The ECC82 has figures which are sim but audio performance is horrible.
Anyone come up with other B9A's with comparable 6SN7 performance ?
richy
Anyone come up with other B9A's with comparable 6SN7 performance ?
richy
richwalters said:
Oh, please -- maybe it isn't as good as some other tubes, but horrible? I bet in a blind test 12au7's and 6sn7's are indistinguishable to 99% of us.
Colt45 said:
Ditto, they both are excellent tubes, the only complaint I have with them is the low gain, which isn't a deal breaker
😀
If you can find them in 8 volt heater version they are often cheaper too!
dsavitsk;
Sorry for that one... (I have to expect some backlash from avid users)...I simply just don't get on with the ECC82... perhaps historical or have grotty samples.....It does have a poor FFT spectrum.
DigitJ- Thanks for 6CG7....Ah!. I really should have realised this one.
richy
Sorry for that one... (I have to expect some backlash from avid users)...I simply just don't get on with the ECC82... perhaps historical or have grotty samples.....It does have a poor FFT spectrum.
DigitJ- Thanks for 6CG7....Ah!. I really should have realised this one.
richy
As many of us have discovered, most of the old tube manufacturers liked to reuse parts. If for instance your circuit required a high mu dual triode, and a low mu, 6sn7-like dual triode, you should consider using two dissimilar triodes. Some of them are remarkably similar to 6cg7 and 12at7 specifically. They seem to have been common plate & cathode structures to use for medium and higher mu purposes in lotsa TV tubes etc.
And if you have 12.6VAC available you can just use a rectifier diode in series with the heater (without any filter cap) and it will operate normally. Power is V^2/R, and the R is not the same, and with the unfiltered diode 1/2 (V^2/R)
(12^2)/2 = 72, and 8.4^2 = 71 which is close enough. I took out 0.6V from the 12.6V for the diode drop (which is not exactly the same as 12VAC, but for this purpose that can be ignored)
dsavitsk said:
The author writing that RCA and GE were pushing on the market miniature replacements probably don't know why: the government wanted smaller tubes for computers so invented a genuine trick: taxes of an enclosed vacuum.
I have a big bag full of 8CG7's. I have found that if your amp uses a Hammond power transformer on typical US 122 to 124 volt power, your filament voltage is probably about 7 volts already. Just plug them in. Most of them work just fine.
Nice trick: rectify 6.3V by a Shottky diodes' bridge, and get exactly 8V on 10,000 uF/10V filter cap under load. I used that in my Tower class A hybrid (2x200W) to power filaments of 8AL9 tubes.
Not sure why you'd not use a 6SN7. If it's cost, use the loctal 7N7 or 7AF7. The latter is handy since it has half the filament draw.
If it's size of socket, the rimlock ECC40 is a great sound. Pretty much 9A size.
Good 9A tubes around this spec include the E80CC which is vastly better than the ECC82
andy
If it's size of socket, the rimlock ECC40 is a great sound. Pretty much 9A size.
Good 9A tubes around this spec include the E80CC which is vastly better than the ECC82
andy
andyjevans said:
... And vastly better than the venerable 6SN7. The E80CC is without any doubt the most linear and best sounding dual triode in 9A (noval) basing you may ever find. Originally designed for demanding (professional) audio applications,not a TV vertical deflection amplifier tube (like the 6CG7/6FQ7/12B4/6BL7/6BX7...) Designed by PHILIPS, the E80CC is a SQ (Special Quality) long life (10.000 hours) tube with gold pins,tight tolerances and excellent matching between the two triode elements. Hard to beat,even with the best 6SN7 variety (5692 Red Bases anyone ?) . Not a direct substitution for the 6SN7 but close enough, It can be used in most 6SN7 applications where plate voltage doesn't exceed 350V. A very underrated tube which can still be found cheap.
Tubologic said:
ECC80 like 6N1P was designed to replace obsolete 6SN7 in a new gear, that means in similar applications it will exhibit similar linearity.
E80CC is a special version of ECC80, like 6N1P-EV
Wavebourn said:
There never was a ECC80 and consequently the E80CC is not a "special version ECC80". Also,it was not designed to replace "obsolete" 6SN7's but was intended for broadcast and industrial applications.
The (Russian) 6N1P is electrically similar,but as far as building quality and tolerances are concerned it can't be compared to a E80CC.
Hi,
E80CC cheap? Send me some.
Anyway the E80CC is a late Philips development intended for the professional user (instrumentation, studio, telephony, telegraphy etc) using boxed anodes and a pin to pin layout conform to the B9A standard.
It's a very linear, reasonably low mu, twin triode bigger than a 12BH7A that CAN be used as a drop in replacement for a ECC82.
It will sound different from the original ECC82 when used as a replacement for that valve but then it should.
Sure, it will often make that circuit sound better but it would be better still if the anode load and cathode resistors were to be adjusted to properly accomodate this valve.
While I can understand the enthusiasm for this E80CC (6085 to US users which were invariably sourced from Europe), it really shouldn't be considered as a drop in replacement for the humble (and mediocre) ECC82/12AU7-A.
And yes, more bad news, there was an ECC80 but it has nothing in common with either the ECC82 nor the E80CC....
Ciao, 😉
E80CC cheap? Send me some.
Anyway the E80CC is a late Philips development intended for the professional user (instrumentation, studio, telephony, telegraphy etc) using boxed anodes and a pin to pin layout conform to the B9A standard.
It's a very linear, reasonably low mu, twin triode bigger than a 12BH7A that CAN be used as a drop in replacement for a ECC82.
It will sound different from the original ECC82 when used as a replacement for that valve but then it should.
Sure, it will often make that circuit sound better but it would be better still if the anode load and cathode resistors were to be adjusted to properly accomodate this valve.
While I can understand the enthusiasm for this E80CC (6085 to US users which were invariably sourced from Europe), it really shouldn't be considered as a drop in replacement for the humble (and mediocre) ECC82/12AU7-A.
And yes, more bad news, there was an ECC80 but it has nothing in common with either the ECC82 nor the E80CC....
Ciao, 😉
Tubologic said:
As I said, as soon as American government invented taxes on enclosed vacuum to force an industry to make smaller tubes for computers, octal tubes were considered as obsoleted all around the world, and miniature replacements were designed and offered. Among them, Philips offered ECC80 to replace 6SN7. SOviet engineers made 6N1P. Yes, tolerances of Russian manufacturing are out of question, I myself worked in a team that restored QC measurement equipment when a Ministry comission demanded from the head of the plant to restore it.
Tolerances of RCA tubes were incredible, even thouigh Telefunken was known as the flagman of tight tolerances.
Neither 6N1P, nor ECC80 are direct replacements for 6SN7; they were designed to replace them in new designs