Eico or HH scott?
- Thread starter mcgarick
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
WopOnTour
Hoarder Extraordinaire
For me it would be the SCOTT
IMO bigger-better iron, better rectification (5AR4),more power (7591), better tone controls with scratch & rumble filters, better input & EQ flexibility (mono LP + twin mag hi/lo RIAA phono, NARTB tape),
and I would venture to say having heard them both (and even at the risk of contradicting the 2006 Stereophile article) better sounding (once properly restored)
JMO
WOT
IMO bigger-better iron, better rectification (5AR4),more power (7591), better tone controls with scratch & rumble filters, better input & EQ flexibility (mono LP + twin mag hi/lo RIAA phono, NARTB tape),
and I would venture to say having heard them both (and even at the risk of contradicting the 2006 Stereophile article) better sounding (once properly restored)
JMO
WOT
)
drknstrmyknight
Addicted Member
AFAIK all Scotts are fixed bias except the 222.
They're both fine amps when restored, though the phono section on the HF-81 is probably a weak point on a stock unit in comparison to the Scott IMHO. The variables of tube complement and the components used in the restore are going to make a sonic difference between two specimens of the same model. I don't think you can wrong with either one if they've been under the knife of a competent technician.
They're both fine amps when restored, though the phono section on the HF-81 is probably a weak point on a stock unit in comparison to the Scott IMHO. The variables of tube complement and the components used in the restore are going to make a sonic difference between two specimens of the same model. I don't think you can wrong with either one if they've been under the knife of a competent technician.
Don't forget about the Sherwood S5000 - I'd put it in the same league as the Scott, for perhaps a bit less money. The HF81 is, objectively, overpriced right now relative to its capabilities.
IMHO, the Sherwood will blow both of them away.
Maybe that's over-stating it a bit. The Sherwood will likely have better dynamic range and more "open" sound than either of the others...
Regards,
Gordon.
soundmotor
super modified
I would get the HF-81 as it is an EL-84 amplifier and for the way the cheap-ass chassis on it is designed; it is far easier to repair or modify. It has a great reputation for sound quality too. (I also love Scott and have a pile of them so maybe I am just bored and want to try something I don't have?)
markus
Master Procrastinator
yup .. .I've got a Sherwood 8000MKIV, and it's a great amp . . haven't even totally recapped it yet, and it sounds amazing
I think you better get one of each so you'll know for sure :yes:
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
Well, the 299C has 7591 outputs, doesn't it? If so, then I'd say the HF-81. If not, then the Scott. Both share the challenge of somewhat over-stressed (i.e., under-spec'd) power transformers. I think Heyboer can do replacements for both (I know they can for the HF-81). The Scott definitely is the more attractivee The phono section in the Scott is doubtless better; I just use a nice, modern outboard phono preamp with my HF-81.
I've got a Sherwood S-5500II (?) in the basement; one of the PP 7591 amps. It definitely sounds good, but I've never set it up for critical listening.
I have two Scott 222Cs (well, three on site at the moment, 'cause I still need to rehab Birddogs!) and an LK-72. I really cannot say too much about them, though, because the 222Cs don't work (one almost certainly has a bad PT) and the LK-72 has low output in one preamp channel. Birddog's 222C, which is absolutely beautiful, has low output in one phono channel. I definitely have a sense that, at this late date, the Scott gear needs more to get it going than EICO or Sherwood equipment of the same vintage. That may or may not be significant.
over-stressed (i.e., under-spec'd) power transformers. I think Heyboer can do replacements for both (I know they can for the HF-81). The Scott definitely is the more attractivee The phono section in the Scott is doubtless better; I just use a nice, modern outboard phono preamp with my HF-81.I've got a Sherwood S-5500II (?) in the basement; one of the PP 7591 amps. It definitely sounds good, but I've never set it up for critical listening.
I have two Scott 222Cs (well, three on site at the moment, 'cause I still need to rehab Birddogs!) and an LK-72. I really cannot say too much about them, though, because the 222Cs don't work (one almost certainly has a bad PT) and the LK-72 has low output in one preamp channel. Birddog's 222C, which is absolutely beautiful, has low output in one phono channel. I definitely have a sense that, at this late date, the Scott gear needs more to get it going than EICO or Sherwood equipment of the same vintage. That may or may not be significant.
mcgarick
Super Member
Theres a guy on Audiogon who is selling these two, restored,recapped and checked out. His feedback is 100%, I guess I really want a Scott 299B with the el84 tube, refurbished.
But its not available anywhere as far as I know. I want to get a great sounding vintage amp to try and use, and enjoy, I want a fixed biased design.
But its not available anywhere as far as I know. I want to get a great sounding vintage amp to try and use, and enjoy, I want a fixed biased design.
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
All the "classic" 7591PP amps sound good, but (IMNSHO) I've yet to hear one that sounds glorious. YMMV.
FalconEddy
Audio Mastering Engineer
Note that the early stock 299B's came with 7189's, not EL84's. I've even seen a couple later version 299B's that had 7591's. Perhaps before they got the official 299C labels on them.
. . Falcon
Mark W.
Nut house of the Universe
I got a Scott 233 a simplified version of the 299c I believe and while I very limited experience with tube amps I am tickled to death with how mine sounds. 7591'a all!
not to mention the beautiful Silver face (sorry just not into the Brass/gold look of the 299's
not to mention the beautiful Silver face (sorry just not into the Brass/gold look of the 299's
NYListens
CBGB & OMFUG
What's wrong with 7591s?
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
Nothing, 'specially now that decent new production is available and prices of NOS have consequently abated.
It's just that every 7591 (and 7868, which is the same tube in a different bottle) amp/receiver I've heard sounds good, but lacks that ultimate spark of real life. Conversely, I think that every EL84/7189 amp (even push-pull, pentode-mode) I've heard has it. The HF-81 has it in spades. Even the modest Dyna SCA-35 has wonderful midrange and decent everything else.
Yeah, I own some 7591 amps and receivers, too... I even used to have a single-ended 7591 stereo "integrated" amp from a Westinghouse hifi (which I passed on to Markus). I am not ant-7591; I just prefer other output tubes based on experience.
kvflyer
Super Member
Well said. Isn't it great that we have choice?
