Tomcat
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2001
- Posts
- 1,276
- Likes
- 18
The tubes in my Earmax Pro started to distort noticeably after three years of use. So I decided to get new ones. I know that a lot of people aren’t really pleased with the two original JAN-Philips 6922 the Earmax Pro comes equipped with, but there seem to be just as many who think, that the Jan-Philips 6922 is quite good, warm and musical. rob n, who has listened to amps like the EAR HP4, Cary 300B, and the Sugden Headmaster and, in the end, still preferred the warm, liquid, non-fatiguing tube sound of the Earmax Pro, seemed to think so in this HeadWize post, and the German store where I ordered the new ones recommended them as well: steinmusic.de. The original sound of the Earmax Pro didn’t strike me as abrasive or shrill, quite the contrary, so I just got the same 6922’s again.
As it turned out, it was the original 12AT7, that was defective. The only thing printed on this tube is “12AT7”, no brand-name, nothing else. markl, jmpsmash, SumB, fellow tube-rollers, this is where the plot thickens, of course… Again, I went with steinmusic’s recommendation and substituted it with a Philips 12AT7WC. I would have loved to try a Sylvania Gold Brand 6201, as recommended by markl (and subsequently by Earmax Pro-owners like jmpsmash or SumB), but I couldn’t find a German store, that carried it. But as it is, I am quite happy with the Philips 12AT7WC. The sonic difference is very much along the line described by Sylvania users: better dynamics, more punch, more slam, more ambience information – more LIFE. And, most important, more FUN. This is after about thirty hours of burn-in, so there might be further improvements. But at this point, some things seem to be very clear. While there is still a whole lot of depth, the soundstage has moved closer to the listener, there is more air around instruments, more ambience clues, and there is better left-to-right delineation and extension. There hasn’t been much of the hole-in-the-middle effect with the Earmax to begin with, but this has gotten even better with the Philips 12AT7WCs. This is probably due to improved micro-dynamics, as the perceivability of phrasing techniques has improved as well.
And then, there is bass. As tight and slamming and resonant and rich and colourful as anyone could wish. I use a Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro (250 Ohm) with the Earmax Pro, and I usually shy away from a term like “revealing”, but that is exactly what the 770 Pro is when it comes to low-frequency instruments like bass drum, electric bass, bass violin or pipe organ. The 770 Pros make it very easy to perceive differences in this area. Now, with the tube-rolled Earmax Pro, those instruments are just plain there and one feels their impact. Ever been ten feet away from a real-life bass drum or a bass violin? That’s how it sounds. Well, almost. To me, it’s pretty convincing.
The conclusion? I couldn’t say the Philips 12AT7WC was a better choice than the Sylvania Gold Brand 6201, or vice versa. But what my tube-rolling experience does seem to confirm is the mediocrity of the original 12AT7 in the Earmax Pro, all those Sylvania users have reported about.
So: get rolling.
As it turned out, it was the original 12AT7, that was defective. The only thing printed on this tube is “12AT7”, no brand-name, nothing else. markl, jmpsmash, SumB, fellow tube-rollers, this is where the plot thickens, of course… Again, I went with steinmusic’s recommendation and substituted it with a Philips 12AT7WC. I would have loved to try a Sylvania Gold Brand 6201, as recommended by markl (and subsequently by Earmax Pro-owners like jmpsmash or SumB), but I couldn’t find a German store, that carried it. But as it is, I am quite happy with the Philips 12AT7WC. The sonic difference is very much along the line described by Sylvania users: better dynamics, more punch, more slam, more ambience information – more LIFE. And, most important, more FUN. This is after about thirty hours of burn-in, so there might be further improvements. But at this point, some things seem to be very clear. While there is still a whole lot of depth, the soundstage has moved closer to the listener, there is more air around instruments, more ambience clues, and there is better left-to-right delineation and extension. There hasn’t been much of the hole-in-the-middle effect with the Earmax to begin with, but this has gotten even better with the Philips 12AT7WCs. This is probably due to improved micro-dynamics, as the perceivability of phrasing techniques has improved as well.
And then, there is bass. As tight and slamming and resonant and rich and colourful as anyone could wish. I use a Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro (250 Ohm) with the Earmax Pro, and I usually shy away from a term like “revealing”, but that is exactly what the 770 Pro is when it comes to low-frequency instruments like bass drum, electric bass, bass violin or pipe organ. The 770 Pros make it very easy to perceive differences in this area. Now, with the tube-rolled Earmax Pro, those instruments are just plain there and one feels their impact. Ever been ten feet away from a real-life bass drum or a bass violin? That’s how it sounds. Well, almost. To me, it’s pretty convincing.
The conclusion? I couldn’t say the Philips 12AT7WC was a better choice than the Sylvania Gold Brand 6201, or vice versa. But what my tube-rolling experience does seem to confirm is the mediocrity of the original 12AT7 in the Earmax Pro, all those Sylvania users have reported about.
So: get rolling.
