revox provides 70db dynamic range why would I need more?" (hopefully quoted close enough as I cannot see the letter now): What about making copies? R2R noise increases with every dupe. Also, I have recorded in spaces where the BG was as quiet as -33dbC, which would make the Revox noise quite audible. Someone in another post mentioned hearing things at a live performance you can' t hear on most recordings. I did one such of the of a clarinet/piano recital by Paul Garner of the Dallas Symphony a few years back. I still love this one as you can hear his fingers in the act of covering the holes and the sound of the mechanism. Very low levels, mind you, but very real. Having been in the band from the 5th grade through college, I've heard these sounds close up thousands of times, but it had been 30 years since I had heard ALL the experience of music up close and personal. I had him miked about 3 feet off the bell with a 1936 vintage RCA ribbon mike. The only way I could have gotten this intimate quality with no audible medium noise was digital, or a 15ips Ampex, Nagra or other top of the line R2R and then only with DBX to increase the SN to 90db. Do the math... Also bear in mind I would have had to invest many thousands of dollars as opposed to the 3k in my self-built equipment. I've learned that Mapleshade records to R2R and then digitizes from that. Certainly viable since you lose the generational noise build up, but I am trying to find out the "why" of this as opposed to direct recording. Also, PWK's statement "...digital misses some of the low-level information -- the recordings are "ghostly" quiet when there should be some noise" raises questions I wish he were here to answer. Does he mean that it (digital) does not record very quiet sounds the ear can hear? My experience with the clarinet recording suggests that is not the case as the noise of Paul's keying and breaths are palpable, if well down from the music (as they should be)...perhaps things improved over the time from 1984 to the present. As to audience breathing and noise, that particular recording was made in a converted firehouse with less than perfect acoustics. I miked to ignore the acoustics and the audience noise that was quite audible from my recording position was not audible on the recording. By now, many may be envisioning this recording as full of breath noises and key clacking. Not at all. It sounds like a private performance of chamber music, and the "space" sounds like a music room rather than a converted firehouse with 200 people in noisy seats. That is what we recording types try to do...make silk purses. As to amps, I rather suspect the Marantz remained on line in the lab... Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IB Slammin Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 "I know many who like the SS amp with tube pre.....it seems for many that this brings a good combination of the SS "slam" wanted in live recordings while allowing for some of the "sweetness" of tubes. " I know I do Audible and love it[] Synergy is the key. Oh Key[] What Tim said!!!![H] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 I think you hit on a good point Dave and wanted to stress that the letter was written a long time ago...was it 1984? If so, digital was rather crappy back then. It was the mid 90's for me when the digital format really started to blossum. I think that was about the time that 24-Bit, 96kHz came out? My memory is crap. Nevertheless, it'd be interesting to see PWK's comments pertaining to the quality of the more recent SS and Digital topologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.