Can solid state tape electronics equal their tube equivalents ?

[RogerD]

On the eve of receiving back my modded Ampex 440 cards for listening tests,I wanted to ask the titled question.

"Can solid state tape electronics equal their tube equivalents ?"

With add on tape preamps available such as the King Cello, Bottlehead series, Haviland,Manley,Aria,de Paravicini and others. I thought it might be interesting to see what WBF members have to say about their experiences with their stock electronics,aftermarket tape preamps,and for a few their attempts to roll their own.

I came across this interview with tape electronics guru Tim de Paravicini and found it very informative.

"I don't have to use tubes in my designs; I only do it for marketing reasons. I've got an exact equivalent in solid state. I can make either type do the same job, and I have no preference. People can't pick which is which. And electrons have no memory of where they've been! The end result is what counts."

http://ear-usa.com/timdeparavicini.htm

I'm not looking for a typical food fight about SS vs Tubes. I would just like to see what preference you might have, given that many here have had a chance to listen to many tape electronics and the effect on analog tape sound.

I would especially like to hear from those on the pro audio sound side.

I must admit I am bored waiting to have my projects completed.

 

[mep]

Good question Roger. I read that article that Tim was quoted from years ago. Until recently, I have been a die-hard tube fan and thought that SS could never sound as good. Now, I'm not so sure. This is especially true for power amps where SS just makes more sense than tube amps electrically speaking. Tube amps will never have the iron-fisted control over woofers that SS amps do. The dampening factor of tube amps is very very low while SS amps are very high which gives greater control over the woofer. And having said that, I think that my Ampex 350s are all that and can't imagine them being bettered (which probably means they could be). There s something very special about them and I'm proud to own them.

Mark

 

[RogerD]

Good question Roger. I read that article that Tim was quoted from years ago. Until recently, I have been a die-hard tube fan and thought that SS could never sound as good. Now, I'm not so sure. This is especially true for power amps where SS just makes more sense than tube amps electrically speaking. Tube amps will never have the iron-fisted control over woofers that SS amps do. The dampening factor of tube amps is very very low while SS amps are very high which gives greater control over the woofer. And having said that, I think that my Ampex 350s are all that and can't imagine them being bettered (which probably means they could be). There s something very special about them and I'm proud to own them.

Mark

Mark,

I also agree the 350 electronics do have "magical" sound,but given that my RTZ solid state cards have qualities that I really enjoy. The bass seems tighter and the highs don't seem to be rolled off as much as the 350's. It will be interesting to hear my Mundorfed 350's to see if this changes any.

Also there is nothing quite like the sound of tape,so does it all sound good? How about the Aria electronics? The're solid state and well thought of as the high end in Pro Audio.

 

[U47]

Speaking of Aria pb electronics, I'm headed to visit a 'phile in NJ who has a Studer 812 with Aria electronics and Flux magnetics play head. We will hook up the King/Cello and see how it compares to the Aria. This rig has been optimized by John French. I'll report back in August. I personally think both SS and tube can deliver the goods for tape playback. Love the Ampex 351 and MR-70 as well as the Tube Research modified Scully(Germanium transistor) and the King/Cello. The Aria has been around a long time and it is one preamp that most tape home audiophiles have not heard.

R Brown

 

[fas42]

Also there is nothing quite like the sound of tape, ...?

Howdy, Roger, this has been stated so many times, and considering you are getting some quite excellent sound from your system in general, where do you feel tape as a generic thing still pulls ahead of digital? Slightly off-topic, but is it perhaps attributable from using tubes versus SS in the circuitry in various places?

Frank

 

[RogerD]

Howdy, Roger, this has been stated so many times, and considering you are getting some quite excellent sound from your system in general, where you feel tape as a generic thing still pulls ahead of digital? Slightly off-topic, but is it perhaps attributable from using tubes versus SS in the circuitry in various places?

Frank

Hi Frank,

I think most that visit the rtr forum here would prefer tape over CD. My digital is very good but tape has a ease and naturalness that is addictive. Up to now my playback has been mostly SS electronics,but that being as it may,my 350 electronics do excell in producing a vast intoxicating stereo image and sound.

 

[fas42]

tape has a ease and naturalness that is addictive. ... 350 electronics do excell in producing a vast intoxicating stereo image and sound.

So digital is never or only sometimes able to do that for you?

Frank

 

[RogerD]

So digital is never or only sometimes able to do that for you?

Frank

I can play a good CD like this one, http://www.amazon.com/Saint-Saëns-Symphony-Poulenc-Concerto-Toccata/dp/B000LP4OII , it will blow my socks off,but it's not available on tape.

All I'm saying is tape has a quality that my digital system,just can't quite get there. I have AB'd tapes and the same digital program and tape is more pleasing to my ear. Now I'm talking about mostly 4 track material. If you single out 2 track and better,than the difference widens.

But my focus is more SS vs Tube tape electronics. Now to include digital let's hear some thoughts about converting Analog tape to hi resolution digital. I mean what is the trend in tape electronics for extracting the best from the original taped performance(master) A2DX to the cutting edge digital format.

That's a subject and a specialised part of Pro audio that I find fascinating.

 

[Bruce B]

I can play a good CD like this one, http://www.amazon.com/Saint-Saëns-Symphony-Poulenc-Concerto-Toccata/dp/B000LP4OII , it will blow my socks off,but it's not available on tape. .

I've got it on tape!!

. Now to include digital let's hear some thoughts about converting Analog tape to hi resolution digital. I mean what is the trend in tape electronics for extracting the best from the original taped performance(master) A2DX to the cutting edge digital format.

That's a subject and a specialised part of Pro audio that I find fascinating.

We just finished archiving Peter McGrath's 30ips master tapes to DSD on our Sonoma. We did 3 transfers on different machines/formats and he chose the Sonoma files to sound the best.
There's been several write ups where he played the digital files at the 2 last shows and one reviewer said he wept. ... 'nuf said.

I know I'm biased, but 3 of the best decks I've ever heard are all SS.

 

[tony ky ma]

On the eve of receiving back my modded Ampex 440 cards for listening tests,I wanted to ask the titled question.

"Can solid state tape electronics equal their tube equivalents ?"

With add on tape preamps available such as the King Cello, Bottlehead series, Haviland,Manley,Aria,de Paravicini and others. I thought it might be interesting to see what WBF members have to say about their experiences with their stock electronics,aftermarket tape preamps,and for a few their attempts to roll their own.

I came across this interview with tape electronics guru Tim de Paravicini and found it very informative.

"I don't have to use tubes in my designs; I only do it for marketing reasons. I've got an exact equivalent in solid state. I can make either type do the same job, and I have no preference. People can't pick which is which. And electrons have no memory of where they've been! The end result is what counts."

http://ear-usa.com/timdeparavicini.htm

I'm not looking for a typical food fight about SS vs Tubes. I would just like to see what preference you might have, given that many here have had a chance to listen to many tape electronics and the effect on analog tape sound.

I would especially like to hear from those on the pro audio sound side.

I must admit I am bored waiting to have my projects completed.

Hi Roger
You look like have a lot of fun in modification of reels. I also asked question about SS and tube in pure or Hybrid of R2R deck's electronic ,which one is better ? but no answer from forums because it is hard to do the ABX in between.I guess. 95% of electronic in R2R deck are SS, they can be divided into in put amp, EQ ,calibrate section ,out put amp,of a repro amp, same in record amp + oscillator. only the in and out put amp are liner gain amp, but the others is gain with filter to form a curve . after the mods of Studer A80 and A810 ,change to tube amp only in liner amp, keep the curve amp of it's original in SS and use a selector switch for a new hybrid system or switch back to the original, in this way I can do the ABX test very easily and the answer is very positive and can't turn back to original design again. maybe only working good in this modification by no mean tube amp is better because it will depend on parts and tube's quality in used
tony ma

 

[RogerD]

Hi Roger
You look like have a lot of fun in modification of reels. I also asked question about SS and tube in pure or Hybrid of R2R deck's electronic ,which one is better ? but no answer from forums because it is hard to do the ABX in between.I guess. 95% of electronic in R2R deck are SS, they can be divided into in put amp, EQ ,calibrate section ,out put amp,of a repro amp, same in record amp + oscillator. only the in and out put amp are liner gain amp, but the others is gain with filter to form a curve . after the mods of Studer A80 and A810 ,change to tube amp only in liner amp, keep the curve amp of it's original in SS and use a selector switch for a new hybrid system or switch back to the original, in this way I can do the ABX test very easily and the answer is very positive and can't turn back to original design again. maybe only working good in this modification by no mean tube amp is better because it will depend on parts and tube's quality in used
tony ma

Hi Tony,

I remember reading about Elvis Presley back in the late 50's and early 60's when Ampex was evolving from different tube platforms and eventually moving to the SS based machines. He and other performers preffered the sound of the 300/350 based machines. But now mastering machines can be both SS and tube, although I think most high end studios use mostly custom made or specialy modified stock electronics.

Now if you asked Jay Mcknight of Ampex I think he said the best sound was the original 200 and 300 based Ampex machines,[402P?,350]compared to the later,(351,354,PR10) now he's talking stricly about Ampex. The Studer line has been mostly SS and the best of those is probably the A80 and the A820. Now the C37 is legendary and that is a tube based platform.

How would you charachterise the difference between your stock studer and your custom electronics? I think we think a like, right now I'm striving to get the high resolution sound,but retain the analog signature, whether it be solid state or tube.

 

[RogerD]

Speaking of Aria pb electronics, I'm headed to visit a 'phile in NJ who has a Studer 812 with Aria electronics and Flux magnetics play head. We will hook up the King/Cello and see how it compares to the Aria. This rig has been optimized by John French. I'll report back in August. I personally think both SS and tube can deliver the goods for tape playback. Love the Ampex 351 and MR-70 as well as the Tube Research modified Scully(Germanium transistor) and the King/Cello. The Aria has been around a long time and it is one preamp that most tape home audiophiles have not heard.

R Brown

Hi Rich,

That is my current thinking that SS can hold it's own against tubes. I would like to know if others think the same? Of course if I had all my projects done, my opinion would be much less of a question. There is no question that the flux heads will make a difference and even the most SOTA machines are fitted with custom guides.

Please report back to us. We need some excitement around here.

 

[tony ky ma]

Hi Tony,

I remember reading about Elvis Presley back in the late 50's and early 60's when Ampex was evolving from different tube platforms and eventually moving to the SS based machines. He and other performers preffered the sound of the 300/350 based machines. But now mastering machines can be both SS and tube, although I think most high end studios use mostly custom made or specialy modified stock electronics.

Now if you asked Jay Mcknight of Ampex I think he said the best sound was the original 200 and 300 based Ampex machines,[402P?,350]compared to the later,(351,354,PR10) now he's talking stricly about Ampex. The Studer line has been mostly SS and the best of those is probably the A80 and the A820. Now the C37 is legendary and that is a tube based platform.

How would you charachterise the difference between your stock studer and your custom electronics? I think we think a like, right now I'm striving to get the high resolution sound,but retain the analog signature, whether it be solid state or tube.

Roger
I am not alone in ABX test, friends all to getter in the same direction of feeling, my English is not good enough to tell the improved but few things for sure is tube sound more clear and clean image shows more sharper compare to the stock found muddy especially in low frequency,( thought they sound best before until now). in the beginning,those feeling are not that strong but after listen a while , we all don't want to listen back to the stock circuit anymore , the best way to understand the difference is to taste by yourself because everyone has different taste and opinion
tony ma

 

[DonH50]

Tape electronics are one of those things that, IMO, a fairly simple tube circuit can do very well (if with a little more noise) than SS. You need FET's to provide the high input impedance and that means less gain and bandwidth with more noise than bipolar transistors. That said, some of the SS circuits blow every tube circuit I've seen out of the water, but those tend to be hard to find and cost according to their complexity and use in high-end decks.

For a while I experimented with high-gain tube gain blocks driving "passive" EQ networks for tape and phono preamps. That is, instead of placing the EQ network in the feedback loop as is normally done, I had a gain block, EQ network, then an output buffer. The results were interesting but ultimately it was too hard to make it all work well (hard to control noise, and noise coupling, and generating enough gain was a pain) so I went back to the normal feedback approach. I had a differential design driving a passive (differential) network that was nice but took twice the tubes. Tony, have you played with passive EQ?

 

[tony ky ma]

Tape electronics are one of those things that, IMO, a fairly simple tube circuit can do very well (if with a little more noise) than SS. You need FET's to provide the high input impedance and that means less gain and bandwidth with more noise than bipolar transistors. That said, some of the SS circuits blow every tube circuit I've seen out of the water, but those tend to be hard to find and cost according to their complexity and use in high-end decks.

For a while I experimented with high-gain tube gain blocks driving "passive" EQ networks for tape and phono preamps. That is, instead of placing the EQ network in the feedback loop as is normally done, I had a gain block, EQ network, then an output buffer. The results were interesting but ultimately it was too hard to make it all work well (hard to control noise, and noise coupling, and generating enough gain was a pain) so I went back to the normal feedback approach. I had a differential design driving a passive (differential) network that was nice but took twice the tubes. Tony, have you played with passive EQ?

Hi Don
My phono stage is a LCR 600 ohm passive EQ, drive by WE 437A and transformer, and I will have no more new ideas to replace them for more better. for tape's EQ filter is more simple than RIAA should be more easy to design but the only different thing tape need calibrate, that is why I keeping the deck's original design for easy calibrate and I am planning to design a 6922 differential in-put to a passive EQ for a 4 track play back (6922 much cheaper than WE437A, need more tubes still OK) on a Revox PR99 transport (replace with a 4 track head) to play with those pre recorded 7 1/2 4 track tape which bought from Ebay although they are not as good as 2 track but has more choice
tony ma

 

[RogerD]

I've got it on tape!!

Bruce you're kill'n me, I love this music. What a performance and the 1st 2 cuts are outstanding.



We just finished archiving Peter McGrath's 30ips master tapes to DSD on our Sonoma. We did 3 transfers on different machines/formats and he chose the Sonoma files to sound the best.
There's been several write ups where he played the digital files at the 2 last shows and one reviewer said he wept. ... 'nuf said.

I know I'm biased, but 3 of the best decks I've ever heard are all SS.

Care to say which ones??

 

[c1ferrari]

Speaking of Aria pb electronics, I'm headed to visit a 'phile in NJ who has a Studer 812 with Aria electronics and Flux magnetics play head. We will hook up the King/Cello and see how it compares to the Aria. This rig has been optimized by John French. I'll report back in August.

R Brown

Hi Rich,

That report is greatly anticipated

 

[c1ferrari]

I've got it on tape!!

Is there ANYTHING you don't have on tape

 

[c1ferrari]

Tape electronics are one of those things that, IMO, a fairly simple tube circuit can do very well (if with a little more noise) than SS. You need FET's to provide the high input impedance and that means less gain and bandwidth with more noise than bipolar transistors. That said, some of the SS circuits blow every tube circuit I've seen out of the water, but those tend to be hard to find and cost according to their complexity and use in high-end decks.
I had a differential design driving a passive (differential) network that was nice but took twice the tubes.

Hi Don,

Regarding the SS circuits...were you able to hear them I like differential balance circuit topology...personally, the valve expense and heat are justifiable

 

[Bruce B]

Is there ANYTHING you don't have on tape

St. James Infirmary??