HAD on tubes vs solid state

[Billion81]

Sorry to have dared cast doubt against your dumble god's silly musings. You probably are surrounded by at least a few educated folks who have degrees in electronics and know when they hear a bunch of "bologna".
Don't let my opinion stop you from drinking the kool aid though. :lol

Hammer away at the Bologna, koolaid etc..- Seriously, note my question about SS getting to this point.

the doorag and fat guy comments are just not relevant to the technical points and weakens the thread and detracts from the discussion-

I agree wholly that that clips lends itself to Hyperbole which is, after all what the OP is about.

[talbany]

It's funny this post has come down to something I've been struggling with, 'what is the best way to get up to speed with TUBE electronics'? I've been looking at night courses at polytechnic, reading and reading, but it really does come down to what you can pull together yourself then...collecting books, keeping up with forums etc, it seems TUBE technology isn't taught so much as it is learned...if you get my drift.

I've collected & read a lot of books on tube electronics design and IMO Merlin Blencowe's book has done the best job so far. He doesn't just give you the algebraic equations for common amplifier stages but goes into the tonal implications of each stage with some surprising insights (e.g. the common cathode follower used in Fender amps is 'flawed' in such a way that it contributes significant 2nd harmonic distortion even at low volumes). I highly recommend this book!

'Designing Tube Preamps for Guitar and Bass' by Merlin Blencowe (Hardcover ... http://amzn.to/9vMCEz)

To Elaborate!!
IMO..The study of tube theory and design is all but a part of the knowledge needed to build a wonderful sounding amp and become sucessful in this crazy business of building amps.. Since most of the theory doesn't exactly translate directly to the sonic aspects and how they all interact with various types of caps pots and resistors/componets etc..

All this must be studied and documented in the field and then your draw your own conclusions and form your own opinions..(This takes YEARS!!)

Studying and knowing/understanding the terminology as well as being able to communicate how and what goes on within your designs to others helps to speed up the learning process IMO in retrospect can only improve on your designs broden your perspective and be able to try new and different ideas within your designs..
It also helps that you can play and have the ability to detect the nuances associated with the inreaction within of the total system.. Knowing the terminology as well as being able to communicate your thoughts and intentions to other players is also a wonderful ability to have in the field.. Sometimes it doesn't always work if you have one player and one EE designer working together as IMO lose some of the finer more important details in the translation..
Detailed ramblings of a Lunatic Huh!!..

Tony

[TheGimp]

My suspission is that IF SS ever emulates tube characteristics it will be with complicated ICs, not a simple circuit topology that allows a design approach similar to tube design (like FETs).

As such, it will push amplifier design into IC design topologies using circuit board layout, etc.

My personal suspission is HAD was trying to make a short statement that most listeners could relate to rather than going into a technical statement which would be over the head of most viewers.

When the statement was made, was he addressing guitar amp consumers? Or designers?

Personally, I think a better explaination is that the harmonic spectra generated by SS is different than that generated by tubes and this is why tubes sound better. But that sounds too simple.

[Aurora]

Well - there are amps - and there are amps.........
If you're looking for clean, there should be nothing wrong with SS, but as most guitarists are searching for " the sound", - meaning an amp that contributes to the sound, and the only form of "sound" an amp can produce, is in the form of distortion - Exactly what you DON'T want in a HiFi amplifier.
The tube/SS debate have been going on in HiFi circles for ages, and especially for PP stages, the conclusion these days, are more leaning towards the fact that both produces odd order harmonics, but tubes seems to stick to the lower order odd harmonics, 3-5 mostly, whereas SS often gives a lot more 5-7-9 th order. But even then, with todays technology, it is not uncommon to find 100W SS amps with distortion figures at a mere tenth of a percent, even at full blast. Clean at it's best! - and not wanted for guitar at all....
One thing that has not been mentioned, is the complex phase relationships that might occur when using an OT, thus maybe being the source of linear distortion - and as far as I can judge from the discussions here, not all speakers are worthwhile either....

I'm just a couple of years older than Mark and Psycho, just old enough that I actually was taught tube tech at college in the early 70s. The old professor was so stuck in tubes, that when we came to FETs - he continued to talk tubes - mostly.

One thing that came to my mind, all the tube amp simulators, that are floating around on the stomp box sites - mostly built with FETs. Have any of you tried any of these?
Some years ago, a german guy designed an AC30 simulator - allegedly so good that it was bought by VOX and pulled from the net....

[phsyconoodler]

Regardless of how much some people seem to understand about circuitry,tube guitar amps are here to stay for a great while yet.
If they were on the endangered species list why is there such a surge in manufacturers of tube amp related parts these days?Even audiophiles are building tube amps.There are lots of goofs there that will pay huge coin for special power cables and cryogenically treated tubes and such.
But the common denominator is the vacuum tube.
So while guys like Vibratoking seem to have a better grasp on theory than the avearage person,we all agree that tubes amps are superior for guitar and audio in lots of cases.
Next time you are filmed and put on the spot like HD was by Henry Kaiser,lets see what you say.
Bet you won't start quoting stuff that no one understands anyway.
I frankly think his response was brilliant.Right or wrong.

[Aurora]

While I agree to tube amps being around forsome time to come, there is a difference between the guitar community and the audiophiles. Tube guitar amps are wanted for their distortion characteristics. Even if it is hard or impossible to formulate the process clearly , it is still as simple as that.
The tube audiophiles, though, seems to be more driven by other forces. The average audiophile does not want distortion, yet the tube audiohile accepts distortion figures up to percent level, while todays top notch SS amps operate down to hundreths and thousanths of percents distortion.
I have been fiddling with HiFI amps for almost 40 years now, -I have yet to build a tube amp. I've told myself maybe I should... as the elder of 4 brothers, I'm the only one with a SS HiFi amp...
The guitar amps will be for my son....

[Structo]

I think HAD's remark was geared more toward guitarists as artists.

If you think about it, most guitarists are not technicians and don't have a good grasp on theory.

So he was trying to put it into terms an artist or musician could understand.

Be that a football field full of marshmellos or a crystal lattice, who knows.
Also, you have to consider the time period in which this description was given.

It was the flower power generation and as such, far out descriptions were groovy, man!

[dave g]

My suspission is that IF SS ever emulates tube characteristics it will be with complicated ICs, not a simple circuit topology that allows a design approach similar to tube design (like FETs).

This. Sort of.

With enough transistors, you can realize ABSOLUTELY ANY I-V characteristic. It's a Turing-complete sort of thing, if you're familiar with CS theory.

The most straightforward way to do it would be to model the device itself, not the entire amp, i.e. you would have an IC where each pin on the IC mapped specifically to a pin on the tube you're modeling. Then, it would essentially serve as a "drop in" replacement for that particular tube type, and you could design circuits around it the same way that you would if you were using the tube itself. And it would sound exactly the same as if you were using that tube. Not close - exactly.

Yes, in order to do this it would take millions of measurements. And millions of transistors. But it's absolutely possible with technology that exists today. And it probably wouldn't be as hard as you would think. But I don't think that there's enough real incentive ($$$) for any circuit houses to bother.

But if we can do this, why limit ourselves to emulating tubes? Tubes may be the best sounding discrete analog device that we've got, but it's not as if some sort of optimization analysis was done on the human ear to aid in their design. In my opinion, more work needs to be done in the psychoacoustics realm than in figuring out how to emulate tubes.

[Colossal]

But I don't think that there's enough real incentive ($$$) for any circuit houses to bother.

If someone were interested in putting that much effort into transistor design to model a tube, I wish the same effort were just put into making better new production tubes! I'll take my electrons in a vacuum and not merrily swinging from delocalized Pi bond to Pi bond thank you! How 'bout NNS: new new stock

[dave g]

If someone were interested in putting that much effort into transistor design to model a tube

Honestly, it would take far less effort to create an IC that mimics a tube than to resume production of tubes in the west. Like, orders of magnitude less effort. The circuit would probably be much simpler than the processor that's in the computer you're typing from.

The fact is that it's not worth it simply because no matter how good it sounds, people aren't going to abandon tubes because tubes are just too cool to play with

[Colossal]

Agreed and agreed! Let us celebrate our agreement by quaffing of ale!

[phsyconoodler]

Quote:"Tube guitar amps are wanted for their distortion characteristic"

They sound better clean too.More harmonics,more 'girth',generally more pleasant overall.
So you've never built a tube amp,eh?Once you have there will be no turning back.

[Structo]

Lets all agree on one thing.
They have been trying to get SS amps to sound like tube amps since the transistor first was used in amps.

Now they have modeling amps that claim to be able to do it.
Modeling everything from the amp to the speaker enclosures used.
Such as the Axe FX processors and the Line 6 POD HD 500.
And a few others as well.

If I had to put it down to one thing that the SS amps can't do is mimic the "feel" of a tube amp.

It is that connectivity between the guitar and tube amp that is the important ingredient that the modelers just haven't been able to copy.

Well I haven't played an Axe FX or HD 500 so I can't say but I have heard them and although they are close, I truly wonder if they will ever be able to clone the tube amp 100%?

That SS Wreck amp that Lance Keltner demo'd is about the closest I've heard to copping the tube thing.

[martin manning]

Consider the violin: The best ones are made of wood, are strung with gut, and are played with a bow made from horse hair. There are alternatives, but the best ones have used the traditional materials for what, 500 years?

I submit that an electric guitar isn't and will never be an electric guitar unless it is played through a tube amp.

[David Root]

Absolutely. Both instruments were designed with the best available materials and technology of the time.

Hide glue is still the best for violins (and acoustic guitars, IMHO). Aircraft epoxy notwithstanding.

Tubes are still the best for guitar amplification. MOSFETS notwithstanding.