Tubes

heiney9

The 5751 in general is probably a better tube for audio applications with it's tighter focus and lower noise floor. But the 5751 was developed for the Military (communication) and commercial aviation and broadcasting systems. When the Sylvania 5751 came out high end audio and especially consumer stereo reproduction was in it's infancy in 1950's, or atleast not a common household appliance.

So I would question why a tube manufacturer in the early 50's would research, design, and manufacture a singular tube for audio. Especially when they couldn't keep up with consumer demand of table top radio's, TV's and other consumer and industrial appliances that used tubes, not to mention Military contracts and commercial contracts.

Just food for thought

tonyb

Actually Brock, think about what was common in the 50's. Tubed radios, especially the console types. Console's with record players and radio's, which were tubed. TV's were tubed...that has an audio application too. Anything broadcast, had to do with audio and many things were tubed in that industry. Stage and production gear, mic's...I can think of a lot of reasons why someone would want to have a specific tube for audio applications.

From all I've read on Joule, and it's owners, as Jesse stated....it's the tube to have in these pre amps for some reason. I don't know, as you don't also, what exactly that reason is....but there's only one way to find out, right ?

heiney9

I was going to leave this one alone, and I am not really arguing the Sylvania isn't a great choice for that application. I am stating that a 1951 Sylvania 5751, 3M bp, square getter is the same regardless of label color or label.

High fidelity, stereophonic reproduction was not a high priority for tube manufacturers in the early 50's. So I very much doubt anyone was sitting in a lab talking about how to make a tube that is superior for stereo reproduction for the masses.

As stated before the 5751 was designed to be rugged, low noise and low microphony and very long life. This was especially helpful for military radios, airlines, and broadcast, etc. Not because it had some magical ability to reproduce an oboe in stereo. We happened to stumble upon these gems much later on and decided they were great for audio.

The first small signal tube I can think of that was specifically designed for consumer audio is the A framed Amperex 6DJ8 of the 70's and later. There maybe others, but I don't recall.

The 50's Sylvania 5751 3m, bp, sq getter is a superb tube, so enjoy, there is no doubt about that.

Anyway I look forward to hearing your impressions. So far it seems like you are really digging it and having tubes back in the mix.

H9

P.s. I am off work today because of ML King Day and I am enjoying the EE Avant with a nice nos pair of 1949 Tungsol 12AX7 black plates and a quad of 1962 Siemens 12AU7 silver plates.

tonyb

Slacker...how dare you take a day off of work. lol

Enjoy man, and yes...I'm diggin' having tubes back in the system. Just have to figure out a way to keep the wife from destroying it.

heiney9

Between you an me, I cherish days like today. Some uninterrupted quality time with the rig today.

pitdogg2

I get what Brock is trying to say. The 6sn7 was I believe for Vertical or Horizontal hold on TV sets. When they went bad they just plopped another in there whether it was RCA, Hytron, Raytheon or any number of others they had in the bag at the time. It wasn't like Tech A and Tech B arguing over which one had a lower noise floor for the RCA TV or which one worked better in Zenith TV's. Many of the old TV guys tubes were tubes as long as the parameters were the same there was no difference. In my book Brent Jesse sent me for tube substitutes the 5692 is rated as OK to use in place of the 6sn7 and the 6BL7 is rated better than the 5692 as a sub for 6sn7. But yet in audio people pay LARGE for the 5692 and you can buy three 6BL7 triple mica tubes for a third the price of the 5692 set.

Brent Jesse turned me on to these 6BL7 6BX7 triple mica tubes for my tube buffer I used them more than any other my Sylvania 5692's didn't get much if any use. They seemed more muffled in the buffer.

tonyb

I also get what Brock is saying, call it curiosity on my part. I wouldn't be so curious if most all Joule owners swore by that tube and why Judd himself insisted that was THE tube to use.

Can't speak for other designations of tubes, they all have some variance that sets them apart. Sylvania actually isn't known for great sounding tubes, except the 5751's. Maybe that's why they are scarce, I dunno.

What I do know is, NOS tubes of any designation will only get more scarce as time goes on driving up prices. Newer tubes just don't have the same sound imho. Call it old world craftsmanship, quality of parts used, I don't know exactly why all I know is that there is a distinct sound difference.

F1nut

The reason vintage tubes sound better is cow flatulence.

treitz3

Just goes to show ya'.....

Ya' learn something everyday.

Tom

heiney9

tonyb wrote: »

I also get what Brock is saying, call it curiosity on my part. I wouldn't be so curious if most all Joule owners swore by that tube and why Judd himself insisted that was THE tube to use.

Can't speak for other designations of tubes, they all have some variance that sets them apart. Sylvania actually isn't known for great sounding tubes, except the 5751's. Maybe that's why they are scarce, I dunno.

What I do know is, NOS tubes of any designation will only get more scarce as time goes on driving up prices. Newer tubes just don't have the same sound imho. Call it old world craftsmanship, quality of parts used, I don't know exactly why all I know is that there is a distinct sound difference.

Actually, Sylvania makes many other stellar tubes, most all of them are early 50's. But they have their share of plain old run of the mill too. The 3 mica 5814 is a stellar tube (ruggedized 12AU7). As is the 50's JAN CHS 6SL7WGT, black plate

The difference is many of the materials either aren't available at all or if they are they have been banned. Also much of the old craftsmanship stopped being handed down and also tooling is old.

I think the past couple years have seen great strides by the Chinese to make nice sounding reliable tubes, but they still don't compare to old stock tubes.

H9

heiney9

Found this article. Sheds some light on why old stock tubes are in most cases better sounding than new stock tubes.

http://www.effectrode.com/signal-tubes/mullard-ecc83-12ax7-reissue-original-physical-comparison/

http://www.effectrode.com/signal-tubes/mullard-ecc83-12ax7-reissue-original-electrical-comparison/


It's just like every other industry, they just don't make them like they used to and that affects the final sound in most instances.

No mention of cow flatulence

H9

P.s. Disclaimer, this just a singular comparison so YMMV.

pitdogg2

Great read Brock.

Although I have never used an original Mullard I can state the 6ak5 new issue Russian Mullards are terrible. In my experience with the 6ak5's there are some differences between brands and they can be slight, BUT there was a HUUUGE difference with the Mullard's. I sent them back to the buyer he sent new pairs out and tested both as very good. The new pair were no different. TERRIBLE noisy screechy fecal matter. From my own experience if you see flying saucer getter its RUSSIAN so do not let them tell you its "NOS" because its just NEW. nothing old about it.

As for 6AK5 I can HIGHLY recommend the Voskods

I bought two set from this seller one was gold pins for 10.00 more the other just like these in the link

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2x-MATCHED-6J1P-EV-VOSKHOD-1974-OTK-TUBES-GOLD-GRID-6J1P-EF95-6F32-6AK5-PAIR-/302138980034?hash=item4658e2f6c2:g:M2QAAOSwal5YIe0J

I still have a set of the non gold pins if anybody is interested hit me up I'll treat you right.

heiney9

I have used Russian 60's and 70's 6N1p-EV from Kaluga, Voshkod and one other that escapes me. They are small signal tube equivalents to the ECC85/6AQ8 and they don't sound bad. Different tone than the American or Euro tubes, but not bad at all. But then I consider them NOS as the manufacturing plants are no longer around as far as I can tell.

H9

heiney9

Another fascinating article on the Mullard factory in Blackburn during it's peak production.

http://www.effectrode.com/signal-tubes/speed-efficiency-perfection-aims-built-mammoth-factory-16-years/

I can pretty much guess tube factories of today pale in comparison to the rigid process and QC of the Mullard factory in it's day. Not sure we could afford to buy new production tubes if the process was as focused, stringent, and detailed as this factory.

I've read TungSol and RCA and Sylvania were just as stringent.

pitdogg2

heiney9 wrote: »

I have used Russian 60's and 70's 6N1p-EV from Kaluga, Voshkod and one other that escapes me. They are small signal tube equivalents to the ECC85/6AQ8 and they don't sound bad. Different tone than the American or Euro tubes, but not bad at all. But then I consider them NOS as the manufacturing plants are no longer around as far as I can tell.

H9

true but my comment was just for the Mullard re-issues Mullard AFAIK never used anything but halo never a saucer getter. So if you see a saucer its Russian, not English.

heiney9

Correct, Russians have almost always used "saucer" shaped getters. Never seen it used by anyone else. The reissues should say "made in Russia", but yes the number 1 giveaway is a saucer shaped getter

pitdogg2

heiney9 wrote: »

Another fascinating article on the Mullard factory in Blackburn during it's peak production.

http://www.effectrode.com/signal-tubes/speed-efficiency-perfection-aims-built-mammoth-factory-16-years/

I can pretty much guess tube factories of today pale in comparison to the rigid process and QC of the Mullard factory in it's day. Not sure we could afford to buy new production tubes if the process was as focused, stringent, and detailed as this factory.

I've read TungSol and RCA and Sylvania were just as stringent.

From the link I find this incredible interesting...You are most likely correct in the cost of new tubes cost if it was this tightly controlled.


"Most fascinating of all was the wire factory where I saw how a tungsten bar two feet long was drawn down and stretched until it was 100 miles long to a thickness of 1/10 that of a single human hair.

But that’s not the end of the wonders as the wire was then checked on a super-fine balance which weighs down to 2/100 of a gramme. These incredible dimensions are achieved by passing the wire through diamond dies – between 200 and 250 of them. As the wire passes through each one it is slimmed more and more and each die involves a separate piece of machinery. Each diamond is worth, dependant upon size, somewhere between £2 and £30 with each during it’s lifetime fining down about one million miles of wire. To allow passage of the wire through the dies, the diamonds are drilled with a sewing needle coated with a special abrasive."

heiney9

I also found this extremely fascinating.

Blackburn (Microtech Solutions) went into administration in September 2009. This was the end to a very long era that had begun when engineer Captain Stanley R. Mullard first founded the company in 1920 to manufacture electronic radio (and then later television components). By 2009 a large part of their business was the production of cathodes for televisions however the development of the new flat-panel screens had started to make the cathode ray technology obsolete. Business became progressively more and more difficult and the few workers at Blackburn finally lost their jobs. To add salt to the wound, as well as manufacturing television components, engineers at Blackburn had been developing a new type of vacuum tube for audio amplification, the MicroTech E813CC, which had some geniune improvements over the ECC83. It required lower heater current and the engineers had also put a great deal of time into working with audiophiles and guitarists to get the tone balance just right. The new tube had only been in production for a matter of weeks before the factory closed.

heiney9

And finally the mother of all articles - The Cool Sound of Tubes.

http://www.effectrode.com/signal-tubes/the-cool-sound-of-tubes/

heiney9

Learn something new everyday. Until now I never knew these existed, although they never made it off the ground it sounds like. Never seen any FS either.

http://www.effectrode.com/techtube-blackburn-e813cc/

pitdogg2

heiney9 wrote: »

Learn something new everyday. Until now I never knew these existed, although they never made it off the ground it sounds like. Never seen any FS either.

http://www.effectrode.com/techtube-blackburn-e813cc/

Aren't they cute look like two itty bitty antenna rotors inside....

Chances are we couldn't afford them if we did.

mhardy6647

F1nut wrote: »

The reason vintage tubes sound better is cow flatulence.

And for good reason, too. The radioisotope signature of vintage cow flatulence was/is very different than the modern version, thanks in no small part to the widspread prevalence of above-ground thermonuclear device tests during the Cold War era.

mhardy6647

pitdogg2 wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

Learn something new everyday. Until now I never knew these existed, although they never made it off the ground it sounds like. Never seen any FS either.

http://www.effectrode.com/techtube-blackburn-e813cc/

Aren't they cute look like two itty bitty antenna rotors inside....

Chances are we couldn't afford them if we did.

jeepers, they really do.

I cannot (rationally) afford most of the NOS tubes all y'all gush over.

pitdogg2

mhardy6647 wrote: »

I cannot (rationally) afford most of the NOS tubes all y'all gush over.

I bet if a NOS WE300B pair show up you'd sell your soul for them..... blood, plasma, second child...

mhardy6647

I'd have to buy a 300B amp to go with 'em

pitdogg2

mhardy6647 wrote: »

I'd have to buy a 300B amp to go with 'em

lol I thought I'd seen you had some amps that took them. What big tube is that you run then?

mhardy6647

heh-heh-heh. you're right, in a way. The amplifier is uses single-ended 2A3 power triodes. The particular "2A3" I am using are modern Chinese-made tubes that, according to what I've read on the internet (so it must be true ), are essentially 300B tubes with 2.5 volt filaments. Sort of super-2A3s (in terms of their plate dissipation).

Some northern New England hifi gurus & I did a little 2A3 shoot out one winter afternoon some years back, and these "Sofia" branded tubes beat the old US tubes for chutzpah - perhaps as a direct result of their aforementioned (apparent) provenance.

DSC_0128 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

WagnerRC

Who is the best trusted source to send tubes to be tested and returned with proper numbers. Thanks

tonyb

Bob, I think your best bet in that regard is to find someone local, a hifi shop or repair place....you might even find a vacuum tube seller local who might offer such services. Shipping tubes around, especially NOS, always carries some risk....especially if you get PFB's delivery guy.

tonyb

DSkip wrote: »

I think you mean they voiced the pre with the sonic Signature of a certain tube in there.

Exactly Skip, you can even say most tubed manufacturers do exactly that. In my case, or should I say Joule's case, specific tubes were chosen for their low noise, durability and life span, sound as the designer intended.

I must say, these are the quietest tubes I've ever heard, not a peep, hiss, buzz, nothing. Just as quiet as any SS piece, which took me by surprise because that's one of the reasons I always despised tubes. I can't stand noise in the signal. It was obvious to me Judd went through a lot of experimenting to find tubes that where up to his standards for his pre amps.

Obviously tube gear allows one to vary their listening according to individual preferences by tube rolling. Which is possible in most all tubed gear. However, Judd had a very narrow idea of how his tubed pre's should sound, and thus recommended certain tubes for his pre's that would work well with his circuit design. That's why he also included those tubes with every pre he sold. That way, your not scouring around to tube roll, a plus in my book. Also why many never felt a need to tube roll, because they sounded great as is.

My quest is to simply find the exact tubes he recommended, in the positions he recommended, so I can hear for myself his intended sound. I'm only one tube away from that. Brent Jessee has one Sylvania 5751 but it's a blue tip, with yellow lettering so I'm going to give that one a shot and see.

Right now, I have RCA 5751'S Blackplates in there now and it's sounding pretty frickin' good.