Could You Tell a Tube Integrated from a Solid State Receiver (in a Video) If All Else Were Equal?

[toddalin]

As the title asks.

This is Stevie Ray Vaughn's Tin Pan Alley played through both a Yamaha RX-Z9 Receiver and Melton KT-88 Tube Integrated. The Yamaha has a rated power of 170 WPC into 6 ohms (540 WPC dynamic power into 2 ohms) and the Melton is rated at 80 WPC. The speakers are ~6 ohm. The Yamaha is in CD Direct Mode and there is no sub, digital processing, eq, or room correction, either physical or electronic used on either piece. Each unit was played for just over an hour before its recording was made.

The room is ~26.5' x 16.5' x 7.5'-16' (sloped ceiling) and is open at one corner to an entry hall and dining room. All pieces are served by a dedicated circuit with 8 gauge Romex and a 20 amp breaker.

The source is an SACD played on an Oppo95. The Oppo connects to the Yamaha with a 4' lengths of Canare cable from it's dedicated stereo RCA jacks (18 gauge). The Oppo connects to the wall jacks with 12' lengths of Monoprice XLR->RCA (16 gauge), through the wall jacks, through 2' of Canare cable, through the wall jacks to the Melton with a 4' length of Canare cable.

The speakers are the "Mermans" (named for Ethyl). These are my own creation and use a JBL 2241h 18" woofer, a JBL 2251J 10" woofer and a Heil AMT. The speakers are fed through 14 gauge OFC from the Yamaha and 12 gauge OFC for the Melton.

The videos were done using a Nikon D750 SLR placed on a Gorilla stand on the couch where I would sit. I've tried to equalize the volume on both cuts using the sound level meter (bar graph) built into the camera, and both should be to within about 1 dB of each other.

So, which is on tubes and which is solid state???

 

[The Fuxtor]

first vid was the tube integrated? Second sounds way "crisper" ...yamahas tend to be a bit "crisp"

 

[toddalin]

first vid was the tube integrated? Second sounds way "crisper" ...yamahas tend to be a bit "crisp"

Yes.

I am a stickler for detail, and obviously, the Yamaha is crisper and more detailed displaying much more microdetail that is lost in the tube roll-off.

When I developed the Mermans, they were designed for the room using the Yamaha. Had I developed these using the Melton/tubes, things would have gone differently. I would have made the Heils brighter than they are, and may never even have achieved the desired level of brightness/detail. Then if played through the Yamaha, they would have been too bright and I probably never would have designed the diffraction lens for the Heils that takes out the HF peakiness because I wouldn't have heard it with the roll-off.

 

[Hyfi]

Before reading response, I picked the first vid as Tubes. Easy to hear the difference in sustain. Notes in second vid are shorter

 

[peterp1]

Thanks for posting. I would have guessed video 1 was tube also, but based on clarity of the guitar on the tube amp. The differences in highs is impossible to miss.

I’m listening on a suboptimal system currently, look forward to reevaluating on my desktop with studio monitors.

 

[Lavane]

Only one of my tube amplifiers are a bit rolled off on the top end due to the choice of tubes and output transformers used. One has a very SS sound to it as well. Except for the one, none roll off the top end. I wonder if the speakers would sound less rolled off with a different tube amplifier, or even different driver tubes? Tube rectifiers can have an impact on sound also at higher volumes due to voltage sag. The 125 watt mono blocks I have use a SS rectifier. The top end is clear and detailed. The same goes for a 17wpc tube amp I have with SS rectification. Another that uses a tube rectifier does get a little loose sounding at high volumes.

 

[Lavane]

The first video doesn't sound rolled off or less detailed to me at all. To my ears I do hear some midrange bloom though. It has a fatter tone. That can be due to choise of tubes or the circuit design of the tube amplifier.
The second video doesn't have that midrange hump. It would be interesting to see how it would sound with a different tube amplifier.

 

[decooney]

While its extremely limited to compare actual sound, tone, stage through youtube videos like this, just for grins I listened to both through different playback systems, including a larger home theater system attempting to hear something different between videos "1" vs. "A". The recording itself leaves a bit to be desired as well, fwiw.

"1" sounded a bit more relaxed and gentle like tubes can be, not as tipped up on the high frequency either. Good separate solid state gear can sound like this too.

"A" sounded bright, forward, tipped up, more fatiguing, ringing for sensitive ears. Sounded closer to an audio-video receiver, less smooth. Drum backing track is off, more forward.

What do your ears prefer listening in person is the more valuable question to answer. Bring friends over and have a listen, much more fruitful feedback than here, IMO.

 

[Terry]

Yes.

I am a stickler for detail, and obviously, the Yamaha is crisper and more detailed displaying much more microdetail that is lost in the tube roll-off.

I am like you I love detail and nuance to instruments and vocals. Unfortunately most tube preamps don't portray this very well. I have found using high Gm tubes, with careful selection of resistors and capacitors, and an output transformer coupled tube preamp really helps not only retain these things, but adds in some dynamics making the musical instruments sound even more separate and some pretty remarkable sound stage effects, like more discernable depth to instruments. You get a sense of how far away every instrument is, and they all sound so much more distinct and separate without ANY harshness. I can't stand harshness even the tinyest amount.