1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Feliks Audio Elise Tube Rolling Guide 6SN7/6AS7G/6080/5998

Discussion in 'Headphone Amps (full-size)' started by renderman, May 6, 2015.
First
 
Back
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Next
 
Last
  1. hypnos1
     
    I have in fact fully catalogued the changes that developed subsequently...in my system.
     
    Regrettable indeed is your stance in all of this, g - as you say...your perspective. I shall say no more, other than I wish you well...
     
  2. Shaffer
    Folks may have noticed that the core participants in this discussion simply ignore certain individuals. It's not as if we can stop them from coming. The truth is, we have little interest in an interaction. Gibosi, OTOH, we want in this thread and we respect him greatly.
     
  3. Shaffer
    Rolled a pair of CRC black plate 6AS7Gs last night into the Elise, 7N7 drivers. It's a fun, exciting power tube to listen with. Not a whole lot of low-level detail, but lots of punch. I prefer the sound of the tube more in the DV, which isn't exactly the champion of low-level information retrieval, as the Elise is capable of so much more resolution.

    Still burning in 6CY7s. Moved on to a pair of Tung Sols with an equally NOS Type 80 rectifier. Doesn't sound too bad after ~20 hours. The tonal balance is right on for me, but the resolution isn't up to the par set by the GZ34. I'll give it time....
     
  4. gibosi
    It has been suggested that since I don't have an Elise, my observations and impressions are of little or no value to the Elise community. However, it is my belief that any reasonably transparent amplifier can reveal the essence of a tube's sonic signature. For example, there is considerable agreement in the 6AS7 and 6SN7 threads about the nature of those tubes even though people are running them in many different amplifiers. And thus, I would argue that the other tubes in the system, the headphones used and the sources are at least as important as the amplifier being used...
     
    And that said, back to the subject matter at hand....
     
    A couple tubes arrived in today's mail. :)
     
    First up is a Raytheon 5694. This tube is electrically very similar to the 6N7G, with 0.8 amp heaters and a gain of 35, but separate cathodes, which invites comparison to the ECC32 which is simply an ECC31 with separate cathodes. I found a review on Google which claims that this is vastly superior to the ECC32. However, when the reviewer went on to say that the ECC32 was "lacking in bottom end response", I had to laugh! From the reviews I have read about the ECC32, and from my experience with the ECC31, bass is anything but lacking!
     
    Unfortunately, this tube requires a simple pin-adapter as the pin out is different than the 6SN7. I have one on the way, but presently, it is somewhere between my house and China, and I will have to wait a little while longer to find out if this tube is as good as that reviewer claims.
     
    This tube has three mica spacers and two top rectangular getters, and I would guess that the date code, 424 indicates the 24th week of 1954. I don't know that I have seen a Raytheon 6N7G or 6A6 and I wonder if Raytheon ever made those tubes....
     
    2015-10-1911.04.02.jpg
     
    And I also received another "fat" Cossor 53KU regulator, rebranded as an RSD GZ33. I have seen this tube labeled as a 53KU, CV378, U54, and now, GZ33. Further, many people call this tube a "fat" GZ37,, so it is a real zoo out there! lol :) 
     
    2015-10-1911.02.49.jpg
     
    Shaffer and Renderman like this.
  5. Renderman
    Hi Gibosi! I agree with your assessment that your input is still valid and valuable to this thread even using a different amplifier. I have always valued your opinion and am glad you are posting here!
     
    That 5694 looks nice, great find, I like the way it looks. I'm secretly hoping they come close to the ECC31/32 in sound characteristics as I really like the set of Philips Miniwatt ECC31 I got here. With any luck I might also be receiving two Mullard ECC31 to compare against the Philips.
    Will be waiting on the edge of my seat to read your impression! [​IMG] 
     
  6. gibosi
     
    Thank you. :)
     
    And I agree. It would certainly be a delicious surprise if the 5694 is as good as an ECC31. I hope that adapter gets here quick!
     
    I currently have four ECC31s, three from the 1940's with the mica standoffs, and one dated 1954, with no standoffs and a "toothy" top mica. And if they sound different, it is too subtle for me to detect. So I will be surprised if you notice any significant difference between the Mullards and Philips. They are all good. :) 
     
    The "newer" 1954 ECC31 with the "toothy" top mica.
     
    2015-10-0609.42.05.jpg
     
  7. Shaffer
    I'm officially done with signal tubes for the Woo. Just picked up the last 2 pairs of RCA 6CY7 from the distributor I deal with, and added a pair of RCA 6DR7 just for yucks. At less that $5 a pop, why not? I'm expecting another terribly inexpensive rectifier to arrive any minute now. It's a GE 5R4GB. For whatever reason, I'm not a huge fan of GE signal tubes, in general, but they sure made a fine sounding rectifier.

    ATM, I'm running a pair of Westinghouse 6DR7s - couldn't stop myself at a $1 a throw. Yes, a whole dollar - and a CRC 5R4GY. Less than $20 worth of tubes. For whatever reason, I get a real kick out of that. The sound isn't the best I've heard, but far from the worst, either.

    Only one purchase left; a backup GZ34. I must say, however, that I'd like to have that Cossor. Perhaps a kind and very knowledgeable man could help me find one, when the time comes. :)
     
  8. hpamdr

    Phillips and Mullard shared design and production of tube so you should not find too much differences...
    Where did you get those Batavian tubes..
     
  9. gibosi
     
    To be clear, Mullard was a Philips subsidiary, and all ECC31 (and 32), regardless of the silk-screened brand, were manufactured only in Mullard's Blackburn factory, and no where else.
     
  10. gibosi
     
    I must say, the fact that your Woo can use such cheap tubes is quite an advantage. But evidently, the SQ just isn't there... :frowning2:
     
    And for sure, now that I have a couple backups, if I come across what appears to be a good deal on a Cossor, I will pass it along. :)
     
  11. Renderman
    I tracked these down in Eindhoven (Philips' birthplace)... it took quite a while but I was delighted when these turned up! Bought them on the spot, for a very good price indeed!
     
    Yes, I figured as much, hence why I had no problem at all buying the Philips branded ECC31, just thought it might be interesting to compare them. I got such a good offer on the Mullard ECC31 I had to buy them, even just to have them as a backup set.
     
    Edit: clarification
     
  12. Shaffer

    Yes, the SQ leaves a bit to be desired. The circuit is very finicky. I have three different 6CY7s. Each brand responds differently to a given rectifier. Some differences are relatively small, others are night and day. Like now, playing the newly arrived $6.75 (shipped) rectifier with the wet sock sounding Westinghouse $1 bottles. They sound noticeably more clear and not just a little. The thing that gets me on a personal level is that I've been playing with audio for ~40 years, 30 of them pretty seriously, and I'm still amazed by the highly audible differences due to relatively minor changes. One would think I'd know better by now, and still that sense of child-like bewilderment won't let go. Perhaps it's a good thing.


    That would be great. Thank you. :)
     
  13. gibosi
     
    I think you are in the early stages of tube addiction... Be careful! lol :)
     
  14. Shaffer

    As much as I'd like to disagree, after throwing three bids in the last hour on yet more tubes, you may be right. Just don't tell my wife.
     
  15. gibosi
    A couple pages ago, I mentioned that I had received a pair of older C3g in flat-black embossed cans, likely from the 1950's/1960's, and was curious to see if they sounded any different from the newer silk-screened shiny-black cans from the 1970's. In my experience, it is reasonable to assume that tubes manufactured at different times, even in the same factory, will likely sound different. After all, over time, changes in the production and assembly of these tubes were inevitable due to the introduction of new materials and processes.
     
    And sure enough to my ears the older Siemens do sound different, but it is very subtle and it took me quite some time to put my finger on it. Finally, I was listening to Melody Gardot and it struck me. On the track, "No Man's Prize", on her recent album, "Currency of Man", there is a very sonorous piano accompanying a breathy vocal. Through the newer Siemens, that piano has a bit more reverb than the older ones. With the older ones, the sound of the piano seems cleaner with better mid-range detail. And while I still don't quite know how to describe this difference in more precise audio terms, at least now I think I have a better understanding of what I hear.
     
    Personally, I never much cared for the shiny-black Siemens all that much and I think this reverberance might be why. However, I find myself quite liking the older ones. But the difference is quite subtle, and with different ears and gear, others may prefer the newer ones. Or even like them both equally. :)
     
    2015-10-1410.09.19.jpg
     
First
 
Back
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Next
 
Last

Share This Page