[connieflyer]

I finished the burn in with the VT 52 coated tubes, and my findings are that they are indeed a good sounding tube. However compared to burned in coated CV1052's they are a little bit warmer, more tilted toward the mid range, treble is a little muted, and sound stage is smaller, in all directions. It is a more intimate sound, and it would be easy to get used to if so inclined. Have another twenty hours or so on them, and I swear they have improved slightly. I don't think that is expectation bias, I believe that it is there. The others that have the tube and did not cook it long enough are missing out on quite an experience. I have put the clear Cv's in to see how they measure up after burn in. So off to burn in the clear CV1052's for a hundred or more hours. The clear tubes that I purchased are defineatly NOS, boxes are new so will take some time to arrive at a good burn in. Can't hurt. And if positive it would be easier for others to find than the coated tubes.

 

[Scutey]

I finished the burn in with the VT 52 coated tubes, and my findings are that they are indeed a good sounding tube. However compared to burned in coated CV1052's they are a little bit warmer, more tilted toward the mid range, treble is a little muted, and sound stage is smaller, in all directions. It is a more intimate sound, and it would be easy to get used to if so inclined. Have another twenty hours or so on them, and I swear they have improved slightly. I don't think that is expectation bias, I believe that it is there. The others that have the tube and did not cook it long enough are missing out on quite an experience. I have put the clear Cv's in to see how they measure up after burn in. So off to burn in the clear CV1052's for a hundred or more hours. The clear tubes that I purchased are defineatly NOS, boxes are new so will take some time to arrive at a good burn in. Can't hurt. And if positive it would be easier for others to find than the coated tubes.

Hi CF, by VT 52 do you mean the straight bottle Marconi?, if so, I have a quad of them and my impression of them mirrors yours, compared to the coated ST CV 1052/ I've found them to be a little darker, a little less detailed, and slightly deeper bass but also looser, still a very nice tube, also have you tried the straight bottle Mullard CV 1052?, they very much have their own sound compared to the VT 52/, I've found them to have greater extension in the highs, more detail, bass isn't as deep but tighter and harder hitting, my first impression was of being a little thin, but with burn in they have filled out somewhat and have very good sound in their own right and compliment the other two versions very well, and at £3.50 a tube you really can't go wrong!.

 

[connieflyer]

Yes, these were the Marconi straight bottle. Have tried this quad with over a hundred hours now, and while it is decent, compared to the coated CV 1052's with well over a hundred hours now, they won't see much use, unless this quad of CV 1052's give out on me. I have not tried the Mullard as I am perfectly happy with the quad of CV 1052 and see no point in getting even more tubes at present. I have to start clearing out the tubes I have to get ready for the new FA amp, if it proves to be as good as Lukasz has said. Glad your assement of the Marconi's parallel mine. Am burning in a quad of clear CV 1052's now to see what the difference between them and the coated variety is. The clear should be easier to find if so. Also have a pair of clear Phillips Miniwatt CV's

 

[OctavianH]

Maybe the differences in perception come from the rest of the line and Elise / Euforia sound signatures. For me things changed dramatically when replacing the DAC without touching anything on the tube amp. So, the whole line matters.

 

[connieflyer]

The whole line is exactly the same for all the tubes that have been tested. So nothing has changed except the tubes.

 

[hypnos1]

I finished the burn in with the VT 52 coated tubes, and my findings are that they are indeed a good sounding tube. However compared to burned in coated CV1052's they are a little bit warmer, more tilted toward the mid range, treble is a little muted, and sound stage is smaller, in all directions. It is a more intimate sound, and it would be easy to get used to if so inclined. Have another twenty hours or so on them, and I swear they have improved slightly. I don't think that is expectation bias, I believe that it is there. The others that have the tube and did not cook it long enough are missing out on quite an experience. I have put the clear Cv's in to see how they measure up after burn in. So off to burn in the clear CV1052's for a hundred or more hours. The clear tubes that I purchased are defineatly NOS, boxes are new so will take some time to arrive at a good burn in. Can't hurt. And if positive it would be easier for others to find than the coated tubes.

Hi cf.

Thanks for doing an in-depth comparison of these EL32 variants - something I personally was unable to do fully alas. I also look forward to your findings re. the clear ST EL32, which I suspect may be closer to the coated, ST CV1052 version.

You have confirmed my initial suspicion that the later straight-sided variants don't quite match in performance the earlier "coke bottle" tubes...as evidenced by the (ridiculously) cheap prices of the former, and the much higher prices commanded by the STs - if you can find them lol!! With hardly any of the coated STs to be seen anywhere now, unfortunately, I sincerely hope the 'clears' will at least prove to be a very useful standby in case of (heaven forbid!) the need for replacements to the "real deal"! My own single one seemed to perform very well indeed, partnering a coated one at least......(And I should imagine that with these tubes not being pushed anywhere near their limits in our amps, they could well last a VERY long time indeed!! ).

 

[connieflyer]

Just a quick update on the clear CV 1052's, they are doing quite well. Sound stage has not opened up yet, about equal to the VT-52 Marconi's with over 110 hours on the VT's ,at this time. Adequate frequency coverage, but lacking in overall depth. I am expecting them to be better after 100 hours. I have about 30 hours on them. They should be a good stand in for the coated CV 1052 if you can not find any coated ones.

 

[hypnos1]

Just a quick update on the clear CV 1052's, they are doing quite well. Sound stage has not opened up yet, about equal to the VT-52 Marconi's with over 110 hours on the VT's ,at this time. Adequate frequency coverage, but lacking in overall depth. I am expecting them to be better after 100 hours. I have about 30 hours on them. They should be a good stand in for the coated CV 1052 if you can not find any coated ones.

Hi cf.

For the soundstage to be thus already bodes well, as they will most surely continue to open up a lot more yet. As should the FR develop, with much further burn-in. So there's hope for them to be a good contender lol!

Only trouble is there seem to be very few of these clear EL32s about alas...and I can't see a single 'coated' ST tube anywhere at all... So treat yours with special care, mon ami...mine are in situ permanently, and fortunately I no longer have any desire/need to plug in anything else whatsoever!! They cover all bases so well in our Euforia systems, that my curiosity in searching out 'new' tubes to try is finally at an end. No doubt there are other unsung heroes hiding out there in the wilderness, but they will be for others to discover......(At least there shouldn't be much need for 'rolling' with F-A's upcoming 2A3 amp soon...even some of the newer Chinese tubes can deliver top class sound, by all accounts! But time will tell lol...).

Good luck with the rest of your trialling, cf...CHEERS!...

 

[connieflyer]

According to Radiomuseum these are very rare, https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_cv1052.html so I imagine finding any is going to be hit or miss. These are the clear that I am using now and the same seller https://www.ebay.com/itm/EL32-VT52-...h=item1ee2f0cc88:g:-cgAAOSwjvJZS5XJ:rk:5:pf:0 there are a few of these out there. I also have two of the VT32 marked by Philips Mini Watt. I have six or eight of the VT 52 Marconi, including the quad that have over a hundred hours on them. The quad CV1052's came to me compliments of a friend, and will not be leaving, the others sure, with the rest of the excess tubes, getting ready for the new amp. Just in case it turns out to be stunner.

 

[ZRW0]

Hello,

I'm new to this forum, but I've been reading it for a while.
I'm from France, and I'm also the happy owner of an Euforia from Feliks Audio.

I've been practicing tube rolling as well, and I've recently acquired a set of 8 NOS CV1052 coated ST shaped to a french seller who wanted to get rid of all his stock of tubes.
So I have an extra spare set of 4 of these tubes, if one of you is interested (can't post any image for now due to new account restriction).

I'm far from the 100h burn-in some of you here recommend with those tubes, and although it is not the best combo to me yet (after many trials, WE421A, TS5998, RCA5692, KenradVT231, TelefunkenEL12-Spez... I really prefer the Sylvania 6SN7-GTB + Tung-Sol 6080WA combo on the Euforia, slightly superior to me to the WE421A+RCA5692 for a much more reasonable price), it actually sounds very promising regarding the wideness of the sound-stage (but basses are extremely lean and dynamics are still a bit shy).

Cheers,

Erwan.

 

[aqsw]

Hey Guys,

I went to the Feliks Audio Facebook page. Look under "community".

4hifi posted some pics of the 2a3 amps monoblicked. Looks like they are only 8.5 wpc. A little low for my liking. They look like Euphorias with with a meter on the front.

Could be a different amp as I don't see any headphone outs.

 

[Ultrainferno]

If you're looking for a beautiful and excellent sounding, do-it-all amplifier, the Feliks Audio Euforia probably is the amp for you. The full review, now on Headfonia!

https://www.headfonia.com/review-feliks-audio-euforia/

I can't wait to see the new amp they're working on!

 

[attmci]

Hello,

I'm new to this forum, but I've been reading it for a while.
I'm from France, and I'm also the happy owner of an Euforia from Feliks Audio.

I've been practicing tube rolling as well, and I've recently acquired a set of 8 NOS CV1052 coated ST shaped to a french seller who wanted to get rid of all his stock of tubes.
So I have an extra spare set of 4 of these tubes, if one of you is interested (can't post any image for now due to new account restriction).

I'm far from the 100h burn-in some of you here recommend with those tubes, and although it is not the best combo to me yet (after many trials, WE421A, TS5998, RCA5692, KenradVT231, TelefunkenEL12-Spez... I really prefer the Sylvania 6SN7-GTB + Tung-Sol 6080WA combo on the Euforia, slightly superior to me to the WE421A+RCA5692 for a much more reasonable price), it actually sounds very promising regarding the wideness of the sound-stage (but basses are extremely lean and dynamics are still a bit shy).

Cheers,

Erwan.

That will save you a lot of $$$. Don't look for other tubes.just use the ones you like.

 

[attmci]

If you're looking for a beautiful and excellent sounding, do-it-all amplifier, the Feliks Audio Euforia probably is the amp for you. The full review, now on Headfonia!

https://www.headfonia.com/review-feliks-audio-euforia/

I can't wait to see the new amp they're working on!

Comparing to your 2359Glenn 300B Amp, any comments?

 

[Ultrainferno]

It's not really a fair comparison but the 300B is more dynamic and has even more precision. It scores even better on technicalities and it has higher output power but it is more noisy than the Euforia.