[CoiL]

 

 
Yes please! I find the 6922EH to be good and not very different from a 6DJ8 orange globe - interesting that you don't like it.  Which phones are you testing with currently?

Mine is 6922 too. So changing to 6DJ8 are not very different?

6922EH and Amperex OG are VERY different sounding tubes! At least with my cans (HD-681 with Frans mkII hardware filter + custom pads + re-cabling) I can tell huge difference in every aspect.

Mike, about PCC85 ...I didn`t add this to the tube list since it`s heater requirements are too high and many out of PCC85 might sound "underpowered" or "distorted". Also I think some PCC85
datasheet required also too high mA draw, not sure but it might do bad for Aune T1.

 

[ethan7000]

6922EH and Amperex OG are VERY different sounding tubes! 

I disagree. Can you post the data sheets for both tubes?

 

[CoiL]

Datasheets? Why you need them? Look from the internet for tube datasheets(Frank`s tube database for example). Datasheets don`t tell the difference, your ears do. There`s been a lot talk about 6922EH and Amperex OG in this thread and you are honestly 1st guy who tells they are "same" sounding! Use search.I don`t know what setup you have besides Aune T1 but those tubes are totally different in soundstage, tightness, mids, warmness, smoothed highs, transparency, separation etc. Use thread search and you`ll find a lot of same impressions. 

 

[frenki]

   
Frenki, I think you're mistaking just what the T1 can do.
 
The T1 is a USB DAC, and a solid state headphone amp. 
 
The RCA jacks on the back are for sending audio that has been converted by the DAC to an amplifier. When you use the line out (the RCA) the volume pot has no effect, it just controls the output to the headphones. 
 
You can't, if I'm understanding this correctly, power a speaker from the RCA jacks.
 
So you're going to need an amp as well that can drive your speakers. That's how I have mine set up. RCA out -> Muse M20 t-amp (20watts for $50) -> bookshelf speakers. It works a treat providing you don't need it super loud. 
 
Hope that helps.

Thank you so much! It certainly helps! I will look for an economic option then and will certainly consider Muse M20 t-amp. 

 

[diaBoliQu3]

Guys, anyone tried this:
 

 
Amperex ECC88 Bugle Boy second hand 1960s vintage tube

 
Or OG is still the recommended? I find a good deal with above tube.  Well, I don't have ebay account or credit card and paypal. But I don't mind using someone service to get the tube from ebay if it's worth it.

 

[ethan7000]

Datasheets? Why you need them? Look from the internet for tube datasheets(Frank`s tube database for example). Datasheets don`t tell the difference, your ears do. There`s been a lot talk about 6922EH and Amperex OG in this thread and you are honestly 1st guy who tells they are "same" sounding! Use search.I don`t know what setup you have besides Aune T1 but those tubes are totally different in soundstage, tightness, mids, warmness, smoothed highs, transparency, separation etc. Use thread search and you`ll find a lot of same impressions. 

Similar =/= same. I'm pretty sure they are very close electronically, so it would make sense that they are close sonically.

 

[Salvatore]

I'm not here to argue about the sound differences because some of us hear differences between tubes and some of us don't. There are so many small things to be taken into consideration when doing critical listening that I'm not even going to start. I just want to note that during the golden years of tube technology there were no restrictions of what materials could be used in tube production. Therefore, tubes of today do not necessarily have the same materials as what the NOS tubes had. Some rare metals, for example, were then more readily available and weren't as expensive as today. NOS tubes were also designed for high end purposes (military/technology/medical uses) and lots of love and dedication went into the tube manufacturing (from refining to assembling).
 
 
The reality of NOS.
 

Steel was really coming into it’s own around World War 1. Submarines needed metals that could be compressed at depth over and over. Airplanes need crankshafts that could stand up to their job. Metallurgy continued to improve. There were great steel companies such as US Steel in the USA, and the fine Swedish and Finnish steels. Today, most of the US steel companies are gone. The great controlled steel recipes are reserved for more critical applications such as aerospace or the automotive and aircraft industries, where a lawsuit is just around the corner. If a tube fails in an amp, who cares?

Then, there is economics from a geographic point of view. The Russians are not cranking out defense equipment any more. They have no money. One batch of steel is completely different than the next batch. In Eastern Europe, it is the same when it comes to the quality control of metal alloys. There is little economic reason to have high quality control standards in a cheap vacuum tube.

When tubes were used in scientific, medical, and defense equipment, quality was an issue. Today it is not an issue.

So, where does this get us?

Today’s new tubes are very inconsistent. Their specs run plus to minus 50%. They are not linear (those plate alloys react differently as the frequency changes and heat changes for one thing), and they do not meet specification that were established in 1957. They may meet one spec, but only if you are lucky.
 
http://www.tubefreak.com/tubesnos.htm
 
-----
 
Even though there are lots of tube measurements, electronics and frequency graphs available, I only trust my own ears.

 

[ethan7000]

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

  I'm not here to argue about the sound differences because some of us hear differences between tubes and some of us don't. There are so many small things to be taken into consideration when doing critical listening that I'm not even going to start. I just want to note that during the golden years of tube technology there were no restrictions of what materials could be used in tube production. Therefore, tubes of today do not necessarily have the same materials as what the NOS tubes had. Some rare metals, for example, were then more readily available and weren't as expensive as today. NOS tubes were also designed for high end purposes (military/technology/medical uses) and lots of love and dedication went into the tube manufacturing (from refining to assembling).
 
 
The reality of NOS.
 

Steel was really coming into it’s own around World War 1. Submarines needed metals that could be compressed at depth over and over. Airplanes need crankshafts that could stand up to their job. Metallurgy continued to improve. There were great steel companies such as US Steel in the USA, and the fine Swedish and Finnish steels. Today, most of the US steel companies are gone. The great controlled steel recipes are reserved for more critical applications such as aerospace or the automotive and aircraft industries, where a lawsuit is just around the corner. If a tube fails in an amp, who cares?

Then, there is economics from a geographic point of view. The Russians are not cranking out defense equipment any more. They have no money. One batch of steel is completely different than the next batch. In Eastern Europe, it is the same when it comes to the quality control of metal alloys. There is little economic reason to have high quality control standards in a cheap vacuum tube.

When tubes were used in scientific, medical, and defense equipment, quality was an issue. Today it is not an issue.

So, where does this get us?

Today’s new tubes are very inconsistent. Their specs run plus to minus 50%. They are not linear (those plate alloys react differently as the frequency changes and heat changes for one thing), and they do not meet specification that were established in 1957. They may meet one spec, but only if you are lucky.
 
http://www.tubefreak.com/tubesnos.htm
 
-----
 
Even though there are lots of tube measurements, electronics and frequency graphs available, I only trust my own ears.
 

Great info, thank you Salvatore. I didn't mean to imply that there are no differences between tubes because I believe that there are. 

 

[mhamel]

  6922EH and Amperex OG are VERY different sounding tubes! At least with my cans (HD-681 with Frans mkII hardware filter + custom pads + re-cabling) I can tell huge difference in every aspect.

Mike, about PCC85 ...I didn`t add this to the tube list since it`s heater requirements are too high and many out of PCC85 might sound "underpowered" or "distorted". Also I think some PCC85
datasheet required also too high mA draw, not sure but it might do bad for Aune T1.

 
CoiL - yes, I'm aware of the heater/current differences, which is why I don't mind being the guinea pig and testing it out.     I haven't taken the amp apart yet while it's got a PCC85 in it, but I have noticed no heat issues running the tubes for a good 12 hours yesterday. 
 
The Mazda PCC85s I have do not play well in the T1, they are definitely underpowered and distorted.   The others that I have tried so far have worked and sounded great.   I'll continue to check through the others and note what I find.
 
6FW8 should also work fine, it was RCA's equivalent to the 6DJ8, though they are hard to find and somewhat expensive from what I've seen.
 
There are a few others as well, once I have a chance to run them through the T1 I'll update about them.
 
Thanks,
  -Mike

 

[CoiL]

 

Datasheets? Why you need them? Look from the internet for tube datasheets(Frank`s tube database for example). Datasheets don`t tell the difference, your ears do. There`s been a lot talk about 6922EH and Amperex OG in this thread and you are honestly 1st guy who tells they are "same" sounding! Use search.I don`t know what setup you have besides Aune T1 but those tubes are totally different in soundstage, tightness, mids, warmness, smoothed highs, transparency, separation etc. Use thread search and you`ll find a lot of same impressions. 

Similar =/= same. I'm pretty sure they are very close electronically, so it would make sense that they are close sonically.

ethan, If that would be true, then most of my tubes ( about 40 by now ) would sound "close / same" ...but they don`t. Tubes within same making batch might sound same, despite they being measured different and marked under different tube types but even tubes made month apart with materials from another supply batch could make difference. So, there`s practically little chance NOS tubes and nowdays produced tubes have same sound. Like Salvatore mentioned, differences between tubes is affected by many factors like hearing differences, different cans etc.
Maybe you aren`t used to listen so critically or you cans match with Aune T1 doesn`t sound so analytical. Don`t take this comment bad way. At beginning of my Aune T1 tube hoarding I also didn`t make much difference. I had to be relaxed so I could concentrate on different aspects of tube sound. The more you do analytical listening, the more easily you understand tube differences.
For me it became fun collecting those tubes and finding differences. Anyway, if everything sounds ok to your ears then it`s all you need

 
Thanks Mike, I added PCC85 and 6FW8 to the tube list post with little sidenote

 

[mhamel]

  ethan, If that would be true, then most of my tubes ( about 40 by now ) would sound "close / same" ...but they don`t. Tubes within same making batch might sound same, despite they being measured different and marked under different tube types but even tubes made month apart with materials from another supply batch could make difference. So, there`s practically little chance NOS tubes and nowdays produced tubes have same sound. Like Salvatore mentioned, differences between tubes is affected by many factors like hearing differences, different cans etc.
Maybe you aren`t used to listen so critically or you cans match with Aune T1 doesn`t sound so analytical. Don`t take this comment bad way. At beginning of my Aune T1 tube hoarding I also didn`t make much difference. I had to be relaxed so I could concentrate on different aspects of tube sound. The more you do analytical listening, the more easily you understand tube differences.
For me it became fun collecting those tubes and finding differences. Anyway, if everything sounds ok to your ears then it`s all you need

 
Thanks Mike, I added PCC85 and 6FW8 to the tube list post with little sidenote

 
 
CoiL - Sure, you're welcome  6BK7B, 6BQ7A and 6BZ7 should all work, but
 
And, if anyone's interested, I have plenty of most types available to sell - need to get rid of some of the stash.  They include: 6ES8/ECC189, 7ES8/PCC189, 6AQ8/ECC85, 9AQ8/PCC85, PCC88/7DJ8, 6DJ8/ECC88, 6BK7B, 6BZ7, 6BQ7A and possibly some 6922/E88CC and E188CC/7308.   All are tested/matched on a modern digital tester (MaxiPreamp2).
 
   -Mike

 

[isendono]

   
CoiL - yes, I'm aware of the heater/current differences, which is why I don't mind being the guinea pig and testing it out.     I haven't taken the amp apart yet while it's got a PCC85 in it, but I have noticed no heat issues running the tubes for a good 12 hours yesterday. 
 
The Mazda PCC85s I have do not play well in the T1, they are definitely underpowered and distorted.   The others that I have tried so far have worked and sounded great.   I'll continue to check through the others and note what I find.
 
6FW8 should also work fine, it was RCA's equivalent to the 6DJ8, though they are hard to find and somewhat expensive from what I've seen.
 
There are a few others as well, once I have a chance to run them through the T1 I'll update about them.
 
Thanks,
  -Mike

Cool, Thanks !

 

[CoiL]

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Quote:

 

  ethan, If that would be true, then most of my tubes ( about 40 by now ) would sound "close / same" ...but they don`t. Tubes within same making batch might sound same, despite they being measured different and marked under different tube types but even tubes made month apart with materials from another supply batch could make difference. So, there`s practically little chance NOS tubes and nowdays produced tubes have same sound. Like Salvatore mentioned, differences between tubes is affected by many factors like hearing differences, different cans etc.
Maybe you aren`t used to listen so critically or you cans match with Aune T1 doesn`t sound so analytical. Don`t take this comment bad way. At beginning of my Aune T1 tube hoarding I also didn`t make much difference. I had to be relaxed so I could concentrate on different aspects of tube sound. The more you do analytical listening, the more easily you understand tube differences.
For me it became fun collecting those tubes and finding differences. Anyway, if everything sounds ok to your ears then it`s all you need

 
Thanks Mike, I added PCC85 and 6FW8 to the tube list post with little sidenote

 
 
CoiL - Sure, you're welcome  6BK7B, 6BQ7A and 6BZ7 should all work, but
 
And, if anyone's interested, I have plenty of most types available to sell - need to get rid of some of the stash.  They include: 6ES8/ECC189, 7ES8/PCC189, 6AQ8/ECC85, 9AQ8/PCC85, PCC88/7DJ8, 6DJ8/ECC88, 6BK7B, 6BZ7, 6BQ7A and possibly some 6922/E88CC and E188CC/7308.   All are tested/matched on a modern digital tester (MaxiPreamp2).
 
   -Mike

 

Any chance you have Ultron SQ PCC189/7ES8 (Bharat India) in your stack?

 

[diaBoliQu3]

   
 
CoiL - Sure, you're welcome  6BK7B, 6BQ7A and 6BZ7 should all work, but
 
And, if anyone's interested, I have plenty of most types available to sell - need to get rid of some of the stash.  They include: 6ES8/ECC189, 7ES8/PCC189, 6AQ8/ECC85, 9AQ8/PCC85, PCC88/7DJ8, 6DJ8/ECC88, 6BK7B, 6BZ7, 6BQ7A and possibly some 6922/E88CC and E188CC/7308.   All are tested/matched on a modern digital tester (MaxiPreamp2).
 
   -Mike

E88CC and 7308 caught my attention.

 

[mhamel]

  Any chance you have Ultron SQ PCC189/7ES8 (Bharat India) in your stack?

 
For Ultron-branded tubes:
 
I have 34 Ultron SQ (Bharat) ECC189, but I don't have them in PCC189.
I also have 35 Ultron ECC189 that are Siemens Halske late 60s/early 70s production.
 
  -Mike