• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Solid State vs Tube Watts: Need Help

#61
Calaverasgrande said:
And yes it is smug. This debate is not vapor. Of course I know a watt is a watt. That the same folks re-iterate that phrase ad nauseum does nothing to educate anyone or help to solve this conundrum for bass head buyers.
Click to expand...

No, like I said, a watt is a watt is not smug--it is truth, it is reality, it is mathematical certainty. IMHO, seeing it as "smug" can only serve as an impediment to understanding.

The statement "tube watts are louder than solid state watts" is disingenuous and contributes to confusion and ignorance.

The facts are, a watt is a watt. Watts are watts. Two amps putting out identical signals at equal voltages into identical loudspeaker systems in identical acoustical environments will be the same loudness at the same distance. But you can't directly correlate power ratings with loudness without also taking into account distortion (and harmonic content), dynamics, and other factors.

A watt is a watt. Don't read so much into the word.
 
#62
Ragnor said:
That's the 'problem'. They ARE! The problem isn't the way manufacturers rate their amps (to give a accurate rating, you'd need a few pages of wattages at different parameters, or a curve that only an engineer could make sense of). The 'problem' is that tube amps are used differently. Tubes are generally used in the clipping area, as I explained in my post.
Click to expand...

Well, no. The example in my post about the SM400 shows the problem *is* the way manufacturers rate amps' power. I proposed a two point (or even one) power spec; not pages of data. Please reread my post.
 
#63
I think each company rightly has it's own R&D department, arguably wrongly different ways of measuring results, and absolutely wrongly marketing hype. The last two factors make it very difficult to be an informed buyer and I feel that it is intentional. If there was a standard, accepted by all companies, way to test everything from speaker drivers to amps it would be a lot easier to be an informed consumer, however it would make some companies inferior and when you also add in brand power and potential market based on price point you get even more of a mess. Cheers.
 
#64
Some great portion of the people I've seen complaining about some bass-oriented brand's power ratings often don't have the slightest clue about leveraging gain staging. That makes it all the tougher to separate legitimate beefs from sheer RTFM-challenged nonsense.

I just head for the pro power amps - or the tube heads - and thus am spared so much of the hidden default voicing tricks the and gain structure knob position nonsense found in the wonderful world of bass heads.
 
#65
okcrum said:
Well, no. The example in my post about the SM400 shows the problem *is* the way manufacturers rate amps' power. I proposed a two point (or even one) power spec; not pages of data. Please reread my post.
Click to expand...

I admit, okcrum, that I cannot tell how accurate the rating of an SM400 is. Neither can I say how accurate the rating of an SVT-whatever-pro is. So, instead of making wild assumptions, let's bring in the technical data.

I opened up the user manuals of those two amplifiers.
They can be found on these links:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
http://www.ampeg.com/pdf/SVT-2PRO.PDF

At "Technical Specifications - Output power rating" you can find that the SVT-350H is rated at 350W RMS for a 4 Ohm load while the SVT-2PRO has this as a rating: "300W RMS continious @ <3% THD".

As you can see, while in the transistor amp they just say "that many watts rms in that load", at the tube amp they bother to mention that it's continious power with less than 3% total harmonic distortion.

So, the point of non-uniform rating, even within the same company is proven.
I guess I just proved myself wrong, isn't that wonderful?
 
#69
Bob Lee (QSC) said:
No, like I said, a watt is a watt is not smug--it is truth, it is reality, it is mathematical certainty. IMHO, seeing it as "smug" can only serve as an impediment to understanding.

The statement "tube watts are louder than solid state watts" is disingenuous and contributes to confusion and ignorance.

The facts are, a watt is a watt. Watts are watts. Two amps putting out identical signals at equal voltages into identical loudspeaker systems in identical acoustical environments will be the same loudness at the same distance. But you can't directly correlate power ratings with loudness without also taking into account distortion (and harmonic content), dynamics, and other factors.

A watt is a watt. Don't read so much into the word.
Click to expand...
Like I said Bob you dont have a dog in this fight so I would rather not go around the house with you on this.
But as is abundantly obvious, we aren't disputing that the actual watts that come out of a tube amp are any better than a solid state amp. A watt is nothing more than a measure of "work". I did go to college. I even remember a little bit of calculus.
What is more up to debate here is how amps are rated for wattage. Tubes amps are pretty easy. A bass head with 6 6550 power output tubes can easily do 200 watts. There are even some (SVT comes to mind) that exceed 300 watts. When I see "X brand" debut a power amp with 6 6550 in it and a claim of 250 watts I do not doubt that they are capable of that. Transistor amps are not so easy to eyeball. How many of you guys (aside from Bob here) can rattle off the names of mosfet output devices and their dissipation in watts? Even if you had that kind of off hand knowledge, it is not so easy to see the output guts of SS amps. Also, most bass amp literature is opaque at best when giving output capacity. Last time I checked Ampeg's site they had a few particularly egregious examples, but those seem to be excised now.
Point being, it is not whether the identical voltages from two amps with different topologies will shake my speaker differently, but whether an amp rated for 300 watts will give me 300 watts, or less. The Tube amps seem to give up all the watts. The SS amps not so much. Now of course I would buy a SS power amp from QSC (or Crown) if I was amplifying a full band through PA cabinets. But here we are talking about bass heads.
 
#72
I think clarification is better than myth-based obfuscation.

Calaverasgrande said:
A bass head with 6 6550 power output tubes can easily do 200 watts.
Click to expand...

Maybe. It depends on much more than just the tube count. "Eyeball" power ratings are fairly unreliable, IME.

It's contradictory to hold tube amp power ratings in high esteem if you think they're based on just "X of Y tubes = Z watts," and then dismiss power ratings for solid state when many of them are not based on what you can eyeball, but on at least EIA methods, and/or (even better) the FTC Amplifier Rule.
 
#74
Ragnor said:
I admit, okcrum, that I cannot tell how accurate the rating of an SM400 is. Neither can I say how accurate the rating of an SVT-whatever-pro is. So, instead of making wild assumptions, let's bring in the technical data.

I opened up the user manuals of those two amplifiers.
They can be found on these links:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
http://www.ampeg.com/pdf/SVT-2PRO.PDF

At "Technical Specifications - Output power rating" you can find that the SVT-350H is rated at 350W RMS for a 4 Ohm load while the SVT-2PRO has this as a rating: "300W RMS continious @ <3% THD".

As you can see, while in the transistor amp they just say "that many watts rms in that load", at the tube amp they bother to mention that it's continious power with less than 3% total harmonic distortion.

So, the point of non-uniform rating, even within the same company is proven.
I guess I just proved myself wrong, isn't that wonderful?
Click to expand...

Don't sweat it, man. I've done that to myself here too. :D
 
#78
rockstarbassist said:
If your amp is too quiet or you don't have the headroom you want, get a bigger one.

I mean it's pretty simple. :o
Click to expand...

In a nut shell, this. Far too many folk use amps that do not fulfill their needs and blame the topology for their misery.

I played gigs all over the UK with a 50W Leak tube power amp, a simple one tube pre-amp and a Marshall 100W rated 4x12. I never ever worried about being loud enough. Nowadays I use a pair of 2x10s and 900W of class D power. I still know that whatever I face my gear will suffice.

Today would I use a full tube amp? Not on your life even though I do own a Hiwatt DR201.
 
#79
BassmanPaul said:
In a nut shell, this. Far too many folk use amps that do not fulfill their needs and blame the topology for their misery.

I played gigs all over the UK with a 50W Leak tube power amp, a simple one tube pre-amp and a Marshall 100W rated 4x12. I never ever worried about being loud enough. Nowadays I use a pair of 2x10s and 900W of class D power. I still know that whatever I face my gear will suffice.

Today would I use a full tube amp? Not on your life even though I do own a Hiwatt DR201.
Click to expand...

Yep. Then that leads to "Zomg my tube amp is too dirty or breaks up too much how can I clean it up" and "I haz a 300W amp (180W at 8 ohms) through a 112 yet I can't keep up with my drummer and 2 Mesa stacks" threads.

I have a 900W amp that I use at full rating b/c I like the headroom. If I wanted that "natural" break up, I'd be rocking a 100W tube job. Or just a pedal, like I do now... ;)
 
#80
Bob Lee (QSC) said:
I think clarification is better than myth-based obfuscation.



Maybe. It depends on much more than just the tube count. "Eyeball" power ratings are fairly unreliable, IME.

It's contradictory to hold tube amp power ratings in high esteem if you think they're based on just "X of Y tubes = Z watts," and then dismiss power ratings for solid state when many of them are not based on what you can eyeball, but on at least EIA methods, and/or (even better) the FTC Amplifier Rule.
Click to expand...
yeah but thats the problem. I see very few bass amp manufacturers that use EIA or FTC ratings. Usually they are quoted with not enough information to really take seriously.
Usually its just
300 watts at 4 ohms*
180 watts at 8 ohms*.
*3% distortion.

No mention of duration of test, frequency of test signal (1k? Swept sine? Band limited pink noise?)
I know in the discrete power amp world there is usually much more information included. A lot of racked power amps will go into installs or even touring rigs. So it is more crucial to know which amps do what when you are speccing your gear.

When it comes to tube amps 2 power tubes usually means about 50 watts. 4 usually means about 100-135 watts and 6 power tubes usually means 150-200 watts. Though for some reason I never quite get there are 6 power tube amps with 250-300 watts on tap. Still there isnt an insurmountable amount of wiggle room there. I have never bought a tube head based on the number of tubes in the back.
If I did I dont think I would get an amp with 6x6550's in it then find out it was meek and incapable of being loud enough. Yeah, the power supply will affect how much comes out, as will the way the taps on the transformer are implemented. But it's not common for a manufacturer to fill an amp with a bunch of tubes and underbuild the transformers.

About the post that said, if your amp isn't loud enough, just buy another one. Well I think that is the crux of the OP's whole issue. Some of us don't want to spend a lot of time trying amps, selling them and buying new ones. You rarely recoup all that you paid for gear (esp amps!) it would be nice if all 300 watt heads DID put out the same amount of power and we could just focus on what the pre did with our Stingray or Jazz or Ric.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back