.... did you get a discount for the uneven GEC labels? ....About to roll a recently acquired matched pair of GEC 6080 power tubes from the Hammersmith era.
I feel like Ted Knight in Caddyshack, lewdly fondling his prized putter--the Billy Baroo.
Oh Billy....Billy...Billy.....
I have never tried Mullard 6080, but have had nothing but positive experiences with Mullard tubes over the years. Not familiar with the particular codes on this example, but if they're pre-1970, made at the Blackburn, Mitchum, or Holland plants, those would be top quality.
I have a couple of pairs of those exact tubes, from Langrex, for my WA22. Solid performers and you can buy from Langrex with confidence. They stand behind their tubes.
I believe the manual actually mentions specifically that the top power rating they quote at high impedance is for the 7236 tube. They also designate 3 tube types as āhigh powerā or some phrase similar to that - 7236, 5998, and 421a.
I have about 12 hours on these tubes now and they have settled in. My initial observations: 1) The 6080s are quieter than the Tung Sol 5998 tubes I had in the output position previously. Not quite silent, but less hum at zero volume---and effectively at a level where I would take hum off the list of cons to the default TS5998s. 2) Much more usable volume range due to the lower gain in these tubes (probably a ZMF VC attribute though so YMMV depending on your cans). If you imagine a clock, I'd say 2 or maybe 3 more number positions to get the same level of loudness. 3) Tone-wise the GEC's sound more "tubey". Modestly less bass definition, about the same weight, a tad slower, a tad less slam than the 5998s. Also, less sparkle-y highs than the 5998s, and so perhaps less detail resolution as a consequence. A bit wider soundstage, but a bit less depth than the 5998s. Definitely can see how the 5998s acquits itself as more accurate and detailed tube.About to roll a recently acquired matched pair of GEC 6080 power tubes from the Hammersmith era.
I feel like Ted Knight in Caddyshack, lewdly fondling his prized putter--the Billy Baroo.
Oh Billy....Billy...Billy.....
If I remember correctly from Woo source. I rated it at 2 watts with 5998s.
I don't claim an understanding of these electrical engineering values (hopefully we have some Double-E peeps in this thread!), nor how they translate into the WA22 specifically....but just in terms of drawing some mental inference about tubes relative to one another, I found this generically:
Cool, great info! Iām concluding that itās not linear, meaning going from an amp factor of 2 to 5.4 somehow equates to only a 0.5 W output increase.I don't claim an understanding of these electrical engineering values (hopefully we have some Double-E peeps in this thread!), nor how they translate into the WA22 specifically....but just in terms of drawing some mental inference about tubes relative to one another, I found this generically:
Not knowing much else, it does help me to see amplification factor numbers and why they make me "feel" like my TS5998s are a blowtorch, and my GEC6080s are not.
I havenāt, but only because I am not exactly sure how to make that determination. I think we might need some info from Woo to do the calculation. I attempted to look at voltage and current with the 7236 extrapolating to a few different headphone impedance levels based on the one data point in the manual, but that I think was for the first gen WA22, and from what I have read itās not always a safe assumption to extrapolate all points along the impedance scale from even a small number, let alone one (in this case the one for 600 Ohms). I think I could be a little more confident with it because the overall shape of voltage, current, and power probably doesnāt change a ton depending on the tube, so we can make an educated guess in that case. I donāt know if thatās possible with the 5998 since Iām not aware of any official numbers for it in this particular amp, and I donāt believe you can derive that from looking at the specs of the tube alone - some amps may push a tube to its limits and some may be much more gentle, so Iām not sure where this one falls.
. My understanding is similar to @LegionofDoom on this. The 7236 and 5998 (and 421a) are way up there and similar to one another, and all other varieties the WA22 supports are in the same ballpark power-wise as the 6080.
Thanks- It is a bit of a mystery and unless one has some measurement equipment, I guess we can only speculate. There is a logical hypothesis that increased gain available on 5998 tubes would correlate with increased output wattage. Not sure if we have any EE's on this thread, but I can also pose the question on the 6as7g tube rolling thread. I don't think there's a 5998-specific thread on Head-Fi. I'm sure some Head-Fi member has the EE equipment or may know the answer.I havenāt, but only because I am not exactly sure how to make that determination. I think we might need some info from Woo to do the calculation. I attempted to look at voltage and current with the 7236 extrapolating to a few different headphone impedance levels based on the one data point in the manual, but that I think was for the first gen WA22, and from what I have read itās not always a safe assumption to extrapolate all points along the impedance scale from even a small number, let alone one (in this case the one for 600 Ohms). I think I could be a little more confident with it because the overall shape of voltage, current, and power probably doesnāt change a ton depending on the tube, so we can make an educated guess in that case. I donāt know if thatās possible with the 5998 since Iām not aware of any official numbers for it in this particular amp, and I donāt believe you can derive that from looking at the specs of the tube alone - some amps may push a tube to its limits and some may be much more gentle, so Iām not sure where this one falls.
I will say for what itās worth, and this should be taken with a massive grain of salt, that it seems with my NOS 7236 and 5998 that I get similar perceived volume relative to the volume dial on the amp, and for both it is a bit more volume at a lower point than with the stock 6080s or the 6H13Cs Iāve triedā¦
*Edit
Always dangerous to reply before reading to the end of the thread
It might also be worth pointing out that the only headphone that might be in question here that I know of is the Tungsten. With either set of tubes, I think this thing can drive just about anything else. @skhan007 am I remembering correctly that you have the Abyss 1266? I would think that would be the next hardest thing to drive, but someone please feel free to correct me if Iām wrong, and I believe it was doing great for those cans. We also saw comments from a user (blanking on the name, sorry!) that had tried it with Tungsten at a local meetup in the D.C. area and felt that the WA22 was awesome with them. If Iām remembering, I think he was using 5998, and for the most power hungry headphones, using one of those three high power options is probably a good idea.
Also, I saw mention somewhere that the second gen revision of the WA22 was more powerful, but there were no numbers provided, and I think the numbers in the manual havenāt changed since the first gen, so itās entirely possible that we could be getting more power than we are predicting based of that table for those of us with models from around 2018 or later.
One other note that I found confusing when starting to look into this - 5998A tubes are not the same as 5998. They are basically on the level power-wise of the 6080. YMMV on sound quality. I tried a NOS pair of Tung Sol I believe (would need to double check on the brand) but they were a touch noisy, and I really didnāt give them adequate time to break in relative to the others, so not totally fair to judge them, but they are not in the league of the 5998, and they are definitely not as powerful.
The 5998 and 421a make me think of the opening sequence of Back To The Future when I first turn on the amp after rolling them back in. They hum a little more and I feel like Iām about to get blown back across the room
