Jump to content

Why do NOS tubes sound better?


David E H

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Okay what about my amp? 2 preamp design, 1 PI. the v1 and v3 (PI) are responsible for the cleans... I should benefit from NOS correct?

 

 

it's really tough to say not knowing the amp-- but i've had good luck with running NOS tubes in my clean stages of an older mesa. the gain channel i don't even use, because it's just TOO much gain for me-- but it makes some nice tones with my gear using old stocks in the ungained-out channel for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yup. NOS tubes work better in some circuits than others. Modern high gain monsters won't see much benefit from NOS tubes IMO

 

 

This is my experience too. Ive got literally drawers full of NOS tubes from every make and manufacturer and most of the oldies dont work as good in high gain amps.

 

The ones that do sound good are too noisy and cause a lot of feedback, especially the long plates. In vintage amps they sound amazing with better detail and clarity, chime, longer life, etc...but for the ultra high gainers, I prefer just using current production short plates and testing to see which ones sound best and have the tightest bass + smoothest highs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not all NOS tubes sound great, and there's certainly no magic tube that will sound great in any amp, but some NOS tubes sound great in some amps.

I tried an old Mullard I found in a really old TV set, and while it was poppy and crackly, it had the nicest mids I've ever heard out of any amp, period.

They vary as much as new tubes though, and as they cost so much it might be good to try before you buy.
I have a Brimar in V1 at the moment and it's great, but I had another one that was muddy and overly bassey and generally horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ive got a 60's RCA EL84 and a Raytheon EL84 and they sound AMAZING in my Blackheart.

 

FWIW in my 80's Marshall New Stock Electro Harmonix EL34's sound better than my Mullards...:freak::idk: they could be worn out too tho.

 

Again, use your ears for tone..not your cork sniffer ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Hmmm......so I never knew NOS was a marketing scam.........I've read they're better by people on the internet, yes.....but I've read that they're better in plenty of tube amp books as well.

 

They are better, quality wise, and will usually last longer as a result. Whether or not they sound better??? That will be an epic discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Part of the story is that people don't really have ways of describing the qualities of the tone/timbre they hear in amplifiers, so they use lots of "fuzzy" terms that sound even more persuasive than the cold objective reality.

 

Part of the story is hype, mystery, fables and misunderstandings, just like musical instruments themselves.

 

BUT the missing link in the then vs now issue is that the ingredients of the components in the tubes, the various chemical, metallurgical and construction recipes and their techniques were all closely guarded secrets that were never patented, and were the result of true masters of their arts over years of devoted effort. Unless you were a colleague of the engineers at Mullard, Telefunken or Amperex you simply would not know the secrets.

 

Now someone COULD lovingly slice apart a Mullard 12AX7 or Tele ECC803 and scan it under an electron microscope, X-Ray crystallograph and chromatograph and tell you the exact composition and construction of the whole magical device - but there isn't enough market for it.

 

What we really need is a half-dozen materials-science grad students at a major university lab to geek over this stuff on their own. :rolleyes:

 

The current production "Tung-Sol" 12AX7 is a very nice sounding tube. Their "Mullard" is an attempt to recreate the performance of the old Mullard, but it's not a reverse-engeneered version of the old Magic Mullard. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Part of the story is that people don't really have ways of describing the qualities of the tone/timbre they hear in amplifiers, so they use lots of "fuzzy" terms that sound even more persuasive than the cold objective reality.


Part of the story is hype, mystery, fables and misunderstandings, just like musical instruments themselves.


BUT the missing link in the then vs now issue is that the ingredients of the components in the tubes, the various chemical, metallurgical and construction recipes and their techniques were all closely guarded secrets that were never patented, and were the result of true masters of their arts over years of devoted effort. Unless you were a colleague of the engineers at Mullard, Telefunken or Amperex you simply would not know the secrets.


Now someone COULD lovingly slice apart a Mullard 12AX7 or Tele ECC803 and scan it under an electron microscope, X-Ray crystallograph and chromatograph and tell you the exact composition and construction of the whole magical device - but there isn't enough market for it.


What we really need is a half-dozen materials-science grad students at a major university lab to geek over this stuff on their own.
:rolleyes:

The current production "Tung-Sol" 12AX7 is a very nice sounding tube. Their "Mullard" is an attempt to recreate the performance of the old Mullard, but it's not a reverse-engeneered version of the old Magic Mullard.
:cry:



yep.. the mysteries of the old timers, for sure. if it's anything like the construction techniques of rca, altec, western electric... all the mojo's in the handiwork of the grandmas they used to get who were really good at putting little bitty things together after years of lacemaking and knitting!

the QC was in the hands of little old ladies-- true story!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why would you want your amp to sound like something out of the 60's? Just curious I like the sound of the newer amps that are being produced and I think the new tubes give them that character. I would never imagined owning an el34 amp that I liked until I stumbled upon the Rivera. Newer technology with new tubes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why would you want your amp to sound like something out of the 60's? Just curious I like the sound of the newer amps that are being produced and I think the new tubes give them that character. I would never imagined owning an el34 amp that I liked until I stumbled upon the Rivera. Newer technology with new tubes.

 

 

i don't think there's really THAT much conscious effort going into tube manufacture to 'create new sounds' with their tubes.. it's kinda a chicken and egg deal that new technology is geared to use new tubes 'cause they're there and available. i don't use older tubes to sound like an older amp-- much to the contrary. i just prefer the amp sounds more like what i idealize it to sound like- which is just clear and lively-- and i've had great luck with a few old stocks in getting that. the EH and sovteks i've had work ok, but they kinda sound pinched in the circuit.. nuf said... just use what sounds good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There's a lot to be said for New tubes for New Amps. I think something like a Soldano is likely a good example of that (I don't own one, I'm just guessing). But the old tubes sound good in some surprising places, like in a "starved" tube circuit for example, you can hear dramatic differences in the voice of an Amperex "Bugle Boy" 12AX7 and a comparitively nice (new) ElectroHarmonix.

 

Someone mentioned radioactive components - aren't they still using thorium to dope the filiaments ? It's no more hazardous than the Americium in smoke detectors, and just needs the same type of Hazardous disposal method (special bin down at the dump with your fluorescent lamps).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...