 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.76.111.30
Quick question for those on the forum who were present during they heyday of tubes as the common amplification device..
Though I was aware of VTV in the 90's and the connoisseurship of specific tube brands, my foray into this came well into the internet era (early 2K's) when information was abundant.
I'm curious if during the 1920s-1960s folks sought out particular manufacturers for their particular sonic qualities?
such as:
'In 1930 did folks go down to Cortland Street to a particular dealer to get a Perryman 45 over a DeForest or a Cunningham that might have been carried closer to home?'
(not sure there are any centenarians floating around these parts ;-)
or
'In 1950 did they look for a Ken-Rad 12AX7 over an RCA?'
Basically, were tubes just components that served a function that were replaced as needed in that era?
Or did some folks have a more discerning ear?
(even to remove all the factory tubes on a new piece to repopulate the positions with specific brand allegiances, sonic or otherwise?)
Follow Ups:
Dad only bought RCA tubes for the TV. He figured that since they made TV sets AND tubes, that they must know what they were doing.
I was buying tubes for high end amps and preamps in the 70s, and my experience was that Amperex—a darling of NOS folks now—was often noisy. Talking preamp tubes; I never had to replace any power tubes during that time. I found Mullard to be the most euphonic, Telefunken to be the most reliable. Lately, I like JJs, for both preamp tubes and KT88s. But I also buy NOS EL84s, Ei Yugos, from RAMTUBES, as well as some preamp tubes, and I like those a lot.
Larry Fisher
Port Townsend, Washington
Can't answer this too well, and anyway I'm in the UK where Mullard was king.
But in terms of sound I'd say the internal construction of the tube was more important than the manufacturer. Different anode structures in particular make a difference.
I can share what I know my father did to keep his equipment running-
[Equipment: MC-30, C-8, Fisher Series 80, Heathkit WM5, and lots of other tuners, preamps, power amps etc-]
He religiously shopped at Radioshak as they had a lifetime guarantee!
If I knew then what I know now, I would have purchased a bunch of tubes -
but mostly MO Valves KT-77 and -88s
Happy Listening
"If I knew then what I know now..."
I would have purchased hundreds of Dynaco output transformers. :)
To the OP's question, I don't remember people buying tubes based on their sonic qualities. In fact, tubes like Mullard were just another brand that had to compete with GE, RCA, Sylvania etc. on the basis of availability and price.
I don't know how users may have been attuned to this, but Ken-Rad seemed to be aware of their own unique qualities - to which I can also attest (grammar aside).
"They give a definitely, clearer, sweeter tone" (sic)
I'm sure that some of their clientele would have also noticed the unique character of Ken-Rad tubes.
I agree COMPLETLY!
on both counts-
My father was not aware that Different Tubes had Different sound(s)-
Merely that, like lightbulbs, they need to be replaced, so
A: have some spares
B: replace them with an eye to cost - don't spend too much!
Happy Listening
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
