Which is the poor man 45 tube?

Jaime · 19th September 2006, 01:38 AM

Which is the poor man 45 tube in SET?
The 1626, may be?

Eusebius · 19th September 2006, 10:32 AM

I like the 1626 but it's a different sound. I wouldn't call it 'delicate' - it's more foot-tapping and gutsy. You won't get much output from it either. I used it as a preamp tube - loved the sound it made on rock and jazz, but it didn't get that lovely delicate treble sound on strings, cymbals etc.

I guess you have to stay with DH tubes. But you have some tetrodes/pentodes you can strap as triodes. I bought a few 1624 to try out like this, and they were not expensive. The 2E22 works nicely but that's closer to a 300b and not too cheap. There's the 46 - don't know what that sounds like in output, but it's a good driver tube. Triode strapping will at least give you that DHT sound.

With indirectly heated tubes, triode strapped 6V6 can sound very nice. And another tube I currently use in the output of my amps is the 6AH4. Now that's a nice sound on a budget - very nice in fact. Needs to be run at higher B+ voltages to get the best out of it, and it's rated at 500v. I run mine around 390v. But I'd look at a DH solution first.

kevinkr · 19th September 2006, 04:39 PM

You might want to try the 47 in triode connection. I have heard amplifiers using it this way, and this is about as close to a poor man's 45 that you can get. (And it's close) 47's are still pretty cheap - I have seen them for as little as $3 - $5 at the MIT hamfest recently.

I would recommend a 5K SE transformer when triode connected.

Eusebius · 19th September 2006, 07:20 PM

Hi Kevin. Have you heard the 49? Forgot about that one. How does it compare with the 47? Andy

kevinkr · 20th September 2006, 02:53 PM

Hi Andy,
Unfortunately I have not heard the 49, I have heard the 45, 46, and 47. I have lots of 45's and have only designed and built using these - I made a habit of buying them whenever and wherever when they were still relatively cheap.

I have heard both 46 and 47 based amplifiers and both were actually very good. I think the 45 wins by an edge over both of these in terms of tonal balance and resolution, but the differences were subtle enough that I would say put them in the realm of differences I hear between a pair of rca globe 245's and a pair of later sylvania st 45's.

I believe all three are capable of powers in the realm of 1.5 - 2Wrms at <5% thd. (I get 1.6W with 4.5% out of my 45 amplifier)

19th September 2006, 01:38 AM	#1
Jaime diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Montevideo	Which is the poor man 45 tube? Which is the poor man 45 tube in SET? The 1626, may be? __________________ I write in English worse than Tarzan

20th September 2006, 02:53 PM	#5
kevinkr diyAudio Moderator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Blog Entries: 6	Hi Andy, Unfortunately I have not heard the 49, I have heard the 45, 46, and 47. I have lots of 45's and have only designed and built using these - I made a habit of buying them whenever and wherever when they were still relatively cheap. I have heard both 46 and 47 based amplifiers and both were actually very good. I think the 45 wins by an edge over both of these in terms of tonal balance and resolution, but the differences were subtle enough that I would say put them in the realm of differences I hear between a pair of rca globe 245's and a pair of later sylvania st 45's. I believe all three are capable of powers in the realm of 1.5 - 2Wrms at <5% thd. (I get 1.6W with 4.5% out of my 45 amplifier) __________________ "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
poor man reciever	v1d9uy	Solid State	4	6th January 2006 02:28 PM
Is PSE is a poor relation?	dhaen	Tubes / Valves	5	30th December 2002 05:21 PM
(Poor) Box design	AvoidTheLloyd	Multi-Way	4	31st December 2001 03:39 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

19th September 2006, 10:32 AM	#2
Eusebius diyAudio Member Join Date: May 2006	I like the 1626 but it's a different sound. I wouldn't call it 'delicate' - it's more foot-tapping and gutsy. You won't get much output from it either. I used it as a preamp tube - loved the sound it made on rock and jazz, but it didn't get that lovely delicate treble sound on strings, cymbals etc. I guess you have to stay with DH tubes. But you have some tetrodes/pentodes you can strap as triodes. I bought a few 1624 to try out like this, and they were not expensive. The 2E22 works nicely but that's closer to a 300b and not too cheap. There's the 46 - don't know what that sounds like in output, but it's a good driver tube. Triode strapping will at least give you that DHT sound. With indirectly heated tubes, triode strapped 6V6 can sound very nice. And another tube I currently use in the output of my amps is the 6AH4. Now that's a nice sound on a budget - very nice in fact. Needs to be run at higher B+ voltages to get the best out of it, and it's rated at 500v. I run mine around 390v. But I'd look at a DH solution first.

19th September 2006, 07:20 PM	#4
Eusebius diyAudio Member Join Date: May 2006	Hi Kevin. Have you heard the 49? Forgot about that one. How does it compare with the 47? Andy