[XXII]

  @XXII, have you received your Teton yet?

 
It's shipped. I should be getting it on Friday according to the tracking. It is around 4 weeks since I ordered.

 

[chengka7]

Any impression so far?

 

[rgs9200m]

With a Pinnacle, I find the PSvane version (CV181) is best. Tubey but precise with great solid bass; smooth, lots of ease, silky sweet well-defined highs, non-shouty mids (I hate shout more than anything). Works great with LCD3, PM-1, HD800.
http://psvanetube.com/wordpress/store/products/cv181-t-6sn7-pair/
I tried all sorts of Syvanias, RCAs, Mullards, Tungsols, and others first (still in my tube box).

 

[minimus]

Are the Psvane CV181s proving to be reliable?  At $290, that tube is almost as expensive as a Mullard ECC32.

 

[rgs9200m]

My Psvanes have each lasted for about a year of usage a few days a week. I've used 3 so far with no problems.

 

[chengka7]

I got my Teton recently and have been listening to it for couple of days, I do not want to comment on the performance with HD800 since I have not done enough test. But surprisingly, I tried Teton(EML 5U4G Mesh/Raytheon 6528/Mullard CV181) with my 80usd Grado sr60e, I am really speechless. I previously thought since it is an OTL amp so it should not handle Grado properly, but man, my Grado sr60e has never sound like this before. Unbelievable, it is so unbelievable, they work together like magic.
 
If you guys have a chance try grado sr60e with 6528 power tube on Teton, What, it is the most ridiculous fun combo I have ever heard. 

 

[rgs9200m]

Yeah, my GS1000i/e really shines with a Pinnacle.

 

[minimus]

I think I have settled on my absolute favorite input tube for the Teton: the Sylvania 6F8G. I prefer this tube to the Mullard ECC32 and every other 6SN7 and 6F8G I have tried in the amp. Although the Sylvania 6SN7 sounded dry and uninvolving relative to the RCA's in the EC Super 7, the Sylvania 6F8G in the Teton is resolving and very extended (with better bass than the RCA 6F8G), while maintaining a sense of liquidity and involvement. It results in jaw-dropping spatial cues and imaging. I think the Teton now creates a better soundstage than the 4-45.

I have only turned on my 4-45 once in the last month, just to check that I hadn't sold it short in my earlier impressions. Time to think about selling it.

 

[lojay]

I think I have settled on my absolute favorite input tube for the Teton: the Sylvania 6F8G. I prefer this tube to the Mullard ECC32 and every other 6SN7 and 6F8G I have tried in the amp. Although the Sylvania 6SN7 sounded dry and uninvolving relative to the RCA's in the EC Super 7, the Sylvania 6F8G in the Teton is resolving and very extended (with better bass than the RCA 6F8G), while maintaining a sense of liquidity and involvement. It results in jaw-dropping spatial cues and imaging. I think the Teton now creates a better soundstage than the 4-45.

I have only turned on my 4-45 once in the last month, just to check that I hadn't sold it short in my earlier impressions. Time to think about selling it.

Before you sell the 4-45, I would suggest you try the 4-45 with the 6C45Pi. I agree with Craig that WE 417A sounds muddied and veiled in comparison, but some people like a more 'dreamy' sound. If spatial cues, detail and microdynamics are important to you, the 417A is probably not the tube you want to assess the performance of the 4-45.

 

[JoshL]

I think I have settled on my absolute favorite input tube for the Teton: the Sylvania 6F8G. I prefer this tube to the Mullard ECC32 and every other 6SN7 and 6F8G I have tried in the amp. Although the Sylvania 6SN7 sounded dry and uninvolving relative to the RCA's in the EC Super 7, the Sylvania 6F8G in the Teton is resolving and very extended (with better bass than the RCA 6F8G), while maintaining a sense of liquidity and involvement. It results in jaw-dropping spatial cues and imaging. I think the Teton now creates a better soundstage than the 4-45.

I have only turned on my 4-45 once in the last month, just to check that I hadn't sold it short in my earlier impressions. Time to think about selling it.

Hi minimus
 
I am considering the purchase of the Teton for my HD800 which is my only headphone.
 
Just wanted to confirm that your findings are with the HD800. Also, which combination of output and rectifier tubes are you using with the Sylvania 6F8G, please? Does your preference change with different output and rectifier tubes? Is there a second best combo?
 
Thanks.

 

[minimus]

  Before you sell the 4-45, I would suggest you try the 4-45 with the 6C45Pi. I agree with Craig that WE 417A sounds muddied and veiled in comparison, but some people like a more 'dreamy' sound. If spatial cues, detail and microdynamics are important to you, the 417A is probably not the tube you want to assess the performance of the 4-45.

 
I bought the WE 417A because I didn't like how the 6C45Pi sounded in the 4-45 -- more dry and lean than the Western Electrics.

 

[minimus]

  Hi minimus
 
I am considering the purchase of the Teton for my HD800 which is my only headphone.
 
Just wanted to confirm that your findings are with the HD800. Also, which combination of output and rectifier tubes are you using with the Sylvania 6F8G, please? Does your preference change with different output and rectifier tubes? Is there a second best combo?
 
Thanks.

Yes, all of my listening impressions are with the HD800s.  I own a number of other headphones, but really only listen to the HD800s now that I own the Teton.
 
I am using the stock Sylvania rectifier and a Texas Instruments 6528, although I believe this is just a rebranded Tung Sol.
 
There are a large number of tube combinations I could try in the Teton and all sound different, in some cases substantially different, from each other.   I own four different rectifier tubes, five different output tubes, and at least ten different 6F8Gs/6SN7s, as well as the Mullard ECC32.  I have found that I keep gravitating toward the Sylvania 5U4G rectifier and the TI 6528.  That said, I don't think my preference for the Sylvania 6F8G is dependent on the rectifier and output tube choice.  Before I bought a Sylvania, I was using the RCA 6F8G, and that remained my favorite input tube no matter what rectifier I used in the Teton.
 
A close second to the Sylvania 6F8G is the RCA 6F8G, followed by the Ken-Rad round plate 6F8G.  I prefer these 6F8Gs to both the Mullard ECC32 and the Tung Sol BGRP 6F8G.

 

[JoshL]

  Yes, all of my listening impressions are with the HD800s.  I own a number of other headphones, but really only listen to the HD800s now that I own the Teton.
 
I am using the stock Sylvania rectifier and a Texas Instruments 6528, although I believe this is just a rebranded Tung Sol.
 
There are a large number of tube combinations I could try in the Teton and all sound different, in some cases substantially different, from each other.   I own four different rectifier tubes, five different output tubes, and at least ten different 6F8Gs/6SN7s, as well as the Mullard ECC32.  I have found that I keep gravitating toward the Sylvania 5U4G rectifier and the TI 6528.  That said, I don't think my preference for the Sylvania 6F8G is dependent on the rectifier and output tube choice.  Before I bought a Sylvania, I was using the RCA 6F8G, and that remained my favorite input tube no matter what rectifier I used in the Teton.
 
A close second to the Sylvania 6F8G is the RCA 6F8G, followed by the Ken-Rad round plate 6F8G.  I prefer these 6F8Gs to both the Mullard ECC32 and the Tung Sol BGRP 6F8G.

Thanks, are the 6F8Gs really that much better than the 6SN7s? I see that you're using those almost exclusively. Do you know of a good online seller where I can get a good adapter for 6F8Gs?
 
In what ways are the Sylvania 6F8G better than the Tung Sol BGRP 6F8G? Seems like the latter gets all the attention.

 

[minimus]

Thanks, are the 6F8Gs really that much better than the 6SN7s? I see that you're using those almost exclusively. Do you know of a good online seller where I can get a good adapter for 6F8Gs?

In what ways are the Sylvania 6F8G better than the Tung Sol BGRP 6F8G? Seems like the latter gets all the attention.

I prefer the sound of 6F8G's to 6SN7's from the same brand...I don't have an explanation, since they are electrically equivalent. I have felt this to be the case with the input tube in both the Teton and in the Super 7. Doing a web search a while ago, I read that some but not all feel the same way about the 6F8G.

I would get an adapter on eBay from any seller with a high positive feedback score.

The Tung Sol BGRP is a great tube to liven up a thick, stereotypically tubey sounding amp. It has great airy highs and great speed. It was the only tube, for example, that made the WA22 sound reasonably satisfying. But it is also a somewhat lean tube, with less authoritative bass than the Sylvanias or even RCAs.

The Teton is not a slow, boring sounding amp. It does not need added treble extension or speed, like the WA22 did. So I prefer the Sylvania in the Teton, followed by the RCA, over the Tung Sol.

 

[JoshL]

Thanks minimus. I've got a spare GZ34 metal base and GZ37 big bottle. Am contemplating getting a U52. Have you tried these rectifiers vs the stock Sylvania?