The shield on the 6C5 is an actual shield connected to ground to reduce noise, the plate (anode) sits interior to it and is solid, at least on all 6C5 I have on hand. The mesh in the type 37 above is the actual plate (anode).
The reason the shield exists on the 6C5 is because it is actually a converted pentode, a 6J7 without a suppressor grid and the screen is tied to the plate, so the 6C5 is essentially a triode-strapped 6J7. It was later replaced by a dedicated triode, the 6J5.
The shield on the 6C5 is an actual shield connected to ground to reduce noise, the plate (anode) sits interior to it and is solid, at least on all 6C5 I have on hand. The mesh in the type 37 above is the actual plate (anode).
The reason the shield exists on the 6C5 is because it is actually a converted pentode, a 6J7 without a suppressor grid and the screen is tied to the plate, so the 6C5 is essentially a triode-strapped 6J7. It was later replaced by a dedicated triode, the 6J5.
Hi LG,
Apparently you own this pair labeled GEC, but in your post you state that they are relabeled Mullard. Are there any markings indicating that they were made by Mullard? What I see here seems to say May 63.
Hi LG,
Apparently you own this pair labeled GEC, but in your post you state that they are relabeled Mullard. Are there any markings indicating that they were made by Mullard? What I see here seems to say May 63.
There isn't strong evidence they were made by Mullard. I don't believe the date on the tube is the date of manufacture, I've come across a number of tubes that were inspected at a later time and rebranded. Unlikely they are GEC as they were using smoked glass on their tubes at the time these would have been made. Also as I said, the 6C5 is an altered 6J7, and GEC had their own model equivalent to the 6J7, the KTZ63, which had smoked glass. Based on the construction, they were most likely made by STC / Brimar, but I can't be 100% certain.
Here is a picture of a KTZ63 labeled with the same perforated shield, but of course its unclear who manufactured the pictured tube. If you could discover the manufacture of one of these KTZ63, then probably the 6C5G would be the same.
Here is a picture of a KTZ63 labeled with the same perforated shield, but of course its unclear who manufactured the pictured tube. If you could discover the manufacture of one of these KTZ63, then probably the 6C5G would be the same.
More 76 on my 6j5 rolling journey. Hytron (CBS?) and Westinghouse (not sure who made these) 76.
Hytron 76 oval micas top and bottom. Made in USA underneath the 76 print on the glass of the tube.
Westinghouse 76 have a cross shaped mica supports up top with a rectangle on the bottom. Made in Canada under the the logo on the glass.
Westinghouse are kind of meh. Unremarkable across the board. Hytron are pretty neutral. Very nice mids, sort of the middle ground between the Tung Sol 76 (nice bass) and Sylvania (bright).
More 76 on my 6j5 rolling journey. Hytron (CBS?) and Westinghouse (not sure who made these) 76.
Hytron 76 oval micas top and bottom. Made in USA underneath the 76 print on the glass of the tube.
Westinghouse 76 have a cross shaped mica supports up top with a rectangle on the bottom. Made in Canada under the the logo on the glass.
Westinghouse are kind of meh. Unremarkable across the board. Hytron are pretty neutral. Very nice mids, sort of the middle ground between the Tung Sol 76 (nice bass) and Sylvania (bright).
Do you find any advantages in sound using type 76 tubes compared to 6C5G/6J5G tubes?
Hytron was a small Massachusetts manufacturer (later bought by CBS).
Your descriptions of the sound of TS and Syl are good descriptions of their house sound. I also found that Sylvania tubes often have a wide sound stage.
Do you find any advantages in sound using type 76 tubes compared to 6C5G/6J5G tubes?
Hytron was a small Massachusetts manufacturer (later bought by CBS).
Your descriptions of the sound of TS and Syl are good descriptions of their house sound. I also found that Sylvania tubes often have a wide sound stage.
Do you find any advantages in sound using type 76 tubes compared to 6C5G/6J5G tubes?
Hytron was a small Massachusetts manufacturer (later bought by CBS).
Your descriptions of the sound of TS and Syl are good descriptions of their house sound. I also found that Sylvania tubes often have a wide sound stage.
Could be, but may not apply to Hytron. Hytron must have been well regarded in it's day, because the British government asked them to produce tubes for them.
Do you find any advantages in sound using type 76 tubes compared to 6C5G/6J5G tubes?
Hytron was a small Massachusetts manufacturer (later bought by CBS).
Your descriptions of the sound of TS and Syl are good descriptions of their house sound. I also found that Sylvania tubes often have a wide sound stage.
So far I have found that the 76 seem to match the 6j5g which make sense because most of them have almost identical internals. The one downside to the 76 is that they can be noisy, but not as bad as the 37. Funny you mention the Sylvania. Just so happen to be rolling Sylvania 76 this morning. I agree with your soundstage observation. These really bring Eva Cassidy Live at Blues Alley to life.
76 internals similar to 6J5G with a few differences. Both have the wire top supports, rounded rectangle micas and round plates. 76 plates have 2 holes while the 6J5G have 3 holes.
76 internals
6J5G (Zenith rebrand) internals
The 6J5G also have a U shield around the top of the filaments that is not found on the 76.
Visseaux 76 and 6J5G seem to have the same exact internals.
76 on the left 6J5G on the right.
Unfortunately I only have one 76 so I can’t really speak to how similar they might sound. The 6J5G are tied with the Fivre 76 as my favorite input tubes for the WE 421a.
Fivre 76.
Internals are a mix of features from the Sylvania (wire spreaders) and the Visseaux (copper bands on the top mica).
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.
