NOSValves Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 Mike, Not sure what your asking but I use Telekunkens on both stages of all my amps. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 mdeneen, Been waiting for you to send me a schematic to do just that !! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 Craig, quote: if he decides to buy a 2K set of Moon Dogs do you really think in comparison they will sound ten times better than this amp. I personally say no way !! What are you smoking? Loving and defending your beloved Scott brand is one thing. Your statement above is a little over the top. You need to hear a good pair of Moondogs before you make that kind of statemment... P-l-e-a-s-e! Klipsch out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 Jazman, I'm not defending my beloved Scott I'm stating plain facts. If you really believe Moon Dogs sound 10 times better than a Scott or a Eico or Fisher or on and on then your on Crack !! I'm not saying that Moon Dogs don't sound better than the above mentioned amps. We were talking value of purchase here weren't we ?? There is no way dollar for dollar that the moon Dogs or for that matter any of the High dollar amps, Turn Tables, CD players , Speaker wire or interconnectors come near the value spent on one of these $200 to $300 vintage amps. If you believe there's value in these products your believing in a delusion for sure. Later Craig This message has been edited by NOS440 on 08-05-2002 at 10:24 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 mdeneen Cool another project !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShapeShifter Posted August 5, 2002 Share Posted August 5, 2002 quote: Originally posted by NOS440: Man where do you guy's get these CV4004 so far I find them to be harder to find and more expensive then Tele's ?? Holidays are a good time to score on eBay. Sure won't enhance your social or love life with the significant other. But you will be in tube heaven, at least till bed time! ------------------ KLIPSCH IS MUSICf> My Systems f>s>c> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 Craig, quote: There is no way dollar for dollar that the moon Dogs or for that matter any of the High dollar amps, Turn Tables, CD players , Speaker wire or interconnectors come near the value spent on one of these $200 to $300 vintage amps. If you believe there's value in these products your believing in a delusion for sure. For some reason, it seems you have broader audio issues than just the issue of amplification and value. I would refer you to mdeneen's post earlier where he stated some important points, including recognizing the Scott as a "MOR" amp. His words, not mine. And if you do the math, after spending $500(tubes included) on it, a pair of Moondogs is less than four times the invested cost of the Scott, and does sound at least four times better. Don't believe me, do the research. I suspect, but not sure, mdeneen is trying to bring home the point of Class A triode amplification with his suggested circuit modification. Mark, please forgive me if I misunderstand your direction. Yet, I also know that value is within the eyes and ears of the beholder. And yes Craig, better speaker wire and interconnects also helps one of your vintage amps reproduce better sound, not just high dollar ones. As a confessed car speed addict, you should know that the more money you spend, the more speed you can achieve. Audio is not much different. Raising the money for the entry fee of the race is one thing, having enough high quality parts to cross the finish line in the money, or in the points is a another. This analogy is not advocating everyone spend a bundle on their audio gear to win the "who's got the most expensive toys" race. Far from it. One can spend tons of money and not achieve what others spend less to accomplish. But to say there's no value to spend more than the $200-$500 cost of a vintage amp is just not true no matter how much you refuse to acknowledge it. If comparing the Scott to a SET amp, or even many current higher end push pull offerings works for you, I'm happy for you. Just don't try to convince the rest of the world. Klipsch out. This message has been edited by jazman on 08-06-2002 at 01:30 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 Craig, why make these huge assumptions? Seriously, it was not that long ago you were asking me of a good cheap amp to get into tubes. If you hadnt been here for the last nine months, you would think you have been into tube amps for years and years. C'mon, you're still a newbie like a good many others, albeit one with a nice newly developed skill with the soldering iron (and it seems you do good work here and are generous). I applaud your enthusiasm; you have really given a lot back here. But I really don think you have had enough listening exposure to a variety of tube amps in a variety of well setup systems to make some of these claims. This really does make a big difference here. I am not trying to jump on you as much as you need to get some listening time and some exposure before making this statements. Also, to have a system that is capable of the next level of resolution helps. I do agree with you that some of these vintage amps are insanely good for the money. And a few are simply shocking. But something like a high quality SET amp of the caliber of the Welborne labs, Wavelength, Lamm, etc is just simply in a whole nother playing field really. Yes, you can get great sound...but the level of transparency and detail, along with the grain-free aspect, and almost uncanny "you are there" experience is something else. Having lived with both sides of the argument, I have to say you need to experience these things a bit more before making educated guesses, something that is valid, but lacks weight when you havent gone the distance. kh ps- On another matter, I think I have actually changed my stance over the last five or six months regarding Triode connected pentodes, especially if running in the low watt range. I was all for Triode wired EL-34 amps until I started noticing they were really losing some of the things I loved about PP tubes while not getting me to the triode purity of a true directly-heated triode offering. I guess what I am saying here is that I think I prefer the Ultralinear connection with a good transformer and circuit with a pentode tube. But like triodes like the 2A3 which really do have amazing control and are more incisive in a good circuit. I didnt feel this last year, as I pretty much preferred triode connected circuits. But I dont think they match the sonic purity of true triodes and miss some of the grip, control, and boogie factor of the pentode Ultralinear or Williamson pentodes. Just some changing observations over time. Phono Linn Sondek LP-12 Valhalla / Linn Basic Plus / Sumiko Blue Point CD Player Rega Planet Preamp Cary Audio SLP-70 w/Phono Modified Amplifier Welborne Labs 2A3 Moondog Monoblocks Cable DIYCable Superlative / Twisted Cross Connect Speaker 1977 Klipsch Cornwall I w/Alnico & Type B Crossover Links system one online / alternate components / Asylum Listing f>s> This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 08-06-2002 at 02:22 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Landau Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 Hello everyone, Did you ever hear about Pareto's law(or 80/20law)? Pareto experimented and came to a conclusion that in order to get 80% of the performance you need to to spend 20% of an amount,and in order to get that extra desireable 20%,you'll need to expend another 80%(4 times as much).That is correct for almost everything in life and it is likewise so in audio. Craig, I guess that you have spent the first 20% in a wise way but in order to get a better result you will probably need to spend nearly 4 times more.If you are happy with your sound-you can stop here and have a bigger saving account and if not(like most of us),the improvement will be very small but they'll cost a fortune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Lindsey Posted August 6, 2002 Author Share Posted August 6, 2002 WOW... look what I started! To be honest with you, I like threads like this because they are very educational. I especially love it when all the tubies jump in and give their opinion. First off, I don't expect the Scott to be the best that tubes have to offer. I do however expect it to be better than the SS that I currently am using. Before shipping it off to Craig however, I didn't feel it was any better. After Craig has worked his magic on it, I now have $250 invested in it. This includes the purchase price, and shipping it to and from Michigan. Craig replaced all the caps with orange drops and put in 23 new resistors. He replaced one electrolytic and put 6 new tubes in it (four 7189's and two 6U8A's). He said it's night and day over how it sounded when he first got it and I believe him. I am now excpecting it to sound better than my Denon/Acurus combo. I will be real disappointed if it doesn't but I'm certainly not going to blame Craig. My plan is to try and spend no more than $100 on a Mullard 5AR4 rectifier and two Mullard 12AX7 CV4004's for the Phono and CD stages. I will then have $350 in it and that's about as high as I would like to go. I don't think that's alot for what I hope to get in return. Hell, I paid $1300 for the Denon Receiver in my HT. Thanks for all the replies, fellas. And thank you Craig for everything you have done here. I can't wait to hear this unit when I get back home. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 guy landau, Mobile Homeless, Jazman "Craig, I guess that you have spent the first 20% in a wise way but in order to get a better result you will probably need to spend nearly 4 times more.If you are happy with your sound-you can stop here and have a bigger saving account and if not(like most of us),the improvement will be very small but they'll cost a fortune." This Quote from Guy is exactly what I'm saying. I'm in no way implying that Vintage Push/Pull can compete with any of the newer or older Set amps sound for sound but I still say dollar for dollar they are a much better value and well worth sinking $400 or $500 into !! That is all I was saying. I learned the Laws a deminshing returns from years a drag racing and the more you spend on Racing the faster you don't go for the most part and I truely believe the same holds true here. I have heard some really low wattage (a custom 45 for one) set amps with Altec speakers and they left me wanting more wattage in a big way I myself think they sound great if you like Elavator music ! I myself am not into layed back music much !! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Lindsey Posted August 6, 2002 Author Share Posted August 6, 2002 quote: Originally posted by NOS440: Mike, Not sure what your asking but I use Telekunkens on both stages of all my amps. Craig Craig, What I meant here is do you know which of the four 12AX7's correlate to the four inputs (2 phono and 2 line)? If I am only going to replace two of the tubes (one of the phono's and one of the line's), I need to know which two tubes to replace... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 Mike, If your going to only buy 2 mullards let me try to explain where to put them. If your going to mostly use this for playing LPs then when looking at the amp from the front you would install them in the 2 sockets all the way to the left these are your phono stage. Also let me clear something else up that I think your confused on. When listening to a LP all 4 12ax7s are at work. when listening to a CD only 2 of the 12AX7s are working with the signal (Mdeneen correct me if I'm wrong). This is why I suggest you buy a quad of 12AX7s. I did some tube swapping in your amp last night and I confirm that with Mullard or Telefunken the amp seems warmer and seems to have more of the Tube sound to it (what I call presence also better sound staging). The GE's almost give it a SS sound slighty harsh on the top and also seem to make the bass a little boomy. These GE's are JAN 12AX7WA they look to have 1986 date code does anyone else have some expereince with these ?? In a short comparison like this its hard to compare and it may be my Imagination. Craig This message has been edited by NOS440 on 08-06-2002 at 08:03 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Lindsey Posted August 6, 2002 Author Share Posted August 6, 2002 Thanks for clearing that up, Craig. Now I'm not sure what I'll do. I may just get the rectifier and live with it for a while... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 Mike, You have mail !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted August 6, 2002 Share Posted August 6, 2002 In order to come to any agreement about sound quality, there has to at least be agreement about measuring it against a reference of some kind. Otherwise what one person says sounds one percent better may in fact be describing the same difference that someone else is saying is a thousand percent better. Then you have to agree on what the best reference will be: Is it going to be live instruments, say, a piano and cello in your living room, or is it going to be some master tape played back on XYZ equipment? Then you need to assign this best reference a number. Are you going to have a 10-point spread from the best to whatever you decide is the worst case, or are you going to have a 100-point spread, or what? And what's the worst reference going to be? And it's meaningless to say on a scale of 1 to 100, this is a 200. That'd be like saying listening to this record sounds twice as good as hearing the singer who recorded it actually singing live in my living room. And how does anyone measure enjoyment, which is what we all agree it is really about? What does it mean to say you like a record by one artist ten times better than some other record? And does listening to your favorite record through an amp that you're not crazy about make you hate the record? Instead of numbers you could have as reference something people might be familiar with on this group. Like the difference between this amp and this amp are like the difference between hearing a Klipschorn and a La Scala. Or the difference between this interconnect and that interconnect is like the difference between moving an inch away from the sweet spot, or whatever. It all comes down to the vagueness of language and the natural tendency to exaggerate in describing something one likes. "That movie blew me away!" "My jaw dropped to the floor when I heard . . ." "I could have died and went to heaven when I heard that speaker." Someone more conservative might say, "That was nice." Now of course it's pretty nonsensical to say this amp is a 4.87 on a scale of 10, while this amp is a 4.88. But I still think it is better than to have no reference at all, when you might say the distance between two cities is "some fair amount" and takes "a lot of time" to travel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Yeah Craig, I have some GE 12AX7's. I hate them. Mullards are way better, I've heard Tele's in someone else's amps, but didn't seem to be that big of a difference to justify the price, IMHO. The GE's seemed raspy, pretty much bottom of the 12AX7 chain if you ask me. This is from my limited experience of tubes, BTW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShapeShifter Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 RCA "Command" 5751 Black Plates are an acceptable substute for 12AX7's. The 5751 Command is a very good tube, as most RCA Black Plates are. They don't have the full depth and mid range bloom the Mullards have, but they are a very worthy subsitute. They can sometimes be found at good prices (low to mid 20's), but usually higher. Tube resellers generally ask $50 per tube. I made a luckly find and scored a quad for a little over $40. They serve as back-ups for my CV4004/ECC83 Mullard's, since I have not found Telefunken's within my preferred price. You may want to add the RCA Command 5751 to your list as well. Also 7025's are a substitute for the 12AX7. Wes ------------------ KLIPSCH IS MUSICf> My Systems f>s>c> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Lindsey Posted August 8, 2002 Author Share Posted August 8, 2002 Thanks for the replies guys... On the Scott Forum, there have been a number of favorable reviews for the JJ/Tesla ECC803S and Tesla ECC83 in place of the Telefunkens. I'll see if I can find a quad of those for a resonable price... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Mike, The Telsa JJ's aren't to bad really. I have a set they cost 38.00 for a quad in matched pairs. I'm not sure there going to be a major improvement over what you have though ! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.