Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Decware Audio Forums
06/22/17 at 19:39:15 







Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Opinions on rectifier tubes? (Read 16223 times)
mark58
Seasoned Member
****




Posts: 4306
Re: Opinions on rectifier tubes?
Reply #50 - 03/14/17 at 18:48:19
 
Hey Will, how are the GZ32 MAZDA/PHILIPS MINIWATT made in Holland compared to the Blackburn made Mullard GZ32?  They are about half the price.  Mark.

PS...the ones I saw have "Cup" getters so I bet they are new models.  The oldest have square followed by Halo...
Back to top
 
« Last Edit: 03/14/17 at 18:53:33 by mark58 »  

"The man that hath no music in himself, nor is not moved with the concord of sweet sounds, is fit for treasons, deceptions, and spoils;
The motions of his spirit are dull as night and his affections dark as Hell. Let no such man be trusted." William Shakespeare
  IP Logged
will
Seasoned Member
****




Posts: 1792
Re: Opinions on rectifier tubes?
Reply #51 - 03/15/17 at 17:48:53
 
Mark, I will compare within a few days. Busy now.

I am not sure of this, but I generally associate the cup getters with Russian made tubes. My Mazdas have double bottom D getters, one on each side, and were made in France.
Back to top
 
« Last Edit: 03/15/17 at 17:51:08 by will »  

PSA P5/modified Brickwall/Shunyata Defender/more; MacMini/Audirvana>Jitterbug/Regen> modified Gustard x20pro DAC; DIY + Pi Audio PCs; DIY ICs + USB; modified Jupiter CSP3, Torii MKIV, HR1; DIY Speaker Cables; feet - Madscientist, SynRes, Archie's, Herbie's isocup
  IP Logged
Tripwr1964
Seasoned Member
****




Posts: 284
Re: Opinions on rectifier tubes?
Reply #52 - 03/18/17 at 14:16:22
 
i like the metal base gz32 in my csp3.  don't like them in my zp3 however.
nos rca 5u4g in zp3 seems better in my setup.  

i've had these in for over 1yr and haven't even thought about changing.

Back to top
 
 

CSP3, CAD 120s MKII, Sota Star Sapphire, SME309, Pulse3, ZP3 jupiter, ZMC1, Schiit bifrost multibit, CEC TL5 transport, MG1.6QR w/ ext xo & mye stands/947/betsys. herbies iso, VH audio flavor diy pwr cords, Beden 8402 IC,
  IP Logged
will
Seasoned Member
****




Posts: 1792
Re: Opinions on rectifier tubes?
Reply #53 - 03/18/17 at 19:32:46
 
Mark,

Sorry it took a while to get back on the GZ32s. These tests were done in the CSP3 using a IEC PCC88 with a bent getter riser and hallow getter for input (sold as a Mullard but looks like Telefunken I have), and Mullard E88CC with parasol getters for power.

I don’t know the date of my Mazda GZ32s. They are lighter weight than the 59 Mullard I have, and the bottle a little shorter. The Mazda has double bottom D getters with a two wire edge on the flat side of the D. The Mullard has single bottom D getter with a single straight wire on the straight side of the D. The Mazda heater wires come off two shiny looking horizontal narrow/flat pieces (rather than wires) where the Mullard’s come off split sets of wires that bend horizontal to get out to the heaters wires.

I also listened to an RCA 5U4G-ST with a top side D getter, and a Valve Art 274B.

The Valve Art is the least sophisticated of these tubes, having decent sound, but not as refined…a bit brasher mids and less refined timbre and ambient information throughout. I think these are largely due to less subtle micro information, and due to being generally a little darker and less spacious than the RCA.

The RCA 5U4G-ST in comparison is interesting, showing similar 5U4G-ST balance and power qualities, but the RCA is more refined in every way, abundant micro detail and detail complexity filling out textures, space and nuance. Very music like, where the Valve Art is cruder, in comparison more like a representation of music.

Both 5U4s have a nice balance with deeper, rounder bass than the GZ32s. But this is part of what I tend to prefer about GZs, especially GZ32s, they have exceptionally well defined bass. In combination with exceptional speed, body/tonal density and a naturally even feeling tonal balance…the Phillips GZ32 bass, though less deep, feels bigger, more present, and more authentic in my setup.

The GZ is a little smoother by nature also. The micro detail, space and textures are all there, very clear, but sound a bit more integrated in some ways. Again, not better or worse, but a real choice. Associated, the extra speed reveals a little more clearly in the GZ32 micro dynamics but is surely there in macro. Think free flow. The RCA micro dynamics are slower, and macro dynamics come off like more power, and can become a little more brash in some midrange areas with my current setup. The macro is certainly there with the GZ32, but the micro speed is the part that "shows up" with a seductive quality that feels “right.” This easy flow, in a revealing but smooth foundation, contributes to the sounds of music more than all these ways of trying to describe it.

The GZ32s are overall warmer than this particular RCA 5U4G-ST without sacrifice to detail complexity, but the detail has a different feel. More mids oriented in body, ambience, dynamics, the GZ32 has a particular flavor of detail complexity. The RCA feels a little more obviously open and spacious (mids up) in some ways... “airier.” I think this is a lot because the GZ32 is faster, somehow conveying macro speed into more tonal density, making the tube more body oriented but not so much as to feel thick. This contributes to a different sense of balance, fine detail, or spacial information...its own sound.

With warmth and speed, tonal density, excellent spaciousness, and excellent micro detail, it has a beautifully revealing and musical balance in this setting...seductive without being syrupy…The speed and body offer a big, authentic quality of natural timbre from all instruments. In concert with a very real spaciousness, and excellent detail complexity, though I could definitely tune to, and love the excellent RCA 5U4G-ST, the GZ32 just sounds realer to me. I have been tuning to this same basic tube set for a long time though!

I think that if this tube were to be a problem, it might be from its more focussed tonal density and dynamics throughout. Related, depending on the room/system, with its particular way of clarity, the focus could possibly be strongish in some areas. That said, my room and settings (though decent but not thorough testing) I found both the RCA 5U4G-ST and Valve Art a little more pressed in the potentially painful upper mid push than these.

The Mazda and Mullard are very similar but also different in subtler areas. Overall, I would say the 59 Mullard is warmer and “richer,” more euphonic. And the double bottom getter Mazda, a little faster/more dynamic, more open/articulate, maybe a little more extended, more spacious, more highly textured. In the wrong setup, I suppose its increased clarity could get intense. But not here, its detail and space rounded out by great micro detail, and still very smooth with plenty of body…it is revealing, but not glaring. Right now I am falling for the Mazda, enjoying a little more transparent presentation. But when I put in the Mullard, then I fall for its more seductive, sweeter qualities.

Lastly, I put in a Belvu labelled GZ32 I found recently (cheap being an off-name and being sold from Eastern Europe). It is exactly the same construction as the Mazda, and clearly brand new. It sounds almost just like the Mazda too, though having a little of the fresh rigidity and lack of bass articulation of new tubes. But it is surprisingly refined and friendly for being new, I think it will stay in a while, the Mazda being part of pair.

Of course, what I hear is defined by everything else in this system/room. The Mullard PCC88 in the CSP3 is a neutral sounding 7DJ8 type, and the Mullard E88CCs are rich, textured, and warmish with great detail complexity...not to mention the Torii tubes and all the other system tuning.

Listening to these rectifiers, I heard less profound differences than expected. I am sure this is a lot because of all the extensive tuning with cables and power supplies I have been up to, particularly the careful bypassing of power caps in my amps, making every tube better and more even natured.

Also I have been modding a new DAC that is rich and revealing, also contributing to my system "tolerance" for different tubes.

All that said, when changing an input tube, power cord, IC, or foot changes the sound, who knows how well these tubes will balance in the vast complex of other settings. This is why I try to give comparative impressions.

Hope this helps.
Back to top
 
« Last Edit: 03/18/17 at 22:13:28 by will »  

PSA P5/modified Brickwall/Shunyata Defender/more; MacMini/Audirvana>Jitterbug/Regen> modified Gustard x20pro DAC; DIY + Pi Audio PCs; DIY ICs + USB; modified Jupiter CSP3, Torii MKIV, HR1; DIY Speaker Cables; feet - Madscientist, SynRes, Archie's, Herbie's isocup
  IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print