I have tried a pair of Melz 1578 from the late 60's and found the opposite of what @thomaskong claims about them. Open/airy but not balanced and certainly not full/deep bass. Maybe they are fakes, maybe the years of production make a difference. No idea but I will likely be selling them. For now, sticking with the tried and true TS BGRP's 6SN7's + Mullard ECC35 combo.
I've gone through that sudden leap of improvement since introducing the RCA 805s. After about a week and a half, things seemed to click. Sound was less bright but more open. A few days ago, I sensed another improvement in terms of nuance and delicacy. I could tell after that week and a half that it was my new reference, but now I'm solidly convinced.
They're not. That was my exact experience as well and I've ensured the construction and production dates were all 100% accurate. Maybe it's his system, his ears, or his tastes, but I've learned to not rely on his recommendations which seem to also change depending on the time of day.
I have three pairs of Raytheon vt231. They sound different from each other. It could be hit or miss. Be sure to order Nos tubes from dealer who offer return.
I've looked many times at Melz listings on eBay but it all seems very daunting. The same tubes with the same name, year, description, at extremely different price points. I couldn't make sense of them. Can someone link to a renowned trusted outfit outside of eBay that sells this tube?
BRENT JESSEE used to carry 1578 tubes one year ago but he had run out of stock. 1578 is famous in HeadfI community. I heard that one amp maker has 5 pairs of them. But I am not sure he is willing to sell his tube. Since you favor detailed and transparent tubes like TS bgrp, RCA 5691 and RCA 805, this 1578 tube may not be for your liking. 30 months ago, I had auditioned Lampi Pacific Dac side by side with MSB Premier and got impressed with Pacific. But I did not pull the trigger for it since I was afraid to have too much warmth with combinaton of tube integrated and tube Dac. Your weak link could be speaker. I believe that Lansche 4.1 will suit your taste since you favor spooky vocal sound. Lansche Audio Lansche Plasma 4.1 high efficiency | Full-Range | Covina, California 91724 | Audiogon
I vote this as probably one of the most unhelpful replies ever written on this forum. @adamaley here's the post I wrote detailing how to verify which ones were real. Had to school a member who shot off his mouth without any real knowledge. Read the post if you wish to look into these. Personally, I wasn't impressed. 6SN7 tubes.Could you please put in order from best to worse these NOS tubes? (Pictures)
@Thomas K I really just want to try the tubes you've raved about, not end up with a new speaker, lol. Context is key, as in all things. I tune my system to be extremely transparent and resolving because my speakers are warm sounding. Cabling and power also play a factor. @Strat-Mangler Thanks for linking to that breakdown of requirements for an authentic Melz tube. However, my research also tells me that, additionally, they need to have been made in a specific year in a specific factory. I'm not sure anyone can be sure they've heard the real deal.
Yes, mentioned in my post; 1976. Due to poor or non-existing documentation, there are likely multiple batches made from different years which are identical. The point is any pair with these traits are the so-called real deal.
I've received the Tung-Sol 6C8G VT163 made in 1940 that I'm using in the 6SL7 slot. Before I pronounce myself on how it sounds, I'll need to evaluate it for a longer period of time. In the meantime, I can say it works well and is not a disappointing listen when comparing immediately back-to-back with the Mullard ECC35. Once I've done a more in-depth shootout, I'll be sure to post my thoughts. In the meantime, it will need a converter and found these to be of high quality and cheap, as well as faster shipping than getting them from China. These are from Poland. Tube adapter 6F8G to 6SN7 - 1 pair | eBay
Good stuff. I really like that tube - give it some time to settle in. Those are the same adaptors I'm using now. They are much better than the metal Chinese ones. The cables have detached from the base on two of my Chinese metal adapters and these are still going strong. On a separate note, I'm looking into experimenting with 6SN7s in the 6SL7 slot. Even though it is lesser gain, electrically it would work. Some interesting findings may come of that. IME, 6F8G types have higher gain than the regular 6SN7s. Pairing 6F8Gs in the 6SN7 slot with a 6SN7 in the 6SL7 slot may compensate for the reduction in gain. I feel 6SN7s are so much better sounding than 6SL7s overall, so more combinations may yield better sonics.
Let us know what you find out. Only experience I have in the matter is using a red base RCA 6SN7 in the 6SL7 slot. Wasn't impressed, to be honest.
I do not want to push you too far. But Lansche 4.1 is the second best speaker for detail freak that I had ever listened. The best one is Western Electric vintage with WE ion tweeters which cost at least 1 million $ and up. I had been happy with it since 2007. It is well made in Germany wifh nice WAF. You had paid 30k$ on Pacific Dac. Why you keep spending small cashes on tubes and tweaks to get minor improvement? If you get Lansche 4.1, you will be amazed with the details and transparency offered by it.. It is also very efficient so I used to drive it with Silbatone 300b amp in 300 sq ft listening room. Even with wide open large listening room, LM 508 have enough power to drive the speaker.
I chose to remain diplomatic in my response to your last post and I will remain so and still try to address your suggestions. I don't have a Lampizator Pacific, I have a Golden Gate 2. Is the Pacific better, I expect it to be, but I have never auditioned one. It is worth noting that a Lampizator DAC can sound as lean and detailed as you want it to sound based on tube selection. They are not inherently warm. I don't favor a detailed sound - I insist on not losing any musical information along my chain of components as I flavorize the sound along the way. You cannot know my end sound simply by my postings on a thread about the amp I own. I have a tubed DAC and a tubed preamp that are extremely responsive to tube changes. I try new tubes because I don't believe I have attained the best sound possible with any of my components. I assume it is also the same reason you try these tubes. I can assure you that my speakers show me every change I make and they scale with improved tube combinations. I believe that this integrated amp we all so love is compromised if one is using its preamp section. That's my personal opinion, but I will never discount anyone's experience including yours and I have taken suggestions from everyone in good faith. For example, you suggested the Melz tubes and I definitely want to try them. @jmpsmash recommended ECC32 and I am bidding on a set on eBay. @Strat-Mangler recommended RCA 805s, and I am selling my Acme 805s as a result. I didn't evaluate these recommendations by judging their equipment. Everyone's audio path is different. I believe all my components perform commensurately. The same way you believe your $55000 speakers are deserving of this $5000 amplifier.
Matched pair Extremely rare 1578 6N8S audiophile 6H8S 6SN7 Metal base 653785085429 | eBay I have three pairs of 1578 and had been using one from above source for 3 months without problem. Actually one of the tube made some noise after 10 days, but she sent replacement within a week and had been fine since then.
I assume you mean 'volume control' given that this is the only thing bypassed by the pre-in input? All tube/gain stages are still on. Given this, has anyone simply tried using a high-quality passive volume control in line between source and the pre-in? I wonder how much benefit that would provide.
something like this ... pure 1 channel Goldpoint SA1 Level Control / Passive Preamp or selectable 2 channel Goldpoint SA2 Level Control / Passive Preamp
My experiences with the Melz hole-plate 1578 type tube are closer to Thomas's, except I find in my system the treble is very well-extended, and an accurate deep bass. Overall this tube has an unequaled 'clarity' across the frequency range, in my system. I have four that were made in 1954, but the problem is one of them often 'acts up' producing that rushing noise. So I have settled on a combination of two Raytheon VT-231 tubes and two of the (non-noisy) Melz 1578 type in the four 6sn7 positions on my power amp. Fortunately this combination seems to combine the best aspects of each tube's sound.
I had tried a Coincident Statement Linestage, which was a significant improvement, and then I preferred a Misho Myronov Preamp ultimately over it. The Coincident is as close to a passive as you can get without being one. Some on here have tried a Don Sachs (if I remember correctly) but didn't notice a worthwhile improvement so YMMV. Edit: Not saying the Don Sachs is a passive, just given preamp feedback in general
Thinking back, I had also tried the lower level Tortuga LDR before trying the Coincident, and it wasn't much of an improvement either. It was a finicky device to use though. I remember one member said it was possible to sever the preamp connection altogether. I don't remember if he had actually done it or was simply suggesting it was possible. I have pondered doing so myself, but I am reluctant to lose the ability to tailor the sound with additional tubes.
I had this exact thought a few weeks ago but as I contemplated further I concluded that a passive volume control won't necessarily benefit the sound vs an active preamp going into the "pre-in" on the LM. In fact, I believe the reason that I get such a tremendous improvement in SQ running my VAC Ren MKV into the LM "pre-in" is largely due to the quality of its variable input potentiometer circuit coupled to the associated transformers - not whether it's an active or passive preamp. Think about it...the pre-in feature on the LM only disables the LM's volume pot, not the preamp section, so that's where the improvement would reside in my view. How the volume pot handles the increases to source impedance can have a profound impact on the SQ. There is no doubt in my mind that the VAC preamp with its high quality volume potentiometer and Lundahl transformers manage the resistance between the source and the LM amp much better than the volume pot built in to the LM. I have A/B'd the pre-in (connected to the VAC) vs the LM used as an integrated numerous times and the difference is stunningly different in favor of the VAC volume control. It's inconvenient to use the VAC and I truly wanted to use the LM standalone for ease and simplification while also not adding unnecessary gain but the improvements are just too large to sacrifice. Since migrating to the RCA 805 and EML 300B tubes I find that difference to be even greater than when using the stock tubes. So my conclusion is that some external preamps have the ability to improve the sound IF they implement a better variable input potentiometer. My particular preamp retails for twice the price of the LM805ia so I'd expect this feature to be better. Whether the preamp is passive or active is likely immaterial in my view.
Interesting that you guys are using pre-amps often costing far more than the LM integrated amp! ... maybe that just speaks to the value of the LM amp itself. Regardless, I am hoping for a much more cost-effective and simple solution that improves SQ of the supposedly weak LM volume control section. I also wonder at what point adding additional gain before the LM becomes a problem ...
I didn't purchase my VAC preamp specifically for the LM - I already owned it and it was paired with my Pass XA30.8. I have since sold the Pass. Your point about managing additional gain is very valid and one I've worked on over the past few weeks. My preamp uses 6922 variants and I was using a nice pair of late 60's Mullards. I shot a note to Brent Jessee about compatible tubes that may provide reduced gain compared to the 6922's. He pointed me to the 7308 which I actually already owned but wasn't using (NOS Amperex 7308). It has a peak gm of 11,500 micromhos where the 6922 tubes peak at 15,700 micromhos. Dropping in the 7308's for the 6922's accomplished exactly what I was looking for and took away the surplus tube rush.
