|
|
|||||||
| 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: Nov 2002
|
I recently purchased a large number of the 1634 tube for a relatively cheap price. I would like to try to use them in place of a 6SL7. If I'm not mistaken they are the same as a 6SL7 except the cathode is common to both triodes and the pin out is different. So would one use it with both sections paralled together or could you just use one section and let the other alone?
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
Paralleling the sections is one option. Another is to use them in a circuit where the cathodes are tied together,Perhaps an LTP phase splitter,or something.
I don't think leaving one section 'hanging' is a good option. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
|
Ok, I have a driver board on my dynaco that has a 6sl7 input and a long tail
6sl7. If I understand correctly I could replace the long tail with the 1634. Could I also parallel the two sections of the 1634 and replace the input 6sl7 tube? Do I cut the cathode resistor value in half if I parallel the two sections? Haven't done any figuring with paralleled sections before therefore the stupid question. |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
|
hey-Hey!!!,
The 1634 is lower gm than the 6SL7. So with equivalent gain, plate resistance is higher. Available swing from its plates will be lower than a 6SL7, and with a 6SL7 as input a 6SN7 would make a better LTP stage; more voltage at lower output Z are available. cheers, Douglas
__________________
the Tnuctipun will return |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
|
But I have 50 or so of them and would like to try them to see what I can come up with. Can I parallel up a 1634 for input and then make a long tail out of another?
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
you can use them if you have them......circuits for 12SC7 should work, are those metal enveloped like the 12SC7's....the rca manual have a resistance coupled chart that you can look up for values of resistors based on B+....
__________________
http://www.electronicslab.ph/forum/i...?topic=32688.0 |
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
|
Quote:
cheers, Douglas
__________________
the Tnuctipun will return |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
|
Douglas,
As one that has followed your marvelous designs I will not doubt that your 100% correct. The 6SL7 is a better tube but I just have to play with the 1634 just to see how it will sound and behave. Quote: you can use them if you have them......circuits for 12SC7 should work, are those metal enveloped like the 12SC7's....the rca manual have a resistance coupled chart that you can look up for values of resistors based on B+.... Yes, metal enveloped like the 12SC7's or VT-268. I think they are supposed to be a premium low noise version. Last edited by Original Burnedfingers; 8th November 2011 at 11:24 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
|
Quote:
cheers, Douglas
__________________
the Tnuctipun will return |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
|
Douglas can you post something or possibly email me something?
Thanks, Joe |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| using only 1/2 of a dual triode | gabriel611 | Tubes / Valves | 18 | 2nd July 2010 06:43 AM |
| 6H30 Dual Triode | GlidingDutchman | Tubes / Valves | 9 | 10th July 2008 10:50 PM |
| Biggest noval dual triode? | leadbelly | Tubes / Valves | 10 | 6th December 2007 04:51 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.10205 seconds (81.73% PHP - 18.27% MySQL) with 10 queries |