Glad you've heard it Tony. Nice to have some affirmation I'm not imagining things or more specifically not talking complete BS.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by tonerei
Printable View
Glad you've heard it Tony. Nice to have some affirmation I'm not imagining things or more specifically not talking complete BS.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by tonerei
Well, with some Cunningham CX-345s on the way, it may interest some to know that Cunningham was a tube bootlegger around 1915-20!
The Cunningham 45 globes are amazing. Head and shoulders better than anything so far.
Does this DAC sound better than my analogue front end? You're too damn right it does - GyroOrbe\Morch DP6\Orpheus\Trichord Diablo NCPSU so pretty good really. And by no small stretch. The L4 couldn't really pull that trick off. This DAC can. Easily. It is a much better listen all round and far more consistent over various recordings.
I thought maybe the B7 lacked some speed, as I did the L7. Speed is there is spades with these 45s. As is awesomely well controlled bass that drops really low with full control. Imaging is superb and resolution is just crazy. Separation of instruments is superb. And the feeling you have something in front of you that is real is vey high indeed.
Why the hell these old valves are so damned good I do not know. But they are. Why they sound so fast when there is obviously no hype in the mid band or above I do not know. These were made post Cunningham's bootlegging days, when against all odds he had secured some very favourable court rulings when all odds were stacked against him. A cunning man indeed.
They are an outstanding achievement and I wonder whether the RCA engineers ever knew it? Well, if the Silbertone system at Munich this year was anything to go by, they bloody well did! I reckon Joe would approve of this device, though there's a chance I might be wrong:)
I wonder whether Lukasz knows just how good they are? I've passed a heads up back to him via appropriate channels.
Er... that would be Silbatone:D
Apologies for seemingly over-hyping this DAC. But I really do believe it is a step forward.
Can you please stop posting, I am trying hard not to upgrade from my 5 here.Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
But yeah, a guy who owns the 30k msb stack seems to have preferred this and a guy with total dac said it was no competition. This tube rolling is very tempting
Repeat after me: "I am waiting for level 8, which is bound to use 2x WE 212" LOL When that comes out, there's always level 9 to wait even longer for:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonzo
Yup, I was at the guys house to tea the Big7 and the MSB stack. Lampi was more analog sounding.
The MSB DACs were in a lot of rooms at Munich 2011. From what I can remember, they all sounded great. This was probably my fave room using one. Video shot by me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCTuCc8nqBw
Your kit may be too good now, Justin - I'm not sure I want to hear it! :lol:
I'll invite myself round once your new speakers have arrived. :)
Discuss at Silverstone Jerry sure we'll meet up as per last year.
Duetta issue you knew about has been resolved now. Just waiting for some custom made 1950s space style "Duettas Interstella" plaques to get finished. I did the art work:D
There seems to be quite a high number of hits on this thread so I'll assume people somewhere really are interested.
Here's a pic from the top showing the size of the thing. It has the EML 45s in. The preamp next to it is large anyway. Take this same shot with a flash and you can see virtually everything inside. Even so, I am unable to determine the chipset being used. I can see two fair sized Dueland caps in it though.
I got the Raytheon 6X5WGTs through, plugged them in and fired the DAC up. Instant impression? Absolutely terrible! Massive mid range tearing or ripping sound coming through. Hold on - it is getting better as time goes by. Even after about 5 minutes and TBH I think far longer I could detect some mid range ripping/tearing going on.
These rectifiers have probably never been used since the 50s. But I know they were at least measured NOS. They were from a high sales high rep ebay seller stateside. Now they have around 20 hours on them they sound clean. They obviously need some time to stabilise? I was surprised because I have never come across this before in any valve I've used. I need to do a bit more swapping between the supplied Russian OTK and these to come up with some firmer conclusions.
For interest's sake I swapped back to the knackered Tri-Vista SACD player I have. I've done it about 3 times now but it never lasts long. This once Stereophile A+ rated player gets beat quite markedly especially in terms of soundstaging and resolution, though to be honest I still like the sound it delivers. With the MF the band is some distance in front of you. With the Lampi, it feels a bit like you've moved forward a few rows - you're more enveloped by the sound. I've also noticed a propensity for it to throw images like they sound as if they are coming directly from the side of you. Really quite interesting to hear and it gives a feeling of disbelief - a sort of WTF? feeling is the best way to describe it. I've never heard my system do it before.
Again beware of reading too deeply into any person's thoughts on hi-fi. The way this machine performs in my system will almost certainly be different in yours, though some basic traits will be consistent I expect. Valve rolling also comes down to personal preference in presentation. Needless to say there are plenty of cheaper very listenable machines that are great DACs for way less money:)
Greg owes me a silver faceplate BTW - they couldn't source any at the time of the build for some reason.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-p...69-no/DSC01296
So, what's the difference in SQ between the Big 7 and the 2 box L7?
literally have no idea what you guys are talking about lol
In a nutshell, Justin bought the best dac around and wants to tell everyone about it, anyone who will listen. He also feels alone at the top because the rest of us have not upgraded. I still have the Lampi 5. So he got the 7, then managed to source some exotic valves to go with it, and is living happily ever afterQuote:
Originally Posted by jorwoo14
The bonz, on the other hand, appears to be trying to sell everything at the mo - speakers, preamp, power amp...
... now if he only upgraded to the 7... he'd be just dandy with everything he has:lol:
Well, maybe;)
Post 45 (see what I did there?). They don't quite sound the same, but they really are quite close WITH THE SAME output valves. However, you can't put Cunningham 45s in the 7. Disadvantage. Quite a big one, but then again I expect there are some killer 2A3s out there all the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by wisnon
Blimey :eek: - I've seen that pre-amp on the left, and it's a Big Box, more of a good-sized power amp than a pre - that Lampi must be HUGE!Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
The BIG7 is a dream DAC, but what I am waiting for is the "Level7-HeadDAC" which is supposed to come later after the release of the new HeadDac which is based on a Level4 DAC, with a headphone AMP built in (with maximum integration for optimal synergy)
Hm... I'm going to do some medieval tests on the Big 7... I'm thinking something and I'd like to see if the measurebating supports the perception.
The metal cased 7 is no more according to the website - orders, or 95% of them appear to be for the Big 7.
The B7 now seems to have a 101D option. So three output triodes are now available for use in this DAC. Excellent flexibility. I'm stuck with the choice of two being the first UK B7 owner. No problem, if I want to explore the 101D I'm sure it could be arranged. For a few dollars more...
I think your Cunninghams may still have the best SQ. The 101ds will have more power. Check your email, i sent you a request for info yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
Man I am just losing track of all the "levels" and options...!
Did you get the 245 or 345 Cunninghams? What is the difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
Replied to.Quote:
Originally Posted by wisnon
Agreed - it is in a state of constant flux! Bascially if you buy one of these DACs you should do so in the knowledge that it may be superseded/changed/removed from the model line up in a short period of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yomanze
Mind you other manufacturers do the same.
Like Apple!Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
LoL
The benefit of short lead time for development. Also, the Dacs can all be refurbed later on for reasonable cost due to the hand built nature...
J,
Lukasz just confirmed to me that the 101d tube will work on ALL Big7/Level 7 dacs as a drop in replacement for the 45 triodes! The circuit is robust enough to accept both.
Only the 2A3 setup is different and unless there is a switch to throw, 45s and 101ds wont work in the 2A3 setup.
No mods needed for 101d.Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
I did compare 45 and 101D specs and thought "probably not", but if the man says so... thanks for that wisnon.
Hm... there's a pair of WE tennis ball type 101Ds on ebay USA for a mere $2,200:D Actually I don't think those particular ones will fit as all four pins look to be the same diameter.
The Psvane replica looks interesting, but I'd be amazed if it beats the Cunningham's, which are just superb.
The TJs are probably good for the money I reckon. Let me know how the cheap Shuguangs compare to the Cunningham's when your Big 7 arrives:) If the Shuguangs win I'll fall off my seat!
Hm. TJs not thought highly of here, but the Psvane re-issue is. Might give it a go at some stage.
DSD rant and internal pics: http://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2966. Worth following the AudioCircle link at the end of the thread, too.
Triode pile so far...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-I...o/DSC01560.JPG
I am finding 6.3 Volt triodes, working in the 45 position to give the best results so far. Quite why this is the case I do not know.
The VT52, pictured below, is probably the 2nd best so far. It seems to me to sound the most accurate. It gives some superbly controlled, weighty bass, which the 45 triodes don't quite have, with excellent separation of individual instruments. It really is supremely clear. The soundstage is relatively closed in compared to some of the contenders, but it just sounds so subjectively precise. Like it isn't acting and trying to BIG things up. I really like it.
If anyone understands US Army Signal Corps order codes I wonder if the 42 stands for 1942, in which case those boxes are OLD. These are claimed unused.
More on the VT52 can be found here. It is a curious valve to say the least.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-E...o/DSC01558.JPG
Greater familiarity with the Cunningham CX-345 and afterwards the Philco 45 reveals a mild issue with these tubes, for me.
It became apparent after sometime that there is some sort of mid-range hype with both of these. They give immense mid-range detail. On some program material that just doesn't work, on others it does, and on other stuff you just don't notice it. After a while I found myself hitting them with about -2 to 4DB parametric EQ at 4KHz with a Q ranging from 0.5 to 1, depending on program, mood, and, well, just what I felt like entering with the material playing. This tames the mid range hype considerably. It isn't something you really want to have to do, though.
Make no mistake, these are lively, fast sounding valves.
Whilst the bass is good, it doesn't match the VT52 or even the next contender.
CX-345 globe
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Y...o/DSC01552.JPG
Philco 45 - ST shape. Quite petite, really.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-q...o/DSC01553.JPG
And now for the cheapest valves so far. I paid the precise sum of £52.60 for these.
I had read on some site a post by someone who seemed to have tried a veritable wealth of different triodes. On top of that list he rated the 6A3 the best he tried. Better check some out, I thought.
So, enter the Tung Sol smoked glass 6A3. These things are ridiculously great sounding devices. Soundstage size is somewhere between the EML and the VT52. Bass, mid-range and treble is all top class with these. They really are euphonic buggers from top to bottom. Quite how they manage to pull it off with all sorts of program material I do not know, but they do.
The priority here seems to be just to sound great regardless. Probably not too accurate but amazingly not super-coloured sounding either.
There don't seem to be many left, but the price is a joke for the performance on offer, at least in this DAC. There seem to be a lot of 6B4G valves around. May try those next with an adaptor. There is someone stateside saying the Sylvania 6A3 is even better. Less confused on complex passages, but TBH I don't hear much confusion going on with the Tung Sol. That said, the Sylv. VT52 IS cleaner, so I can see that maybe the Sylv. 6A3 has a similar type of sound to the Sylv. VT52.
The Tung Sols are used but measure very well. They are NOT good in the 2A3 position - they sound distorted. They go over the 6.2 Watts max I found out later - 6.5 I am told.
Excellent results are also being reported with the 300B in the 2A3 switch position.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-b...o/DSC01554.JPG
6A3 inspired by Interstage Tranny's post here here.
300B results will of course depend on which 300Bs you use. If the thoriated tungsten ELROGs weren't so expensive...
I got the Hytron VT52s, and 6A3s I have one Lafayette and one Tung Sol that look the same construction
Well one of my Tung Sols is branded Aristocrat (didn't show it in the pic), but it is defo a Tung Sol.
Congrats I reckon you have picked well Kedar. Journey hasn't ended. There may be better still out there!
However, if anything beats the TS 6A3 I'll be amazed. That is to my ears in my system. Some speakers/ears will favour other valves I am sure.
Great thread Justin, a very interesting read - its a little tricky (for people like me who are a little new to tubes anyway) to keep up with all the tubes you've tested and how you rank them, and what their positives/negatives are.
Any chance of a quick summary of how you rank the tubes you've tested and a brief review of sound stage size/focus/separation, detail retrieval/resolution and bass definition/extension relative to one another and to the stock tubes that come with the B7, plus a quick comment on the overall presentation (warm, smooth, clinical etc) of each?
Gareth general consensus is 6A3, VT52s, 45s and 101Ds are all good. VT52s are super 45s, which are 45s with a bit more power. Also, 6A3 and VT52s, if you can get them, are available relatively cheap. VT52 will go up to $400 for the pair, I think, 6A3 cheaper. The Western Electric 101Ds are $2000.
So given that, it is safe to start off with a 6A3 and a VT52. 300Bs are also expensive, so better demo 300b and 101D if you can before buying. For the others, it is easier to buy on faith.
Kedar's summary is good.
There's quite a lot of info in the thread. I haven't the time/inclination to supply much more.
Gareth - do you own a Big 7 (are your system details out of date?)
Fair enough. No I don't have a B7 at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
Basically if you do get one Gareth try at least a few valve types to tune it to your tastes/system. Your tastes won't be mine I suspect, not the least because of the rest of your system. You can deduce my ranking order from what I have said.
Enjoy:)
There is a nice B7 tube shootout here http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=129512.0
Lads on a Level4 reading a variety of threads a few valves are suggested for the ECC40 valves. Tungsram, Phillips white label and on occasion some strange variants.
What valves will work in that position and where are you buying them? Thanks in advance.
Hi Justin,
Very nice tubes you have there. I own the two-box L7 DAC and I can confirm the effect of tube rolling. You may also want to roll the rectifier tube as well, yours' 6x5 or 5U4G? I found the Raytheon 6x5 much better than the Russian counterpart.
I wonder if you just plug the 6A3 into the Big7 and run it without modification? I think the 6A3 has 6 volt filament while the 45/2A3 has 2.5V so that means the 6A3 will be running with a very low filament voltage: ~2.5V vs 6V. Similar for the VT-52 which has 7V filament. This may work just fine as tubes are very resilient.
Happy listening.
Jack
The Sylvania VT52 is 6.3V. Lucasz says it is fine to use them, as is the 6A3.
I really don't like the Raytheon, which just goes to show.
You are right about voltages otherwise. 6A3 - don't try it in a 2A3 setup L7. It sounds distorted.
As I have said you exceed allowable Wattage with 6A3 in the 2A3 position.
This is an amazingly nerdy thread, even by hifi forum standards! :lol:
Carry on as you were ... :popcorn: ...
ECC40 doesn't have much in the way of rolling options. Most were made by Tungsram. I have some Tungsram totally NOS apart from 3 hours use. PM if interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonerei
Does your Lampi have any other sockets?
Forget about vintage WE 101ds...overpriced unobtanium! Try the metal base PSVANE W.E. Replica 101ds for about $550 on Ebay. I agree with Justin that the 6A3 (typically $150) a pair on Ebay is by far the best buy. It MAY be just shaded by the Sophia Electric Carbon Princess 300b (2.5v NOT 5V as the normal 300Bs are). These go for about $525 a pair with 30 day warranty and are meant as a 2A3 replacement tube.Quote:
Originally Posted by bonzo