Welcome to the world of tubes. A manufacturer makes tubes, to pass electrical tests. A vender, such as Ram, New Sensor, Audio Research, etc., tests tubes, to meet certain electrical parameters. Certain venders, burn in tubes, so that the ones, that will fail early, will fail in burnin and will not wind up, in someones gear. Then they are tested again, and graded. 99% of the time, the customer, is the first to actually listen to music, through the tube. No manufacturer today, comes anywhere near, the consistency of manufacture, that companies had, during the tube making heyday. Different runs, off the same line, on the same day, will sound different. Every tube maker today, makes a great sounding tube. Its just that they have problems, consistently making a great sounding tube. No manufacturer, is going to destroy tubes that test great, just because they don't sound great. A tube that tests perfect, does not neccessarily, have to sound perfect.
I'm Freaked Out by this Tube comparison
I was comparing two amplifiers - ARC VT100 Mk II & SF Power 2. They both have Sovtek 6922's in the input stage that were manufacturer selected and matched of about the same vintage. Both have 8 new EH 6550's, matched & measured.
On cymbals, brushes etc, the Power 2 had a more distant and smaller presentation that lacked detail. Chesky guitar recordings sounded thinner, had less ring, less body, less resonance. Overall, less involving sound.
I attributed the sonics to the design of the amplifiers. I had a third set of Sovtek 6922's that I put in the Power 2. No noticeable difference.
THEN ------ I decided to take the 6922's out of the VT100 & put them in the Power 2. I couldn't believe my ears -- now the Power 2 took on much, though not all, of the character of the VT100. The cymbals, etc. became more detailed, more present, more resonant. So did the Chesky guitars, and now with more body and resonance. More decay. In some respects, the Power 2 sounds better than the VT100.
Am I crazy??? I can't believe that one set of the Sovteks could be that much better than the other. Or is Audio Research's claimed intensive selection process responsible?
There is no biasing for the 6922's in the Power 2. SF told me to replace tubes, you just plug and play. The output tubes (6550s) were accurately biased in both amps.
What gives here?
On cymbals, brushes etc, the Power 2 had a more distant and smaller presentation that lacked detail. Chesky guitar recordings sounded thinner, had less ring, less body, less resonance. Overall, less involving sound.
I attributed the sonics to the design of the amplifiers. I had a third set of Sovtek 6922's that I put in the Power 2. No noticeable difference.
THEN ------ I decided to take the 6922's out of the VT100 & put them in the Power 2. I couldn't believe my ears -- now the Power 2 took on much, though not all, of the character of the VT100. The cymbals, etc. became more detailed, more present, more resonant. So did the Chesky guitars, and now with more body and resonance. More decay. In some respects, the Power 2 sounds better than the VT100.
Am I crazy??? I can't believe that one set of the Sovteks could be that much better than the other. Or is Audio Research's claimed intensive selection process responsible?
There is no biasing for the 6922's in the Power 2. SF told me to replace tubes, you just plug and play. The output tubes (6550s) were accurately biased in both amps.
What gives here?
- ...
- 13 posts total
- 13 posts total