Ok I’m stepping up to the batters box.
There is no arguing the mathematical computation of what the speaker can handle.
There is no arguing that the most dynamic range can be produced by the highest peak SPL which will require more power.
There is no arguing that an amplifier with a high output impedance (tube, solid state or other) will have a less accurate frequency response than a low output impedance amplifier. The degree of aberration will be more with low impedance speakers (2-4 ohms) compared to higher impedance speakers (<8ohms). These inaccuracies can be ameliorated by different output taps such as those on an amplifier’s transformers.
The question is: does all one needs to hear in music found in those statistics?
I would argue that the inherent nature of most solid state amplifiers allows for a greater dynamic range due to their higher power output.
However, IMHO the life of the music, the subtle harmonics, the micro dynamics of the midrange, the subtle inflections of a voice, the detailed finger work on a guitar or piano is reproduced with higher fidelity using a tube amplifier. This will not be measured which any scientific instrument as none is as good as the human ear.
I am a very big fan of Harbeth speakers.
The demonstration presented was explained as being “more lifelike “ with the very high quality CH amplifiers using insane amounts of power.
It is impossible to make that evaluation over the internet.
I do know that most systems lack the dynamics of a live event and it is really impossible to reproduce all that a live event encompasses with two channel stereo.
I would much rather listen to a more involving less globally dynamic system then the opposite but if someone else prefers the globally dynamic system I would not argue the point.
I am not sure how long my ears would last at 106-110 dB of SPL. [emoji33]
|