yuujin
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2006
- Posts
- 32
- Likes
- 10
Thanks tom for the invaluable kits that are close to effortless to build.
Hello all,
A little off topic but does anyone have any comparisons on the Torpedo vs Bottlehead crack. I am torn what to build next but am leaning toward the Torpedo. I have not heard either but will be driving my HD600s with one of these two amps and am looking for a recommendation.
Thanks in advance.
--Dustin
Can anyone recommend a cinema are similar transformer for the input of this to take a balanced connection (my DAC has balanced out and is quite a distance from the amp.)
TomB told me that this amp has zero harshness... I feel this is significantly dependent on tubes you use ( = it's not true everytime). I've tried six different pairs and while they sound all similar, there are differences that become obvious especially when you are searching for the right "synergy" with your DAC and headphones to finalise the chain.
Because torpedo tubes are all about 50 - 60 years old, when first using a set of tubes they won't perform so well for the first few hours. They need a bit of time for the getters to do their thing and restore the vacuum inside. So don't judge any tube on initial impressions. But even after all that, some of my torpedo tubes are a bit crappy sounding.
I think my best overall performers would be dumont 5964s i got from tomb.
Many thanks for such a fine review, RustA!! I'm glad we sent all those tubes. It's very nice to know that it can pair well with HD800's.
P.S. Dust is a sometime nuisance on mine, too. I thought it was just me, but I wouldn't want to change back to silver.
Because torpedo tubes are all about 50 - 60 years old, when first using a set of tubes they won't perform so well for the first few hours. They need a bit of time for the getters to do their thing and restore the vacuum inside. So don't judge any tube on initial impressions. But even after all that, some of my torpedo tubes are a bit crappy sounding.
I think my best overall performers would be dumont 5964s i got from tomb.
I believe the getters are always active, even when the tubes are in storage and not used. They are just a layer of metal that react with gases inside the tube and "absorbs" them by oxidation. They are independent of the tube being powered or not. If a tube has been infiltrated by gases, powering it won't change much.
I do agree that most tubes will change characteristics after a few hours. I haven't learned what may be responsible for this yet, but I'm pretty sure it does not involve the getters.
I think you are correct in theory, but maybe not in practice.The getter "flash" is the silver deposit on the inside of the glass. It's produced the first time by heating the getter itself, which usually has barium on it (from what I've read). The high heat will "flash" the barium over to the glass, producing the silver splotch.
You are correct that the silver splotch will continue to react with gas in the tube whether the tube is on or not. This is easy to see if you've ever broken a tube, because the getter flash will turn white almost instantly in the presence of the oxygen in air. However, heating the tube back up after a few decades of storage may still release additional barium from the getter, aiding the cleansing of the tube from gas. Plus, heat will speed up almost any non-exothermic reaction, so the removal of residual gas is still aided by having the tube "run-in" for awhile if it's been a NOS tube in storage for a number of years.
That's a valid argument. Heat may speed up the process. Raising the temperature also means particles which need a higher energy to react have a higher probability of doing so.
But honestly, there's no way powering it up again will release more barium. This stuff boils at 1897 °C (3447 °F). I doubt a tube gets that hot. It is originally flashed using radio frequency of the type used in microwave ovens.
So, anyone willing to "burn in" a NOS tube using a microwave oven?
(honestly, don't, that's a joke)
There are a lot of other materials used besides Barium. I'll admit that I didn't look up the vaporization temperature, but you seem interested enough to read this, maybe you can tell us why the old advice about burning out residual gas in NOS tubes is a lie:
http://www.emissionlabs.com/Articles/GETTER/getter.htm
Besides, why wouldn't adsorbed gas on the surface of the plates vaporize easier under heat so that the getter flash can react to it? I'd rather believe the old advice - I'm satisfied that there's enough going on to provide ample explanation for reducing the gas when the tubes are on.