|
|
Post by pop on Apr 30, 2015 8:47:07 GMT -5
I have been trying to expand my knowledge on Tube amps. Obviously a common question is "why is the rated power so low, and will they drive my speakers as good as X solid state."
I am in the same boat, I'm a numbers guy. The other day I decided I was going to put it to the test and hooked the Olympicaiii up to our Mcintosh MC275 amp (2 channel 75 watt tube). My finding was that they sounded FANTASTIC and the lower end had a robust, full sound. The olympica prior were hooked up to a 5 channel 200 watt Mcintosh amp with only the two channel driven. The tubes didn't seem to get taxed at all.
We also keep the ML Montis hooked up to our MC275 and they sound sublime without feeling taxed at all.
So here is my question to someone who has previously jumped heavily into this question. Assuming the amps are in the same family.
What is a general power rating from tube to solid state?. Ex: 75 watt tube = 200 watt solid state. Is this even an assumption that can be made? I'm looking for a general blanket statement. "Generally 75w tube amp will compare in power to a 200 watt solid state"
Would you use 75Wx2 to power your high end, not very sensitive speakers?
I have a general understanding on the distortion qualities of tubes being more gradual hence not sounding as harsh as solid state amps, and also the increase voltage making the tube seem more powerful. I interpret this as horsepower and torque working together.
Let's discuss, and as always thanks for the insight!
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 30, 2015 9:01:17 GMT -5
I have been trying to expand my knowledge on Tube amps. Obviously a common question is "why is the rated power so low, and will they drive my speakers as good as X solid state." I am in the same boat, I'm a numbers guy. The other day I decided I was going to put it to the test and hooked the Olympicaiii up to our Mcintosh MC275 amp (2 channel 75 watt tube). My finding was that they sounded FANTASTIC and the lower end had a robust, full sound. The olympica prior were hooked up to a 5 channel 200 watt Mcintosh amp with only the two channel driven. The tubes didn't seem to get taxed at all. We also keep the ML Montis hooked up to our MC275 and they sound sublime without feeling taxed at all. So here is my question to someone who has previously jumped heavily into this question. Assuming the amps are in the same family. What is a general power rating from tube to solid state?. Ex: 75 watt tube = 200 watt solid state. Is this even an assumption that can be made? I'm looking for a general blanket statement. "Generally 75w tube amp will compare in power to a 200 watt solid state" Would you use 75Wx2 to power your high end, not very sensitive speakers? I have a general understanding on the distortion qualities of tubes being more gradual hence not sounding as harsh as solid state amps, and also the increase voltage making the tube seem more powerful. I interpret this as horsepower and torque working together. Let's discuss, and as always thanks for the insight! Hope I am not going too off topic on this but regarding the tube sound - let's say you have an XMC-1 and make the switch from solid state to tubes. Would you have to run Dirac again? Since tubes do change the sound, would Dirac then compensate for that to make your system sound like it was before you changed to tubes? |
|
|
|
Post by pop on Apr 30, 2015 9:03:27 GMT -5
Rickie, I think any questions on the differences between tube and Solid state should be welcome here. I myself would like to learn from others as much as possible. The tube amps are beautiful and add a classy approach to a 2 channel listening environment.
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Apr 30, 2015 9:12:24 GMT -5
"I have a general understanding on the distortion qualities of tubes being more gradual hence not sounding as harsh as solid state amps........." An ancient claim that's been dead for decades now. Modern solid state amps. amplify......clean and sweet with no harshness or distortion. No maintenance, no glass to break, just the easiest way to get back to the music big time. It would be an interesting study to explore the age demographic for the increased interest in tube amplification. Average age is probably "thirty somethings" who did not have a chance to experience tube amplification when nothing else was available.(this also applies to record players). I have a friend in that age range who is into this old technology. I know after spending some rather long listening sessions with him, that the reality of such things is like anything else when you are young. (no matter what, you need to experience it for yourself!)
|
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Apr 30, 2015 9:44:43 GMT -5
Ideally, tubes shouldn't have a sound at all, as they should not impart any personality of their own. However they are famous for embuing even order harmonics that for some make it pleasant. Though not all. Also because of the innacuracy of their performance which people seem to like, tubes live well.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 30, 2015 9:56:10 GMT -5
I have been trying to expand my knowledge on Tube amps. Obviously a common question is "why is the rated power so low, and will they drive my speakers as good as X solid state." I am in the same boat, I'm a numbers guy. The other day I decided I was going to put it to the test and hooked the Olympicaiii up to our Mcintosh MC275 amp (2 channel 75 watt tube). My finding was that they sounded FANTASTIC and the lower end had a robust, full sound. The olympica prior were hooked up to a 5 channel 200 watt Mcintosh amp with only the two channel driven. The tubes didn't seem to get taxed at all. We also keep the ML Montis hooked up to our MC275 and they sound sublime without feeling taxed at all. So here is my question to someone who has previously jumped heavily into this question. Assuming the amps are in the same family. What is a general power rating from tube to solid state?. Ex: 75 watt tube = 200 watt solid state. Is this even an assumption that can be made? I'm looking for a general blanket statement. "Generally 75w tube amp will compare in power to a 200 watt solid state" Would you use 75Wx2 to power your high end, not very sensitive speakers? I have a general understanding on the distortion qualities of tubes being more gradual hence not sounding as harsh as solid state amps, and also the increase voltage making the tube seem more powerful. I interpret this as horsepower and torque working together. Let's discuss, and as always thanks for the insight! To answer one of your questions, I do power my "hi-end" not with 75 but with 70w. The power transformers in the amps I am using weight 14 pounds and the output transformers weight 12 pounds! So that is a lot of transformer duty. |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Apr 30, 2015 12:17:03 GMT -5
I power my Dynaudio Geminis (87db efficient) to very satisfying levels in a 16,000 cubic foot room.
I run my monoblocks at 35 wpc in triode mode or, I'm really up for LOUD 70 wpc in pentode, like Pedrocols.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmasterj on Apr 30, 2015 12:52:09 GMT -5
I'm not sure exactly what it is with tube power amps that leads one to believe they are more powerful than their solid state counterparts, but I too think their is a difference. I was over my Emotiva buddy for life "snackers" place last night we finally got a chance to switch out his speakers from the 105db efficient Klipsch La Scala's to the 86db efficient Maggie MG12QR's. We were both interested in hearing how well the 50watt/channel Yaqin MC30-L tube amp would do with a planer speaker larger than my MMG's.
We were not disappointed that little tube integrated amp seemed to take charge of the MG12QR's just as good as it does the MMG's. We also noticed that the sound of the two very different speakers were very close to each other in that space. With the La Scala's he couldn't use the amps remote control because just the slightest touch would increase the volume a lot. They were so efficient the volume rarely exceeded 2. With the Maggies the volume control is around 4, or 5. Not a thing was lacking and the tube amp didn't seem to be taxed at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Apr 30, 2015 12:57:43 GMT -5
"I have a general understanding on the distortion qualities of tubes being more gradual hence not sounding as harsh as solid state amps........." An ancient claim that's been dead for decades now. Modern solid state amps. amplify......clean and sweet with no harshness or distortion. No maintenance, no glass to break, just the easiest way to get back to the music big time. It would be an interesting study to explore the age demographic for the increased interest in tube amplification. Average age is probably "thirty somethings" who did not have a chance to experience tube amplification when nothing else was available.(this also applies to record players). I have a friend in that age range who is into this old technology. I know after spending some rather long listening sessions with him, that the reality of such things is like anything else when you are young. (no matter what, you need to experience it for yourself!)
Every new owner of a tube amp I know is in their 50's or '60's, FWIW. Maybe more a matter of disposable income and refined taste than age? |
|
|
|
Post by vneal on Apr 30, 2015 13:15:26 GMT -5
Tube amps do sound different than Solid State. Though if I wanted a tube sound for two channel only listening my recommendation would be to go Tube Preamp and still use a Solid State power amp. Traditionally the lower watt tube amps 75W and below should be paired with efficient speakers (91db and up)
A watt is a watt is a watt. A 100 watt tubes will put out no more than a 100 watt SS, In fact tube amps always have more distortion than SS
I have owned tubed McIntosh power amps. preamps and tuners in the past. Still wish I had the tubed tuner
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Apr 30, 2015 13:27:05 GMT -5
"Every new owner of a tube amp I know is in their 50's or '60's, FWIW. Maybe more a matter of disposable income and refined taste than age?" You could be right. I have no clue as to the stats, which is why I brought it up of course. Let's see what the thread yields or if it goes "dead". |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 30, 2015 13:28:19 GMT -5
I'm not sure exactly what it is with tube power amps that leads one to believe they are more powerful than their solid state counterparts, but I too think their is a difference. I was over my Emotiva buddy for life "snackers" place last night we finally got a chance to switch out his speakers from the 105db efficient Klipsch La Scala's to the 86db efficient Maggie MG12QR's. We were both interested in hearing how well the 50watt/channel Yaqin MC30-L tube amp would do with a planer speaker larger than my MMG's. We were not disappointed that little tube integrated amp seemed to take charge of the MG12QR's just as good as it does the MMG's. We also noticed that the sound of the two very different speakers were very close to each other in that space. With the La Scala's he couldn't use the amps remote control because just the slightest touch would increase the volume a lot. They were so efficient the volume rarely exceeded 2. With the Maggies the volume control is around 4, or 5. Not a thing was lacking and the tube amp didn't seem to be taxed at all. Yeah but the important thing is, how did they sound with your Bose speakers? |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Apr 30, 2015 13:28:54 GMT -5
In fact tube amps always have more distortion than SS ALWAYS avoid absolutes!  |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Apr 30, 2015 13:30:02 GMT -5
I bought my first receiver in 1966. It was a Sansui 500A - 17 or so tubes inside that 20wpc powerhouse. As more and more powerful SS receivers and integrated amps came on to the market I couldn't wait to own one. I sold that receiver in 71-72 (CRS) for cheap and bought a Kenwood SS receiver with 80wpc - truly a powerhouse! I haven't missed tubes one bit. Not even interested. Tubes - vinyl - what else? Are 8 track tapes going to make a comeback too? I'm not buying any of it! I've heard some tube setups over the years that were quite awesome. One was a friend's setup - a Macintosh tube pre and amp with about 70wpc and some Advent speakers. Very nice sounding. Sweet as a matter of fact. My current setup reminds me of that setup.
While tubes & vinyl probably aren't currently just fads all I can think of is I've been there and done that - I have no interest in either. I did briefly flirt with vinyl a couple of years ago when I fell into a deal that included almost 200 LP's and the guy threw in the TT to seal the deal. I quickly remembered why I like digital. I can sit on my ass (I'm 67 and tired and retired) and play from a selection of over 400 CDs with a mouse. My son has many of the CDs now. He's got one of those single slot loaded players - an older Marantz IIRC. He's still young! He also has a couple of TT's - and is collecting albums. For birthdays I send him Amazon gift cards (I told you I was tired!) and he turns them into the next LP he's been wanting. He loves those TT's. Says his next venture will be tubes. I tell him to bring money - lots of it!
Sorry if I got off topic Pop. I tend to ramble a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by pallpoul on Apr 30, 2015 14:02:18 GMT -5
I recently got into tubes amps. I am using the emotivA DAC's and pre amp, and some fairly efficient towers speakers. May be its me, but I DO LOVE THE SOUND, compared to my SS amps like UPA-2, UPA-1'S, XPA-100'S, XPA-200 and even my XPA-2.
May be suggestive, well I am sure it is, however to my ears I am liking it a lot. just MHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmasterj on Apr 30, 2015 14:24:25 GMT -5
I'm not sure exactly what it is with tube power amps that leads one to believe they are more powerful than their solid state counterparts, but I too think their is a difference. I was over my Emotiva buddy for life "snackers" place last night we finally got a chance to switch out his speakers from the 105db efficient Klipsch La Scala's to the 86db efficient Maggie MG12QR's. We were both interested in hearing how well the 50watt/channel Yaqin MC30-L tube amp would do with a planer speaker larger than my MMG's. We were not disappointed that little tube integrated amp seemed to take charge of the MG12QR's just as good as it does the MMG's. We also noticed that the sound of the two very different speakers were very close to each other in that space. With the La Scala's he couldn't use the amps remote control because just the slightest touch would increase the volume a lot. They were so efficient the volume rarely exceeded 2. With the Maggies the volume control is around 4, or 5. Not a thing was lacking and the tube amp didn't seem to be taxed at all. Yeah but the important thing is, how did they sound with your Bose speakers? Hey snacker, looks like you found a new Bose speaker Buddy in monkumonku. You guys can PM each other with old Bose speaker stories. |
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Apr 30, 2015 15:32:35 GMT -5
Before I made the decision to dive into the world of tubes amps I read many dark stories about owning them. These dark stories were not from people who actually owned tube amps at one time or another but from people who had a prejudice for SS and HI POWER performance that they sponsored to make claims to clear, no distortion performance and vaults of headroom.
Headroom yes, translation...power. Beyond that level...?
Clarity and dimension with a listening vision of a centered focus point was not well represented as with tube amps IMO.
I have found NEGATIVE stories unfounded in my short personal experience with vacuum tubes.
Over the last year or so I have walk away with the idea that there are many apples on a tree and to some the apples may taste tart and to others sweet while others say no taste at all.
I owned a pair of Emotiva XPA1's gen2. I chose the XPA's from the standpoint of $$ value with the idea promoted from this forum by some that what was needed in my application was headroom for my B&W804S speakers simply b/c B&W speakers require a lot of power to bring them to there full potential. B&W's are notoriously thirsty for power at least in the world of SS which has been defined on this forum and others that I have subscribed to over the years.
Another lame claim to fame of people who dis tube amplifiers is the idea of how to, when to bias a tube amp, indentifying this procedure as a complicated effort and labor intense. Simply put NOT TRUE.
I was, in the beginning nervous about the bias procedure (there is a procedure) but it became FUN once understood. A good feeling came over me to realize that I was actually a part of the process.
Finally and in closing...while I am writing..running my B&W804S speakers in triode mode rated at 35watts per channel, filling a room that is 25' long, 13' wide with 6'5" ceilings with plenty of power to spare.
For the naysayers who advocate that tubes are distorted in sound imaging.
A BIG BOLOGNA
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 30, 2015 15:41:59 GMT -5
In fact tube amps always have more distortion than SS ALWAYS avoid absolutes! And state what kind of distortion. I certainly don't want a tube amp with higher 3rd order distortion than my XPA-5 but one with higher 2nd order distortion I might actually like. |
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Apr 30, 2015 16:43:58 GMT -5
What Distortion?  |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Apr 30, 2015 17:05:51 GMT -5
My dealers says that Tubes Watts behave like 2x SS watts. So 100W tubes behave like 200W solid state. In absolute terms I don't believe that the Watts are actually different.
|
|
