I have seen the following having a mesh plate
UX280
RGN1054
RGN1064
RGN2004
RGN4004
AZ1
I think the AZ1 and RGN1064 are jusy the same tubes with different base.
I have not seen a RGN 2504 having a mesh plate, but there may well be a version with mesh plates.
I have to say, mesh plate rectifiers do sound good, may be is due to the better isolation from microphonics.
My problem with mesh plate diodes are spark up on switch on. Any idea what is the cause and how to tackle it?
UX280
RGN1054
RGN1064
RGN2004
RGN4004
AZ1
I think the AZ1 and RGN1064 are jusy the same tubes with different base.
I have not seen a RGN 2504 having a mesh plate, but there may well be a version with mesh plates.
I have to say, mesh plate rectifiers do sound good, may be is due to the better isolation from microphonics.
My problem with mesh plate diodes are spark up on switch on. Any idea what is the cause and how to tackle it?
Sophia Electric offers a mesh plate "274A"
Note, 10uF capacitor input limit, and current limit is also lower than their (and WE's) solid plate version.
This may relate to some issues with mesh plate diodes.
Note, 10uF capacitor input limit, and current limit is also lower than their (and WE's) solid plate version.
This may relate to some issues with mesh plate diodes.
Emission labs currently makes some mesh plate 5U4B and 5Z3.
If we want to be exact, the Sophia/TJ/FM version is not a mesh plate, but peforated plate.
The old mesh plate is a piece of wire mesh, the Sophia version is a plate with holes punched on it. I am not sure if there is any difference or just marketing hype.
In my amp, the input cap is 8u, but I still get random sparking on switch on.
If we want to be exact, the Sophia/TJ/FM version is not a mesh plate, but peforated plate.
The old mesh plate is a piece of wire mesh, the Sophia version is a plate with holes punched on it. I am not sure if there is any difference or just marketing hype.
In my amp, the input cap is 8u, but I still get random sparking on switch on.
Colt45 got to it before me, those two points don't always equate. I am not doubting they are good rectifiers, can't comment because they command those price points so I cannot currently justify building with them. However I hope they fetch that price because they are good rectifiers; not they are good rectifiers simply because they command that price.
Cheers
James
Cheers
James
Colt45 said:
I don't believe we can just look at the specs and say that they are poor rectifiers. Otherwise SS diodes will trump all our tube rectifiers.
There are other factors too that makes different tube rectifers sound different.
BTW, most of these 4V rectifiers aren't that expensive, certainly less than a U52 version of the 5U4 and the famed WE274A/B.
IMHO, the non mesh 4V rectifiers are a steal. I think they do sound a bit better (more mellow sound) than 5V rectifiers, and they are cheaper than the NOS or used 5U4B or 5AR4 or the GZ3X family.
Adapting them to use in a 5V transformer is easy, just add current dropping resistors and the appropriate sockets.
Adapting them to use in a 5V transformer is easy, just add current dropping resistors and the appropriate sockets.
IMHO, the non mesh 4V rectifiers are a steal. >>
Couple of things - first, they tend to be lower power, so more for preamps.
Second, the mesh plates do sound awfully nice - have that added softness and sheen.
But I have started using AZ1 for preamps - you have the option of using a standard one which is cheap and good, or saving up and putting in a mesh one.
andy
Couple of things - first, they tend to be lower power, so more for preamps.
Second, the mesh plates do sound awfully nice - have that added softness and sheen.
But I have started using AZ1 for preamps - you have the option of using a standard one which is cheap and good, or saving up and putting in a mesh one.
andy
"Best" and "most expensive" aren't always mutually inclusive.
"Best" and "most expensive" aren't always mutually inclusive.
While this is sometimes true -- in this case, in general, "Best" and "most expensive" are highly correlated. In general mesh plates sound better than solid plates. I keep both mesh and solid plate AZ12 rectifiers around. The solid plate units are a bit more dynamic. The mesh plate units have a clean, clear sound, with just a touch of warmth and a wonderful top end. While 5U4 tubes lack detail, add way too much warmth, while sounding almost fuzzy.
________________________________________________________
high voltage drop, low rectified current... Newer rects smoke these spec wise, especially later run dampers, and by a long shot.
I have a bit of experience using with AZ12 mesh and solid plates in tube amps. These will handle 200ma of current so I wouldn't call them "low rectified current"
I like listening to my audio system and tube rolling (with adaptors in this case). Do you like lining up "spec sheets" and imagining the sound? Only kidding but your comment begged for this response.
When you're getting outclassed by a 5U4, something is wrong. ---
Not only do I have experience with AZ12 mesh and solid plate rectifiers, I have directly compared them to 5U4 and GZ34 rectifier tubes.
In a high resolution system, that does not lean towards bright, there ain't no 5U4 that I've ever used that can touch an AZ12 mesh or solid plate.
"Best" and "most expensive" aren't always mutually inclusive.
While this is sometimes true -- in this case, in general, "Best" and "most expensive" are highly correlated. In general mesh plates sound better than solid plates. I keep both mesh and solid plate AZ12 rectifiers around. The solid plate units are a bit more dynamic. The mesh plate units have a clean, clear sound, with just a touch of warmth and a wonderful top end. While 5U4 tubes lack detail, add way too much warmth, while sounding almost fuzzy.
________________________________________________________
high voltage drop, low rectified current... Newer rects smoke these spec wise, especially later run dampers, and by a long shot.
I have a bit of experience using with AZ12 mesh and solid plates in tube amps. These will handle 200ma of current so I wouldn't call them "low rectified current"
I like listening to my audio system and tube rolling (with adaptors in this case). Do you like lining up "spec sheets" and imagining the sound? Only kidding but your comment begged for this response.
When you're getting outclassed by a 5U4, something is wrong. ---
Not only do I have experience with AZ12 mesh and solid plate rectifiers, I have directly compared them to 5U4 and GZ34 rectifier tubes.
In a high resolution system, that does not lean towards bright, there ain't no 5U4 that I've ever used that can touch an AZ12 mesh or solid plate.
How do you play a rectifier? With a bow (like a violin) or drumsticks?BrianLW said:
Is that code for 'a system which is fussy about rectifiers'? "Bright" presumably means a perceived change in HF frequency response. What sort of circuit makes its HF response depend on the number of holes in the rectifier anodes?
I wonder why you always feel the urge to be condescendent to people you don't agree with...
Just because *you* can't hear it, it doesn't mean it's not there.
I have compared different rectifiers and I can perceive subtle differences in the sound of the amplifier. That may be because of their different plate impedances and the waveform of the rectified current, with more or less high order harmonics, etc.
Next, SY will come to tell me that if I can hear differences between components like valves and capacitors, it must be because the design is seriously flawed.
Cheers.
LOL {vincent77} and {brianlw}
I actually built an amplifier a decade ago that had 4 independent rectification systems - 3 tubes and one silicon rectifier section. All of them could be ''switched in'' at any time. No lights or other indicators on the thing; I was testing this ''sounds different'' hypothesis.
I got together the most sensitive ears amongst my audiophile friends, especially the ones with strong opinions about this subject. With an external concealed (so they couldn't actually see what section was selected) switch, we went through 5 pieces of music material, changing every time they said "change please". Sometimes I'd change nothing; sometimes I'd double back. I recorded it all … and the results were … amusing.
There WERE subtle differences that people identified. The effect is real! There was a strong correlation between running voltage of the DC side and perception of ''clarity'' and ''openness''. The higher the DC, the more ''clarity'' was universally correlated.
Odd thing was … this gave the silicon rectifier section the edge. Had the lowest average voltage drop, resulting in highest DC. (The SS rectifier had clamping resistors as well as damping circuitry to suppress parasitic reverse EMF oscillation. Always good practice). The high voltage DC was about 1.5% higher than the lowest value.
My audiophile friends were deeply unamused: it was a blind test, and they agreed they tried hard to eliminate their own bias during listening. But when shown the results, several of them demanded to have a re-test. SURE ENOUGH, now they "downgraded" the clearer sounding silicon rectifier choices.
This was the most important "listener-prejudice/bias" test I ever ran.
ps: this same amplifier was modified many times to have alternate-tube sections at the front-end, to test different manufacturers' tubes… with similarly "listener prejudiced" results. Needless to say, I'm no longer much trusting of whatever highly-opinionated people have to say about cherished ideals. Mostly they're full of … beans.
GoatGuy
I actually built an amplifier a decade ago that had 4 independent rectification systems - 3 tubes and one silicon rectifier section. All of them could be ''switched in'' at any time. No lights or other indicators on the thing; I was testing this ''sounds different'' hypothesis.
I got together the most sensitive ears amongst my audiophile friends, especially the ones with strong opinions about this subject. With an external concealed (so they couldn't actually see what section was selected) switch, we went through 5 pieces of music material, changing every time they said "change please". Sometimes I'd change nothing; sometimes I'd double back. I recorded it all … and the results were … amusing.
There WERE subtle differences that people identified. The effect is real! There was a strong correlation between running voltage of the DC side and perception of ''clarity'' and ''openness''. The higher the DC, the more ''clarity'' was universally correlated.
Odd thing was … this gave the silicon rectifier section the edge. Had the lowest average voltage drop, resulting in highest DC. (The SS rectifier had clamping resistors as well as damping circuitry to suppress parasitic reverse EMF oscillation. Always good practice). The high voltage DC was about 1.5% higher than the lowest value.
My audiophile friends were deeply unamused: it was a blind test, and they agreed they tried hard to eliminate their own bias during listening. But when shown the results, several of them demanded to have a re-test. SURE ENOUGH, now they "downgraded" the clearer sounding silicon rectifier choices.
This was the most important "listener-prejudice/bias" test I ever ran.
ps: this same amplifier was modified many times to have alternate-tube sections at the front-end, to test different manufacturers' tubes… with similarly "listener prejudiced" results. Needless to say, I'm no longer much trusting of whatever highly-opinionated people have to say about cherished ideals. Mostly they're full of … beans.
GoatGuy
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.