Tubes? Transistors? Which are better?

Sedond: The concert hall, being the acoustical space within which the concert occurs, is an integral part of the aural experience and as such, is an accurate representation of itself (to be redundant). Which of these halls would you consider inaccurate? Symphony Hall in Boston, Carnegie Hall in N.Y., The Musicverien in Vienna, The Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, Severance Hall in Cleveland, etc., etc.. They each have unique acoustical signatures. None of which would be considered as being wrong or inaccurate.

waldhorner, i agree w/ewe. my only point is that there isn't necessarily a *correct* sound. short of extremely elaborate multi-channel ambient-surround-sound processing, ya won't get a *correct* sound in the home. so, when setting up yer home system, yust try to get it to sound musical to ewe. i *do* have a nice ambient-surround processor that i can insert, along w/my main two channels, if i like. it can be very effective in giving venue ambience for some different music. but, i'd be kidding myself if i thought it sounded *live* and, sometimes i've found that it sounds better at home than live, so it's not always a question of which is correct, but which is pleasing. of course, all that said, i do value accurate frequency response in my audio equipment. doug

Y'all have gone way off the original subject of tube vs. transistors sound. As stated, some (like me) prefer the mosfet sound as a nice in-between tubes & bipolars. Belles 150A Hot Rod amp was just reviewed by Stereophile; they proclaimed this amp's "musicality" in sound over others' "accuracy". Some of the last few posts regarding "how faithfully bad-sounding does your hi-res. rig reproduce a bad recording?" brings up an interesting point. I finally decided that, when my rig was configured for so much high-resolution, then a lot of just-avrage recordings were no longer so enjoyable anymore, and I had taken it too far. I then decided to de-tune my rig's resolution-factor just enough, so that although the best recordings weren't so faithfuly rendered, many more average-sounding sources were much more enjoyable to listen to. Making it sound any better than that was going beyond the point of diminishing returns.

Hi Bob good points. A poor recording will bring more attention to its faults with a high res system rendering it less enjoyable overall. I am finding that out to a greater degree as the resolution of my system improves in the quest for musical enjoyment on the level of the live event. On the other hand the great recordings have more of what I find in real music that the lesser res system veils. How do you balance it, two systems? I still buy poor recordings of music that I like regardless. Got to take the good with the bad in matters of reproduced music, there are no easy solutions. For the reason you stated I'm really not too sure I want much more res than I have although there are areas that can be improved for overall enjoyment. I just wish I could enjoy my system more and analyze less after hearing a good live performance. It takes a few days for things to get back to normal.

Bob: Meandering divergence from the matter-at-hand contributes to interesting conversation. However, due to the interelatedness of most things, it often returns to course. You have nailed one problem, i.e.,hyper-concern for resolution. Many modern system configurations are simply too microscopically detailed in their rendering. E.g., occasionally during concert performances there are instances of harshness, shrillness, glare etc. which are absorbed into the mass of the audience and hall during a performance, yet are picked up in excruciating detail by very sensitive microphones during the digital recording process. Additionally, even fairly recent digital recordings sometimes sound overloaded. And older analog recordings done with mildly distortive tube electronics... (you can hear it on many of the early Mercury recordings..it wasn't nearly as noticeable when we listened to those pressings in the '60s). All of the previous can be very unattractive when played back on a system which is too revealing.(Have you ever noticed how unappealing the hollywood beauty can be when you're in the first row and her pores are 2"wide and nostrils a foot?) Of course, there have always been plainly bad recordings. For some, the ameliorating effects of tube electronics serve to smooth out many of these distractions. And it's amazing how effective the discreet application of the heretical tone control can be in making a bad recording listenable. Pax