Does "Tube Sound" Exist?

Early B.

On one hand, you hear lots of folks, including reviewers, talking about the glory of tube sound. They'll typically say that a particular piece of SS gear sounds tube-like. On the other end of the spectrum you have folks say that the distinction between high quality SS gear and tube gear is difficult to discern. If that's the case, then is there really something called "tube sound?" If so, what is it?

dragon1952

Here's a good article that I found posted on another forum. I think it discusses the issue pretty well.
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/1640

mulveling

Means different things to different people.

Some correlate it to grain and harsh edges - claiming SS generally has more of it than Tubes

Some say tubes have a larger, more expansive soundstage

Some say a warm midrange often coupled with a gentle treble rolloff

Some say the PRaT is better with tubes (though some probably say the reverse)

Some say the tubes impart a more organic, liquid sound with a more natural tonality/timbre/texture (this is more abstract than the above attributes)

Some say the bass is a big difference - though claims here can be all over the map since the specific implementation of an amp has at least as much to do with bass as whether it's tubes or SS.

Some will claim any combination of the above...

Tubes being smoother and warmer tend to be the most common themes. Personally I'd rather have a good high-end SS amp over any mid-fi tube amp, and vice-versa. I've heard tube gear I don't like, tube gear that's decent, and tube gear that rules. Same with SS. Head tube gear that's harsh and brittle (though it's not too common an affliction of tube amps). SS gear that's mushy. There's so much more to a great amp than just the question of glass vs silicon.

I DO think tubes and SS each have a slight bit of difference in their own inherent signatures (that runs along the lines of the above), but usually if there's something glaringly wrong with the sound it's the amp designer's/builder's fault.

Probably clouding the issue is that there's so much bad SS gear out there. The vast majority of cheap crap out there is SS because it's more cost effective. That gear sucks because the design, implementation, parts are all crap. Tubes are usually catering to our audiophile niche and are more likely to be carefully designed & built. That may be giving SS more of a bad rap than it deserves.

Early B.

mulveling wrote: »

The vast majority of cheap crap out there is SS because it's more cost effective. That gear sucks because the design, implementation, parts are all crap. Tubes are usually catering to our audiophile niche and are more likely to be carefully designed & built. That may be giving SS more of a bad rap than it deserves.

Good point. Hadn't considered that.

cfrizz

Excellent post Mulveling.

mhardy6647

May I humbly suggest:
Reading about "tube sound" is like reading about sex.
Go and listen!

hearingimpared

mulveling wrote: »

Means different things to different people.

Some correlate it to grain and harsh edges - claiming SS generally has more of it than Tubes

Some say tubes have a larger, more expansive soundstage

Some say a warm midrange often coupled with a gentle treble rolloff

Some say the PRaT is better with tubes (though some probably say the reverse)

Some say the tubes impart a more organic, liquid sound with a more natural tonality/timbre/texture (this is more abstract than the above attributes)

Some say the bass is a big difference - though claims here can be all over the map since the specific implementation of an amp has at least as much to do with bass as whether it's tubes or SS.

Some will claim any combination of the above...

Tubes being smoother and warmer tend to be the most common themes. Personally I'd rather have a good high-end SS amp over any mid-fi tube amp, and vice-versa. I've heard tube gear I don't like, tube gear that's decent, and tube gear that rules. Same with SS. Head tube gear that's harsh and brittle (though it's not too common an affliction of tube amps). SS gear that's mushy. There's so much more to a great amp than just the question of glass vs silicon.

I DO think tubes and SS each have a slight bit of difference in their own inherent signatures (that runs along the lines of the above), but usually if there's something glaringly wrong with the sound it's the amp designer's/builder's fault.

Probably clouding the issue is that there's so much bad SS gear out there. The vast majority of cheap crap out there is SS because it's more cost effective. That gear sucks because the design, implementation, parts are all crap. Tubes are usually catering to our audiophile niche and are more likely to be carefully designed & built. That may be giving SS more of a bad rap than it deserves.

Good stuff Bro!!!! My take on it is the same as vinyl vs. digital. I'm a vinyl junkie. I still haven't heard a digital front end do justice to music the way vinyl does. I have an open mind to both tubes and digital. I want to be shown!

Ricardo

What is PRAT??

george daniel

I think it's PRaT,,and I don't know either

sucks2beme

Tube sound was best desribed by a guitar player.
Get feedback on SS, everyone hates you.
Get feedback on tubes, you're a guitar hero.

mulveling

george daniel wrote: »

I think it's PRaT,,and I don't know either

Pace, Rhythm, and Timing.
Another really abstract concept where everyone has their own idea of what it should precisely mean. To me, good PRaT just means that a system should be able to rock

MillerLiteScott

Tubes are cool.

I have low level Tube amps with stock Chinese tubes and I love the sound.

Both SS and tubes have their place.

ND13

Does "Tube Sound" Exist?

YEP!!!!

Early B.

I'm still not totally convinced. Generally speaking, I'll bet it would be hard to tell the difference between a good pure tube system and a good solid state one, and every combination in between.

janmike

Early B. wrote: »

I'm still not totally convinced. Generally speaking, I'll bet it would be hard to tell the difference between a good pure tube system and a good solid state one, and every combination in between.

That is a real interesting thought. Makes you think about what to purchase, but I still believe in the hear it for yourself theory.

dougy

I think what's commonly accepted as "tube sound" can be attributed mainly to high orders of second harmonic distortion and to low output impedence. The 2nd harmonic distortion has been shown to sound subjectively pleasing to many people, while the low output impedence generally produces a rolled off top end response which again, to many has proven to help the sound. I suspect, particularly with horns and overly bright dome tweeters.

Bill Ayotte

I have A/B'ed my Marantz DV-8300 against my carver 490t a couple of times now, and there is a difference......the Carver is more "open", and a little bit more laid back than the Marantz....Which has been rated highly for music as well as DVD playback...Don't get me wrong, I love my Marantz, but the sound of the Carver makes me crave a Jolida, I have heard these plays circles around the Carver......Someday..

markmarc

I believe tube gear gives a clarity that similarly priced SS gear can't touch. But, it still depends on synergy of equipment, some equipment just doesn't match up well, pure and simple.

madmax

dougy wrote: »

I think what's commonly accepted as "tube sound" can be attributed mainly to high orders of second harmonic distortion and to low output impedence. The 2nd harmonic distortion has been shown to sound subjectively pleasing to many people, while the low output impedence generally produces a rolled off top end response which again, to many has proven to help the sound. I suspect, particularly with horns and overly bright dome tweeters.

I liked your answer so much I quoted it above. Throw in the lesser degree of intermodulation distortion (IMD)provided by tubes and we are together on this one.

Intermodulation is different than harmonic because it is at clashing intervals. Imagine harmonic distortion as a musical chord and intermodulation distortion as two or more notes which clash with each other. Even the smallest amout of IMD is very noticeable.

I went into the IMD because I believe that is what most tube lovers hate about SS sound, whether they know it or not.

madmax

Early B.

madmax wrote: »

I liked your answer so much I quoted it above. Throw in the lesser degree of intermodulation distortion (IMD)provided by tubes and we are together on this one.

Intermodulation is different than harmonic because it is at clashing intervals. Imagine harmonic distortion as a musical chord and intermodulation distortion as two or more notes which clash with each other. Even the smallest amout of IMD is very noticeable.

I went into the IMD because I believe that is what most tube lovers hate about SS sound, whether they know it or not.

madmax

Good points here, fellas. If IMD is the culprit, then do we hear IMD on high quality SS gear? In other words, does well designed SS gear minimize IMD so it's virtually imperceptible?

mhardy6647

I think what's commonly accepted as "tube sound" can be attributed mainly to high orders of second harmonic distortion and to low output impedence. The 2nd harmonic distortion has been shown to sound subjectively pleasing to many people, while the low output impedence generally produces a rolled off top end response which again, to many has proven to help the sound. I suspect, particularly with horns and overly bright dome tweeters.

I'll bet you meant "high output impedance" (i.e., low damping factor) on tube amps; didn't you? There are very few tube amps (even those with Williamson UL circuits and gobs of negative feedback) that ever are accused of having low output impedance :-)

In fact, the HF response of good tube amps is extremely extended. For example, the EICO HF-81 integrated amp claimed HF response to 75 kHz at 1 watt output.

dougy

Yup, you're absolutely right! Thank you for setting that straight. I think my output impedence may be a little out of spec!

reeltrouble1

yes, there is tube sound, it has to do with measureable harmonic differences for those that need a spec. Its definetely different sounding. There is a great deal of information readily available should one care to study it.

Well heck after reading the all the reply posts (yea I admit I did not read them all) Max already covered it. There are ways ss can change the 2nd or 3rd order harmonics to sound more tube like but its too long a story for me right now.

RT1

Frank Z

mhardy6647 wrote: »

May I humbly suggest:
Reading about "tube sound" is like reading about sex.
Go and listen!

Listen? To sex?






















EWWWWW!

285exp

Another less well known factor is your source of electricity. I find the coal generated powerplants have a harsh, sulfurous sound. Solar power tends to be overly bright. I much prefer hydroelectric power, as it has a cool and liquid quality unmatched by your less natural sources.

kalgiers

Hello, all I've been following the forum for a few years now, but only recently decided to break down and create an account.

One of the things I remember hearing on this issue from an industry vet was that one of the reasons tube based gear sound better than solid is state is the way that distortion is handled. That tubed gear, when the do distort do so along harmonic frequencies. As opposed to solid state amps which do the exact opposite. Solid state has proven more popular in most cases because of ease of manufacture, lower heat build up and lower upkeep.

unc2701

About 99% of the tube aura can be traced back to guitar players. When SS guitar amps first hit the market, everyone knew something was wrong when they overdrove them and it all sounded like ****. Overdrive the hell out of a tube amp and it just starts sounding sweeter... SS just isn't the same.

Move on to an audiophile tube amp and the differences are far more subtle than most reviewers allow. In fact, you'll find almost as many double-blinds that can't tell tube from SS as you will find on cables. If you know what to listen for, it's there... at which point it's just a matter of personal preference.

Early B.

unc2701 wrote: »

Move on to an audiophile tube amp and the differences are far more subtle than most reviewers allow. In fact, you'll find almost as many double-blinds that can't tell tube from SS as you will find on cables. If you know what to listen for, it's there... at which point it's just a matter of personal preference.

Agreed. In fact, I'll take it one step further and say beyond a certain level of quality for either SS or tube gear, the term "tube sound" becomes inconsequential.

John K.

EB, there can be a "tube sound", and as some of the previous replies have mentioned it can result from the higher amount of second harmonic distortion in some tube designs together with a high output impedance causing a less flat frequency response. There can, however, be tube designs which are competitive in quality with solid state equipment and achieve their high fidelity , and as a result don't have a "tube sound". One of the classic examples is the well-designed $12,000 pair of tube amps which were indistinguishable from the $220 Pioneer receiver in the Stereo Review amplifier blind listening tests , which still stand unchallenged by solid evidence to the contrary.

reeltrouble1

Anti Hi-Fi Audio Insurgent Sighting.

RT1

285exp

"Tube sound" is often masked by other sources of distortion. Even premium cables are often undershielded. When I bought the last Dixie Chicks CD, I was shocked at how shrill and harpy-like they sounded. I made a little tent of aluminum foil to place over the interconnects, and there was an audible decrease in shrillness. Natalie Maines' voice still sounded a bit fat though.