One Man's Opinion

One Man's Opinion

I'm not posting this to start a war. Well, maybe a little one. But I must
say I have never read anyone say that he thinks SS amps are superior to tube
amps in all departments.


http :// howard.davis2.home.att,net /Tubesvs.SolidState.htm


"A well-designed solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if not, the
use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal like the vintage solid-state EH Hot
Tubes can make it do so."



Any opinions?

Re: One Man's Opinion

LenBum <LenBum@optimum,net > wrote:
> I'm not posting this to start a war. Well, maybe a little one. But I
> must say I have never read anyone say that he thinks SS amps are
> superior to tube amps in all departments.
>
>
> http :// howard.davis2.home.att,net /Tubesvs.SolidState.htm
>
>
> "A well-designed solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if
> not, the use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal like the vintage
> solid-state EH Hot Tubes can make it do so."
>
>
>
> Any opinions?

He's probably right when it comes to Hi-Fi amps. Guitar amps, I think
he's fulla crap (that sentence in particular).

Re: One Man's Opinion


"RichL" <rpleavitt@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:Ll5Vj.198$%X1.35@trnddc08...
> LenBum <LenBum@optimum,net > wrote:
>> I'm not posting this to start a war. Well, maybe a little one. But I
>> must say I have never read anyone say that he thinks SS amps are
>> superior to tube amps in all departments.
>>
>>
>> http :// howard.davis2.home.att,net /Tubesvs.SolidState.htm
>>
>>
>> "A well-designed solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if
>> not, the use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal like the vintage
>> solid-state EH Hot Tubes can make it do so."
>>
>>
>>
>> Any opinions?
>
> He's probably right when it comes to Hi-Fi amps. Guitar amps, I think
> he's fulla crap (that sentence in particular).
>
>

What you already know...in hi-fi, the objective is uncolored reproduction.
High end solid state excels in this department. They make stuff that sounds
as good as any tibe amp; some thing they are better, others don't. I
suspect the discussion is mostly about stuff you can see on a scope, but are
not capable of hearing, espeically if you have reached mature adulthood.

The guitar amp is part of the instrument. Tubes have an unparallled knack
for coloring the sound in a pleasing way; maybe we've learned to like that
sound. I don't know.

My limited experience with cheap SS guitar amps leaves me in a spot where I
can't really comment much. Also, I saw BB King in the last year or so -- he
uses a Gibson Lab series -- and I thought is tone was kinda bland.

Re: One Man's Opinion

On May 9, 6:03 pm, "Phil S." <psymonds no s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>


Davis has been around a long time and knows a few things. I've always
been willing to grant him superior technical knowledge. But I've been
around for a bit myself, and have played through a few different amps.
He won't change my mind about tone -but I'll bet he coul;d put
together a rig that would have me thinking about it.
Chuck

Re: One Man's Opinion

Phil S. wrote:
>Also, I saw BB King in the last year or so -- he
> uses a Gibson Lab series -- and I thought is tone was kinda bland.
>
Since Gibson make few tube amps .. Gibson had to off load the SS
inventory somewhere .. who better than a man living on the chickling
hwy who will take anything for free ?

Re: One Man's Opinion

On Fri, 9 May 2008 20:03:32 -0400, "Phil S."
<psymonds_no_spam@comcast,net > wrote:

>if you have reached mature adulthood
Uh what's that?

Re: One Man's Opinion


"J.P." <jpasano@hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:6kq9249ae2j98t0qv65aoau2oqq2an22nr@4ax,com ...
> On Fri, 9 May 2008 20:03:32 -0400, "Phil S."
> <psymonds_no_spam@comcast,net > wrote:
>
>>if you have reached mature adulthood
> Uh what's that?

Translation: If you survived into your 30's or so, you have hearing loss.

Re: One Man's Opinion

On Sat, 10 May 2008 09:43:05 -0400, "Phil S."
<psymonds_no_spam@comcast,net > wrote:

>
>"J.P." <jpasano@hotmail,com > wrote in message
>news:6kq9249ae2j98t0qv65aoau2oqq2an22nr@4ax,com ...
>> On Fri, 9 May 2008 20:03:32 -0400, "Phil S."
>> <psymonds_no_spam@comcast,net > wrote:
>>
>>>if you have reached mature adulthood
>> Uh what's that?
>
>Translation: If you survived into your 30's or so, you have hearing loss.
>
What did you say? You've gotta talk at my face if you want me to hear
you..my hearing must be off..the last two Champs I rebuilt and sold
sounded okay to me but the customers didn't like their sound...so I
need another source of hearing before I send something out
again...lol...no wonder those tone mods didn't do much..lol

Re: One Man's Opinion

Phil S. <psymonds_no_spam@comcast,net > wrote:
> "RichL" <rpleavitt@yahoo,com > wrote in message
> news:Ll5Vj.198$%X1.35@trnddc08...
>> LenBum <LenBum@optimum,net > wrote:
>>> I'm not posting this to start a war. Well, maybe a little one. But I
>>> must say I have never read anyone say that he thinks SS amps are
>>> superior to tube amps in all departments.
>>>
>>>
>>> http :// howard.davis2.home.att,net /Tubesvs.SolidState.htm
>>>
>>>
>>> "A well-designed solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if
>>> not, the use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal like the vintage
>>> solid-state EH Hot Tubes can make it do so."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any opinions?
>>
>> He's probably right when it comes to Hi-Fi amps. Guitar amps, I
>> think he's fulla crap (that sentence in particular).
>>
>>
>
> What you already know...in hi-fi, the objective is uncolored
> reproduction. High end solid state excels in this department. They
> make stuff that sounds as good as any tibe amp; some thing they are
> better, others don't. I suspect the discussion is mostly about stuff
> you can see on a scope, but are not capable of hearing, espeically if
> you have reached mature adulthood.
>
> The guitar amp is part of the instrument. Tubes have an unparallled
> knack for coloring the sound in a pleasing way; maybe we've learned
> to like that sound. I don't know.
>
> My limited experience with cheap SS guitar amps leaves me in a spot
> where I can't really comment much. Also, I saw BB King in the last
> year or so -- he uses a Gibson Lab series -- and I thought is tone
> was kinda bland.

I've probably been through 5-6 SS amps over the years, mostly when I
didn't know any better. I did hang onto one...a Roland Jazz Chorus 77.
I love that thing with my Ric 12 string, but then again you're not
looking for overdrive with that guitar, just a nice, clean, chimey
sound. So I think SS amps have their uses, there aren't that many that
are really good (although some would argue that the technology exists to
make them good), so generally I like my *toobs*.

It's interesting though what you say about "learning to like that
sound". I've thought that in the past, and still do on occasion now,
that we've been conditioned by our past. But then I think of the times
i tried to play on gigs with SS amps and looking back they never held up
right in the mix. The dynamics just weren't right.

There's something to be said about natural tube compression!

Re: One Man's Opinion

LenBum wrote:
> davis
>
> Any opinions?

He likely has an asshole too.

Re: One Man's Opinion



LenBum wrote:
>
> I'm not posting this to start a war. Well, maybe a little one. But I must
> say I have never read anyone say that he thinks SS amps are superior to tube
> amps in all departments.
>
> http :// howard.davis2.home.att,net /Tubesvs.SolidState.htm
>
> "A well-designed solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if not, the
> use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal like the vintage solid-state EH Hot
> Tubes can make it do so."
>
> Any opinions?

Yes. It's too short, sweet, and incomplete.

============================================================================
TUBES VS. SOLID-STATE

© 2004 H. Davis



Vacuum tubes were the earliest of electronic devices, and for decades they were the sole basis of
the
ever-evolving electronics industry. Some of us may remember the early days of television and the TV
repairman.
In those days TVs broke down frequently. The repairman made house calls just as physicians once did,
and he
carried a box full of various tubes. The great majority of repairs required no more than the
replacement of a tube
or two. When TV went solid state the visiting repairman went out of business - but TVs became
better, smaller,
lighter, cheaper, and far more reliable.

(Service Costs Went Up, Parts inventory went up, service time went up, along with the component
parts explosion it takes to produce the equivalent. The Cat's Whisker Radio has few parts even as
a kid's toy.)



The invention of the semiconductor transistor in 1947 started as great a technological revolution as
that of the
triode vacuum tube by Lee de Forest in 1906. As semiconductor science advanced, integrated circuits,
the audio
op-amp being among the earliest, packed the performance of dozens or even hundreds of discrete
transistors into
one tiny, efficient, inexpensive, and rugged package. Without solid-state many common and almost
indispensable
products could not exist - including the computer you are probably reading this on.

(Not to mention the cell phone with it's unreliable performance and shit audio reproduction).



Today, high-power radio transmission remains the only area in which solid-state electronic
components have not
superseded vacuum tubes. In all other applications, tubes are obsolescent or obsolete.

(The mantra of the sandcasters from their birth. Yet, that tube still kicks their ass.)


Musicians that swear by their tube amps may disagree. Yes, some tube amps have desired
characteristics that
may not as yet have been duplicated in solid-state equipment. But there are those that still use
huge, heavy, and
unreliable tape delay units in preference to small and superior pedals, so, to each his own. If you
like it use it, but
be aware that you may be able to sound just as good or better with far less effort and cost, and
with much fewer
maintenance hassles and expenses as well.

(And still the analog produced recordings of the past are supperior to the best of the digital world
today).



In guitar amps, where tubes now find their greatest audio application, it is not the tubes alone
that account for the
"tube sound." The large, heavy output transformer that is unnecessary with solid-state circuitry
introduces
harmonic distortion, particularly at low frequencies, that can be desirable. Keep in mind though
that, like the many
pounds of transformer weight, this distortion cannot be eliminated when it is NOT desired.

(This is not a true statement).


Practically, there is much more to consider than sound quality alone. Reliability is also important,
as who wants
their equipment to die onstage, or perhaps worse, start emitting the random squeals and hisses tubes
have been
known to produce? Transistors and ICs in properly designed circuits last much, much longer than
vacuum tubes
do. In addition they are far less subject to drift, the changes caused by aging that affect sound
quality and require
periodic bias voltage adjustment and the expensive replacement of tubes.

(Again, not a true statement. SS amps take a crap and go noisy too. If tubes were as bad as
stated, the tubes that took us into and through the space race, would have never let us land a man
on the moon. How's that for a thought?)



Solid-state guitar amps are, for the same output power capability, smaller, much less heavy, lower
in cost
(particularly ongoing maintenance costs), more reliable, less fragile, and far more efficient. A
well-designed
solid-state amp can sound like a tube amp, and if not, the use of a good overdrive/distortion pedal
like the vintage
solid-state EH Hot Tubes can make it do so. The advantages of solid-state design are even greater in
bass amps
than in amps for guitar alone. And the last thing you want under the hot lights onstage in a crowded
club in summer
is to be surrounded by tube amps that are more efficient as room heaters than as sound producers.

(Another falsehood. To date, there has been no side by side comparison test case you can point to,
where two amplifiers were intentually designed to equal each other... one being built with tubes,
and the other with sand. Till then, keep dreaming.)


As an engineer as well as a musician, I am not a believer in pedals that contain tubes.
Glass-enveloped tubes are
relatively fragile and unreliable. Pedals with tubes cannot be powered with an internal battery, as
tubes require too
much power. A special power supply, large wall-wart, or a line cord is necessary with tube
equipment. Tube
pedals are significantly larger, heavier, and more expensive than their solid-state equivalents. And
tubes are not
even necessary to get "tube sound!" Properly designed CMOS or FET circuitry can produce beautifully
tube-like
even-order harmonic distortion and soft compression, with all the solid-state advantages of low
power
consumption, no warm-up time, lower cost, and a smaller, lighter, sturdier, more reliable pedal.

(More sandcaster fluff.)


Tubes are relatively primitive devices. As they cannot produce an audio delay, they are incapable of
generating
echo, reverb, chorus, or flanging. Research I have done has shown them incapable of producing decent
phasing or
vibrato effects as well. Pedals that claim to be tube-based only use the tubes for voltage gain or
overdrive
distortion. A "tube" envelope-controlled filter or modulation pedal for instance may use tubes for
signal gain or
buffering, but op-amps, optocouplers, and other solid-state devices generate the actual effects. The
tubes are
used more as a selling point with tube faddists than as necessary components; in fact they are NOT
necessary
components.

(The concept of tubes being used in a pedal is as practical as putting sand in a tube
amp.)


I once evaluated a prototype "tube" pedal that contained a small light bulb. The bulb had no
function other than to
light up as tube filaments do; the actual filaments were not visible, so a power-wasting
incandescent bulb was
included, at the potential buyer's expense, strictly for appearance's sake! In fact it was actually
detrimental to the
unit's proper functioning due to its light leaking into the optocouplers that did the actual job the
tubes were
supposedly doing. Whenever I want to laugh, I think of this!

<Which only proves,.. as it is with sandcasters, there are also those with stupid ideas playing with
tubes for stupid applications.)



In my opinion tube-based guitar pedals, made mostly by those in the tube manufacturing and sales
business
seeking to create a market for their wares, are a throwback to an obsolescent technology with no
advantages and
many disadvantages for this application.



The promotion and use of vacuum tubes in equipment for the audiophile market is even more ludicrous
than their
use in guitar pedals. It is a RIPOFF, a complete FRAUD upon the consumer! I can prove this assertion
in
technical detail, but that would be off-topic here.

(Typical sandcaster talk without a clue.)



Regards,

Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http :// www .timeelect,com

Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers