Printable View
Just wondering. I've been messing around with 6SL7GT's for 3 months. Now I'd like to spend a little time tube rolling my EAR834 clone. Tried some Mullards, tried som GE JAN's. Thanks to everyone that's given advice to me in the past with regards the ECC83. But is there a best Telefunken ECC83?
ECC803S.
In my honest opinion after owning both the Tele and the Tesla 803S at the same time, the yellow print 32 factory version, it is a complete waste of money. The Tesla is so close to the Tele it is virtually indistinguishable from it.
And that was using some Martin Logan Ascents and an Air Tight ATM2.
Don't waste your money. The Teslas were made using Telefunken machinery. Structurally they are very similar internally.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
I have to disagree!Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
Telsa's I've tried arent even close in sonics!
The Telefunken are all clean lines and transparency whereas the Tesla, whilst good and my second favourite, just aren't on that level.
I tried multiple variations of valves is 3 separate pieces of kit and there was no denying it. I had Alan round when I swapped a NOS Tesla out for a NOS Tele and it was such a gulf that he went home and bought some Telefunken Valves and Alan rarely spends money!
Seriously,l if you want to hear what that lovely phonostage can do, put some Telefunken Valves in.
If you want to save a few quid, search for Fisher Valves. They are rebranded Telefunken Valves. Made at the original factory and they don't make counterfeit Fisher valves. [emoji6]
My opinion of course. Feel free to disagree!
I spent hours comparing the two and there was absolutely no way I could really tell the difference.
Did you really have the exact valves I listed? I'd be amazed if you did.
I've spent 30 odd years rolling valves BTW.
Just been looking and the Tele ECC803S price is now so insane I can't see many paying the going rates. They were extremely expensive when I had them but now it is absolutely bats.
It all depends which Telefunken and which Tesla your are talking about. There are many NOS out there and not all of them are NOS, not all of them are genuine and as I have found with Tesla's in particular there are many ECC83's manufactures in different factories over different years. All claiming to be NOS and the genuine article.
However on listening I have been surprised and dubious of the exact origin and authenticity of the cartridges I have owned. Yes I know all about reputable sellers etc but ultimately at the end of the day it all boils down to how they sound and not the magic faded writing on the tube.
I have moved from older NOS Tesla's to younger Tesla ECC83's preferring their sound and recently actually found some very cheap JJTesla ECC83S were better in one position than my NOS.
Ears are the best evaluator, not price, name or faded magic writing and symbols.:);)
I wasn't refering to your "exact" valves, rather the brands. The ones available to me which were certified as never being used and genuine NOS.Quote:
Originally Posted by User211
Hmm... I'd argue [and with good reason] that the 'best' ECC83 isn't a Telefunken, so the question is somewhat moot...;)
Marco.
Best readily available?
Is it the Radiotelecomunique you prefer ?
Yup! These things, however, are hugely personal taste and system-dependent, which is why it's a fallacy to consider that there is any one 'best' valve of any type, Telefunken included.
What there is, however, are selected groups of valves, from certain manufacturers, which are of a higher quality overall than others (due to how they've been constructed), and among that you'll find ones that suit your ears and equipment best, as in my experience each has its own 'house sound' (sonic signature), which will either suit your ears and system or not.
In that respect, the worst thing you can do is use too many of the one type (from the same manufacturer), i.e. all Telefunken, as that way you'll get too much of the 'house Telefunken sound' [cool, clear, detailed, if a little matter-of-fact and 'soulless' - it's a German thing], when a bit of Mullard 'phatness' and warmth might be what's needed, especially with equipment prone to brightness.
You need to see valves as essentially tone controls, all with different 'flavours', so in order to get the best sound, it's about successfully marrying those flavours together, in order to create the right 'recipe' for YOU.
However, for the sake of amusement, if you want to kid on that there exists a universal 'best valve', ECC83 or otherwise, then carry on!;)
Marco.
Good Observation Marco regarding mixing of valve types! I have experienced this myself and have pondered the question why. I have had better results with a mix of valves (different in PSU and phono stage) than if I use all the same. Maybe certain valves work better in different positions and what is needed for great sonics in the phono stage may not what is required in power supply or voltage regulation?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
I am intrigued by the notion of different national characters of valves, and the resulting need to establish a sort of United Nations or European Community of valves to prevent one type of valve invading Poland or whatever. I wonder what the national characteristics are of non-German valves?
British - pragmatic, dogged, but a bit lazy and prone to not working for long periods.
Japanese - hard-working, but wily and inscrutable.
Russian - reliable, but a tad assertive and need watching carefully. Avoid mixing them with US valves.
US - brash, insensitive, forward-sounding.
Chinese - multifarious.
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe
However it's not quite as simple as that - two British brands: Brimar and Mullard are either British/American (the first), or wholly Dutch (the second). I'm not sure about Mazda or Marconi, but suspect they are re-badged Brimars.
Hi Jim,
I don't think it's so much a case of the latter, as that will simply come down to which is most electrically suitable in a particular circuit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
You'll have heard what I have, by mixing different valves (of the same type), from different manufacturers, simply as a result of the effects of their (varying) constructions, such as anode plate/mica/getter structure, how the valve concerned has been designed to help eliminate the effects of vibration, different pin/base materials, etc, and even the size and construction of the glass tube itself.
Just because, say a Mullard ECC83 and a Telefunken ECC83, perform the same electrical function, doesn't necessarily mean that they will sound the same!;)
And if they don't sound the same, then their respective sonic signatures, just like with cables, will influence what you hear accordingly, which is why you can hit upon certain combinations that just 'work' (better than others), simply because they combine to create a sound you like, and which works with (rather than against) how your system has been 'voiced' [as a result of the choices you've made to date, in that respect, perhaps inadvertently].
Hope that makes sense?:)
Marco.
Makes sense mate. :) I have been through dozens of valves in the last 3 years and am constantly surprised how valves from just one particular manufacturer/Brand can sound so different depending which year they were manufactured. They obviously evolved the technology and subtly changed the 'Ingredients' over time as many were trying to simply get a valve to last as long as possible. I wonder how much thought went into the actual sound of the valve. Did they try different materials and listen to them in order to voice a valve or were they developed purely for longlevity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
I wouldn't have said purely for longevity for 'normal' valves, as the SQ types such as E88CC and the like were made for long service.
I can only guess that none of the low frequency valves were voiced by listening to them, just developed to give a certain gain figure or low noise.
Many of the valves intended for high frequency operation, eg TV's, will have been developed with low capacitances in mind or with variable gain factors dependent on the valve biasing. It is a happy circumstance that a lot of these can be used effectively at audio frequencies.
:)
So valves were only developed to meet a technical specification? I suppose back then how they sounded was not a concern?Quote:
Originally Posted by Firebottle
Mullard always makes me think of Arthur Mullard, with associations of weight and dullness. However, I've only ever used US or Chinese valves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry
I just had visions of Telefunken Valves goose stepping all over Europe while the plucky Mullards scarper across the channel in various small ships....:mental::eek:
You can measure the change in your systems FR really easily after a valve roll. I did it with 4 different quads of 211 valves.
Just sayin' it's all real - for the doubters, that's all.
Said it before and I'll say it again... Having rolled many vintage ECC83s and their variants, IME the best by a long distance- in numerous valve applications- is the uber-rare foil getter, welded plate Tungsram ECC83 ('58-'63) Nothing else I have tried comes close.
I kinda guess the only way your gonna find your ideal ECC83 is to buy, experiment and get cracking!
Sorry for the late reply, Jim..
Yes, Alan's right. As far as I know, the KT88 is the only vacuum tube to have been specifically designed for audio purposes, although the 300B may also come into that category, but I stand to be corrected on that one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
Anything else, or the vast majority of valves, were designed for commercial purposes, often in telecommunication and broadcast applications, and especially in military ones. Therefore, they were built with reliability and longevity in mind, not sound quality.
However, the unintentional by-product of that, due to the superior construction techniques and materials used on the best military spec valves, was often improved sound quality, when said valves were used for audio purposes, which is why the best sounding valves often come from NOS examples of ex-military (WW1 & 2) stock.
As for "evolving the technology", that only happened during the heyday of when valves were used universally, in the applications outlined, probably up until the early 60s. After that, when transistors were introduced, things went downhill rapidly, in terms of the quality of materials used and vacuum tube production techniques, as factories down-scaled their production and moved to transistors.
Therefore, it's fairy safe to assume that the best valves, for hi-fi purposes, were produced from around the 1920s to the early 1960s, and that current production varieties are inferior for that reason. You just have to listen to, say, a modern Chinese or Russian-produced ECC83 (the only two countries still making valves), compared with an (electrically optimal) NOS Telefunken, Tesla (not JJ), Mullard, etc, and you'll instantly hear the difference!
However, there's also just as big a difference in cost, some of which is down to rarity and/or inflated pricing, due to demand from audiophiles for the best NOS varieties, but mostly you get what you pay for :cool:
Marco.
Bought some of these recently, not saying they're the best, but they do sound good!
NOS Chinese Military 6N4-J 12AX7WA - Square Getter.
I believe Chinese-made valves have improved considerably in the last fifteen years or so. Earlier ones were awful: they would often crackle, pop and bang.
Not that I would use them - I'll stick to NOS Mullard, Philips, Siemens & Halske and Telefunken. (I have no experience of US-made valves.)
The 300b was designed for US telephone repeater units. The repeater units were buried underground, and thus the valve had to be sufficiently robust and reliable to operate in that specific environment.
I like the idea of "bulbs" being buried underground. Wonder what future generations of archaeologists would make of this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry
Thermionic devices were also used in undersea repeater units up till the late '60s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherwood
Thanks for that, Barry. I wasn't sure. Looks like then only the KT88 was specifically designed for audio use :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry
Current production Chinese valves may have become more reliable, but they still sound crap compared with the best NOS varieties, although Gary's NOS Chinese ones will no doubt be different.
Marco.