Please post your experience with 6C45 and 6H30

[inertial]

Hi all,

I am very interesting to learn your experiences with 6C45P and 6H30
about microphonic effect of these triodes.
I hate microphonycity and before purchase one of these tubes I would
know your suggestion
All the comments are welcome!

Cheers,
Paolo

[audiowolf]

The 6H30 suck I removed a bunch of them in a BAT preamp, VK51SE and replaced them with EC99 from JJ Tubes, made a few resistor changes too...MUCH better bass extension, far more clarity in mids and far lower microphonics issues. 6H30 had horrid microphonic problems..not just mechanical pick up, but worse yet, excitation from the signal passing through it. Tested some with a single pulse and saw about half a second of 'mechanical' ringing in the output induced by the pulse and its electromagnetic field moving around the parts, which then just vibrated on for a while .

My suggestion for 6H30 is to take them to your local firing range and set them up at 50 feet and practice with a 22LR cal pistol....at least they would be good targets for developing your aiming skills.

No experience with the 6c45p......but Do look into the ECC99 for dual triode medium mu. It will do 20 ma per section easy.

cheers

[Gluca]

I replaced ECC99 with 6H30. No microphonics at all. I preferred 6H30. I didn't like 6C45pi, it sounded "metallic" and "hard" if you allow me to say so.

6N6p can be a valid replacement too (and cheaper).

Ciao
Gianluca

[inertial]

Oh thank you very much audiowolf!

I like decise positions
6H30 forgot !
I am wondered how it is possible a serious brand like BAT, very regarded here in Italy, have emploied it Incredible.

At the moment I use 6N6P this is supposed silmilar to ECC99,
I believe. Quite satisfied ,for now.

Wow it seems to me 6C45 is my last possibilietis but I have a bad
expecting about microphonicity becuse his High transconductance.
Curious to read others experiences.......

Cheers,
Paolo

[inertial]

Originally posted by Gluca
I replaced ECC99 with 6H30. No microphonics at all. I preferred 6H30. I didn't like 6C45pi, it sounded "metallic" and "hard" if you allow me to say so.

6N6p can be a valid replacement too (and cheaper).

Ciao
Gianluca

Thanks, Gianluca.

So opposite opinions here. Interesting
Was your 6C45P even slightly microphonic ?

Paolo

[pistoljoe]

Or you can send those 6H30s to me, instead of blasting them into little pieces.

I also preferred the JJ ecc99 to the 6H30, until I ran the russians fat. Dialing them above 30mA, with Pimm's CCS, made them sing with great bass.

The 6с45п you need to handle with kid gloves, like the 417 and 437. I wouldn't recommend unless you need the tube for what it does so well, and you're willing to work at it.

Joe

[inertial]

Originally posted by pistoljoe
.

The 6A45? you need to handle with kid gloves, like the 417 and 437. I wouldn't recommend unless you need the tube for what it does so well, and you're willing to work at it.

Joe

Hi Joe,
perdone me , my english is poor that I have not entirely understood
your comment . Why 6C45 is so "fragile" ? At cost to be annoing I'm interested in microphony first, then the rest maybe is workable

Cheers,
Paolo

[analog_sa]

Fragile? Are those things not supposed to sing in a Mig fighter jet?

Mine are not microphonic but i only use them at line levels.

[SY]

By "fragile," I'd guess he means "prone to burst into oscillation unless designed and constructed with great care."

[Gluca]

Originally posted by inertial

Was your 6C45P even slightly microphonic ?

No.

Me, I biased the 6H30 at >20mA too.