Which is better: Tube or transistor audio?

JAKARTA (JP): There are two kinds of high-end amplifier and preamplifier (preamp), namely tube and transistor.

In Indonesia until recently, the high-end market belonged almost entirely to solid-state equipment.

But, audiophiles and engineers are still involved in a seemingly endless debate to determine which of the two has the best sound quality.

Is there an audible difference between them? Which one sounds better?

The use of tubed equipment in the making of amplifiers started as a semi-nostalgic subculture, with the use by audiophiles of vintage hi-fi amplifiers before 1970.

Transistors were faster, lighter, smaller, and cheaper. They started a revolution in the world of electronic design which led to the subsequent logical step in electronic devices, the integrated circuit.

Tubes, invented in 1906 by Lee DeForest are basically light bulbs with a few extra gizmos inside, and trace their heritage to the Edisonian age of the 19th century.

Unlike users in the music performance market, audiophiles often prefer tubes for their clean, smooth sound -- in some cases, far more detailed and life-like than most early solid- state equipment.

Preamp is more likely to use vacuum tubes instead of solid state devices (transistors). It is because preamp handle only low level signals, making tubes more practical and affordable than in power amp.

Unfortunately, power amp tubes are larger, more expensive, run more hot, and require more frequent replacement than transistors.

Tubes have several advantages in their favor as audio amplifying devices. Why?

First, the circuitry associated with a vacuum tube -- the ancillary parts that make the tube work -- is generally much simpler than a circuit using transistors.

Second, the distortion tubes produce is very different from the distortion created by solid state electronics.

Harmonic distortion, introduced by all active electronics adds spurious frequencies to the signal being amplified. If a preamp is passing a 1 Khz signal, for example, the preamp will generate distortion at 2 Khz (second harmonic), 3 KhZ (third harmonic), 4 kHz (fourth harmonic) and so forth.

Tubes circuits generally produce lower order harmonic distortion components such as second and third harmonic, in contrast with the higher order distortion (seventh and ninth) introduced by transistors.

In Indonesia, some high-end audio businessman/audiophiles believe that if the system is to include tubes, they are best employed closest to the signal source -- such as in the preamp.

They claim that tubes have a more natural treble, which is warmer and sweet. Much of the legendary "warmth" is attributed to the differences in the way tubes and transistors respond to overload signals.

According to them, tube records have more bass. The bass actually sounds an octave lower. The middle range of tube recordings is very clear and each instrument has presence, even at very low playback levels, while transistor recordings tend to emphasize the sibilants and cymbals, especially at low levels.

Other audiophiles believe that solid state preamps tend to make the treble dry, brittle, metallic and etched.

The result is steely sounding strings (such as violin), unnaturally emphasized vocal sibilants(s and sh sounds).

A natural sounding tubed preamp can tend to ameliorate the system's tendency toward these amusical characteristics.

Transistor records sound restricted like they are under a blanket, have highs and lows but there is no punch to the sound. Transistor recordings are very clean but they lack the 'air' of a good tube recording.

Transistors add a lot of musically unrelated harmonics or white noise. especially on attack transients.

This same phenomenon has been expressed by another person as a "shattered glass" sound that restricted dynamics.

1t was generally agreed that tubes did not have this problem because they overload gently.

So guess, who is the winner?