I may have concluded that so much stuff recently in teh magazine is like having a standard flush toilet in a low flush world. Why do they keep doing reviews on stuff that harkens BACKWARDS to battery power? Hmmm years ago with stuff they had 67V EVERREADYS providing supplies to tubes, hardly anything new. In an mA stabilizer for stuff i worked on, they had a battery for revernce, voltages, using 2d21 Thyratron tube...So with these products being reviewed using battery powered pre amp, battery powered phono preamps. It's just going BACKWARDS not forward. also a lot of marketing BS. There really is no engineering or design qualitys that call for such crap. Modern electronics has modern components to supply what is needed. When some company trys to convince me that their wood case effects the sound of 2 transformers inside...and teh knobs effect teh sound. When does teh reviewer just say, what teh hell are you talking about, explain the claim..instead of giving it a casual mention, and letting it slide by. Is Stereophile more about hyping nonsense with stuff from teh 60's technology, or moving forward with 21st century up to date electroncis. The constatn BS that somehow these obsoleted ckts are more musical etc. Is becoming to my revlation that it's mostly BS. DSD/SACD smokes anything out there. Without spending $100K on one component to try and get something out of teh obsolete format. Push the music playback formward, not backwards, with obsolete newly minted products. CD players using dead IC chips, claiming it's better. Amps using obsolte oil filled caps, obsolte tubes, it's getting absolutly retarded. Tubes used in guitar amps are tone generrators, making the sound, using obsolte tube ckts are still tone generators, coloring everything it gets. Hardly high end reproduction. Hybrid ckts use only the best of both, Hybrids are a more current design. A $10K amplifier using more obsolete crap, ain't high end. And of course, this amp was like listening to the certain recording for teh first time...no it ain't!!! Enough already Shindo, is this month's breakthrough, what happened to those McIntoshs or Audio Research units that where the like listening to teh recording first time , are these reviews written for people that only read Stereophile one month each year? Every month has another breakthrough. It's getting old, be truthful, why not say, this sounds just like the last amp, or pre amp...sounds like teh last 10 I used, but, one cost $20K and this one say is only $2K.....A 15W $4K tube amp, yupper, useuless, don't care if it's Class Triple A, 15W ain't moving no speakers to lifeleike realism, trying to reproduce teh full spectrum. In single use guitar amps, I've seen/heard 30W 60W class a amps fill the room, un aided by a PA system. But they ain't reproducing the full recordings, only the guitar signal, different concepts. Also please explain how taking teh cover off theis amp, sounded BETTER?!! That means for $4K they messed something up in it's design, or AD imagination gone wild....not available on VHS or DVD...like the girls gone wild. Any measurements to prove something changed with and without teh cover on. Never ehard of any McIntosh or ARC having sounds different with teh covers off. Shindoisms? Or crap amps? Microphonics? Using obsolete junk tubes?
Hybrid ckts use only the best of both [tubes and transistors], Hybrids are a more current design.
1) What are the best characteristics of tubes which make them better than transistors?
2) What are the best characteristics of transistors which make them better than tubes?
Tubes handles large voltage swings better, Mosfets do current better. How come my hybrid stuff have super fast slew rates, super low distrotion specs .01% while some extremely expensive tube stuff have distortion of horrible quantitys, and ears think this sounds natural and real? Slew rates of dismal numbers..hardly high end stuff, just high priced. When done right, it works well, well just over priced, that is all it is.
And tubes suck as extreme energy wasters...room heaters, like OBSOLETE incandescent lamps, both are 100 years old concepts, and there are 21st century replacements that work well. But then we still roll on rubber tires in teh 21st century...but tires have improved in new materials, handling etc. Standard incandescent lamps still are only like 25LPW, horrible in teh 21st century, and they don't last. CFL baby, long live, more LPW, less heat(wasted energy) Vacuum tubes where fine when electricy was 3 cents/kwhr.
So why is a hybrid better than all SS? Why use tubes at all?
I already gave you the advantages of each component. All SS is much better energy wise. Tubes are a big waste, room heaters. Some hv SS devices would surely replace tubes, but might be mo money? hV ckts in X-ray use ss components. Hmmmm
So why does AVA make a hybrid?
What part of Dups answer didn't you undertand? I read this thread a couple of times and couldn't figure out why you seem to be hounding him.
He already told you why he thinks Tubes have one advantage and MOSFETS another. He already stated he thought Hybrids, ( Using a combination of both Tube strength and MOSFETs or Transisters strengths)were the best designs today. Whether you agree or not doesn't matter. He explained it. Then you seem to persist in asking the obvious. Even when DUP explained it again.
He refers you back to his answer, and you ask why a company he likes makes the type of amplier design he likes?
Usually online this is referred to as TROLLING.
I think the confusion is a product of DUP traditionally being rather "anti-tube", and now speaking of them in a positive light. On the topic of hybrids, I think they're cool, and I may have auditioned one if I hadn't fallen in love with the Brio3. In the end, I decided I didn't want to mess with tubes or have to worry about replacing them. If I were out of college with more money and fewer practical considerations, I might give tubes a whirl.
An all tube amp is not my cup of tea. It doesn't have any advantage, but a lot of faults. Besides a giant room heater. Hybrids certainly seem like a modern concept that uses both componets to their advantage. Surely when MOSFETS get developed that can handle large voltages at a resonable price tubes should finally be laid to rest, they really are an obsolete idea. hV transistors exist for lotsa applications, perhaps they just ani't suited for audio. CRT displays are fading fast...that's a big vacuum tube whose days are done. LCD, OLED displays and further solid state designs have buried them. Plasma displays are also obsolete. a full tube amp is mostly a tone generator, used in guitar amps. Doesn't ARC make some hybrids too? Moscode does. McIntosh fixed tube issues by having that expensive output transformer in their stuff. tubes are obsolete. Even in hybrid stuff way too much wasted energy in the form of heat, not good.
I think the confusion is a product of DUP traditionally being rather "anti-tube", and now speaking of them in a positive light.
Also, I asked open-ended questions to learn why DUP liked the concept of hybrids. I am simply curious. I am not interested in arguing with him on this or any other topic; it is counterproductive.
From DUP's pleasant response it appears he believes that tubes do a better job in the initial "pre-amp" gain stage than SS does. This surprises me as he generally prefers SS and additionally adheres to the "if it's newer, it's better" belief system.
I must admit however that I am really amused that Colin is concerned that DUP, of all people, was being "hounded". I doubt that DUP felt in the least threatened.
Newer is better. hybrids have been around for quite some time, but they are newer than just an all tube setup. Speakers of current desing will always be better than some from 20 years ago. New materials. Why doesn't tv's from 1950 evoke the same audio ratioanl about using obsolete tubes as some mystical benefits? I'll take a modern HDTV LCD pixel plus 3,Crystal Clear ckts. HDMI inputs etc, anyday over some 20 year old CRT based tv. Newr is better. In just 5 years or so, even tv's are getting better from stuff just a few years old . Why is audio stuck in being kinda backwards? LP's better than SACD/DDSD digital, don't think so. All tube amps better than high powered Mosfets, with modern FAST slew rates, nope, mushy tubes from the 50's is hardly 21st century reproduction. LP/vinyl is the technolgy from teh 50's too. No matter how pricey a platter spinning on a spindle you try to verbalize how wonderful it is, it's still obsolete, mechanical stylus wearing out teh groove technolgy. It doesn't sound better, it is usally worse. Then there is teh modern convienece factor. How come tv's all have remotes, and most aduio systems, oh, better to get up like 1963 and change channels, yeah, that's better, well maybe it did keep people from getting so fat!!! Did it? Even guitars built on modern computer controlled machines using teh original plans from Gibson or Fender are better, more accurate fits etc. They mimic the sound with modern updates, better fit, they stay in tune better, it's new it's better. A modern Gibson Les Paul reissue has better fit than some of teh old originals, why they demand such a price for some of teh real old stuff is bizzare. Re issues with modern fit stabilty has to be better. How's that 1957 chevy doing, yeah, I'm sure that is better than a modern Audi A6.