Tube amplifiers

[lindsayt]

This is one of those threads where I can agree with or fully understand where everyone is coming from in this thread.

A good valve amp for 300 euros is possible if you build one yourself as a DIY project.

Also possible if you get a once in a lifetime lucky 2nd hand find.

The 300 euro Chinese brand new valve amps. Never properly auditioned one that cheap myself. I've read varying reports on them. Some people saying they're fine for the money, other's saying it's apparent where the cost savings have been made.

For 300 euros you can get some very good sounding solid state amps. You can also get some reasonable speakers. For anyone wanting warmth / a sound that's not too lean, whilst having OK bass quality, that's easier to acheive on a budget if you're relaxed on speaker size and looks.

The valve buffer is a nice idea. For me personally it makes no sense. Less is more. Using one would be trying to fix a fault with an inverse fault, which is generally not a good idea in hi-fi.

I personally think that valve pre-amps make no sense in a system with a digital source. You generally don't need the extra gain that an active pre-amp would give you. Seems crazy to overamplify your digital source, only to cut it back with a volume control. Better to have one or two less amplification stages in your system and the volume knob at a higher setting. IE use a stepped attenuator passive pre-amp if your source has a sufficiently strong output. Less is more - again.

There are many people that are happy with their push pull valve amplifiers. This genre of amplifier is not for me. It could be that there are not many speakers that are ideally suited to them. For 80 something db sensitive speakers and speakers with 4 ohm nominal impedances I'd go for solid state. For 95 db or over speakers I'd go for SET's.

World class, for midrange realism, SET amplifiers can be bought for prices starting at £1250 (maybe a little more with the pound being so wek now). For that price you can get a 2 watt SETwith 80 year old NOS valves. When mated with highly efficient speakers no other type of amplifier that I've auditioned is better at sounding as if there is nothing between the source and speakers. You can spend many thousands of euros on a new valve amplifier. As valve amplifiers increase in power, they generally cost more and sound worse.

My advice: if you want to try valve amplification by all means go ahead and try it and make your own mind up as to how well it works in your system. For low efficiency speakers - which most people have - I would stick to solid state.

 

[ellisdj]

Here is the caveat - low sensitvity speakers - 87db

However only driving them 100hz and above - so the real donkey work is done elsewhere - now do you want a medium power SET or still a solid state LindseyT ??

 

[Vladimir]

Chinese valve amps are simply implementations of old RCA manuals and audio electronics magazines with known and proven topologies. The main issue are the cheap labor and cheap components used to get such low prices.

Considering there is a lot of point to point wiring, quality control is immensely more important with this type of kit than with PCB based SS. When you order one, God only knows what you may be getting. The components used often include completely inferior POS fake 'japanese' capacitors, resistors and pots. Tubes and transformers that are total crapola. This impacts reliability, unit life span will be short and sound quality will significantly lag behind the true potential of the implemented topology design.

However, someone who has no experience and 'ear' for this type of kit might be very pleased with his purchase. Valves will distort, make you fuzzy and warm inside, you didn't spend $300 on a custom output transformer, and all is well in the world.

There are lots of cheap oriental valve amp offerings on ebay, but I pointed out Dared, as I know someone who purchased their kit and was very pleased with it. Again, you get your money's worth.

 

[Infiniteloop]

This is one of those threads where I can agree with or fully understand where everyone is coming from in this thread.

A good valve amp for 300 euros is possible if you build one yourself as a DIY project.

Also possible if you get a once in a lifetime lucky 2nd hand find.

The 300 euro Chinese brand new valve amps. Never properly auditioned one that cheap myself. I've read varying reports on them. Some people saying they're fine for the money, other's saying it's apparent where the cost savings have been made.

For 300 euros you can get some very good sounding solid state amps. You can also get some reasonable speakers. For anyone wanting warmth / a sound that's not too lean, whilst having OK bass quality, that's easier to acheive on a budget if you're relaxed on speaker size and looks.

The valve buffer is a nice idea. For me personally it makes no sense. Less is more. Using one would be trying to fix a fault with an inverse fault, which is generally not a good idea in hi-fi.

I personally think that valve pre-amps make no sense in a system with a digital source. You generally don't need the extra gain that an active pre-amp would give you. Seems crazy to overamplify your digital source, only to cut it back with a volume control. Better to have one or two less amplification stages in your system and the volume knob at a higher setting. IE use a stepped attenuator passive pre-amp if your source has a sufficiently strong output. Less is more - again.

There are many people that are happy with their push pull valve amplifiers. This genre of amplifier is not for me. It could be that there are not many speakers that are ideally suited to them. For 80 something db sensitive speakers and speakers with 4 ohm nominal impedances I'd go for solid state. For 95 db or over speakers I'd go for SET's.

World class, for midrange realism, SET amplifiers can be bought for prices starting at £1250 (maybe a little more with the pound being so wek now). For that price you can get a 2 watt SETwith 80 year old NOS valves. When mated with highly efficient speakers no other type of amplifier that I've auditioned is better at sounding as if there is nothing between the source and speakers. You can spend many thousands of euros on a new valve amplifier. As valve amplifiers increase in power, they generally cost more and sound worse.

My advice: if you want to try valve amplification by all means go ahead and try it and make your own mind up as to how well it works in your system. For low efficiency speakers - which most people have - I would stick to solid state.

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

 

[Vladimir]

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

You can get room filling sound on the same speakers even with 4W. However, in no universe can 88db and 89db be called efficient. You wont be getting good transients, they are getting clipped off and making the sound a bit too pleasant. For true instrument and vocal representation you want the nasty edges of the transient peaks.

This isn't inherent to valve amps, just when you pair them with inefficient speakers. Hook them up to 100db+ and look and behold, spiky transients filling your music with lifelike zing.

 

[Infiniteloop]

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

You can get room filling sound on the same speakers even with 4W. However, in no universe can 88db and 89db be called efficient. You wont be getting good transients, they are getting clipped off and making the sound a bit too pleasant. For true instrument and vocal representation you want the nasty edges of the transient peaks.

This isn't inherent to valve amps, just when you pair them with inefficient speakers. Hook them up to 100db+ and look and behold, spiky transients filling your music with lifelike zing.

When I hook the same speakers up to my 200W Devialet, The sound is less warm and euphonic, but I cannot discern any extra 'zingyness'. I'm pretty sure transients are just fine with both Amps.

 

[Vladimir]

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

You can get room filling sound on the same speakers even with 4W. However, in no universe can 88db and 89db be called efficient. You wont be getting good transients, they are getting clipped off and making the sound a bit too pleasant. For true instrument and vocal representation you want the nasty edges of the transient peaks.

This isn't inherent to valve amps, just when you pair them with inefficient speakers. Hook them up to 100db+ and look and behold, spiky transients filling your music with lifelike zing.

When I hook the same speakers up to my 200W Devialet, The sound is less warm and euphonic, but I cannot discern any extra 'zingyness'. I'm pretty sure transients are just fine with both Amps.

Transients.

 

[lindsayt]

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

Yep, with a 24 watt SET you'll be fine for most listening. With a 2 watt SET you'd be limited to 92 dbs @ 1 metre from the speakers, plus the 2 watt set might sound shut-in with low impedance speakers with the standard transformer that is optimised for 8 ohm loads.

How much did your 24 watt SET cost you and what output valves does it have?

 

[lindsayt]

Transients.

In that video he's getting c100 db transients at like 5 cms from his drums.

I've never listened to a band with my ear 5 cms from the snare drum.

A 24 watt amplifier with 88 db sensitive speaker can hit 105 dbs at 5 cms without clipping.

And what's the big deal if you play the drum back at 90 dbs instead of 100 dbs anyway? 90 dbs is still loud for listening at home.

 

[Vladimir]

Transients.

In that video he's getting c100 db transients at like 5 cms from his drums.

I've never listened to a band with my ear 5 cms from the snare drum.

A 24 watt amplifier with 88 db sensitive speaker can hit 105 dbs at 5 cms without clipping.

And what's the big deal if you play the drum back at 90 dbs instead of 100 dbs anyway? 90 dbs is still loud for listening at home.

I've sat on a couch next to a full set of Premier drums and had my ears ringing for two days. Cymbals hit 114dB at few feet easily.

 

[Infiniteloop]

I think most people would be very surprised at how far a few Watts will go. My 24 Watt SET has no trouble at all in producing party levels of unclipped, undistorted, delicious, room filling sound with my Focals (89dB) or Sonus Faber's (88dB).

Yep, with a 24 watt SET you'll be fine for most listening. With a 2 watt SET you'd be limited to 92 dbs @ 1 metre from the speakers, plus the 2 watt set might sound shut-in with low impedance speakers with the standard transformer that is optimised for 8 ohm loads.

How much did your 24 watt SET cost you and what output valves does it have?

£5.5K, 845's. The output transformers have both 4 and 8 Ohm taps.

 

[lindsayt]

Having ringing ears is unpleasant. Any sensible person would play back a drumkit on their hi-fi at less than 100 dbs instead of 114 dbs.

Who listens at 105 dbs and requires 3 db headroom?

I don't.

I usually listen at c60 dbs and require about 30 dbs headroom on more dynamic recordings.

 

[paulkebab]

for me between valves and SS is in the detail. My ears don't like lots of midrange so that in itself presents a problem - loss of detail in midrange. Somehow valves reproduce that lost detail without having to turn the volume up to a point where I have to employ the DEQ to back a few frequencies off, I do try to use it as little as possible. The IPL s4TL's I have are 89dB so not very sensitive, the Vincent delivers the first 10WPC in valve then anything after that goes SS. I can't tell where the crossover point is and sometimes wish they'd put a switch in place to defeat the SS stage, just to see how loud that 10WPC really is and also to try and catch that crossover point. All in all I listen at lower levels generally, and thankfully spend my listening time enjoying things instead of metaphorically pulling things apart. To the OP good luck but I feel the answer lies in more outlay.

 

[Vladimir]

Having ringing ears is unpleasant. Any sensible person would play back a drumkit on their hi-fi at less than 100 dbs instead of 114 dbs.

Who listens at 105 dbs and requires 3 db headroom?

I don't.

I usually listen at c60 dbs and require about 30 dbs headroom on more dynamic recordings.

I agree. We have veered off topic with the theoretical becomes unpractical chat. Back on tubes.

 

[Rethep]

I can hardly believe in an extra tube-driver/stage. Because in every 'extra' you loose something of the original signal. The signal path will become longer, and the sound will be less pure.

I.m.o. that's where 'all-tube' amps excell. Just few (two ?) amplifying stages. Short signal path, and little or no feedback.

 

[nopiano]

I can hardly believe in an extra tube-driver/stage. Because in every 'extra' you loose something of the original signal. The signal path will become longer, and the sound will be less pure.

I.m.o. that's where 'all-tube' amps excell. Just few (two ?) amplifying stages. Short signal path, and little or no feedback.

That's rather the point, though. The tube 'buffer' stages add the ear-friendly distortion that they produce naturally, and users think the system is more 'musical'. They are adding distortion, but that sometimes is euphonic, as in almost every unamplified instrument with overtones and harmonics, etc.

Or more blatantly, smoothing the edges off a system that sounds rough.

 

[lindsayt]

That's rather the point, though. The tube 'buffer' stages add the ear-friendly distortion that they produce naturally, and users think the system is more 'musical'. They are adding distortion, but that sometimes is euphonic, as in almost every unamplified instrument with overtones and harmonics, etc.

Or more blatantly, smoothing the edges off a system that sounds rough.

A good valve amp, when matched with suitable speakers, will sound like there's nothing between the source and the speakers (when compared to lesser valve amps or good solid state). Especially in the midrange (the bass might not match up to good solid state). If you can detect distortion from the valve amplifier (in the midrange), even if it's pleasant euphonoic distortion, then it's either not a good one, or it has been matched to the wrong speakers.

Surely the aim of the amplifier game is to get one that sounds, relatively speaking, as if there is nothing between the source and the speakers? And preferably to do it for the lowest cost.

 

[Rethep]

To me there is more then a difference in distortion. My tube-amp gives me a much more open sound, beside some less rough dynamics, as they (you) call it. That's why i think, an extra tube buffer won't give you a more open sound and maybe just a slightly less rough balance. Then you could also buy a warm sounding ss-amp, which, in general, will be less open too.

The difference is the way of amplifying (tube or ss), not an extra stage of tubes (buffer).