Hi!
I have a Sonic Frontiers Line 2. I came across an article pointing out 6H6P tubes can be used as a replacement for the 6922 used in my amp with no mods?
If search and it seems some of us here thinks the 6H6P is better sounding than the 6922.
If yes, then where is the best place to put them? In the input section, gain stage or cathode follower?
If no, then would the supposedly direct repleacment 6N23P sound better than the 6922 in the pre amp?
Thanks for looking and help is much appreciated.
I have a Sonic Frontiers Line 2. I came across an article pointing out 6H6P tubes can be used as a replacement for the 6922 used in my amp with no mods?
If search and it seems some of us here thinks the 6H6P is better sounding than the 6922.
If yes, then where is the best place to put them? In the input section, gain stage or cathode follower?
If no, then would the supposedly direct repleacment 6N23P sound better than the 6922 in the pre amp?
Thanks for looking and help is much appreciated.
Hi Henkel
Which article is that?
Deliberately swapping tubes around in an unknown circuit is not very 'wise', so to say. At least I would not do it... The 6H6P (I think you are referring to the 6N6P, which is similiar to the ECC99) has a higher filament current that may strain the power transformer. Besides, with the existing components, the 6N6P will probably not be properly biased, or it may draw extra current from the B+, also straining the power transformer.
A good exercise would be to obtain the schematic of the preamp and calculate the circuit with the 6N6P in place. But if you just want some 'tube rolling', than stay with the 6922 and it's replacements (E88CC, 6N23P, etc).
Good luck, Erik
Which article is that?
Deliberately swapping tubes around in an unknown circuit is not very 'wise', so to say. At least I would not do it... The 6H6P (I think you are referring to the 6N6P, which is similiar to the ECC99) has a higher filament current that may strain the power transformer. Besides, with the existing components, the 6N6P will probably not be properly biased, or it may draw extra current from the B+, also straining the power transformer.
A good exercise would be to obtain the schematic of the preamp and calculate the circuit with the 6N6P in place. But if you just want some 'tube rolling', than stay with the 6922 and it's replacements (E88CC, 6N23P, etc).
Good luck, Erik
Thanks, Erik.
The article I read is in www.lampizator.eu in which an apprentice of Mr Fikus, substituted the 6922 tubes in a Copland CT405 amp with the 6H6P.
Hence my curiosity about my own 6922 based pre amp.
Will do as per your advised.
The article I read is in www.lampizator.eu in which an apprentice of Mr Fikus, substituted the 6922 tubes in a Copland CT405 amp with the 6H6P.
Hence my curiosity about my own 6922 based pre amp.
Will do as per your advised.
Finally managed to borrow a pair of 6H6P from a friend. Plug it in to the LV3 & V3 row, i.e. cathode follower tube row of the SF Line 2. Had a quick listened.
The power supply regulators run a little hotter than usual and the tranny became rather hot about 10 mins of playing time.
I was a little worried about about the power supply, so reverted back to the 6922 tubes of origin.
I found the sound characteristic changed a little, background was much quieter with the 6H6Ps.
I am happy to confirm that 6H6Ps are not suitable in the SF Line 2 preamp.
Thanks all whom replied.
The power supply regulators run a little hotter than usual and the tranny became rather hot about 10 mins of playing time.
I was a little worried about about the power supply, so reverted back to the 6922 tubes of origin.
I found the sound characteristic changed a little, background was much quieter with the 6H6Ps.
I am happy to confirm that 6H6Ps are not suitable in the SF Line 2 preamp.
Thanks all whom replied.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.