A bit condescending to suggest the attraction to tubes is the warm glow. I have had and seen tube amplification where you cannot observe the tubes from the listening position. As a matter of fact, I find the tube glow on Steves' LAMM amp somewhat annoying.
But if that's the best you got..
@DonH50 got it right.
FWIW, when we came out with our first amps the biggest complaint we got was that the tubes were on the rear of the amp. I've always heard about people liking to play the system in the dark so the room is lit by the power tubes. The simple fact is a lot of people regard the tube glow as a bit of bling.
But I don't care about that. I care that I can listen to the system all day without getting bored or fatigued- that the music simply draws me in. My point was simply that you can love the system for what it does, even if the one aspect of the soothing glow of the power tubes isn't there.
Heartbreaking coming from you, Ralph!
Why?
Regarding our OTLs, we ran them without feedback because they sounded better that way. In order to get them to sound right with feedback we would have needed to run a lot of it- about as much as the class D does right now. We couldn't do that because in any amplifier there is a design characteristic called 'phase margin', which, if exceeded, means the amp can go into oscillation. You may recall the Futterman OTL had a reputation for this problem and exceeding the phase margin (via distortion harmonics) was how it occurred.
So instead we did everything we could to linearize the circuit: Class A, triode, one stage of gain, fully differential and balanced and no output transformer. That way without feedback we could still get some pretty good numbers, for example our early MA-1s from the 1980s had a THD at full power of only 3%. Over the years we were able to decrease the distortion, with attendant improvement in detail (since distortion obscures detail/transparency) and a smoother more relaxed presentation on the same account.
From their inception it was obvious that class D amps don't have the same signature of harsh and bright that most solid state amps have. The latter are that way because the 2nd and 3rd harmonics are insufficient in their distortion spectra to mask the higher orders. It might come as a surprise as how profoundly this affects the tonality of an amplifier; all tube amps make more of the higher ordered harmonics that the ear senses as harsh and bright than almost any solid state amp, but because the 2nd and 3rd harmonics are also prominent, they are able to mask the higher orders. SETs are the worst offenders in this regard; its why they sound 'dynamic' compared to other amps but its simply the higher orders on transients that are being perceived by the ear as 'loudness cues'. That is why I tell people that if they really want to hear what an SET does, they need a speaker that is efficient enough that the amp never makes more than about 20-25% of full power, so as to avoid that 'dynamic' problem, which should be coming from the recording rather than the amplifier!
Apparently in a class D you can have very similar distortion spectra as you get in a good tube amplifier. Clearly this isn't true of all class D amps! Otherwise we would not be having this conversation
That is how it worked out in our amp however. But it also worked out that overall, the distortion is lower, so the amp is more transparent, more detailed yet retains the musical mids and highs that IMO are a requirement in any good system.
I don't see why anyone would see that as heartbreaking.