On his site http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#June
, Arthur Salvatore gives a "scientific" explanation of the differences between solid-state and tube amplification. I have read the passage several times, and I'm still looking for his explanation.
Here is an abridged version. He is discussing a Titan amplifier (emphasis mine):
I can state this with near certainty
, because even though I've never heard the Titan, it is a fact that no transistor amplifier, using current technology, and with that much power (and thus with unavoidable "size" and ultra-complexity), can equal any good tube amplifier in their unique sonic strengths,
and especially the finest single-ended-triode (SET) models (with their highly contrasting ultra-short signal paths and their ultra-simple circuitry). There's a scientific reason for this.The laws of physics
, on a micro-level, have always precluded this "bridging the gap" from happening, and ignoring those laws, along with hoping and wishing, and/or spending huge amounts of money, won't change that unfortunate reality. If this weren't so, tube amplifiers for the home would have disappeared 40 years ago. Instead, despite their greater cost and impracticality, tube amps are still popular with the most serious audiophiles and/or music lovers , and this will continue until there is a true technological breakthrough in transistors or humans experience an evolutionary and collective hearing loss (of ultra-soft sounds)."
Can anyone help me (or him) with the science? He never discusses the "scientific reason". What is the theory at work? (i.e. theory as an analytical framework to explain empirical observations)
Or this just more audiophile b.s.?