Tubes vs. transistors in recording, mixing and home playback..

[Steve Hoffman]

Your thoughts?

From this thread:


http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?p=2840578#post2840578

Talking about Beatles' ABBEY ROAD which was the first transistor Beatles' recording. Says it all:

----------------------------------------------

SH Forums member SolarWind states:

It was also the first Beatles album recorded through a transistorized desk. There is an interesting interview with Geoff Emerick, in which he speaks about the "difficulties" of the new equipment, amongst other things:

-All the albums up until Abbey Road were recorded through a tube desk. Abbey Road was the first album that was recorded through an EMI transistorized desk, and I couldn't’t get the same sounds at all . . . . There was presence and depth that the transistors just wouldn’t give me that the tubes did.

...When Studer came out with their transistorized multitrack tape machines, we were A/B-ing with an MCI 8-track, and the same thing happened. The tape machine just wouldn’t produce the same snare or bass drum sound. And, of course, they could never give you an answer. You could only hear it and say to the people from Studer, “Why does it sound this way?”

-And they’d run test tones through it and say it was all to spec.

-Exactly.

This is a great description of what tubes can do that transistors cannot. I wish they could; it would be a lot cooler in my rooms.

[Director]

I always felt that tubes were like watching a movie in Technicolor, where the colors are vivid and hyper-real, like "The Wizard of Oz".

Transistors, to me, are like watching a modern day movie: it's a more accurate depiction but it's lost the "magic".

[Jamie Tate]

Remember that poll where we were asked what we thought the best sounding Beatles album was? Abbey Road (their only album done on a transistorized console) won.

[Billy Budapest]

I always felt that tubes were like watching a movie in Technicolor, where the colors are vivid and hyper-real, like "The Wizard of Oz".

Transistors, to me, are like watching a modern day movie: it's a more accurate depiction but it's lost the "magic".

I'm not even sure if solid state is more "accurate." It's kind of like the difference between tube televisions and solid state (ie, LCD, DLP, or LCoS TV's)--the new solid state TV's are arguably sharper and have better color accuracy, but are not as bright, do not reproduce blacks anywhere near as well, and do not have anywhere near the contrast ratios as tube TV's. Which ones are more accurate? It's hard to say. They each do different things in different ways. The same could be said for tube vs. solid state audio.

[phallumontis]

Remember that poll where we were asked what we thought the best sounding Beatles album was? Abbey Road (their only album done on a transistorized console) won.

I think that also has to do with the fact that they had more available tracks (eight, I believe?) to work with while recording Abbey Road. Earlier ones had four tracks, so a lot of bouncing tracks had to take place in order to fit all their crazy ideas onto tape, thus degrading sound quality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Jamie Tate]

I think that also has to do with the fact that they had more available tracks (eight, I believe?) to work with while recording Abbey Road. Earlier ones had four tracks, so a lot of bouncing tracks had to take place in order to fit all their crazy ideas onto tape, thus degrading sound quality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Even so, Geoff still complained he couldn't get the drums to sound right on the TG console. Besides, I think the multiple bounces through the tube console actually helped things sound larger because of the added tube and tape compression and distortion. That's why most engineers I know love the sound of those records. I know I do.

[Stax Fan]

There was a nice interview of Bruce Botnick in an old issue of The Tracking Angle. I remember he was talking about running a clicking sound into a lively room and recording it with a tube microphone preamp vs a solid-state preamp, both into the same console. He said the tubes would pick up the reverb and room sound that he knew was accurate having heard the sound live in the actual room while the solid-state version dried everything up and didn't capture the way it actually sounded. Most of the room sound was lost.

[Steve Hoffman]

There was a nice interview of Bruce Botnick in an old issue of The Tracking Angle. I remember he was talking about running a clicking sound into a lively room and recording it with a tube microphone preamp vs a solid-state preamp, both into the same console. He said the tubes would pick up the reverb and room sound that he knew was accurate having heard the sound live in the actual room while the solid-state version dried everything up and didn't capture the way it actually sounded. Most of the room sound was lost.

Botnick is describing the exact same thing, yes. Good call.

[JBStephens]

There is no disputing that tubes and transistors do the same thing in different ways. The question is, why? I have a strange little theory about that. Electricity is of course, electrons. Billions and billions of electrons moving from one place to another. Inside a tube is a vacuum. The electron cloud is moving through space, and nothing else. But in a transistor, the electrons are moving through an actual physical substance. That's got to have some kind of effect on them, an effect that can be heard, but too elusive to be measured. Surface area might also have something to do with it. Compare the plate area of a 6L6 to the surface area of a transistor. Tubes have many, many times the "electron gathering" potential. Just a thought.

[phallumontis]

Even so, Geoff still complained he couldn't get the drums to sound right on the TG console. Besides, I think the multiple bounces through the tube console actually helped things sound larger because of the added tube and tape compression and distortion. That's why most engineers I know love the sound of those records. I know I do.

Never thought about it that way. It does impart a unique character to the overall sound, especially if you listen to them in mono. The drums on the older ones are warmer, while Abbey Road has a very close-miked, somewhat dried-out sound. I remember reading somewhere that George Harrison also had issues with the transistor sound during those sessions. If I had to pick a favorite Beatles album in terms of engineering, it would probably be The Beatles.

[johnny33]

Maybe the reason many didnt pick the tube cut albums of the Beatles is because they havent heard the tube cuts?

I didnt know that there was a difference but now that I do I definitely prefer the tube sound.Actually I wish all music could be cut with that tubey sound and then if I wanted to lessen the effect I could play with my system to do so accordingly.

[morinix]

Jfet and mosfet transistors that drive audio transformers can get much of the nice nonlinearities of the classic tube sound. Also, even an op-amp based preamp with a few paper dielectric capacitors, carbon composition resistors and a squishy power supply can get a nice rich, complex sound. Conversely, ever listen to a preamp with the sons and daughters of the 6dj8 tubes in them? They can approach all of the sterile sounds of the solid-state gear when every effort is made to tame distortion in the design. Try taking a 12ax7 and use low cost capacitors and switching power supplies for everything around it - you'll get crap!

[Dave D]

If I had to pick a favorite Beatles album in terms of engineering, it would probably be The Beatles.

Same here, with Pepper and Revolver next. Pepper mostly because it sounds so well recorded, but Revolver because it sounds so mental. Crunchy and dirty and loud. It fits the music, IMO. The White Album sounds different to my ears than any Beatles album, maybe mostly due to Ken Scott's influence? Plus they were going kookoo with "full top, full bottom" on lots of tracks. It's a very cool sounding record.

[Steve G]

Same here, with Pepper and Revolver next. Pepper mostly because it sounds so well recorded, but Revolver because it sounds so mental. Crunchy and dirty and loud. It fits the music, IMO. The White Album sounds different to my ears than any Beatles album, maybe mostly due to Ken Scott's influence? Plus they were going kookoo with "full top, full bottom" on lots of tracks. It's a very cool sounding record.

agreed about the white album and revolver - don't agree about Pepper as much - the music and arrangements are groundbreaking but it doesn't sound as good to me. From that era I'd rather listen to the Penny Lane/SFF 7".

-s

[morinix]

There was a nice interview of Bruce Botnick in an old issue of The Tracking Angle. I remember he was talking about running a clicking sound into a lively room and recording it with a tube microphone preamp vs a solid-state preamp, both into the same console. He said the tubes would pick up the reverb and room sound that he knew was accurate having heard the sound live in the actual room while the solid-state version dried everything up and didn't capture the way it actually sounded. Most of the room sound was lost.The little wrinkle with this is the class of operation the SS amp was running in. I can be quite sure the tube preamp used here was full class A. But the SS amp may have been running in class b or low biased class A/B. That would cause the low-level detail loss in the SS unit. Take the same SS preamp and strap some current sources and many (not all though) of the low level signal transfer ills will often be greatly reduced.

Unfortunately one of the sicknesses that followed SS was class B operation being used MUCH more often. Almost ANY op-amp will be running in class B. The op-amp can be tightly trimmed to almost null out the crossover distortion completely but it is ALWAYS there some. And most EE's are not aware of the work done in the DIY community in the late 80's-early 90's involving use of current sources to force op-amps to operate in class A or high-biased class A/B. So most SS designs today are just the same old *****. Too bad too, because a SS chip can usually sing quite nicely when attention is paid to such concerns.

[Plinko]

I always felt that tubes were like watching a movie in Technicolor, where the colors are vivid and hyper-real, like "The Wizard of Oz".

nice analogy...I always wondered why I liked Technicolor. :)

[morinix]

agreed about the white album and revolver - don't agree about Pepper as much - the music and arrangements are groundbreaking but it doesn't sound as good to me. From that era I'd rather listen to the Penny Lane/SFF 7".

-sRevolver was kinda" whacked is some respects. But hey, that was because it was the transition from the "pop" Beatles to the "psychedelic" Beatles. Change is always uncomfortable and sketchy at first.

[Dave D]

agreed about the white album and revolver - don't agree about Pepper as much - the music and arrangements are groundbreaking but it doesn't sound as good to me. From that era I'd rather listen to the Penny Lane/SFF 7".

-s

Maybe I should rephrase it. I like the sound of Pepper a lot, even though maybe technically it's not a perfect recording. But I hate perfect recordings. I like some mung. I like the mentally compressed drums, and the distorted brass and the ADT and all that soup added.

[Doug Sclar]

The little wrinkle with this is the class of operation the SS amp was running in. I can be quite sure the tube preamp used here was full class A. But the SS amp may have been running in class b or low biased class A/B. That would cause the low-level detail loss in the SS unit. Take the same SS preamp and strap some current sources and many (not all though) of the low level signal transfer ills will often be greatly reduced.

Unfortunately one of the sicknesses that followed SS was class B operation being used MUCH more often. Almost ANY op-amp will be running in class B. The op-amp can be tightly trimmed to almost null out the crossover distortion completely but it is ALWAYS there some. And most EE's are not aware of the work done in the DIY community in the late 80's-early 90's involving use of current sources to force op-amps to operate in class A or high-biased class A/B. So most SS designs today are just the same old *****. Too bad too, because a SS chip can usually sing quite nicely when attention is paid to such concerns.


Gosh, I've never heard of an audio amp running in Class B mode, though I guess that doesn't mean there weren't any. That would seem to sound almost unlistenable. Crossover distortion in Class AB is one thing, but having the dead zone +/- .6v above the baseline should be avoided for any type of fidelity. IMO, Class B should only be used in non audio applications where effeciency is the prime design criteria.

OTOH, I agree that it's kind of hard to compare a Class A operating amp to a Class AB amp, regardless of whether they were tube or solid state. Another large factor is the fact that most tube circuits are extremely simple using very few tubes compared to the number of active devices used in most solid state designs.

[morinix]

Gosh, I've never heard of an audio amp running in Class B mode, though I guess that doesn't mean there weren't any. That would seem to sound almost unlistenable. Crossover distortion in Class AB is one thing, but having the dead zone +/- .6v above the baseline should be avoided for any type of fidelity. IMO, Class B should only be used in non audio applications where effeciency is the prime design criteria.

OTOH, I agree that it's kind of hard to compare a Class A operating amp to a Class AB amp, regardless of whether they were tube or solid state. Another large factor is the fact that most tube circuits are extremely simple using very few tubes compared to the number of active devices used in most solid state designs.The OP275 runs in class B. It is one of my fave. devices but...

HUGE amounts of EE man-hours have been dedicated to the elimination of crossover distortion in audio amps THAT ALONE should sound off alarms when audio design choices are made for the hi-fi world. Most EE's think power efficient design can coexist with hi-fi but I have not seen it really happily married yet.

I guess the main thing I am pointing out is most tube gear runs class A and most SS does not. And the traditional components around the tubes have quite a bit to do with the sound too. The interesting thing is when one starts mixing these elements up - magic can happen and it does not HAVE to have tubes. Amazing maybe, but I have seen/made it happen. In that way a designer is blessed with the hindsight that is available if one embraces the whole of electronic technology from WWII on out.

[Grant]

Remember that poll where we were asked what we thought the best sounding Beatles album was? Abbey Road (their only album done on a transistorized console) won. Yes! But, I think it was because of the music. And, I always loved the deep bass on Abbey Road.

[Mike in OR]

There was a nice interview of Bruce Botnick in an old issue of The Tracking Angle. I remember he was talking about running a clicking sound into a lively room and recording it with a tube microphone preamp vs a solid-state preamp, both into the same console. He said the tubes would pick up the reverb and room sound that he knew was accurate having heard the sound live in the actual room while the solid-state version dried everything up and didn't capture the way it actually sounded. Most of the room sound was lost.

Tubes (done right) are well......just more "real". Once you have had a great taste of tubes there is no turning back to the sand devices. I try to use the word "epiphany" very carefully as I grow older, but that is exactly how I felt more than 25 years ago when I was first turned onto to what a great tube based system does for playback in the home.

[Doug Sclar]

Well just because the board was not tube based doesn't mean there weren't still lot of tubes used in the recording of Abbey Road.

[Jamie Tate]

Well just because the board was not tube based doesn't mean there weren't still lot of tubes used in the recording of Abbey Road.

Right....

There were still a lot of tubes in the signal path (mics and the Altec and Fairchild compressors) and they were going to analog tape yet Geoff still complained about the sound. It makes me wonder what the REDD console sounded like. It must've imparted quite a lot of character on the sound. I wish I could get my hands on a few channels. :drool:

[morinix]

I have an issue of Tape-Op here somewhere that has an article about the classic Motown Studios. The guys at Motown were also having a hard time with the new SS console they got to replace the tube one. So it goes.