Has anyone performed a sonic comparison between the three tubes? Do they sound exactly alike, or
sonically different? If different, how sonically different?
How about longevity?
Thanks
pos
sonically different? If different, how sonically different?
How about longevity?
Thanks
pos
Last edited:
From simulation pairs of 6550's will have lower distortion and more power than a KT120 or KT150 at the same HT. So I am a fan of 6550's.
I am not speaking of power, but of sonic impressions, and just the new Tung Sol tubes listed.
thanks.
thanks.
Sonic impressions is a figment of your imagination, non linearity is what tubes have a bit of.
Agree wholeheartedly. The thing to watch out with most 6550 versions is the value of the grid bias resistor (50Kohms) using fixed bias. . That places quite a load demand on the driver stage to be able to provide voltage swing with low distortion. Somewhere I read some 6550 vendors quoted 100Kohms max but cannot confirm this.
Ironically, I find the previous Svet 6550B version provides the lowest distortion when compared to the latter SV6550C but much depends on circuit. I use 40% UL.
Various contributors to these forums often sideline the little stumpy 5881; on an open chassis it may look a bit odd to other tube lineup´s but my early Tungsol versions beat the 6L6 and are capable of near 6550 power throughput. Recent makers derate the 5881 but it is a fine tube sonically. I wonder who else is using this tube for HiFi ?
Bench Baron
I do use the Russian "equivalent", the 6P3S-E. Great tube for Hi-Fi, the guitar crowd also loves it, it seems that it can take a lot of punishment.
Some modern 5881s are re-labelled 6P3S-E.
Same number tubes etc means different manufacturers, but same numbers, such as 2A3, 6550, EL34 etc.
Maybe you can enlighten us as to:
1. Are all the tubes with same number designed with the same rp, Gm, Mu?
2. Do all the tubes with the same number have the same total harmonic distortion (HD) figures?
3. Do all the same number tubes have the same Harmonic Distortion (HD) structure? Do you know what this means?
4. Do all the same tube number use the same materials or same quality materials?
5. Do all the same tube number have the same vacuum?
6. Or perhaps you listened with poor designs and/or parts?
The other responses have no connection to the OPs first post.
keep on truckin
joe
Last edited:
Ah, we are talking about if the TS tubes sound the same or Not the same; NOT what we prefer one over another.
There is a basic difference.
A little more info for clarity.
The three TS tubes have similar ratings such as Gm, rp, Mu, but different plate dissipation and filament current.
Has anyone actually compared two or three of the TS tubes in the same circuit and listened for sonic differences?
keep on truckin
joe
Last edited:
I've been using these 5881 output tubes for nearly ten years now.
Attachments
Really, despite of some effort, I'm not able to listen to heater (not filament in this case!!!) current and plate dissipation. Does anyone else do?
Anything else you named in #9 is subject to measurements.
Best regards!
"Really, despite of some effort, I'm not able to listen to heater (not filament in this case!!!) current and plate dissipation. Does anyone else do?
Anything else you named in #9 is subject to measurements.
Best regards!" From post #13.
May I suggest you reread both posts #9, #10 until you understand them, as you are muddying the waters and causing confusion
to others.
I shall use capital letters after each point I have made to help newbies bypass your ineffective statements.
1. Are all the tubes with same number designed with the same rp, Gm, Mu?
A. Different manufacturers, same number tube will have different characteristics, Gm, Mu, rp etc.
2. Do all the tubes with the same number have the same total harmonic distortion (HD) figures?
A. No. Different manufacturers have different total Harmonic Distortion (HD) figures.
3. Do all the same number tubes have the same Harmonic Distortion (HD) structure? Do you know what this means?
A. No. Does the typical music lover have such equipment? No again.
4. Do all the same tube number use the same materials or same quality materials?
A. We don’t know but from different countries, even continents, I
seriously doubt such. The manufacturer also probably does not know, at least some of the parts.
5. Do all the same tube number have the same vacuum?
A. We do not know as such is not published in the specs.
6. Or perhaps you listened with poor designs and/or parts?
A. From the designs I have seen, I can believe the designs may not be sensitive enough. This is where polypropylene
decoupling caps in the power supply comes into play.
As one can see, even with proper equipment, only a few of the points can be measured. A listening test is in order for at least some data.
Kay’s comment of not listening to heater current or plate dissipation. Altering the filament current (same fil voltage) will almost certainly change the cathode surface area, altering the Gm, rp, and Mu of the tube. (There are exceptions, usually for military and industrial conditions.) The basic equation
Mu =Gm X rp demands such. (Mu = Gm times rp).
Altering the plate dissipation either requires altering materials, or altering the size or even shape of the plate. Changing the size and shape alters the capacitance, including the Miller capacitance, of the tube. Altering the materials is self explanatory. But we again do not know the material, nor the purity.
Since the specs of the three, new production Tung Sol 6550, KT120, Kt150 are similar; that is why I have asked if anyone has compared the sonics of the 6550 to the KT120.
I hope I have helped in ridding of any confusion.
Maybe we can get on track again.
joe
Anything else you named in #9 is subject to measurements.
Best regards!" From post #13.
May I suggest you reread both posts #9, #10 until you understand them, as you are muddying the waters and causing confusion
to others.
I shall use capital letters after each point I have made to help newbies bypass your ineffective statements.
1. Are all the tubes with same number designed with the same rp, Gm, Mu?
A. Different manufacturers, same number tube will have different characteristics, Gm, Mu, rp etc.
2. Do all the tubes with the same number have the same total harmonic distortion (HD) figures?
A. No. Different manufacturers have different total Harmonic Distortion (HD) figures.
3. Do all the same number tubes have the same Harmonic Distortion (HD) structure? Do you know what this means?
A. No. Does the typical music lover have such equipment? No again.
4. Do all the same tube number use the same materials or same quality materials?
A. We don’t know but from different countries, even continents, I
seriously doubt such. The manufacturer also probably does not know, at least some of the parts.
5. Do all the same tube number have the same vacuum?
A. We do not know as such is not published in the specs.
6. Or perhaps you listened with poor designs and/or parts?
A. From the designs I have seen, I can believe the designs may not be sensitive enough. This is where polypropylene
decoupling caps in the power supply comes into play.
As one can see, even with proper equipment, only a few of the points can be measured. A listening test is in order for at least some data.
Kay’s comment of not listening to heater current or plate dissipation. Altering the filament current (same fil voltage) will almost certainly change the cathode surface area, altering the Gm, rp, and Mu of the tube. (There are exceptions, usually for military and industrial conditions.) The basic equation
Mu =Gm X rp demands such. (Mu = Gm times rp).
Altering the plate dissipation either requires altering materials, or altering the size or even shape of the plate. Changing the size and shape alters the capacitance, including the Miller capacitance, of the tube. Altering the materials is self explanatory. But we again do not know the material, nor the purity.
Since the specs of the three, new production Tung Sol 6550, KT120, Kt150 are similar; that is why I have asked if anyone has compared the sonics of the 6550 to the KT120.
I hope I have helped in ridding of any confusion.
Maybe we can get on track again.
joe
Last edited:
Title says: New Tung Sol 6550 vs KT120 vs KT150 Sonic Comparison
Post #7:
Various contributors to these forums often sideline the little stumpy 5881; on an open chassis it may look a bit odd to other tube lineup´s but my early Tungsol versions beat the 6L6 and are capable of near 6550 power throughput. Recent makers derate the 5881 but it is a fine tube sonically. I wonder who else is using this tube for HiFi ?
Bench Baron
Maybe it's my old ears, but I can only say the 5881 tubes in my shitty little garage amp sound really good in my garage. I don't know or care about all the tube measurements. They sound sonically good in comparison to my 6L6 and 6550 tube amps I own.
As far as different brand vacuum tubes- I can only hear minor differences. Not enough difference to justify spending tons of money. That's why I sold my tubes, test gear three years ago when I retired. Nobody is going to tell me their opinion about some tube "sounds" better than another. Mostly because I have the volume too loud. 😉
Post #7:
Various contributors to these forums often sideline the little stumpy 5881; on an open chassis it may look a bit odd to other tube lineup´s but my early Tungsol versions beat the 6L6 and are capable of near 6550 power throughput. Recent makers derate the 5881 but it is a fine tube sonically. I wonder who else is using this tube for HiFi ?
Bench Baron
Maybe it's my old ears, but I can only say the 5881 tubes in my shitty little garage amp sound really good in my garage. I don't know or care about all the tube measurements. They sound sonically good in comparison to my 6L6 and 6550 tube amps I own.
As far as different brand vacuum tubes- I can only hear minor differences. Not enough difference to justify spending tons of money. That's why I sold my tubes, test gear three years ago when I retired. Nobody is going to tell me their opinion about some tube "sounds" better than another. Mostly because I have the volume too loud. 😉
Maybe there is a reason more are not using the 5881????
Anyone can say beating a 6L6, or 300b, 2A3s, 45s if the associated amplifier design is of poor quality.
Running SET, well, what is the difference between 5881 1.8 watts triode at 5% vs 6550 7 watts at 2.2% triode,
and 13 watts double digit HD vs 20 watts output double digit (both beam power mode).
Running 5881 Push Pull near 6550s power output at 45 watts is running Class AB2 folks, which requires driving
power when the control grid/signal grid/no 1 grid crosses over to drawing current, and requires special
circuitry. Using an interstage transformer requires more power to cover interstage transformer losses.
Besides that, one has to remove ringing to keep the frequency response flat.
Tube life is also shortened. Suggesting such sounds just like a TL idea.
You said it, "my shitty little garage amp". Thank you for being honest with that statement.
pos
Anyone can say beating a 6L6, or 300b, 2A3s, 45s if the associated amplifier design is of poor quality.
Running SET, well, what is the difference between 5881 1.8 watts triode at 5% vs 6550 7 watts at 2.2% triode,
and 13 watts double digit HD vs 20 watts output double digit (both beam power mode).
Running 5881 Push Pull near 6550s power output at 45 watts is running Class AB2 folks, which requires driving
power when the control grid/signal grid/no 1 grid crosses over to drawing current, and requires special
circuitry. Using an interstage transformer requires more power to cover interstage transformer losses.
Besides that, one has to remove ringing to keep the frequency response flat.
Tube life is also shortened. Suggesting such sounds just like a TL idea.
You said it, "my shitty little garage amp". Thank you for being honest with that statement.
pos
Hmm,
I upgraded my tweaked Cary SLM-100 mono's (each with 4x end tubes) from EH KT88 to the KT120.
The power transformers replaced (special build by a transformer fab), as K120 requires more heat current(s). Output transformers is still equal.
Sonic wise, the EH KT88 sounded using Maggie's 3.7 speakers more with opened/hair stage,
as KT120 as more power (as expected) a bit dully and IMHO may best for as Bass amp.
Best to PNP and test and not to forget the heater current(s), as it goes with the input tubes as EH I did not liked. Old RCA as best.
I upgraded my tweaked Cary SLM-100 mono's (each with 4x end tubes) from EH KT88 to the KT120.
The power transformers replaced (special build by a transformer fab), as K120 requires more heat current(s). Output transformers is still equal.
Sonic wise, the EH KT88 sounded using Maggie's 3.7 speakers more with opened/hair stage,
as KT120 as more power (as expected) a bit dully and IMHO may best for as Bass amp.
Best to PNP and test and not to forget the heater current(s), as it goes with the input tubes as EH I did not liked. Old RCA as best.
And so kowing how manufacturing tollerances can be quite wide, commonly 10% from bogey, you're looking for someone who has run at least 10 of each type through their amp and took meticulous listening notes to compare their final averaged assessment of each type to each of the other type? And you would take that as a good advice to guard against the risk of buying a set of tubes for your particular amp that you wouldn't like?
I'd rather listen to music.
I'd rather listen to music than read opinions.
POS= piece of schittt
I'd rather listen to music than read opinions.
Even with those tolerances, and I have multiple new TS 6550 tubes (before the russian invasion), the sound is quite stable. And I use
polyprope decoupling capacitors in all my component's power supplies, putting the components in a different league, musically.
For newbies, electrolytic caps have a dielectric absorption (DA) from 7% to 10% while polypropylene capacitors have a DA of only 0,02%.
One is losing inner detail because the DA in a capacitor's insulation between the plates does not want to let go of the charge/electrons,
in essence the musical signal. One is losing about 10% of the true inner detail of the signal across each decoupling capacitor.
The signal voltage across a decoupling capacitor varies with frequency, but all frequencies are affected.
Each Polypropylene capacitor allows for some 53db deeper, inside the music vs its electrolytic counterpart. What that does is bring
one closer to natural, lifelike, experiencing music from all over the world as if being there, but without having to travel, obtain a live result.
As you can see in this string, there are some who are against hearing live music quality.
I will leave it at that.
cheers
pos
Last edited: