[Richardcoulter]

Just been reading a magazine article that begins "The development of transistors saw the number of valve based amps drop dramatically in the 70's and 80's. However, many audiophiles believe that there is no better way of amplifying the signal that emanates from your CD player than by using valves. "

It goes on to say that there are such things as a Pathos Classic MKIII priced at £1,535 www.ukd.co.uk and a Roth Audio MC4 for £399 www.rothaudio.co.uk etc.

Is this article correct with what they are saying and do enthusiasts really pay such prices for old technology that they believe produces a better quality sound?

[Sid Law]

In short yes and yes.

When it comes to high quality hi-fi there is a lot of overpriced crap, but there is also a lot of extremely high quality and expensive equipment available and these products fill a niche in the market.

Now, there are lot of poseurs out there who will buy this sort of stuff. A lot of really high end audio equipment is bought by those who have plenty of cash and cloth ears, but it if makes them happy...................

On the other hand, there are a lot of audiophiles who can appreciate the quality and who really do spend serious amounts of cash on equipment. I have to say that these audiophiles won't be playing their music from an i-phone or any other such device though!

BTW, compared to a lot of modern equipment valve amplification sound lovely but it is not for those with shallow pockets

[RadioQuiet]

In guitar amplification, valves are still in very common usage. Having used various types of amp, Solid State, Digital and Valve, i can safely say from experience that valves just seem to give a fuller and warmer sound than either solid state or digital amps. Digital is getting better, but doesn't give the same sort of richness of sound that a good valve amp can produce.

[Richardcoulter]

I didn't know that they still made valves, I thought that people had to source them from broken/old sets to keep others going.

[lundavra]

You see words like "warmer" used for valves, just means that they prefer the distortions produced by valves to those produced by solid state amplifiers.

[Andy2]

I'd say that people prefer the type of distortion produced by the output transformer that is necessary in a valve amp. At high power especially (think guitar amps) the distortion is 'rounded off' in the transformer, whereas a clipping transistor amp just sounds harsh.

I can't remember who it was who did them (possibly Peter Baxendall??), but back in the 70's there were several blind tests between transistor and valve amps, both of which had been engineered to high standards. The audience was made up of laymen, casual enthusiasts and the 'golden ear' brigade (who always tell us they can hear the difference between types of speaker cable).
No-one could tell any difference, with audience members from each category getting it right/wrong on a random basis. QED.

[lundavra]

Originally Posted by Andy2

I'd say that people prefer the type of distortion produced by the output transformer that is necessary in a valve amp. At high power especially (think guitar amps) the distortion is 'rounded off' in the transformer, whereas a clipping transistor amp just sounds harsh. ....

If the solid state amplifier is clipping then surely it is being overdriven. Design it for an output before it clips or turn it down from 11.

[Andy2]

What I'm saying is that guitarists will often drive their amps to distortion to get that loud screaming sound. Under these conditions a valve amp with its copper and iron output transformer will sound great, but a transistor amp which doesn't have a transformer will just be unpleasant.
When run well below clipping, there is virtually no audible difference between the two.

[Gary Brenton]

Having listened to both vintage transistor amps and valve amps....I have to say I prefer 'transistor' simply because 'valve' amps simply 'distort' too much, and I don't think the quality is actually 'warmer' as such...but infact 'sharper'

I have a 'Sansui AU-117 amplifier which circulated around 1978 (transistor) and I have to say that it reminds me of listening to a 'valve' amp due to the 'sharp' quality it produces. (also...it DOES distort at half volume too...just like some valve amps)

At 25w per channel through a pair of 100w speakers...you would think that this amp would handle it quite easy...unfortunatley not.

On the positive side...this Sansui AU-117 amp sounds 'too safe' at moderate levels and is perfectly ideal for 'classical' music...but if you wish to venture out to the likes of 'rock' music and 'dance music' etc... it sounds far too serious and 'formal' for those specific genres.

Whatever music is played through this amplifier....it can ONLY be taken on a serious level. If you want to party with this amp with non-stop dance music CD's...forget it... also if you decide to give the classic rock albums a blast....then definately change your plans for the evening because anything more than classical or ambient music will disappoint. (and I will go the same with valve amps too)

Vintage valve amps (including vintage transistor amps) tend to sound far too serious and are great for 'midrange' and 'treble' listening....but when it comes to the more 'commercial' sector in listening - then this is where they tend to disappoint somewhat.

I love my Sansui AU-117 amp as I have completely cleaned and restored it to almost new condition...but listening to it seems more of a 'flat'...but serious experience and I cannot see the major fascination in valve amps.

[Phil Dodd]

Firstly, valves. Towards the end of the valve era, Quad were producing designs that used valves in output pairs without an output transformer, along the lines of their later current-dumping solid-state amps. They also used DC supplies for the valve heaters, to remove the mains hum that AC introduces. Within the recording and broadcast industries, DC heaters were a feature of equipment too. There were also speakers with high-impedance coils which eliminated output transformers to save cost, but tended to be in receivers rather than hifi separates. Output transformers were always an obstacle in the audio chain.

Now, solid state. Bell Labs were a focus of transistor development post-WWII ( see their Wikipedia entry, as it corrects some misconceptions ). The first transistor radios and amps were appalling because they used bipolar transistors ( switching devices ) in circuitry devised for valves. Open the back of a 1950s Perdio or Bush radio, and it is miniature valve circuitry, but using transistors. Such switching transistors ( germanium and then silicon ) were developed for the computer industry, and from there unfortunately found themselves into audio and radio.

Progress was first made by realising that those transistors are effective in audio and radio because of sensitivity not selectivity as were valves, and redesigning the circuits to cater for this. So that, I hope, gives and indication as to why transistor kit used to have a poor reputation as compared to valves. We weren't using them in the right way. They were even used handicapped further with output transformers !!??!!

All is different now, again thanks to the computer industry of the mid 1970s. The driving force in computing was to get computers out of expensive large air-conditioned suites, and into the corner of offices, running off a standard mains socket. Part of the miniaturisation to do this was the development of a different type of transistor, high-power FET devices by using a new way of creating them, called VMOS. These high-power devices also make great power amplifiers for audio and radio. As far as this thread goes, VFETs as they are known, work in the same way as valves. They control the signal going through them like a valve and not a switch. They sound great as output stages in amplifiers. So now, our solid state equipment sounds like the best valve kit used to. Great bass. And no horrid output transformer.

About 30 years ago, a design was published for a class-A amplifier using one of these VFETs, the VN67AF. It was valve identikit, and a pair of them would give true hifi with bookshelf speakers or phones. They were very inefficient, though, and ran quite hot, needing a large heatsink.

Nowadays, the constraints placed on how good the sound is that we hear is dependant upon where we live and what speakers or phones that we listen on. Get the best quality speakers or headphones that you can for your main listening area at home. There is the amplification readily available to drive the speakers, at reasonable price, that works in exactly the same way as valve hifi did, but sounds much better. So real valves are nice to look at as far as nostalgia goes, but are nowadays totally outclassed by the imitation. That explains it would you believe as briefly as I can, but see the Wiki pages if you want to know more.

[Gary Brenton]

Originally Posted by Phil Dodd

Firstly, valves. Towards the end of the valve era, Quad were producing designs that used valves in output pairs without an output transformer, along the lines of their later current-dumping solid-state amps. They also used DC supplies for the valve heaters, to remove the mains hum that AC introduces. Within the recording and broadcast industries, DC heaters were a feature of equipment too. There were also speakers with high-impedance coils which eliminated output transformers to save cost, but tended to be in receivers rather than hifi separates. Output transformers were always an obstacle in the audio chain.

Now, solid state. Bell Labs were a focus of transistor development post-WWII ( see their Wikipedia entry, as it corrects some misconceptions ). The first transistor radios and amps were appalling because they used bipolar transistors ( switching devices ) in circuitry devised for valves. Open the back of a 1950s Perdio or Bush radio, and it is miniature valve circuitry, but using transistors. Such switching transistors ( germanium and then silicon ) were developed for the computer industry, and from there unfortunately found themselves into audio and radio.

Progress was first made by realising that those transistors are effective in audio and radio because of sensitivity not selectivity as were valves, and redesigning the circuits to cater for this. So that, I hope, gives and indication as to why transistor kit used to have a poor reputation as compared to valves. We weren't using them in the right way. They were even used handicapped further with output transformers !!??!!

All is different now, again thanks to the computer industry of the mid 1970s. The driving force in computing was to get computers out of expensive large air-conditioned suites, and into the corner of offices, running off a standard mains socket. Part of the miniaturisation to do this was the development of a different type of transistor, high-power FET devices by using a new way of creating them, called VMOS. These high-power devices also make great power amplifiers for audio and radio. As far as this thread goes, VFETs as they are known, work in the same way as valves. They control the signal going through them like a valve and not a switch. They sound great as output stages in amplifiers. So now, our solid state equipment sounds like the best valve kit used to. Great bass. And no horrid output transformer.

About 30 years ago, a design was published for a class-A amplifier using one of these VFETs, the VN67AF. It was valve identikit, and a pair of them would give true hifi with bookshelf speakers or phones. They were very inefficient, though, and ran quite hot, needing a large heatsink.

Nowadays, the constraints placed on how good the sound is that we hear is dependant upon where we live and what speakers or phones that we listen on. Get the best quality speakers or headphones that you can for your main listening area at home. There is the amplification readily available to drive the speakers, at reasonable price, that works in exactly the same way as valve hifi did, but sounds much better. So real valves are nice to look at as far as nostalgia goes, but are nowadays totally outclassed by the imitation. That explains it would you believe as briefly as I can, but see the Wiki pages if you want to know more.

****About 30 years ago, a design was published for a class-A amplifier using one of these VFETs, the VN67AF. It was valve identikit, and a pair of them would give true hifi with bookshelf speakers or phones. They were very inefficient, though, and ran quite hot, needing a large heatsink.****

You havn't felt the heat from my JVC AX-222 amp...at very low levels (yes - low levels) it gets quite hot...even to the extent of a heater on low level!

[happyradio]

One reason why some prefer valve amps is that they add to the total listening experiance Listening to music is not only about the aubible flow through the ears. Just as watching a record on a turntable adds to listening pleasure so does seeing the glow from the valves and feeling the warmth. You can almost see the electrons flowing through them. Valves give you something that other devices cannot offer. They are still being manufactured and will be for a long time to come.

[Richardcoulter]

Very interesting, I wouldn't have known this had I not have come across the article that I mentioned.

Are the sole purposes of valves in radios used to amplify the volume and of the incoming signal?