Why do old tubes sound better than current tubes?


just wondering, is there something in the design, materials, or fabrication that makes old tubes sound better than those being currently produced?

it seems nearly universally held that old tubes are superior sounding to those made today - is there something specific about the old tubes that make then sound better?

-Scott
128x128srosenberg
tung sol 12ax7 gold pins, very musical, sovtec lps 12x7 , very open great bass , but maybe a little less body than the tung sol.
Almarg, if you will open NOS, on Mapmans post dated 08-23-10, and then read my post above his which was posted before his post; you will be able to reach some very interesting conclusions.
Orpheus10, yes Brent Jessee's article is certainly an interesting read. However, the concerns about genuineness and condition are not applicable to the 5963's I referred to.

The 5963's were part of a large collection of tubes I purchased about 20 years ago, from a very nice elderly gentleman in my local area, whose career had been servicing radios and tv's. All of the tubes had been stored for many years in his nicely appointed house, and he obviously had no interest in misrepresenting anything in order to maximize his profit. He sold me the entire collection of about 1400 tubes for a total of $65, and he obviously just wanted to get them out of his house and to have them find a good home. I am an antique radio collector, which is mainly why I purchased the collection (very few of the tubes he had are applicable to audio).

Brent's article also contained the statement that:
"Five percent is doing really good for a match of vintage NOS tubes. Most amplifiers that are designed correctly should be able to operate just fine with even a 25 percent or greater mismatch, provided the bias is set correctly.
Which provides an interesting quantitative perspective, but the reference to 25% is obviously addressing power tubes.

So my questions about section-matching of small-signal dual triodes remain.

Thanks,
-- Al
Hi Al, it of course depends on how the tube is being used in the circuit. If the two sections are cascaded single-ended transconducance amplifiers, or a triode driving a split-load phase inverter, then I'd say the matching matters not at all, so long as each section of the tube is within specs to work for its own part of the circuit.

But for a differential amplifier or cathode-coupled ("long-tailed pair") phase splitter, then the matching of the two sections affects the production of even-ordered distortion products. Both of these types of circuits are sensitive to both quiescent and dynamic balance between the two active elements. The extent to which the circuit can tolerate an imbalance is generally directly linked to its transconductance -- the higher the transconductance, the more critical the balance. It's also wrapped up a bit in the tail current - a true current-source will make the balance less critical for large-signal distortion. One can also place degeneration resistors in the cathodes, and increase the tail current to keep the same transconductance . . . and make the balance less critical.
Kirk, thanks very much for your informative and characteristically knowledgeable post.

To complete the picture, can anyone cite significant measurement experience that would provide a feel for the degree of section imbalance that can be expected for various makes of vintage and current production dual triodes?

Thanks,
-- Al