valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

  • Tube amp (modern)

    Votes: 53 49.5%

  • Transistor/tube modelling, etc.

    Votes: 12 11.2%

  • Tube amp (vintage)

    Votes: 42 39.3%
  • Total voters
    107
  • Poll closed .
ginormous

ginormous

Understatmentologist
As seen elsewhere (cf. the Vox vs. Roland thread), this fight has no signs of stopping. I'd like to get a sense of perspective among the UGF'ers.

Some points to consider:

Tube amp technology hasn't fundamentally changed since the days of Edison and Marconi. All the successful American amp designs (Fender, Ampeg, etc.) were based on AT&T patents from the 1930's & '40s; the early Fenders needed to license portions of their circuit diagrams from the phone company.

Transistors and IC chips have grown more sophisticated and powerful, as a result of computer research, as well as defense and aerospace technology.

The sound and power of amplifiers has improved in general, both from the rise of rock music and from competition among designers and manufacturers (not to mention bands & musicians).

What's your opinion, and why?
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I voted tube amp modern. Probably picked that over vintage because I love the Bogner stuff so much.

Anyways... there's still no comparison. Take that from a guy who gigged a Yamaha DG80 and Line 6 Duoverb for years and hundreds of gigs in the past ten years. I loved those amps and they did a great job. So modeling and solid state amps have come a long ways. But I've been back to tube amps for several years now and asked myself why I ever left them. As I described in another recent thread -- tubes are ALIVE. They react to the playing, to the temperature, etc. They HELP you create beautiful tone, and therefore , beautiful music. They are like part of the band. Computer chips are the same, every time. They are just a lifeless tool. They don't change. They don't react, they just do the same thing they were programmed to do. Always. Nothing you can do there. Even with firmware and software updates to your digital rig, it's still completely lifeless when compared to tubes. You know it's true and so does anyone who's used both. For those years that I gigged without tubes I tried to convince myself I was better off with the parameter programability and instant patch recall that technology offered. It was nice to be able to switch sounds like that. But I was painting with MS Paint. A tube amp enables you to paint with oils on canvas. There is no comparison. I'm the artist. But when I limit myself to a tool that doesn't measure up, my art suffers. Why get the best tool you can afford.

Which reminds me, I HAVE to get that Bogner I've been drooling over for years. My "art" demands it! lol...
 
Last edited:
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Understood and respected, Red. My point of view differs:

A gigging musician needs a certain amount of reliable, predictable "sameness"; for ex, B. B. King has been using Lab Series amps for years. Not one of Gibson's more spectacular designs, and yet he's made the room moan and sway with each bend of his string. A canvas is also reasonably predictable. Most of the time, they're white and blank.

Let's not confuse the romance of days gone by with the aggravation of being in a remote location, and having a 12AX7 or a 6550 crap out on you. Can't be artistic in silence, unless you're a mime. :earl:
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I would say tube modern and vintage...overall just tube amps. I've played alot of amps both SS and Tube and there really isn't anything like a good tube amp. Tubes just have more feeling and warmth to them then SS. By all means this doesn't mean that SS amps are crap, in the contrary they have come along way and sound very good for being SS especially the Peavey Transtube series and the Marshall MG series. I would def. consider getting one of these medtioned amps as a small bed room amp. JMO...
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

ginormous said:
Understood and respected, Red. My point of view differs:

A gigging musician needs a certain amount of reliable, predictable "sameness"; for ex, B. B. King has been using Lab Series amps for years. Not one of Gibson's more spectacular designs, and yet he's made the room moan and sway with each bend of his string. A canvas is also reasonably predictable. Most of the time, they're white and blank.

Let's not confuse the romance of days gone by with the aggravation of being in a remote location, and having a 12AX7 or a 6550 crap out on you. Can't be artistic in silence, unless you're a mime. :earl:
Click to expand...

Honestly I've had more problems with SS equipment than tube equipment. It is a guitarists responsiblity to have tubes on hand in case of an accident, just like it's their responsibility to have a set of strings, or guitar in case the high E string breaks.

Different strokes for different folks. I love old tube amp designs and new tube amp designs and really can't pick. I think the new Dr. Z is going to be a really nice fusion of those schools of thought.

Luke
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

ginormous said:
Understood and respected, Red. My point of view differs:

A gigging musician needs a certain amount of reliable, predictable "sameness"; for ex, B. B. King has been using Lab Series amps for years. Not one of Gibson's more spectacular designs, and yet he's made the room moan and sway with each bend of his string. A canvas is also reasonably predictable. Most of the time, they're white and blank.

Let's not confuse the romance of days gone by with the aggravation of being in a remote location, and having a 12AX7 or a 6550 crap out on you. Can't be artistic in silence, unless you're a mime. :earl:
Click to expand...

I hear ya! And like I said, I did LOVE my Yamaha DG and Line 6 Duoverb. They were great amps that made me a lot of money and were enjoyable to play. I could always count on them. But then again, I've not had tube amp let me down yet. In fact, it was digital gear that did let me down. There was some "brown" power at a gig or two that totally screwed the patch memory on some of my gear and I had to reprogram all of my patches. A tube amp wouldn't have done that to me. I just carry spare tubes and fuses for those.

I just know that for my experience, the beauty of tone that comes from a tube amp is in another league than that coming from a solid state or digital amp. I admit that I haven't plugged into an H&K Zentera or even a Line 6 Vetta. So I haven't played the best of the modelers. But I just know that as a tube warms up and gets pushed it reacts. Modeling can try to simulate that, but it's still just simulation.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Since i'm an Engl user i voted for tube amp(modern). i can't get the tones i want out of a vintage fender or marshall since Engls have a pretty unique sound to them and that isn't really old or vintage.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Luke Duke said:
Honestly I've had more problems with SS equipment than tube equipment. It is a guitarists responsiblity to have tubes on hand in case of an accident, just like it's their responsibility to have a set of strings, or guitar in case the high E string breaks.

Luke
Click to expand...

this is a great point. most solid state amps i've dealt with exhibit a much lower build quality than almost any tube amp out there. i'm aware that not all SS amps are built poorly, but most of them are made as budget amps and are manufactured as such. simple things like input jacks breaking because they're mounted to the PCB and not even attached to the chassis at all, things like that. I've found that tube amp manufacturers tend to get the basics down a little better.

OTOH, yes a tube amp will require more upkeep than a SS amp over time, but hey, so does your guitar. it's all part of the game.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I don't really think it's a totally fair comparison. They continue to be sort of apples and oranges. They both have things they do better than the other. Tubes don't make great bedroom jammers. And they are certainly not affordable when compared to SS. And while anything can break down over time, there is more regular maintenance and cost associated with tubes. But tone-wise tubes have a warmer, more organic feel and sound.

Tubes are like Caddy's while SS is like a Chevy. There are markets for each. A Chevy will never ride as smoothly and as comfortably as a Caddy. But that Chevy will get you to the corner store faster and cheaper than the Caddy ever will.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I had trouble voting. I love Vintage Tube Amps that have a modern twist. Im only 22. I like vintage tone with a bit of balls. Thus, the tele with a hotstack. And Im currently savin for a new Fender Champion 600. I think It breaks up quicker than a vintage champ
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Oh yeah and the only tube/solidstate amp I liked was the Kustom Tube 12. If you are not going all tube I think you should just get a POD or a Crate.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Tube Amp, Vintage. Herer are the dates of my amps:
SS:
1995
2004

Tube:
1962
1965
1970
1996
1996
2001
2004

Much more a fan of old amps! Mojo galore, and cheap too.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Tubes, something Marshally...but not necessarily a Marshall...rather have new than vintage for upkeep's sake....solid state or emulators just aren't the same thing, no matter how good the math geeks claim the algorithms to be, they haven't nailed the feel, the warmth, the life.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I voted vintage tube. My take on it is that whilst technology has been able to radically improve functionality, it has not been able to improve tone. A good percentage of the sounds that modelling technologies are attempting to emulate are those of tube amps, both vintage and modern. I choose to avoid the digital processors and converters, and go direct to the source of the real thing. The only post-tube technologies I don't have a problem with are the germanium transistors and IC's in top quality pedals, and the reasoning for this is quite sound. The tones that made me want to play guitar in the first place and still inspire me also had some of those technologies in the chain, with most of my favorite players and tones incorporating a germanium treble booster, fuzz or IC overdrive between guitar and vintage tube amp.

A similar situation exists in DAW recording. A lot of time and money goes into producing plug-ins which will emulate tape saturation or vintage analog dynamics and eq processing equipment. The difference is, it's a heck of a lot easier to carry around a few spare tubes for a guitar amp than it is to maintain a 24 track Studer 2" tape machine. In the case of the tube amp, maintainence is relatively simple for the result gained. It is much harder to substantiate running a home studio based on a Studer, LA2A's, Urei's and Lexicons when a more than adequate result can be obtained on a computer, especially if you incorporate a genuine tube preamp (as opposed to the "glowing 12AX7" pretenders) in the front end.

I take it one step further with my tube amps, and actually use vintage tubes as well. My Fender Super Champs are loaded up with blackplate RCA 12AX7's and 6V6's from the mid to late 1950's, which are stunningly toneful and exceptionally well made tubes from the Golden Age of tube technology. I haven't found a current production tube which even occupies the same stratosphere as these treasures. These amps would not even have seen tubes like these when the amps were new, and the improvement in soundstage and dimension is more than worth the effort. With these things considered, the option of using a digital modelling amp to attempt to replicate that which already exists seems ludicrous, and that's how it sounds and feels whenever I have played through modelling amps. They strike me as a toyish, pale shadow of something truly beautiful. Personally, I can't see the point. I recently performed in the pit band for a nationally telecast sports show here in Oz, and they made myself and the other guitarist play through Line 6 Vetta's, and man, those things sucked balls so bad, it was like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Never again.


Cheers.......................wahwah
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

My vote goes to Tube/Valve Moderrn/Vintage !!!


Let me explain !

Get a brand new amp (modern), but cloned on a goo 'ol 60's (vintage) amp, like a Celtic :usa2: , Victoria, or any of the other handfull of custom amps that are based on the old (read : proper amps) masters !

YES, there are some modern amps that i would not mind to have (Ampeg, and ORANGE comes to mind), but i would love to have the tone of the origenal bad boys, with modern reliability . . . did i say CELTIC AMPS ??? WINK-WINK :fingersx:

S/S amp, IMHO, is not a complete waste, because i feel they do have their place, if you are looking for an EXTREME tone, like that of Pantera, or any other hard-core band where distorto is your only tone !


My 2cents
JP
;)
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

i don't know a lot about the underlying technology or technological amplifier innovations in the last 50 years, but i do know that tube amps just sound better. in fact, i went from vox to traynor all tube just today because i recently became convinced that their tone is superior. i'll still keep a solid state around anyway.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

I love the tone of Edana's(Celtic) sound way better than JTM45 re-issues, and I LOVE my Laney AOR series I(six knober) which I belive is 1984 so am I a vintage dude? AOR has no diode clipping but is a pcb board, so ???? who am I?
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

No, the battle does not continue. It was over a long time ago. Modelling, whether or not it some day sound identical to the real thing, will still not be the real thing. Same with variax. I'm not disrespecting modelling/variax, just saying it's not for me.
 
Re: valve/tube vs. solid state -- the battle continues

Nothing like a vintage Bassman, AC30, JTM45 or DR103 for pure, unadulterated tube tone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

leevc5
  • Poll Poll
valve/tube vs. solid state -- 10 years later - add hybrid
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
1K
Mincer
Mincer
Back
Top