My ears tell me not everything new is better

This is a vacuum tube. In England, it's called a valve. It has nothing to do with cleaning the carpet.

Regardless of what you call this electronic device, it helps power guitar amplifiers in a way that professional musicians prefer over modern, solid-state components.

The tube glows. It gets scorching hot. There are usually several tubes in each amplifier. Tube-based amps are extremely heavy and expensive compared to their cool-running, lean, solid-state cousins. The tubes are glass and very delicate. They need to be replaced every so often. Most parts in a solid-state amp last for as long as a person might own the unit.

So why is it that the more technically advanced amplifiers haven't replaced these tube dinosaurs yet? Well, despite solid state amps having been around and refined for a few decades, the older tube amps simply sound better. Even with all of the drawbacks, the tubes produce a warmer, more musical sound.

There was a time when the average home stereo also contained these types of tubes. But those days are long gone, although there are still tube stereos available for astronomical prices. For playing back records, CDs or over-the-air radio broadcasts, modern transistors work better than tubes for the average listener. Yet, for musicians powering their electric guitars, ancient tube technology remains the preferred choice among pros and some amateurs such as myself.

Why am I telling you this?

With all of the technological advances coming at us at the speed of light, it's sometimes good to reflect on old technologies that still do the best job. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's better.

Oil officials have been talking a lot about the advancements that make drilling safer than ever. Yet, the worst accident in the history of off-shore drilling just occurred and apparently can't be stopped by any technological wizardry.

The other day, it was discovered that iPads could be easily breached by hackers. Apple scrambled to make the fix, but one has to wonder how this could have happened.

I still can't hear people as well on my cellphone as I can over a land line in my house.

So while it's factual that many modern inventions are far better than earlier versions, it is also true that change for the sake of change isn't always a good or workable thing. Change might be marketable, but it doesn't make it better, which explains why tube amps have survived.

I read a lot of news online and for some reason see far more mistakes, mostly typos, on my screen than I ever did in newsprint. Is reading news online more convenient? Most of the time, yes. But so far the trade off seems to be sloppier editing. Many long-time editors swear that it is easier to catch typos on paper than it is on a monitor. I tend to agree. I don't know why this phenomenon exists, but it does.

My four-year-old Jeep has power windows. Now that technology has been around a long time. You would think all the bugs would have been worked out by now. Yet, two of my windows have collapsed and broken because of a faulty motor mechanism. A third window is about to go. I don't like power windows, but that's a standard feature in most cars nowadays. Rolling up the windows with a crank has never struck me as overly taxing. It is also a highly reliable system compared with power windows. If one of my old cars with hand-cranked windows would have gone into a lake, I could have still rolled down a window even after the electronics were short-circuited by the water.

In college, a roommate of mine had a hot dog zapper. This revolutionary appliance was suppose to electrocute the meat until it was cooked. Sounds yummy, huh? You would have to put each end of the hot dog onto a metal stud. Then it was just a matter of hitting the switch and waiting about 60 seconds. Well, the hot dogs tasted like crap and I never saw one of these cookers again. To my taste buds, a frank cooked on a charcoal grill is still the best technology for the task.

Some cars actually got better gas mileage 25 years ago than they do now. Some approached 50 mpg. To get that kind of mileage these days, you'd need to move up to a pricey hybrid. With all of the advancements in cars, why can't engineers improve upon fuel efficiency? Why are advertisement campaigns bragging about cars that get 28 mpg? It's all an illusion. A sales pitch.

This is not to say that I am anti-gadgets or stuck in past technologies. I like my digital TV. I think it's cool that some people still have the vision to invent things that improve our quality of life -- things that work. I have no desire to go back to IBM typewriters -- the ones with the little metal ball with the letters on it.

But with all of these advancements in the last 10 years, we also seem to take a step backwards at times. Perhaps this particular type of oil spill wouldn't have happened a couple decades ago. Maybe the rush of today's society and the illusion that everything new is better, safer, more efficient is making our world more dangerous. Identity theft is off the charts and medical care is on the decline, according to most people old enough to remember when doctors made house calls and had something called bed-side manners.

As long as vacuum tubes are sold and telephone land lines still exist, I won't be rushing to get the latest digital amplifier or smart phone -- not because I am old or stubborn -- but because tubes and land lines still sound the better than trendy alternatives.