|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
107.147.215.251
Could someone recommend a good manufacturer for a 6SN7 tube please? I am going to be using it in my Ember headphone amp. Thanks.
Follow Ups:
I have bought and sold every 6SN7 ever made and I agree with the AA postings!
In general, you need to know your predispositions - what you want to hear. Then the shortcomings of your gear and if a given tube can compensate for the weakness.
Something not discussed often is the dynamic realism of a tube. For crescendos and large scale music, the CBS Hydron tubes would not do as well as say, a Sylvania Bad Boy. Conversely, if folk music is your passion, the CBS would be among the best tubes to listen to.
Usually, you need to experience the differences and find the best for your gear and ears.
Thanks for your post. I figured I would have to try a few to get an idea of what it would sound like on my gear. But these posts help to narrow the field some, good information.
Loctal 6SN7 you can use with a tube adapter... The old square plates are considered better than the triangle plates. I certainly loved using them. Just to help confuse the issue. :)
I was wondering if those were swap able. I will be using an adapter to use the 6SN7 tube with the headphone amp I have. The amp's manufacturer is making adapters available to use this tube, and I figured I would get the research in and order a few tubes before the adapter arrives. Thanks for the info.
In Reply to: And then there is always 7N7 posted by Paully on January 7, 2015 at 18:16:08:
I was wondering if those were swap able. I will be using an adapter to use the 6SN7 tube with the headphone amp I have. The amp's manufacturer is making adapters available to use this tube, and I figured I would get the research in and order a few tubes before the adapter arrives. Thanks for the info.
It is useable in place of a 6SN7 but only with a 7N7 to 6SN7 adapter. If you are doing an adapter to get to 6SN7 then you are going to be piggy backing another adapter onto the adapter then into the tube socket. Two adapters isn't something I would be interested in doing, personally.Edit: of course if the original tube is directly adaptable to a 6SN7, then it is directly adaptable to a 7N7. Just need to find the appropriate adapter.
I don't think I have ever written the word adapter that many times in a post.
Edits: 01/07/15
It can be done by hand. I'm assuming you're going from a 9 pin? Long ago, I had a fellow make me a 9pin-loctal, but i can't remember the name. 7Af7 also works, by the way.
Observe, before you think. Think before you open your yap. Act on the basis of experience.
I am going from a 9 pin, have an adapter on order from the maker of the amp. Have seen the prototype and a description of the final product, some be fine.
I find the Sylvania 6SN7GTA produced crystal clear sonics. Most other vintage 6SN7s colored the sound too much for my tastes. I also used a Tung Sol 12SN7 black round plate that was excellent.
There are lots of great 6sn7s to choose from. In general, I think it is hard to beat Sylvania for testing the waters of this tube type. They are all at least good, and some are among the best. The green label GTA or GTB top getter from the 1950s are good value tubes, still readily available for under $60 a pair. I prefer the bottom getter GTs (including the VT-231) from the late 40s early 50s. The three hole plate bottom getter Gts ("badboys") are one of the best, as are any of the 6sn7Ws. The brown based WGTs and WGTAs are also good but not worth the premium over the GTAs IMO.
The original Tung Sols are all pretty good. I would not call the GTB a lean tube, I think it is a good tube especially as a driver in amps. In general RCAs are rich, Hytrons are fast and leaner, GEs somewhere in between.
Enjoy the roll.
Thank you all for your advice, I really appreciate it. When I first started rolling 9 pin tubes, I got carried away, bought alot more than I will ever use, finally decided 12at7 Amperex bugle boys. Now I want to try these tubes and see where it takes me. This time I asked for advice from folks that I knew would have information to make this a more logical decision. Not that music is logical, when I look at what I have spent on this over the last 55 years, it is amazing. Thought I was done until had to start using headphones and the journey started all over again. Many thanks, Don
I am curious sometimes about tube rolling, and the extent to which one could ever really say that "brand X" has an intrinsically different tonal quality from "brand Y."
Any tube two tubes of the same type will inevitably have different values for the mutual conductance, the plate resistance, and so on. If one pulls out one tube and pops in another and it sounds "better," could it simply be that by chance the biasing set up in the amplifier happens to be more appropriate for hitting the ideal operating point of the second tube than it was for the first tube?
In other words, might one simply be roaming around in the parameter space of possible values for the characteristic properties of the tubes until one happens to hit one that is ideally suited to the way the biasing, etc., is set up in one's amplifier? If one, for example, changed the value of the cathode resistor in the amplifier somewhat, and then repeated the exercise, maybe now it would be a different tube amongst the set of candidate tubes that happened to be the one that hit the sweet spot for the newly-configured amplifier?
Even statements such as that "brand X systematically sounds better than brand Y" might be subject to the same kind of influences. For example, it might be that brand X systematically happens to have a lower mutual conductance than brand Y, and that given the choice of cathode resistor value in one's amplifier, this meant that brand X tubes ended up closer to the ideal operating point than brand Y tubes. But this would not mean there was a general statement that "brand X is better than brand Y," but merely that the person making the report happened to have selected a value for the cathode resistor that was better suited to brand X than brand Y.
I'm not saying there couldn't be any more to it than this, but I am just curious how one could make statistically significant general assertions about the superiority of one brand over another when there must be so many confounding factors involved.
Chris
"I am curious sometimes about tube rolling, and the extent to which one could ever really say that "brand X" has an intrinsically different tonal quality from "brand Y."
Any tube two tubes of the same type will inevitably have different values for the mutual conductance, the plate resistance, and so on. If one pulls out one tube and pops in another and it sounds "better," could it simply be that by chance the biasing set up in the amplifier happens to be more appropriate for hitting the ideal operating point of the second tube than it was for the first tube?"
-I think so.
You could also flip this thought around, perhaps certain manufacturing processes and materials yield a product more consistent with the datasheet ideal, which was necessary in most cases for designing devices that will be made before replacement tubes.
"Even statements such as that "brand X systematically sounds better than brand Y" might be subject to the same kind of influences. For example, it might be that brand X systematically happens to have a lower mutual conductance than brand Y, and that given the choice of cathode resistor value in one's amplifier, this meant that brand X tubes ended up closer to the ideal operating point than brand Y tubes. But this would not mean there was a general statement that "brand X is better than brand Y," but merely that the person making the report happened to have selected a value for the cathode resistor that was better suited to brand X than brand Y."
-Similar to my thoughts above. If brand X was generally closer to datasheet ideals, then generally speaking it would be the desired tube to use in most cases compared to Y, generally speaking.
-Anything that strays too far from the datasheet ideals becomes a specific case which cannot have general qualities applied to it. I'm not saying tube Y is worse then X, it's just that, as you say, maybe brand Y needs some design changes to accommodate Y's actual parameters.
I also reserve room for thoughts that chemical composition of certain materials used plays a significant part as well.
I can't help but wonder if you tried to make the old style parts the same way today, that the costs and/or environmental hazards may make it somewhat prohibitive compared to the materials and techniques employed now by modern makers.
The circuit itself can be enhanced or not with a certain tube. For the most part a great tube sounds good in many circuits and a mediocre tube usually does not sound great anywhere.
"..could it simply be that by chance the biasing set up in the amplifier happens to be more appropriate for hitting the ideal operating point of the second tube than it was for the first tube? "
Yes and a good argument for getting a curve tracer and building our circuits around the exact tube we are going to use.
I'm too cheap and lazy for that but I would never argue against it.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
of high end tube gear may be doing exactly that, what with 'only' currently manufactured tubes available for use in their gear.
I've heard some REALLY good sounding tube gear with some REALLY crappy Russian and Chinese tubes in it!
They must be doing SOMETHING right. =:-0
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I think personal experience has something to do with it. I tend to rely on my experience of personal use of a product, combined with others that have seen the same results. Tube rolling for me, has been hit and miss. I have followed the forum leads, some panned out, some did not. However, it is my experience that, on average, most congrugate info is accurate. Reusing the tubes I have purchased, I can generally tell soon after warmup why the tube was placed in the little used box as opposed to my rotate stock box. I was in a flight electronics tech waaaaayyy back in the early 1960's, was trained on tubes just as solid state was coming into it's own. Now you want to be confused that was the time to do it. Still in school, got tube theory locked down tight, then go to the next school and instead of electron flow thru the tube, we now have hole flow in the reverse direction, bla bla bla, I learned to drink right after that. But I think you have to trust to some extent, sincere people that want to help, as I have seen here on this forum, to use their experiences to help guide the way. I appreciate people that will take the time to give advice, you can usually see or tell the ones that just want to talk that don't have the knowledge. Sorry for the long wind, got a good nights sleep for a change! One more question if I may, I have purchase many tubes from this reseller on Ebay, and wondered if anyone had any experience with this tube.
"But I think you have to trust to some extent, sincere people that want to help, as I have seen here on this forum, to use their experiences to help guide the way...."
Yes, I'm not in any way doubting their sincerity. I'm just wondering to what extent they may be finding which tubes are better matched to their specific amplifier, with its specific choices for resistor values, etc., rather than finding intrinsic and universal superiorities of one manufacturer's tubes over another's.
Chris
There is no doubt that the circuit effects the performance of any given tube. There is a right tube for every circuit, and every given listening preference. Agree that it is impossible to recommend "the best" tube of any type.
That said, the general sound of certain tubes of a given type seems to be common over a large variety of gear and well documented by a wide variety of listeners. Everyone (pretty much) describes the grey glass RCA VT-231 as rich sounding, or the Ken Rads as having great bass, or the Tung Sol roundplates and metal based Sylvania 6sn7Ws as being all around great sounding. These descriptions are made by many different listeners with many different types of gear.
Experimentation with different tubes in a given piece of equipment is the only way to determine what is best for you. But it is nice to have a place to start, and other's experiences can be helpful in that regard. Nice to have a stash of different types to play with. One of the joys of owning tube equipment for me.
Of the new production 6SN7s,my favorite is the Shuguang Treasure CV-181z but they are about 120 a pair.
My absolute favorite 6SN7 is the Tungsol Round Plate but they are very costly but are unbeatable AFAIC.
The RCA and Sylvania black plates are really good and they are really cheap to buy.
"If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing."
- Daniel R. von Recklinghausen
Anything here (Link Below) though I would avoid the Sovtek and the Sino. The TungSol $19 and the EH $19 are new production and OK.
6SN7GT? I have never tried a new production tube. If the tube is in a position that affects the sonics in your amplifier, then there are still a lot of vintage tubes available on Ebay, but it is something of a gamble as many tubes are offered without any measurements and some aren't even identified correctly.For a lush sound: RCA grey glass. For a more refined and neutral presentation, Raytheon T or flat plates; for more bass KenRad black glass. For a leaner drier sound, GE and CBS Hytron tubes generally fit the bill. The most neutral tube, Sylvania 6SN7W.
You probably can't go wrong to start with a WWII-50s, Sylvania 6SN7GT, but there are a lot of different constructions.
There are many, many, many others to choose from. Except for the Sylvania 6SN7W, all of these are widely available on Ebay, and I have refrained from mentioning the really expensive ones, like the TungSol black glass round plates. (However, TungSol did make some good clear glass models, but stay away from their 6SN7GTB, unless you like a leaner sound).
One tube you can't go wrong with is the 7N7 - all made by Sylvania. It is the electrical equivalent of the 6SN7GT and requires a pin adapter, which can be found on EBay.
Observe, before you think. Think before you open your yap. Act on the basis of experience.
Edits: 01/07/15
I strongly agree with Frihed's descriptions, they are indeed useful guidelines to consider . If you do decide to go with the Sylvania W which is not the WGT BTW, just W, there is a relatively inexpensive variant, the short bottle vs the tall and intermediate which command significant premiums. I think it would make an excellent choice, but it really only matters how it sounds to you. Is there any any specific sound quality you are looking for?
I will mention one of the more expensive 6SN7s which I have come to enjoy which is the Brimar black glass, brown base CV1988, this tube also seems to do everything right in the amp I use it in. I think you will be able to find it for somewhat less than a good Tung Sol Round Plate.
Steve
Although the differences are subtle at best, sometimes negligible, I have acquired a taste in older production black-plate type tubes from RCA or Sylvania.
FWIW
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: