Replacement for the tube 6922 (ECC88)?

[Gost22]

Hi all!
Which is a better replacement for the tube 6922 (ECC88), tube 6n11 or 6n23p-EV in the buffer musical fidelity X10-D?😕🙄
thank you

 

[ihear21khz]

I do not think the tube heater power-supply in the X10-D can support the higher heater current needed for either of the two tubes you are considering.

 

[Gost22]

I do not think the tube heater power-supply in the X10-D can support the higher heater current needed for either of the two tubes you are considering.

Which gives better sound in this buffer?
Of course if you have experience with this buffer X10-D. Which of these two tubes (6n11; 6n23p-EV) is a direct replacement for ecc88?
Thank you for your cooperation!

 

[ihear21khz]

We fitted a 6N1 into the buffer and the heater voltage dropped to below 5V iirc. This clearly showed that the psu could not supply the higher current needed for this family of tubes. That was the end of the experiment.
I have replaced 6922 with 6N1 in SRPP circuits with great sonic benefits though I have not tried any of the tubes you are considering.

 

[Eli Duttman]

6Н23П-EB (6n23p-ev) IS 6922. That's exactly the case for ElectroHarmonix (EH) branded tubes sold as 6922. A 100% electrical equivalence exists.

How much sonic difference will be present, if any, in a buffer (cathode follower), when the tube is "rolled" is, indeed, a question. Good NOS 6922s are damned expensive. The best sounding current production variant is the "reissue" Genelex E88CC, but that variant carries a 45 USD price tag. FWIW, I say use the tough Russian tube, as it has decent sonics and it will last.

 

[faithintruth]

6DJ8

 

[lordearl]

Try an ecc804 (smaller 6cg7 with higher transconductance and equivalent heater current requirements), works better at the low voltage too (isn't the x10-d very low b+?).....

 

[Wavebourn]

Try couple of MOSFETS instead of triodes in cathode follower configuration, you will be surprised.