Preamp stage tubes. What to get??

rromeo923

I have a Yaqin MC-10L Integrated tube amp that I have been extremely pleased with. It initially came with Chinese 6N1 tubes in the preamp stage. I replaced them with Russian Nos 6N1P-EV's and noticed a big improvement. I am looking to take another step up and am wondering what might be some good alternatives. I understand that I can use ECC88 tubes and have been considering Amperex Bugle Boys made in Holland circa 1960's.

fyi- I have Reissue Mullards EL34 as output tubes.

I am new to tubes really and would appreciate any suggestions.

dorokusai

I don't see 6N1 as a replacement for the ECC88/6DJ8 in my Tube Substitution Handbook....you sure about that? Just because the pins are the same doesn't mean you can pop anything in there, just checking on ya'...

rromeo923

This is where the confusion sets in. I got this info from a Yaqin Facebook page where a number of Yaqin mc-10l users are saying that they can be used as a substitution. Yaqin seems to have no manufacturer support sites online that I can find. I bought the unit used and the manual is pretty worthless. I can't say enough about how good it sounds but as to getting information it ain't easy.

dorokusai

Well, I'd feel better since there are other users doing that, so that's cool. I'd just double check with them in some way but it sounds like it's been done. That being said, for recommendations in that tube I'd definitly suggest Mullard and any series of Amperex since they change a lot between each one. Good luck.

Tbone289

6N1 are a substitute for the ECC88/6DJ8 in my Yaqin CD-1 tube buffer. If that is also the case for the MC-10L, I would suggest Holland-made Amperex tubes also. Though I think the Bugle Boys sound great, I don't have a preference for them necessarily, as I find the globe-branded a-frames to be just as good, and usually a better buy than the Bugle Boys. I've run a Bugle Boy, but I'm currently running an a-frame in my buffer, and it sounds great. Either are better to my ear than the mid-high grade Russian tubes I've tried (Electro-Harmonix 6922 gold pin cryo).

Have a look here at the 6DJ8 Amperex descriptions: http://www.audioasylum.com/scripts/d.pl?audio/faq/joes-tubes.html#6DJ8

Here is a pic of the top of my buffer. Note the substitutions.

dorokusai

Yeah, Orange or White Globe are always nice to have handy for rolling. I agree, the Bugle Boys are simply over rated for most applications. Thanks for the pic Tbone and I'll have to slap a post-it inside my Handbook on that one. It doesn't even list a 6N1...only 6N3 and up. Weird.

Tbone289

Glad I could help.

headrott

I would suggest the Amperex D-getter 1958 or 1959 ECC88/6DJ8. They are one of the best ECC88's I've heard. They have to be the D-getter though. Haven't heard a mullard ECC88, but the 12AX7 and 12AU7 Mullards are good so the ECC88's may be as well. I would absolutely look into the Amperex D-getter ECC88's though for sure. That's my suggestion.

Greg

Edit: Here is a link to a pair for $100.00. That is a good price if they test ok. Audiogon link:http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?accstube&1328817863&/Ediswan---Amperex-6922/6dj8/73

falconcry72

As far as Amperex ECC88/6DJ8, E88CC/6922, and E188CC/7803 go, you really can't go wrong.

I will say that being made at that Herleen plant in Holland is not the end-all-be-all for vintage Amperex's by any means. The American-made white-label PQ's are where it's at.

I currently roll between American PQ 6922's from '61, Holland Bugle Boys from '64, and Holland Orange Globes from '68.

They're all good, but the PQ's are more refined sounding. They aren't as "tubey" sounding as the Bugle Boys, but I think they're more accurate.

How many tubes does your pre take? I have a pair Mullards, made in England, 6922 government issues that you can have if you want them.

rromeo923

Falcon,

It takes 4 tubes but I understand that only two of them make a real difference in sound so I was really only looking for two. I appreciate the offer for the Mullards! That is very generous. My only question is whether I can use the 6922. Are they compatible??

Thanks!

heiney9

dorokusai wrote: »

I don't see 6N1 as a replacement for the ECC88/6DJ8 in my Tube Substitution Handbook....you sure about that? Just because the pins are the same doesn't mean you can pop anything in there, just checking on ya'...

I have been saying that all along. I have an amp that uses the 6N1 and it CAN'T use the ECC88/6DJ8 tubes. The substitute is 6AQ8/ECC85. I tried to convey this to Zingo for one of his amps but he has been using the ECC88/6DJ8 combo without issue, I guess. I suppose it comes down to the piece of gear. But if IIRC, the 6N1 and ECC88 aren't all that close spec wise whereas the ECC85/6AQ8 is almost identical.

The best ECC85 I have heard to date is the Telefunken followed closely by the Valvo Hamburg made with D getter and flat cross bar.

I would sub the ECC85/6AQ8 before the ECC88/6DJ8. But what do I know

H9

rromeo923

I will be drinking soon!!

This is all somewhat confusing. I almost wish I was a kid again listening to my parents cheap
console stereo. Sounded good to me then!!

heiney9

rromeo923, does the manual or script on the chassis say anything about substitutes? If it says you can use 6DJ8 then I'd say your safe. It looks like other Yaqin pieces can, so perhaps it's wired differently than other manufacturer's that can't sub a 6DJ8 for a 6N1.

Tubes and tube substitutes for modern equipment is not an exact science.

H9

falconcry72

heiney9 wrote: »

But what do I know

H9

lol. Not much. :biggrin:

rromeo923

H9 Unfortunately the manual is worthless and it doesnt say anywhere on the chassis.

falconcry72

rromeo923 wrote: »

Falcon,

It takes 4 tubes but I understand that only two of them make a real difference in sound so I was really only looking for two. I appreciate the offer for the Mullards! That is very generous. My only question is whether I can use the 6922. Are they compatible??

Thanks!

This is the 6dj8 family:

6dj8 is the same as ecc88. 6922 is the same as e88cc. 7308 is the same as e188cc.

As far as compatibility, anything that's spec'd for a 6dj8/ecc88 can take a 6922/e88cc or a 7308/e188cc. The 6922 is basically a tighter spec'd 6dj8, and the 7308 is a tighter spec'd 6922, so anywhere that calls for a 6dj8 you could definitely use a 6922 or 7308, but you wouldn't necessarily want to use a 6dj8 in an application that called for a 6922 or a 7308. Make sense?

I have no clue whatsoever if your particular piece can accept the 6dj8 family. I share Doro and H9's skepticism, and I'd like to see more research.


Here are a couple links on 6dj8's:

http://www.audioasylum.com/scripts/d.pl?audio/faq/joes-tubes.html#6DJ8

http://www.audiotubes.com/6dj8.htm



I'll give you those Mullards, but only if you can prove that the 6dj8 family works in your pre.

rromeo923

Just got this info which makes sense to me.
What do u all think?

The 6922 is a substitute for the ECC88.
The ECC88 is a substitute for the 6DJ8.
The 6922 has a max voltage of 220 volts.
The 6DJ8 has a max voltage of 120-130 volts.
You can put a 6922 in a 6dj8 / 6n1p-EV circuit but not the other way around.

6DJ8 is the "baseline" version of this tube type.
The 6922 is the improved version designed to lower microphonics and improve life span.
The 6922 also is rated for a higher voltage.
6922 can be used interchangably in 6DJ8 gear.
However, while in most applications it isn't a problem, the 6DJ8 isn't always usable in 6922 applications.

ECC88 is the European designation for 6DJ8. E88CC is the European designation for 6922.
You'd think they could've differentiated the letters a little more to make it less confusing CV2492 is the military designation for 6922 (used by Mullard, most notably).

7308, E188CC, and CCa are yet other super premium versions of the standard 6DJ8.
These were built to tighter tolerances and are very rare (and expensive).

heiney9

Yep, that's all correct as it's describing the 6DJ8/6922 tubes which are variants of each other. Still doesn't really answer the question about subing for a 6N1. Clearly on some gear (like the yaqin tube buffer) it's suggested it can be done.

In my manual for my Dared MP5 it states it can't be done.

Actually the 6N1 and 6N1P are slightly different tubes as well. But are so close it doesn't matter.

A 5Z4, 5Z4P, 5Z4G, 5Z4GT GZ30, CV1863 are all interchangeable but slightly different rectifiers. Not all, the 5Z4 being a metal can, rather than a glass envelope, can't handle the voltage of the others because it can't dissipate the heat which is why the made glass envelope tubes

Again this is not an exact science.

H9

falconcry72

rromeo923 wrote: »

Just got this info which makes sense to me.
What do u all think?

The 6922 is a substitute for the ECC88.
The ECC88 is a substitute for the 6DJ8.
The 6922 has a max voltage of 220 volts.
The 6DJ8 has a max voltage of 120-130 volts.
You can put a 6922 in a 6dj8 / 6n1p-EV circuit but not the other way around.

6DJ8 is the "baseline" version of this tube type.
The 6922 is the improved version designed to lower microphonics and improve life span.
The 6922 also is rated for a higher voltage.
6922 can be used interchangably in 6DJ8 gear.
However, while in most applications it isn't a problem, the 6DJ8 isn't always usable in 6922 applications.

ECC88 is the European designation for 6DJ8. E88CC is the European designation for 6922.
You'd think they could've differentiated the letters a little more to make it less confusing CV2492 is the military designation for 6922 (used by Mullard, most notably).

7308, E188CC, and CCa are yet other super premium versions of the standard 6DJ8.
These were built to tighter tolerances and are very rare (and expensive).

I think you've got the right idea; however, I'd word it that 6dj8 = ecc88, 6922 = e88cc, and 7308 = e188cc. The ones that equal each other aren't just substitutions; they are the same thing, and like I said earlier, you can always use the tighter spec'd tubes in a lower spec'd application, but not necessarily vice versa.

That said, a NOS Amperex 6dj8 will sound better than a modern 6922.


My Mullards are CV2492's, BTW.

falconcry72

heiney9 wrote: »

Still doesn't really answer the question about subing for a 6N1.

This.

rromeo923

Not sure if any proof is available. All I know is that others are using the 6DJ8/ECC88 without problems and are recommending it.

No big deal. I appreciate all the info.