![]() For me the wider or more accurate beefier bandwidth of the Rocket is more relaxed and less forced, but by this I don't mean Cary-mushy which I'm sure someone will jump on me about. However, on something like the Stingray which uses the 34's and has the same power ration 20w triode/40w UL the transients are highlighted and the mids to me are slightly euphonic (another "opinion-type" term because of the feedback). Also the overall power curve is flatter with KT88's than E元4's - again the "euphony", or nice sound, depending on your take between the two. I conjecture however that plate size (bigger on the KT88 than the E元4 - more electrons, more information, this is why 845's and such sound so great despite their attrocious power curves - of course, they are also very simple circuits - see the 2A3 discussions for more - interesting though) effects transient response. ![]() The Manley's still a great rock n' roll amp - especially if you like that Sun Studios sound, which I for one, can't get enough of. The purity is because feedback has not been added to the design - the Manley has some feedback in it. I find the Rocket almost sounds like a single ended amp - something many people have noted. Although I love the Manley Stingray, it is less pure (bad "opinion-type" term) than my Cary Rocket. One thing about the KT88 which has not been mentioned is it's affinity with transients without having to add feedback. Color me happy - but some of this could be about comparing best of breed with middle of the road manufacturing.įWIW The designers who want max watts use KT88s The 6550s have more slam, a lot more air and expanded my soundstage towards "you are there" dimensions. I have never even wanted to listen to 34s again. Happiness set in the day a quad of used Tungsol 6550s showed up. I then got a set of older Teslas which offered a considerable improvement. I got it used here on the 'Gon and it came with quads of both Svet and Sovtek 34s. I have a heavily modded Cary SLA70 which runs E元4s, 6550s or KT88s in triode or ultralinear. most 34s have a softer distortion tone (in guitar applications) than 6550s because of construction differences". The even lower cost, lower power EL-34 was introduced by Philips in 1954 - one year before the 6550s and three years before the 88s.Īccording to VTV "because they (34s) were low in cost, they had a lot less "hard" vacuum and a less rigid structure than 6550s. Both were introduced in the mid-50s, with the KT88 capable of taking more voltage. According to one of their incredibly well researched tube profiles, the KT88 was a descendant of the 6550 which in itself was designed to meet the need for a low cost, high power tube. * Conrad-johnson is currently getting 60 Watts per pair of '34s in their MV60, but that has much-larger-than-average (for '34s) output transformers.īeyond the forums here and at AA you can find a wealth of information at Vacuum Tube Valley. These differences probably can be swamped by the extremes of different brands of the 2 the above is average or typical. The '88 (and its very close cousin the 6550) is more balanced across the frequency band, exhibiting more-extended and -controlled bass and better-quality treble than the '34 while lacking the '34's (euphonic?) midrange richness. On sound quality, the consensus seems to be that the '34 has more lushness or richness in the midrange than almost any other mid- to hi-power output tube while being a little soft at the frequency extremes. per pair is around 50*, with around 40 being more common. In pentode/ultralinear/beam-tetrode mode, for which both were designed, a pair of '88s is capable of as much as 100 Watts, altho perhaps 70 is more common, while the '34's typical max. First, the power outputs of the 2 vary significantly.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |