[bmichels]

The BHSE is absolutely not bright with 009, yggy, and my British Mullard xf3 tubes - and that's with silver interconnects. In fact if anything it's a bit on the warm side, and some days I prefer the slightly more aggressive Holland xf5. I experienced that too back when I was using el34 on speakers - those Brit tubes are super warm, and sound great in a system that would otherwise be slightly bright.

 
Interesting...   where did you purchase your British Mullard xf3 tubes ? 
 
could you post pictures of your British Mullard xf3 tubes  and of your Holland xf5 so that we can see the didderence ?
 
thanks in advance

 

[JimL11]

I have the 404LE with the T1 and it sounds great. I have no knowledge about caps or tubes though. I bought the T1 on eBay and it seems to work fine. How would I know if the tubes are impacting the sound? Is there a particular sign to look out for?

So, because the T1 was made between 1987 and 1993, that means it is over 20 years old.  The issue is that electrolytic power supply caps can deteriorate and become unreliable in that period of time, even if the amp was just sitting on the shelf.  Therefore it is a very good idea to either replace the caps yourself (there are 10 of them), or have an electronic tech replace them.  Electrolytic caps have gotten smaller since the T1 was built, and so you can replace them with higher value caps (must be the same rated voltage or higher), which will actually improve the power supply.  After the caps are replaced, you can also check that the output voltages are close to zero and adjust as needed.  If you do a search on Head-Fi you'll find a procedure to adjust the output voltages.  Again, if you don't want to do it, have a technician do it for you.

 

[mulveling]

   
Interesting...   where did you purchase your British Mullard xf3 tubes ? 
 
could you post pictures of your British Mullard xf3 tubes  and of your Holland xf5 so that we can see the didderence ?
 
thanks in advance

I wouldn't get too hung up over the specific xf # versions within one make. Years ago when I tried British xf2 (double-O), xf3 and xf4 - they all sounded very close to each other. I got the xf3 for BHSE simply because they're cheaper and much easier to find with NOS-like test readings, tight pair/quad matching, and like-new getter flashings verses the older (and more sought after) xf2. Plus I think the xf3 look cool with the stapled plates and huge grid post heat sinks, and again it's a lot easier to find clean good looking tubes with crisp labels in an xf3/4 (you have a beautiful BHSE, so why not use good looking tubes?). Cosmetics aside, I wouldn't buy an EL34 tube with a worn getter -- that clearly indicates LOTS of use, regardless of test readings. 
 
When I popped these xf3 tubes in - yep, sounds exactly like what I expect from a Mullard EL34. While the Mullard xf1 and metal-base Holland versions are almost certainly superior (based on reports), I haven't heard them and they're beyond my pain threshold to collect in muliple matched pairs with spares.
 
As for the Hollands -- I've heard an xf5 quad and a mixed xf4/xf5 quad; they sounded the same so I wouldn't stress the xf4/5 difference there. Both the Hollands and Mullards are great sounding tubes; choose Mullard if you want that extra bit of warmth. But Purk prefers the Hollands, and I see why. I'm as of yet undecided between the two. Also tried various Russian EL34 back in the day (Winged-C, Svetlana, Electro Harmonix EL34 and fat-bottle 6CA7), and based on that experience I wouldn't even bother popping them into my BHSE. The new-sensor variants listed above are good for use in warm/syrupy amps (bright, with various nasties in treble), and the winged-C were almost as warm as Mullards but just sounded plastic and artificial somehow. 
 
I've bought most of my EL34 from tubeworld express, and have been consistently very happy with the quality of tubes purchased there. He's more diligent that other tube vendors, and seeing the actual tubes you will receive is great (I've received loose-pin tubes, "matched" pairs that are CLEARLY different makes, tubes with hardly any getter left, different tube version than advertised, etc from other vendors).
 
Here's a British Mullard xf3 (early 1970's) - huge cool-looking fins on the copper grid posts, single-O getter, stapled plates, black base, glass can have a slight point on top: 

 
And here is a Holland xf5 (1962) - Welded plates, double-D getter, smaller rectangular fins on grid posts, brown base, very smooth and perfect glass tops:

 
Just buy some nice vintage tubes man, and don't stress so much about choosing the holy grail tube before you've heard any of this stuff. I'm sure you'll be happy with any decent Mullard or Holland set with decent pair matching.

 

[Jon L]

 
I wouldn't get too hung up over the specific xf # versions within one make. Years ago when I tried British xf2 (double-O), xf3 and xf4 - they all sounded very close to each other. I got the xf3 for BHSE simply because they're cheaper and much easier to find with NOS-like test readings, tight pair/quad matching, and like-new getter flashings verses the older (and more sought after) xf2. Plus I think the xf3 look cool with the stapled plates and huge grid post heat sinks, and again it's a lot easier to find clean good looking tubes with crisp labels in an xf3/4 (you have a beautiful BHSE, so why not use good looking tubes?). Cosmetics aside, I wouldn't buy an EL34 tube with a worn getter -- that clearly indicates LOTS of use, regardless of test readings. 
 
When I popped these xf3 tubes in - yep, sounds exactly like what I expect from a Mullard EL34. While the Mullard xf1 and metal-base Holland versions are almost certainly superior (based on reports), I haven't heard them and they're beyond my pain threshold to collect in muliple matched pairs with spares.
 
As for the Hollands -- I've heard an xf5 quad and a mixed xf4/xf5 quad; they sounded the same so I wouldn't stress the xf4/5 difference there. Both the Hollands and Mullards are great sounding tubes; choose Mullard if you want that extra bit of warmth. But Purk prefers the Hollands, and I see why. I'm as of yet undecided between the two. Also tried various Russian EL34 back in the day (Winged-C, Svetlana, Electro Harmonix EL34 and fat-bottle 6CA7), and based on that experience I wouldn't even bother popping them into my BHSE. The new-sensor variants listed above are good for use in warm/syrupy amps (bright, with various nasties in treble), and the winged-C were almost as warm as Mullards but just sounded plastic and artificial somehow. 
 
I've bought most of my EL34 from tubeworld express, and have been consistently very happy with the quality of tubes purchased there. He's more diligent that other tube vendors, and seeing the actual tubes you will receive is great (I've received loose-pin tubes, "matched" pairs that are CLEARLY different makes, tubes with hardly any getter left, different tube version than advertised, etc from other vendors).
 
Here's a British Mullard xf3 (early 1970's) - huge cool-looking fins on the copper grid posts, single-O getter, stapled plates, black base, glass can have a slight point on top: 

 
And here is a Holland xf5 (1962) - Welded plates, double-D getter, smaller rectangular fins on grid posts, brown base, very smooth and perfect glass tops:

 
Just buy some nice vintage tubes man, and don't stress so much about choosing the holy grail tube before you've heard any of this stuff. I'm sure you'll be happy with any decent Mullard or Holland set with decent pair matching.

 
Wow, an unusually sane and helpful post for an audio forum  

 

[bmichels]

Thanks a LOT mulveling for all those infos & pictures. I will try the British Mullard xf3. I may also investigate some Siemens that Dan from Mr Speakers recommended me.

 

[hardpike]

I wouldn't get too hung up over the specific xf # versions within one make. Years ago when I tried British xf2 (double-O), xf3 and xf4 - they all sounded very close to each other. I got the xf3 for BHSE simply because they're cheaper and much easier to find with NOS-like test readings, tight pair/quad matching, and like-new getter flashings verses the older (and more sought after) xf2. Plus I think the xf3 look cool with the stapled plates and huge grid post heat sinks, and again it's a lot easier to find clean good looking tubes with crisp labels in an xf3/4 (you have a beautiful BHSE, so why not use good looking tubes?). Cosmetics aside, I wouldn't buy an EL34 tube with a worn getter -- that clearly indicates LOTS of use, regardless of test readings. 

When I popped these xf3 tubes in - yep, sounds exactly like what I expect from a Mullard EL34. While the Mullard xf1 and metal-base Holland versions are almost certainly superior (based on reports), I haven't heard them and they're beyond my pain threshold to collect in muliple matched pairs with spares.

As for the Hollands -- I've heard an xf5 quad and a mixed xf4/xf5 quad; they sounded the same so I wouldn't stress the xf4/5 difference there. Both the Hollands and Mullards are great sounding tubes; choose Mullard if you want that extra bit of warmth. But Purk prefers the Hollands, and I see why. I'm as of yet undecided between the two. Also tried various Russian EL34 back in the day (Winged-C, Svetlana, Electro Harmonix EL34 and fat-bottle 6CA7), and based on that experience I wouldn't even bother popping them into my BHSE. The new-sensor variants listed above are good for use in warm/syrupy amps (bright, with various nasties in treble), and the winged-C were almost as warm as Mullards but just sounded plastic and artificial somehow. 

I've bought most of my EL34 from tubeworld express, and have been consistently very happy with the quality of tubes purchased there. He's more diligent that other tube vendors, and seeing the actual tubes you will receive is great (I've received loose-pin tubes, "matched" pairs that are CLEARLY different makes, tubes with hardly any getter left, different tube version than advertised, etc from other vendors).

Here's a British Mullard xf3 (early 1970's) - huge cool-looking fins on the copper grid posts, single-O getter, stapled plates, black base, glass can have a slight point on top: 



And here is a Holland xf5 (1962) - Welded plates, double-D getter, smaller rectangular fins on grid posts, brown base, very smooth and perfect glass tops:



Just buy some nice vintage tubes man, and don't stress so much about choosing the holy grail tube before you've heard any of this stuff. I'm sure you'll be happy with any decent Mullard or Holland set with decent pair matching.

Indeed a great post
Many thanks

 

[wuwhere]

I like tubes. Gotta save up for one like this.
 

 

[yates7592]

Thanks a LOT mulveling for all those infos & pictures. I will try the British Mullard xf3. I may also investigate some Siemens that Dan from Mr Speakers recommended me.

I just wondered, you only had the BHSE for a few weeks. What don't you like that makes you want to roll tubes so soon?

 

[paulchiu]

  I like tubes. Gotta save up for one like this.
 

 
Very nice.  Another builder's implementation of Dr. Kevin Gilmore design.  Most widely known certainly is Headamp, built and perfected by Justin Wilson.  This one in the picture looks classic with the KGSSHV stock casing,  Have you heard it?
 
Paul

 

[joseph69]

And here is a Holland xf5 (1962) - Welded plates, double-D getter, smaller rectangular fins on grid posts, brown base, very smooth and perfect glass tops:
 
 

@mulveling
I picked up the same tubes (Amperex Bugle Boys) for my BHSE.

 

[wuwhere]

   
Very nice.  Another builder's implementation of Dr. Kevin Gilmore design.  Most widely known certainly is Headamp, built and perfected by Justin Wilson.  This one in the picture looks classic with the KGSSHV stock casing,  Have you heard it?
 
Paul

 
Nope. Saw it for sale here.  I don't have $4.7k...yet.

 

[paulchiu]

   
Nope. Saw it for sale here.  I don't have $4.7k...yet.

 
Ah, that makes sense.  The casing is of an older iteration.  Justin's recent BHSE has a  slimmer profile.
You know you can built one youself and save a bunch, if you have the time.
 
Paul

 

[wuwhere]

   
Ah, that makes sense.  The casing is of an older iteration.  Justin's recent BHSE has a  slimmer profile.
You know you can built one youself and save a bunch, if you have the time.
 
Paul

 
Time plus equipment including test equipment. Buying from a reputable manufacturer is expensive. It should keep its value specially if bought used, which I plan to do.

 

[purk]

   
Time plus equipment including test equipment. Buying from a reputable manufacturer is expensive. It should keep its value specially if bought used, which I plan to do.

When you have the BHSE, you have that sense of pride of owning a work of art.  The build quality and craftsmanship on the BHSE is just really second to none.  I do miss it everyday but I can survive by listening to the T2 & Carbon.  

 

[bmichels]

  When you have the BHSE, you have that sense of pride of owning a work of art....

 
Agree at 200%   it is sooo good looking glowing in the dark of my listening room.  
 
I am thinking to add a Veracity DAC that will aestically match it perfectly (But... I need to find a way listen to the combo before. Afterward, SQ is ALSO important 

 )
 

 

 
The idea behind those dacs is great.  We just need to verify how this translate in term of sound quality :
 

1. This is a dual DAC where the PCM is decoded by separate converters and stand-alone DSD playback is fulfilled without digital processing. These two DACs through direct connection share only the valve output stage on a 'one-at-a-time' basis. 
   
2. DAC auto switches with incoming signal file format- directing DSD to DSD reconstruction filter or PCM to parallel PCM only DAC: This means that you can play your library of different format tracks in their native form, seamlessly and without software format processing, when you feel to do so. This dual DAC will adapt and switch to dedicated for PCM engine or DSD filter playback itself (in milliseconds) using analog signal relays. Very different approach when compared to `all-in-one`ΔΣ chips with transistor logic switching or devices which auto-convert music files from one format to another.
   
3. A non-oversampling mode was designed to bring remarkable clarity and emotion to CD recordings and 16 bit/44.1kHz music files. This design effort was made to reveal full music potential of Red Book recordings.
   
4. The DAC is upsampling free: i.e. the original sample rate of source PCM recording will not be changed (up-sampled). 
   
5. Multibit hybrid DACs - instead of plain delta sigma or switched resistors a hybrid method has been chosen to bring the most realistic dynamics and boost low-level performance- PCM D/A conversion uses dual (for Mystra) and quad mono (for Chrysalis) architecture