Hey, tube testing gurus! I'm looking at buying a uTracer 6 kit, and wondered if the AT1000 offered anything superior to that unit, in the technical sense? The usual audio tubes will be done (12a*7, 6s*7, 6v6/6l6) so I don't exactly need v6 but I'm springing for the newer design anyways).
The purpose is to get basic information such as plate current and Gm/rp/mu. Ideally I could define the testing parameters, and get the same results as an Amplitrex. I'll test noise/microphonics and shorts separately.
I have a donor tube tester with sockets and switches. The uTracer seems ideal for a much less expensive DIY alternative. Any opinions and/or experience greatly appreciated 🙂
Edit: there's a good uTracer thread here: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21903
The purpose is to get basic information such as plate current and Gm/rp/mu. Ideally I could define the testing parameters, and get the same results as an Amplitrex. I'll test noise/microphonics and shorts separately.
I have a donor tube tester with sockets and switches. The uTracer seems ideal for a much less expensive DIY alternative. Any opinions and/or experience greatly appreciated 🙂
Edit: there's a good uTracer thread here: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21903
Last edited:
I know nothing about AT1000 but a lot about uTracer 3+ and 6. My primary tester is a RoeTest V9 (max. 600V plate voltage). I also have a uTracer 6 used for higher voltage tubes like GM70, 805 etc. I have also built more 3+ for friends and acquaintances.
For the price, nothing beats uTracer. It has its limitations but is absolutely sufficient for most people. The build-in filament supply is limited to app. 19V/1,6A, but it's easy to use an external if higher current and voltage is required. The software is not fail-safe, it can crash. No harm done, rust restart.
I am pretty convinced that RoeTest is superior to AT1000. They are in the same price range. I am working on a V11.2 and it will cost me 1500-2000 €/$ finished.
RoeTest is a VERY competent tester with a LOT of features and tools. The software is free and contains a GIANT database with tube data and test setups.
https://www.roehrentest.de/EnglishInfo.html
For the price, nothing beats uTracer. It has its limitations but is absolutely sufficient for most people. The build-in filament supply is limited to app. 19V/1,6A, but it's easy to use an external if higher current and voltage is required. The software is not fail-safe, it can crash. No harm done, rust restart.
I am pretty convinced that RoeTest is superior to AT1000. They are in the same price range. I am working on a V11.2 and it will cost me 1500-2000 €/$ finished.
RoeTest is a VERY competent tester with a LOT of features and tools. The software is free and contains a GIANT database with tube data and test setups.
https://www.roehrentest.de/EnglishInfo.html
Super helpful response. Thank you! Yeah I'm 100% ok with any software crashes in this use case 🙂
It looks like there's a Javascript version that runs in a browser. I may switch to the 3+ and provide my own filament supply.
It looks like there's a Javascript version that runs in a browser. I may switch to the 3+ and provide my own filament supply.
If you were running a commercial tube matching service or doing R&D, the AT1000 is worth it.
But for a knowledgeable DIYer or hobbyist wanting lab-like performance on a budget, uTracer 6 is incredibly capable.
+1. It looks like the uTracer has been out there enough for credibility purposes at the hobbyist level. I can quote actual Gm/mu/rp from that, plus the test results on the 600 (relative Gm), the remaining measured results (shorts/gas/emissions) from the 667, and screen for noise/microphonics via a simple test rig. I'm absolutely not wanting to screw anyone over in any way - I'm testing like I would want someone else to do, if buying from them 🙂
The ones I'm interested in the most were highly likely to be both tested at the factory, and screened again at the point of installation. They have the telltale dots of paint on the tips that were sometimes used to use to mark tested/passed units.
I probably will run a life test, where the heater is run at a 10% lower voltage, looking for an appreciable drop in Gm. Should be pretty simple, especially if I do this with an external supply.
Thanks everyone for the comments and experience, it's very much appreciated.
The ones I'm interested in the most were highly likely to be both tested at the factory, and screened again at the point of installation. They have the telltale dots of paint on the tips that were sometimes used to use to mark tested/passed units.
I probably will run a life test, where the heater is run at a 10% lower voltage, looking for an appreciable drop in Gm. Should be pretty simple, especially if I do this with an external supply.
Thanks everyone for the comments and experience, it's very much appreciated.
If you're only going to look at (lower power) tubes, the uTracer sounds like the way to go. I had an eTracer a while ago, which was also nice. Hower, at some point I discovered these newfangled sand parts, so I made my own tracer that does it all: https://pypsucurvetrace.readthedocs.io
That's very cool! I'll be needing a couple of power supplies, and will lean towards the ones you have documented. Python-programmable PSUs ftw 🙂
I'll still do the uTracer for now, since I have the case and want something dedicated to tube Gm, but I'll need to do sand-based stuff in the future. Thanks - I wasn't aware of your work until now. Great stuff!
I'll still do the uTracer for now, since I have the case and want something dedicated to tube Gm, but I'll need to do sand-based stuff in the future. Thanks - I wasn't aware of your work until now. Great stuff!