I think it's helpful to write in terms of coloration and transparency when
describing characteristics of different tubes. I also believe it's less helpful to
write potentially pejorative statements like "unnatural warmth".
Who is to say what is natural and unnatural, and what one tube may do in one
persons circuit versus another person's circuit?
To describe a tube as being warm/colored in the mids, or rolled of in the
highs is enough to allow someone to make a decision about whether that
tube might be worth investigating.
I'll give an example that happened just yesterday. I acquired a tube preamp
model that I had owned several years ago. My system is completely different
than it was when I owned the preamp previously. The first go-around, I loved
Mullard Blackburn 6922 and 12AU7 tubes in the preamp. I had tried Siemens
CCA (early 60s grey riser) and found them to be too incisive, and frankly too
austere for my taste. Well, yesterday, I decided to install CCa tubes again
(Siemens early 60s grey riser) along with Mullard 12AU7 (early 60s, Blackburn
production). This time around, with my new system, the Siemens CCa were a
very nice change over the Mullard 6922 (early 60s, Mitcham production).
So, my point is that systems and preferences differ, and systems and
preferences change.
What's preferable now, may not be preferable down the road and vice versa.
I'm in favor of describing characteristics of tubes without adding negative
personal opinion that may dissuade someone from experimenting with a tube
that might actually provide the listener with enjoyable results. Transparency
varies by small or large amounts depending on who is evaluating the tube.
Now, I absolutely agree that if the OP seeks transparent 12AU7 tubes, then
Siemens or Telefunken are more transparent than other brands, and
especially the ECC802s model previously mentioned.