|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum |
| diyAudio Sponsor | ||
|
|
||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
|
I'm sure there are people here who have tried both the 26 and the 27. How would you compare the two sonically?
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
|
The 26 is magic and the 27 is a tube.
andy |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Yakima, Washington
|
oops never mind. Wrong number...
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
I prefer the 26 to the 27. Both are highly microphonic, but IMHO the 26 tends to sound better in similar circuits. The 27 seems to have some issues with breakdown of the cathode to filament insulation. I've never heard a really bad sounding 26, but have heard a few NOS 27s that I would not live with for a moment - some sort of linearity issue that resulted in very hard and glassy sound.
I am listening to a signal chain right at this moment that includes 26s..
__________________
www.kta-hifi.net |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
|
Could you give me some explanation as for why there's such a difference between DHT and IDHT?
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
I'm not sure there is a good answer, and I am not going to attempt to answer your question as I am pretty agnostic on the issue. OK: Challenge of getting it to work, and cool factor/fashion statement. (Sometimes OK IMHO.) The biggest problem with these early tubes whether DHT or IDHT is that the techniques used to make them also lead in many cases to severe microphonics, most later IDHT are much better in this respect. Make no mistake the 26 will sing along (and not so nicely) with the music if given an opportunity to do so, and that also applies to most samples of the 27 I have worked with. I like the 26, I also like the 6SN7A, the 5842/417A, and triode connected D3A, and C3G.. I think of each as being suited to certain types of tasks.. The 26 is a great microphone, err moderate MU triode.. IDHTs are easier to use and some of the early 5 pin and octal triodes (56/76/6C5/6J5/6SN7) in the low - medium mu range also have excellent linearity and relatively low rp's. I like the challenge of designing with difficult tubes which is why 10yrs ago I designed my first iteration of a transformer coupled 26 line stage. I knew the linearity would be OK, didn't know if I could tame the other issues. I still use that much reworked line stage today, its flaws are significant, but overall I prefer it to anything else I have done. I know I haven't answered the question, but from my perspective this is a question without an answer.
__________________
www.kta-hifi.net |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 10Y, 26, 27 and 45: relative microphonics | rick57 | Tubes / Valves | 38 | 30th December 2010 11:38 PM |
| SimpleSE R17/27 | fandersen | Tubelab | 2 | 5th September 2010 04:34 AM |
| 26 preamp | w00t | Tubes / Valves | 49 | 26th August 2010 12:51 AM |
| Accuphase C-27 | Onvinyl | Analog Line Level | 4 | 25th February 2009 04:27 PM |
| type 27 pre | exurbia | Tubes / Valves | 14 | 26th December 2003 04:01 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.08609 seconds (76.47% PHP - 23.53% MySQL) with 10 queries |