[RobxMcCarthy]

Hi, I was just wondering if anyone could confirm that the "military" version of the 5963 red cap was the same as the consumer "audiophile" version.

There's only one datasheet, so I'm assuming it's the same design, but are the consumer versions any different? Seems like they have a shinier paint job and "RCA" labeling. Other than that they seem the same.

Thanks.

PS: by the same I mean are the military tubes as "amazing" as the consumer tubes.

PPS: Also, I currently use two slightly mis-matched (different factories, maybe different year) RCA black cap tubes (6Sj7), one is also a little rusted (bought them as an experiment to see if they'd work, and loved the way they sounded). Would these have a very similar sound to the "red cap" 's?

 

[Polaris111688]

I'm not sure, but I think military parts generally just have a more extreme range of operating temperatures and are tested under different conditions versus consumer parts.

 

[RobxMcCarthy]

Ok thanks, so is there an actual design difference or is it just how they're "binned" (to take a term from the computer world)?

IE do they test them at certain temps / vibration levels and determine which ones are "military grade" ? Or do they design certain ones to be "military" by adding dampening / heat sinks etc.

And finally, do military grade tubes sound any different from their consumer counterpart?

 

[djork]

http://thetubestore.com/nos-5693.html

check this out..

 

[ericj]

military parts are built tougher - that usually means that the glass is thicker - which doesn't do anything good or bad to audio - and often means that the electrode structure inside the tube is built tougher - which can mean that the tube is less microphonic.

For example, the 6n1p-ev (military version) has the getter supported on both sides, where the 6n1p-vi (consumer version) has it supported on only one side.

Less internal vibration == less microphonic

 

[Fitz]

Like ericj said, it's mainly just physical durability. The 5692, a ruggedized 6SN7, has several more mica support rods, supposedly so it could stand up to all the vibrations caused by artillery fire.

 

[dsavitsk]

It depends on the tube. For a modern tube, there is often a physical difference, such as some of the above mentioned examples. However, in a vintage tube, this is not always the case. Often, a batch of tubes was spot tested, and if they passed they could be considered military. This does not mean that non-military tubes could not pass, just that they were not tested. Moreover, sometimes a batch would be marked military by the factory but not pass the test. In some cases, these were just dumped in a warehouse. Many of these are now being found and sold as military when in fact they are in fact military rejects making them, in some cases anyway, worse than non military tubes.

As a last note, from Lynn Olson: "Avoid metal-can tubes - thanks to internal outgassing from the metal, these sound dreadful,"

 

[dsavitsk]

Here's a nice example. I pulled some 6SJ7's out of my box-o-tubes. These are JAN, and judging form where I got them they are not rejects, but they are still 6sj7's.

The distinction from the 5693 is not that it is a military tube, but just that it is a higher quality one.

http://www.pmillett.com/tubedata/HB-...Tubes/5693.PDF

 

[Mazuki]

I think the Philips JAN 6SJ7WGT tubes sound better than the Red Hots. Give it a shot when you get the chance.

 

[a1rocketpilot]

OK I'm a bit confused. This tube is labeled RCA 5963, however, I have an old mil-spec 5963 (originally for the USN) which looks like an ordinary 9 pin miniature. However, on The Tube Store website, it says that this is compatible with 5963 types. The tube pictured is clearly an octal, so how can this be? Are there multiple types of RCA 5963's?

Aditya

 

[dsavitsk]

Confusion on someone's part ... 5693 is an octal and is a high spec 6sj7, 5963 is a noval similar to a 12au7.

 

[a1rocketpilot]

Wow, I can't read...Thanks for clearing that up!

Aditya