or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The Apex Teton Review and Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Apex Teton Review and Impressions Thread - Page 7

post #91 of 234

Just received my Teton today! :dt880smile:

 

Maybe I'm not a bass head but I don't find it bass light with the stock tubes. Nice detail and presence. Looking forward to some tube rolling and the amp running in and improving with time.

 

Anyone care to share their experiences with running in the amp? How long does it take before the sound settles down?

post #92 of 234
Thread Starter 

What do you mean by s

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshL View Post
 

Just received my Teton today! :dt880smile:

 

Maybe I'm not a bass head but I don't find it bass light with the stock tubes. Nice detail and presence. Looking forward to some tube rolling and the amp running in and improving with time.

 

Anyone care to share their experiences with running in the amp? How long does it take before the sound settles down?

In my experience, the brand new Teton I bought from Todd sounded brighter to me than the loaner Teton that I had borrowed earlier from Todd.  It took at least a couple of months before the new amp sounded the way I remembered the loaner amp did. I now have owned the Teton for about a year and I do not find it to ever be bright or fatiguing.  I am also a believer - unlike some other Teton owners - that tube rolling allows you to significantly tailor the sound of the Teton to your liking.  I certainly would not be using the stock 6SN7 as the input tube, which I seem to recall was a new production Tung Sol 6SN7GT.

post #93 of 234

You guys can try sylvania 6SN7 metal base, it is more harsh sounding than Sylvania 6f8g, but definitely my favorite. It is super fast and dynamic. The bass is so good. Sound is very spacious and engaging than any other tubes I tried. Sylvania 6F8G is more refined but less dynamic and a little slower. But still very good tube. 

post #94 of 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by minimus View Post

What do you mean by s
In my experience, the brand new Teton I bought from Todd sounded brighter to me than the loaner Teton that I had borrowed earlier from Todd.  It took at least a couple of months before the new amp sounded the way I remembered the loaner amp did. I now have owned the Teton for about a year and I do not find it to ever be bright or fatiguing.  I am also a believer - unlike some other Teton owners - that tube rolling allows you to significantly tailor the sound of the Teton to your liking.  I certainly would not be using the stock 6SN7 as the input tube, which I seem to recall was a new production Tung Sol 6SN7GT.

Thanks for sharing. I couldn't resist swapping out the new production 6SN7GT for an RCA grey glass VT231 and immediately the sound is different. So I'm with you on the Impact of tubes on the sound. Smoother and denser but less open and perhaps a tad more veiled. Think my tubes need burning in.

Interesting times ahead. I've got a Ken Rad Vt231, Sylvania 3 rivet bad boy, TS BGRP and ECC32 to try. Also waiting for my Raytheon 6528A from Todd to arrive.
Edited by JoshL - 12/4/14 at 5:08pm
post #95 of 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshL View Post


Thanks for sharing. I couldn't resist swapping out the new production 6SN7GT for an RCA grey glass VT231 and immediately the sound is different. So I'm with you on the Impact of tubes on the sound. Smoother and denser but less open and perhaps a tad more veiled. Think my tubes need burning in.

Interesting times ahead. I've got a Ken Rad Vt231, Sylvania 3 rivet bad boy, TS BGRP and ECC33 to try. Also waiting for my Raytheon 6528A from Todd to arrive.

The sound on the driver tubes are noticeable, rectifier make tiny difference

post #96 of 234
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chengka7 View Post

You guys can try sylvania 6SN7 metal base, it is more harsh sounding than Sylvania 6f8g, but definitely my favorite. It is super fast and dynamic. The bass is so good. Sound is very spacious and engaging than any other tubes I tried. Sylvania 6F8G is more refined but less dynamic and a little slower. But still very good tube. 

Thanks. A while ago, someone PM'd me who had the Teton loaner to say that the Sylvania metal base 6SN7 sounded absolutely phenomenal in the Teton, so I might hunt one down.
post #97 of 234

Try a Psvane CV181 (direct drop-in for a 6ns7), as that's the best in my Pinnacle. Lots of nice clean tight bass, especially on HD800s and LCD3s and TH900s.

post #98 of 234
Just put in the 1952 Sylvania 3 hole bad boy. Much better now. Sound stage opens way up compared to the RCA. Better detail and presence. Mids are sweeter. Female vocals makes my hair stand. Nice!
post #99 of 234
Been comparing the Sylvania 3 rivet bad boy with the TS BGRP. My BGRP makes a little crackling noise at times. But overall even when it's quiet I still prefer the bad boys surprisingly. Sylvania is just more open sounding with weightier bass and transparent mids with a tinge of sweetness. This is with the WE421A as output tube and big bottle 53KU as rectifier. I found this combination gives me a good balance of speed with tonal weight.

Both the RCA and ken rad VT231 is noticeably behind these two tubes, as they are more veiled sounding.

The only tube I like as much (or maybe just a little more) is the ECC32 Mullard.
post #100 of 234
I've kind of settled on 2 tube combos right now:

53KU Big Bottle, WE421A, Sylvania 3 rivet bad boy 1952

GZ34 Metal Base, WE421A, ECC32 Mullard

The first combo gives a more precise sound with a bit of 'bite' that is quite nice with some music. There is enough body and weight in the bass from the 53KU. The Sylvania gives delicate highs and clear mids.

The second combo combines the smooth, rich harmonics of the ECC32 (very obvious with vocals) with the clear wide open sound stage and tight bass from the GZ34 metal base. The bass is not as weighty as the first combo but seems more textured and faster/tighter.

On balance I prefer the second combo a little more across a wider genre of music.

I find that I like the WE421A as output tube best with HD800. Gives a weighty sound to the mids and bass, without sacrificing openness compared to the 7236 and 6528. More balanced overall with the HD800. I can imagine the 6528 suiting audezes more.
post #101 of 234

I do not like ECC32 on Teton, I vastly prefer Sylvania 6F8G or 6sn7 Sylvania metal base. They are more engaging than ECC32 mullard, and also faster and more dynamic. 

post #102 of 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by chengka7 View Post

I do not like ECC32 on Teton, I vastly prefer Sylvania 6F8G or 6sn7 Sylvania metal base. They are more engaging than ECC32 mullard, and also faster and more dynamic. 

Hi Chengka,

Thanks for sharing your preferences.

I can see where you're coming from, and I can't discount sound preferences. For me using the Sylvania, the clarity and speed is nice but I need the 53ku big bottle to give it enough density of tone.

For the ECC32, I love the density and rich harmonics but it does sound a bit slow when I used it with the 53KU. But with the GZ34 metal base, the soundstage opens up again, with a clear and 'cooler' quality, lots of air and lots of speed to balance things off.

Haven't tried any 6F8G yet as I didn't feel like using an adapter. The 6sn7w metal base is intriguing but I haven't come across one from a seller that I trust yet.

For me the real surprise was how I preferred the Sylvania bad boy to the TS BGRP. Maybe the TS hasn't been run in yet.
post #103 of 234

Thanks my friend, and I see, if you like the density of the sound, then ECC32 is a good choice. But it is a bit boring to my taste. 

post #104 of 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by chengka7 View Post

Thanks my friend, and I see, if you like the density of the sound, then ECC32 is a good choice. But it is a bit boring to my taste. 

I know what you mean. The sylvania has that 'bite' and excitement to its sound. I enjoy it sometimes when I'm in the mood too. It's like rock music, it doesn't sound good when it's too smooth, it needs a bit of bite and kick!
post #105 of 234

Purchased the Apex Teton from Chengka... First impression after turning on the amp was - wow! 

 

Will do some A-B comparisons with the EC 4-45, but I think the differences are very noticeable right off the bat: 

 

  1. The Teton has more weight and body the sound which benefits the HD800 (mine is semi-modded). I think the Teton fits nicely between the WA5 and 4-45 in terms of lushness (though it is by no means syrupy or muddy).
  2. From my hour's long listening I would give the slight nod to the Teton for a more accurate tonality.
  3. Both amps are smooth and free of grain, with the slight nod again to the Teton in this aspect. It is really liquid smooth.
  4. Both amps are very detailed. The Teton has a front-row presentation which allows you to hear "more" in the soundstage, whilst the 4-45 places you further back in the stage, thus requiring the listener to pay more attention to the details to find them.  
  5. The 4-45 is the leaner of the two amps, which translates to more impressive spatial presentation and imaging. I think the 3D soundstage is presented with more realism on the 4-45 for live recordings because (a) spatial cues are more delineated and precise and (b) there is better back-front layering. I think this will be a matter of preference given the back-row presentation on the 4-45 may not favour with those who prefer a lively sound.
  6. The Teton does modern recordings much better. The extra body and weight helps.
  7. The Teton is much more musical and engaging. 

 

*I am using the EML 45 (solid plate) and WE 417A on the 4-45, and the Mullard GZ34, Sylvania 6SN7W (metal base) and WE 421A on the Teton. My DAC is the MSB Analog (with Audiophilleo 1 PP + AES converter). 


Edited by lojay - 1/24/15 at 12:08am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The Apex Teton Review and Impressions Thread