Right but not really a fair comparison, one is a workhorse amplifying and pumping out good sound; the other is trying to do the most complex SOTA codecs to an ever expanding number of channels (and all the legacy things expected of it). The implication is that if someone built a tube SSP it would be more reliable (which it wouldn’t), whereas I think you’re trying to say that we should just be happy with great two channel audio.
No need for me, my system is high end and excellent.
Can your system with all tubes be used for home theater , with all of the decoding and multi channel surround modes? Again, apples and oranges. Your system, with tubes in certain parts is not meant to, or able to, operate as a home theater audio system.
PRE AMPS: Integra DHC 9.9, Threshold T2
POWER AMPS: Threshold SA/4e, Threshold S200 (2), XPA-1's (2) XPA-5
Speakers: Thiel 3.6 main, Velodyne F1500r subs (2), B&W HTM center, Polk RTi28 rear, ERD1 side sur.
SOURCES: OPPO BDP 83, Logitech Duet/Touch combo, Pioneer Elite CLD97 Laserdisc, Oracle TT w/ Magnepan Unitrac 1 arm and Shure V15 V mr cartridge
Stax srx mkIII phones
Samsung 61" LED DLP T
LG LED ceiling mounted projector W/ 100" Elite motorized
So if you want to compare the reliability of a tube amp to the “lack of completeness” of the RMC-1, ok, point taken, but IMO it’s not even apples and oranges and I can’t even come up with a fruit, vegetable, or other food that could even be an analogy.
I don't think that Emotiva has offered a reliable and trustworthy pre/pro since their existence. I'm not even keen on their preamps and DACs. Emotiva should stick with making amps their number one concern, and with proper effort, they could build a solid and loyal customer base.
SOME tube gear is issue-free, but some isn't. For awhile there in the '70s and '80s, companies who didn't know any better seemed to be designing and selling tube gear whose reliability was worse than the lowest-priced solid state stuff. When the "audiophile boom" went bust, the majority of those companies went out of business, and the tube-gear companies that were left were those who had better engineering and more reliable products.
One can buy the cheapest Yamaha AVR on the market, and it'll be as reliable or even more reliable than the majority of Chinese tube gear. The Yamaha will exhibit that reliability despite having more channels, more functions, and more features. And don't disparage the sound quality of the little Yamahas either - you can spend a LOT more money before getting better sound (operated within their power limitations of the AVR, of course).
So let's level the playing field. Pick an identically-priced tube amp and solid-state one and tell me which you think will be the more reliable. I can't argue that some prefer tube sound and are willing to pay more for it, but the theory that tube gear is more reliable than solid state may be on thin ice.
My ARC preamp and amp were not terribly reliable. And tubes wear out, get noisy, microphonic, etc. Sounded nice when they worked. IME SS has well surpassed tubes in terms of reliability. Comparing the birthing pains of a new complex product like the RMC-1 to a simple tube amp or preamp is grossly out of line. For a different comparison, I had to repair my ARC amp twice and retube several times in ten years; my XPA-series amplifiers are doing fine with zero maintenance in the same amount of time.
"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
Post by tropicallutefisk on Jul 5, 2019 6:07:01 GMT -5
Over years I owned two different Yamaha receivers and a Rotel prepro that worked flawlessly for several years. All were passed down to family members and served them well till they purchased newer equipment. My first issue with any receiver or prepro was a Marantz purchased new in 2008. In 2016 one of the HDMI ports fritzed out and I was upgrading to 4k, so I replaced it with the Marantz 8802a. The 8802a went green screen after a week in my system. I had to pay shipping costs to send it back to Marantz so it could be repaired. I was NOT happy with Marantz or my dealer. However, rather than blame Marantz for a shoddy product I am more inclined to believe this is a matter of issues with new tech. Though I do hold Marantz and the dealer responsible for the policy of making me pay to have the item shipped for repair.
As for amplifiers, I have or have owned a total of seven solid state amps from brands such as McIntosh, Rotel and Emotiva. None have ever given me any trouble.
In response to the thread shift to mass market transistors vs tubes. My post was about the troublesome nature of “pre-pro” units, whatever that is.
I can respond to that. I have used preamp processors for years..almost 20 years. I've never had any problem with any of them. I currently have an Integra DHC 9.9. It's 10 years old and is used just about every day. Never a problem, everything has always worked. I had an Outlaw 990 pre amp processor for years as well. Never had any issues with it. I also still use a Harman Kardon Signature 2.0 preamp/processor. I've been using that for 11 or 12 years. Never any problems with it.
As for tube preamps and amps vs solid state for reliability, I have a Threshold T2 solid state fully balanced preamp. I've owned it for 25 years and still use it every day. Never a problem nor any maintenance needed. I would put the sound quality, capabilities and versatility up against any tube preamp, and win. I also have multiple solid state power amps, including a Threshold SA/4e. I bought it about 26 years ago and it has never needed any service or maintenance. Again, I'd put it's sound quality up against any tube power amp. Tube equipment has specific sounds that some people enjoy. That's fine. But to say that tube equipment has far fewer problems is ridiculous.
Since there are no tube based pre/proc, you can't compare reliability of solid state ones to something that doesn't exist.