If you ever run across some early Heinz and Kaufman 5Y3WGTAs, I think you would likely love them...They make my 50s RCA 5Y3s sound coolish.

will wrote on 03/07/13 at 00:51:38:


Interesting. Thanks.

Thanks will. I inquired about buying a pair (but if you're not using yours and wish to sell, let me know). Sounds worth trying.

There is something about the 5Y3 that is just so right in my system I haven't even been tempted to pop a 5U4 back in!

Interesting. First, these things are built heavy!!! and you really need to get them warmed up before evaluating, including playing music through them in this case....

Starting with Siemens 7DJ8s (CBS label) Raytheon (Westinghouse) OB3, RCA OC2, cryo'd JJ 6CA7s, and cryo'd Valve Art 274B and leaving the bass and treble the same...the Bendix (Heintz and Kaufman) 5Y3WGTA were less powerful (turned up the amp a bit) and shifted the frequency balance/emphasis upward...Less bass, and a midrange shift toward the upper mids. Also, they flesh out the recording more, manifesting amazing spacial information and impressive speed! These are definitely high quality and well made tubes.

But with this tube set, I think I prefer the Valve Arts as they bring out the big part of the mid-midrange and have a softer upper midrange, and they are more laid back...better balance for me.

As usual, there is that synergy thing (or lack thereof), and there are traits of the Bendix worth exploring. Also, these Siemens inputs are on the bright side of transparent/neutral relative to most tubes I have, but also very good tubes technically, with good extension, speed, and balance, and very revealing, so the combination may be the problem.

So I stuck in some warmish inputs...some Mullard 6DJ8s with large hallow getters. Now, the balance shifted downward again. Warmer, bigger bass, still really fast, still very revealing and ridiculous spacial information, but smoother, softened by the Mullard warmth. Are they too revealing....this evaluation may take longer than I expected. This tube is very interesting.

So for now, I will put in the RCA 5Y3s.

Wow! Another notch down on the mid emphasis, back to a similar range as the Valve Arts. The big mid-mids are back on top with a nice balance of upper and lower mids...that seductive "tubey" sound. And the bass aspect of the balance is UP!!!...up to a really nice sense of balance overall.

What's up here? It has been some time since I explored these tubes last, and my system/room (as well as my perception of sound) have gone through a bunch of small, but progressive refinements....Hmmm.....

One thought is that these RCA 5Y3GTs and the 6CA7s have a really good thing together with good, warmish inputs in front. The spacial information is still vast, but smoother and more organic, not too revealing. The upper mids are smoother....The speed is still there, but less notable...again, more organic....this is a really good sound....very nicely balanced, and yes, dynamic!!! On first impressions I would call the micro dynamics extremely good, while perhaps the dynamic range and macro dynamics are a little compressed compared to a lot of 5U4s, and especially the Valve Arts. Interestingly, the way these rectifiers bring down the tonal balance, the upper-upper mids and highs seem softer, but not particularly rolled off...they sound really good. And the bass feels and sounds really good. At the same time, all the necessary articulation and detail is there to flesh out the sound stage and all the sweet little things like air on reeds, attacks, and ambient information...and all with a really friendly, big midrange.

The bass does not go as deep as with 5U4s, but still deep enough in this system, especially with the low-mid bass and mid bass emphasis these tubes bring to the set...the bass feels organic and tight, but not too tight. And there is a sweetness to this tube set that brings out the emotional wonder of amazing musical exploration at home. They feel a wee bit restrained in a way that is currently inexplicable to me, perhaps the slight sense of a narrower dynamic range compared to the Valve Arts, but not in a big or offensive way in the least. I think the Valve Arts are exceptional in dynamic range though.

OK guys...I'm tired. Thanks Lon for helping me stumble into this exploration. I think I will leave these tubes in for a while and check it out more once I have the flavor of the set more subconsciously intact.

Until then....

Agreed. This is the opposite of my initial impressions of the H&K versus the RCAs...but that was a while ago, with different tubes, perhaps a different source, and definitely before we had 6CA7s. Anyway, where you are with the RCAs makes sense to me from my wanderings this morning.

Will try getting your hands on nos rca 5R4GY rectifiers...they are my favorite.

JD

JD,

Thanks for the tip...I have some GE and some Phillips 5R4GY, and I really do like them...They have an interesting blend of clarity, warmth and articulation. Right now though, my exploration of the cryo'd Valve Arts is consuming and keeping my attention. As Lon suggests, they can be demanding, but for the live players in the room sound I am after, they are really good. Literally, no sense of restriction of musical flow and a big open sound top to bottom that is somehow not harsh, but remains very spacious. It holds nothing back...all the textures, ambient cues, etc, it is all there uniformly across recordings.

Lon,

Big changes again in your system. I look forward to your impressions as you get the new parts integrated.

I agree, the differences in our gear/setups could make a mark. But on the other hand, revealing is revealing, and how we accomplish it could work from a lot of angles. I do have a world class source, great cabling and cable synergy, serious power and vibration isolation, as well as a fair bit of room work/compensation...

So yes, different, but if anything, my system is hyper transparent and  revealing. So finally, within a revealing system/room, I always think a tube to tube comparison is the best we can do considering that each of our system/rooms are invariably different...the room generally being the biggest "component." Interestingly, in this room, and within my live/open sound objective, my soundstage player locations do not change significantly unless I really damp down the sound...losing detail and therefore spacial/ambient information. The Valve Arts are big sounding, and more forward feeling, but the player locations don't change in any notable way with them for me.

I'm wondering if our tactics for getting good sound across recordings have diverged enough that a segue from your sound (or mine) one way or another could feel very different depending on the starting point....You seem to be working from the best average sound across all recording types by softening/ warming things while trying to maintain the best detail, texture, dynamics etc from within that.....and perhaps I am trying likewise, but by livening/opening things up as much as possible while maintaining enough softness and warmth for it not to get hard. If I have this roughly correct, it occurs to me that this could yield pretty different feeling sound.

Also, you refer to your old studio recordings as a baseline reference for liveness, soundstage etc, and I rely on the makers of my gear to have worked the reference/accuracy angle and follow that using only what I hear in my system/room as a baseline. Then I creatively and progressively refine toward my sense of an engrossing, live, players-in-the-room sound.  So my "reference" changes as I change and my system changes.

This feels to me sort of like playing music, but I am "playing" my system/room...the starting point being where I am right now. From this, the system and my perceptions have evolved, and for me, I have a better sound (for me) than I have heard in almost any studio or live room I have been in.

I could never quite buy the idea of accuracy, since every studio and room is different, and every engineer is different, with different preferences and objectives toward their idea of "real" sounding. So really, I don't think a solid baseline for accuracy exists or is possible.

On the other hand, my shifts are progressive, and I could be off track....I could be out on a limb, but it sure doesn't feel that way. I get grabbed by the music all the time!

One thing occurs to me though that is quite different in our systems....and it might help help explain the differences with our sense of our system sound in general. I remembered that you are running the Torii wide open on the volume/power, so I tried that using Pure Music as a pre to ride the volume from flat in Pure, turning up the Torii, and riding down the Pure to about -20dB to get a similar volume as the Torii at about 8:30 and Pure at OdB.

Not the same as how you accomplish this, but a similar approach, and man does my setup (with these tubes) sound pushy and hard with the Torii at full power and the dithered "pre" down enough for normal listening.

Hard to say...just brainstorming....but I am glad we are both reaching our objectives, though from pretty different angles.