Clicks and pops with tubes vs ss

[PHC1]

Anyone else notice that clicks and pops are less offensive with tube preamps? I was listening to some of my older vinyl that is not in mint shape and I have noticed once again that clicks and pops exist on "another plane" when there are tubes in the chain, another words, they are somehow rather "detached" from the music and are much easier to ignore as compare to SS preamps.

It's not that my tubed Lamm LL2D is not resolving enough as compared to the Ayre KX-R, it may be just a touch less illuminating and transparent but not to such a degree where those pretty offensive clicks and pops would sound that much less offensive if that is all there was in the difference between the two preamps. I hear just as much micro details as I do with the Ayre, except with the Ayre or other SS preamps come to think of it, the clicks and pops are somehow intertwined with the rest of the music and with the tubes they seem to be "detached" from the music.

[Tonepub]

Haven't had that experience here. Pretty much the same with either.

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Anyone else notice that clicks and pops are less offensive with tube preamps? I was listening to some of my older vinyl that is not in mint shape and I have noticed once again that clicks and pops exist on "another plane" when there are tubes in the chain, another words, they are somehow rather "detached" from the music and are much easier to ignore as compare to SS preamps.

It's not that my tubed Lamm LL2D is not resolving enough as compared to the Ayre KX-R, it may be just a touch less illuminating and transparent but not to such a degree where those pretty offensive clicks and pops would sound that much less offensive if that is all there was in the difference between the two preamps. I hear just as much micro details as I do with the Ayre, except with the Ayre or other SS preamps come to think of it, the clicks and pops are somehow intertwined with the rest of the music and with the tubes they seem to be "detached" from the music.

Serge, you can probably guess that my take on this is what you are hearing is the "mushing" that tubes do to sound in general. It may not be a popular position, but that is what I hear.
Jim

[klipschfan]

Mush


n.

• A thick porridge or pudding of cornmeal boiled in water or milk.
• Something thick, soft, and pulpy.
• Informal. Mawkish sentimentality, affection, or amorousness.

tr.v., mushed, mush·ing, mush·es.
To reduce to mush; mash or crush.


[Probably alteration of MASH.]

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by Stillone

Serge, you can probably guess that my take on this is what you are hearing is the "mushing" that tubes do to sound in general. It may not be a popular position, but that is what I hear.
Jim

Jim, Lamm is not that kind of a preamp. It recreates a more 3 dimensional stage than even the mighty Ayre KX-R. It is very neutral and not Toobey or mushy at all. In fact it has been a great while since I've heard one of those really Toobey preamps. There is no reason why tubes should sound like that other than a very budget oriented example that sacrifices resolution and transparency due to budget components supporting the tube circuits. If tubes where that bad, I doubt Russians would use them for critical military applications. All the higher end tube preamps from VTL, ARC, BAT and even MCintosh give up virtually nothing but they can and do add more air and dimensionality to the sound.

No, I think what's happening is because the Lamm is better at recreating space, the clicks and pops are simply projected into the soundstage differently. That's my take on it, right or wrong but that's what I'm hearing.

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Jim, Lamm is not that kind of a preamp. It recreates a more 3 dimensional stage than even the mighty Ayre KX-R. It is very neutral and not Toobey or mushy at all. In fact it has been a great while since I've heard one of those really Toobey preamps. There is no reason why tubes should sound like that other than a very budget oriented example that sacrifices resolution and transparency due to budget components supporting the tube circuits. If tubes where that bad, I doubt Russians would use them for critical military applications. All the higher end tube preamps from VTL, ARC, BAT and even MCintosh give up virtually nothing but they can and do add more air and dimensionality to the sound.

No, I think what's happening is because the Lamm is better at recreating space, the clicks and pops are simply projected into the soundstage differently. That's my take on it, right or wrong but that's what I'm hearing.

Serge
I will agree that tubes probably offer up a bit more of a 3D soundstage, or more dimensionality as you state. I am not saying tubes are bad, they are just a different sound. I can enjoy them and could make a second system around them. But, I prefer good SS where the notes to my ear are better defined in time and pace (that is not space spelled incorrectly).

I have heard that one reason some military equipment (Russian ??) is tube based, it is less susceptible to electro-magnetic pulses that will fry SS gear.

Jim

[vintage_tube]

Originally Posted by Stillone

I have heard that one reason some military equipment (Russian ??) is tube based, it is less susceptible to electro-magnetic pulses that will fry SS gear.

Jim

Part true -- the other factor involved was their limited capability with state of the art SS equipment. Yes, they believed tubes would be less susceptible during a HEMP (high altitude electromagnetic pulse) explosion. The US Gov't tested that fact using a SS based back pack radio some time ago -- it survived, the similiar tube version did not. Go figure.