• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

EL34 vs. 6L6GC vs. 7591 ? Truth - Who's Best !

Mr Boochie said:
Too bad 6V6GT wasn't an option.

minions-sad.gif
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, 6V6s aren't nearly as linear as any of the others mentioned.

Mind you, I like my 6V6 amp a lot (HK Award A300), but it took a LOT of feedback to linearize those 6V6s, to a reasonably low distortion level. It sounds excellent, but it's not the easy way to get that sort of good sound, compared to EL84s.

Regards,
Gordon.
 
GordonW said:
Unfortunately, 6V6s aren't nearly as linear as any of the others mentioned.

Mind you, I like my 6V6 amp a lot (HK Award A300), but it took a LOT of feedback to linearize those 6V6s, to a reasonably low distortion level. It sounds excellent, but it's not the easy way to get that sort of good sound, compared to EL84s.

Regards,
Gordon.
Click to expand...
I guess we agree to disagree. ;)
 
Mr Boochie said:
I guess we agree to disagree. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, just compare the plate curves. That's just simple physics. The 6V6 just has higher inherent distortion, as a result, compared to the others.

Not saying that 6V6s can't sound good in many cases- it is just harder to make them as linear and low-distortion as other tube types mentioned here.

Regards,
Gordon.
 
GordonW said:
Well, just compare the plate curves. That's just simple physics. The 6V6 just has higher inherent distortion, as a result, compared to the others.

Not saying that 6V6s can't sound good in many cases- it is just harder to make them as linear and low-distortion as other tube types mentioned here.

Regards,
Gordon.
Click to expand...
Oh well...
 
GordonW said:
Unfortunately, 6V6s aren't nearly as linear as any of the others mentioned.

Mind you, I like my 6V6 amp a lot (HK Award A300), but it took a LOT of feedback to linearize those 6V6s, to a reasonably low distortion level. It sounds excellent, but it's not the easy way to get that sort of good sound, compared to EL84s.

Regards,
Gordon.
Click to expand...
6V6 came about as a smaller beam tetrode 6L6, supplanting the 6F6/42 & falling in power somewhere between a 6K6/41 and 6L6 for table sets and consoles where the 6L6 was more than required. The 6F6/42 pentode was still in use mainly for consoles by Philco, Zenith, and others eschewing RCA sourced tubes.
 
Last edited:
Like some one else said its not so much about the tubes as it is the output transformers. That said with the right speakers the little Mcintosh 225 has just a bit more satisfying sound for me with 7591's than the 240 with 6l6 GC or 275 with KT 88's. But the much larger MC 3500 is the champ whether at 1 watt 30 watts or 400 watts is the leader of the group. It uses 8 6CG7's. Much lower distortion. larger signal to noise ratio, and much longer life span than the others. But then it has a pentafiliar output transformer. Five coupled windings.

Now if you want a real quiet amp with much higher signal to noise, and much lower distortion you want a Class A Quad balanced amp from Accuphase. Mac makes amps with even lower distortion using Quad balanced circuits to , but their amps are class B. And heaven for bid use autoformers. So their amps still have a sound similar to advanced tube amps like the MC 3500 MK II. or current 1502 , 2301, or little 275. In the 60's the 275 were consider to be big amps. But not today. Of course there is always Audio research tube stuff. But they don't make anything smaller than a 75 watt amp either anymore. A Marantz 8B was a great sounding amp as was the Marantz model 9. but they are no longer made either.

But it seems to me today most people don't care about distortion levels in their tube amps. Cary and Prima Luna for example are amps with higher in fact much higher levels than most would accept in the 60's. It is all apart of that mystical tube sound most people are after to tone the recording practices in the digital age and the elevated top octaves of some, but not all popular SS condenser microphones. Ever notice Enoch Light of Command Records used ribbon mics to tone down certain brass instruments and reed instruments? Its always been about the 5khz to 10 khz octave for me. Get that octave in balance with the rest of the lower spectrum and you have the reproduction of the sound almost licked. Oh! Messing around with the top octave helps a bit with percussion cymbals and snare, and with first violins occasionally. Some tube amps don't do well below 40 hz or so either, but then most speakers don't also. Does that mean when it comes to sound reproduction two minuses actually make for a positive experience? Some seem to think, so.
 
Last edited:
nj pheonix said:
Not sure you can get any kind of intelligent answer. That is, while certain families of tubes may have a characteristic some prefer.
The same quad of whatever (you pick) in 5 differents amps (different driver stages, OPTs, can have different sounds.
It's possible to find preferences within a given group.
One last point, all E34s, 7591s, 6L6s aren't created equal so even within a single type you may have preferences. My 2c
(Worth exactly that:biggrin:)
Click to expand...

yes, +1 for same comments.
 
twiiii said:
Like some one else said its not so much about the tubes as it is the output transformers. That said with the right speakers the little Mcintosh 225 has just a bit more satisfying sound for me with 7591's than the 240 with 6l6 GC or 275 with KT 88's. But the much larger MC 3500 is the champ whether at 1 watt 30 watts or 400 watts is the leader of the group. It uses 8 6CG7's. Much lower distortion. larger signal to noise ratio, and much longer life span than the others. But then it has a pentafiliar output transformer. Five coupled windings.

Now if you want a real quiet amp with much higher signal to noise, and much lower distortion you want a Class A Quad balanced amp from Accuphase. Mac makes amps with even lower distortion using Quad balanced circuits to , but their amps are class B. And heaven for bid use autoformers. So their amps still have a sound similar to advanced tube amps like the MC 3500 MK II. or current 1502 , 2301, or little 275. In the 60's the 275 were consider to be big amps. But not today. Of course there is always Audio research tube stuff. But they don't make anything smaller than a 75 watt amp either anymore. A Marantz 8B was a great sounding amp as was the Marantz model 9. but they are no longer made either.

But it seems to me today most people don't care about distortion levels in their tube amps. Cary and Prima Luna for example are amps with higher in fact much higher levels than most would accept in the 60's. It is all apart of that mystical tube sound most people are after to tone the recording practices in the digital age and the elevated top octaves of some, but not all popular SS condenser microphones. Ever notice Enoch Light of Command Records used ribbon mics to tone down certain brass instruments and reed instruments? Its always been about the 5khz to 10 khz octave for me. Get that octave in balance with the rest of the lower spectrum and you have the reproduction of the sound almost licked. Oh! Messing around with the top octave helps a bit with percussion cymbals and snare, and with first violins occasionally. Some tube amps don't do well below 40 hz or so either, but then most speakers don't also. Does that mean when it comes to sound reproduction two minuses actually make for a positive experience? Some seem to think, so.
Click to expand...

would have to agree. I have at least 2 copies of all the MAC tube amps, and the MC225 is sure one sweet sounding amp. And if you run two in mono operation, a lot of the magic is lost, so one 225 sounds better than a pair in mono.

+1 for comments on 8B amp. Ony 35 watts but what nice sounding amp.
 
GordonW said:
Not saying that 6V6s can't sound good in many cases- it is just harder to make them as linear and low-distortion as other tube types mentioned here.
Click to expand...
Pentodes are pentodes. They all require considerable feedback for satisfactorily linear operation and suitable IM numbers. My small SET amp is 6V6, but I tested the circuitry with a number of other types in the prototype, including NOS 6BQ5. The 6V6 was not more difficult to tame than other pentodes, and considering this is Class A, I think that should say something. It's an excellent tube in its genre, and I have never even considered replacing it with anything else.

Jack
 
invaderzim said:
But, which EL84 tube sounds best? :rflmao:
Click to expand...
Smokey Hole Mullards

I've had 6V6, 7591, EL34 & 84 amp's, integrated and receivers from many makers and no matter the name on front of the equipment the tubes I always prefer and come back to are the EL34 & 84's. The Luxkit/Luxman A3500 EL34 amp being the pinnacle. Some how I've never owned a 6L6 piece of any type. I should rectify that.
 
Last edited:
GordonW said:
Unfortunately, 6V6s aren't nearly as linear as any of the others mentioned.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to be true if I compare the typical load lines. 6BQ5 produces poorer THD numbers than 6V6.
GordonW said:
Mind you, I like my 6V6 amp a lot (HK Award A300), but it took a LOT of feedback to linearize those 6V6s
Click to expand...
That might be due to the design of that amplifier more than anything else. For one thing, the driver utilizes nested positive feedback, and that tends to increase distortion. Also, if the output stage is anything like the receiver version that I have, the OPTs are pretty small. This might be a contributing factor in the measurements.

Jack
 
Last edited:
sanford12 said:
Smokey Hole Mullards

I've had 6V6, 7591, EL34 & 84 amp's, integrated and receivers from many makers and no matter the name on front of the equipment the tubes I always prefer and come back to are the EL34 & 84's. The Luxkit/Luxman A3500 EL34 amp being the pinnacle. Some how I've never owned a 6L6 piece of any type. I should rectify that.
Click to expand...
The Magnavox 9303 6BQ5 amp I have came with a full set of Mullard tubes.
I recently bought a couple quads of Russian Reflektor 6P14P-P's. The 6P14P's sounded better than the Mullards in my Magnavox 9303, and even the Magnavox 8600 I built from scratch. They even have those scorched spots like the Mullards.
I really need to get a quad of the longer life 6P14P-EV's to try in my ST-35.
 
Mr Boochie said:
:thumbsup:

Plus, the 6V6GT has better headroom. In my humble opinion.
Click to expand...
Well, the 6V6 certainly seems less vulnerable to operating conditions that exceed the specifications. Leo Fender got a lot of mileage out of that. :) I'll just add that the Russian 6V6 (6N6C) is not as linear as NOS types IME. I hand-pick tubes in my amps for minimum distortion, and the Russian version is not as good. This is one reason I recently modified my small SET to take NOS 12V6 when I ran out of 6V6 tubes. Also, just to clarify my likes and dislikes in all this a little more, I'm a huge fan of the 6BQ5 in UL mode. No other tube comes close IMO, including the EL34. All my amps are straight pentode, but I regret not buying a Dynaco ST-35 before prices shot up.

Jack
 
TriodeLuvr said:
Well, the 6V6 certainly seems less vulnerable to operating conditions that exceed the specifications. Leo Fender got a lot of mileage out of that. :) I'll just add that the Russian 6V6 (6N6C) is not as linear as NOS types IME. I hand-pick tubes in my amps for minimum distortion, and the Russian version is not as good. This is one reason I recently modified my small SET to take NOS 12V6 when I ran out of 6V6 tubes. Also, just to clarify my likes and dislikes in all this a little more, I'm a huge fan of the 6BQ5 in UL mode. No other tube comes close IMO, including the EL34. All my amps are straight pentode, but I regret not buying a Dynaco ST-35 before prices shot up.

Jack
Click to expand...
For the 6N6C Reflektor-Saratov made tubes, I had to decrease the idle bias to get any life out of them. Especially, in Fender amps that ran high plate voltages on their 6V6GT amps (like the Deluxe Reverb). Even then, the Russian tubes sometimes get noisy, rather early. They're just not made as well as the US 6V6GT tube.

Those early Shuguang made 6N6C were no better. :(
 
dcgillespie said:
Different tube types were designed with different operational and performance goals in mind. That point is everything. Trying to establish which one is best based on a given perception of sound produced in a given circuit is an exercise without end, as the exercise is entirely subjective. It is the circuit that determines the outcome of the sound produced. Changing to different tube types will likely produce a different sound from a given circuit -- but the change in sound is not directly due to the qualities of the different tubes. It is because the qualities of the different tubes have now changed the way the circuit operates and performs.

Dave
Click to expand...
Agree! It's tube-circuit interaction variations that are what may be audible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom