What is a 5963?
John Templeton
Hello all,
I was at the tube graveyard (a treasure trove) and picked up a really
nice looking dual triode (it appears). It looks a lot like an older RCA
7025 I have, large rectangular ribbed plates. The only ID is a very
faint stop-sign type border and the number 5963. I don't have a good
industrial cross ref. and would like some help with an ID. I have a
reprint of the RCA receiving tube manual and it's not in there. Most of
the stuff I get for use at home is industrial coded, it's old but still
works better than any new 12AY,U,X.... that I've purchased. Thanks for
readin'.
Regards,
John Templeton
PS Any sources for good tube x-ref lists would also be appreciated ;)
craig
electrically identical.
MSchu46776
John:
According to Ludwell Sibley's book "Tube Lore", this is a computer rated 12AU7
that is not suitable for audio use due to its noise and microphonics
characteristics.
This is an excellent reference book. Check it out at:
Well worth the 20 bucks!
Mike Schultz
Ned Carlson
mschu...@aol.com (MSchu46776) wrote:
>John:
>
>According to Ludwell Sibley's book "Tube Lore", this is a computer rated 12AU7
>that is not suitable for audio use due to its noise and microphonics
>characteristics.
IMA: the presence of ratings for computer use
doesn't mean they are better for audio or that
audio use is ruled out,( a number of folks have used
5963 as a sub for 12AU7).
Let's put it this way, computer tubes aren't intentionally
made more microphonic or noisy than others.
IMA, *which* kind of computer the tubes were made for
would make a difference, (and the spec sheets don't
necessarily say), remember that in the 50's, *analog*
computers and tube opamps (aka "Philbricks")
were commonplace, and in that type of application
I'd think that noise & linearity would be just as
critical, if not moreso, than audio apps.
I think the spec to look for to determine if a
tube was intended for *digital* applications
would be one for extended use under cutoff
(ie: no plate current) conditions.
Being labelled "IBM" or "Burroughs"
or maybe "Honeywell" (tho there's other
apps Honeywell tubes could have been used
for), would sorta be a giveaway, too.
Ned Carlson, Triode Electronics, Chicago, IL http://www.triodeel.com
Open 12:30-8 PM CT, 12:30-5 PM CT Sat Closed Wed
ph:773-871-7459 fax 773-871-7938 "where da tubes are"
Email catalogs: email our CataBot: cat...@triodeel.com
gary longrie
Ned
I have been digging for source material about
the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
And you come along and just casually toss it
out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
As I understand it, the Philbrick was the first
op amp. Others tried to copy it, with limited
success, maybe back then they didn't fully
understand the importance of layout and parasitics
to performance.
The Philbrick op amp was a big deal and I would
like to learn more about it.
seasonings
gary
gary longrie
vacuum electronics branch
code 6840
naval research laboratory
washington dc 20375
Scott Dorsey
In article <349F8A...@mmace.nrl.navy.mil> gary longrie <lon...@mmace.nrl.navy.mil> writes:
>
>I have been digging for source material about
>the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
>And you come along and just casually toss it
>out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
What kind would you like data on? I have a bunch of them around, and
Teledyne/Philbrick probably still has schematics available.
>As I understand it, the Philbrick was the first
>op amp. Others tried to copy it, with limited
>success, maybe back then they didn't fully
>understand the importance of layout and parasitics
>to performance.
I dunno. The Hewlett-Packard ones came out at about the same time. And
the Ft on these things was so low that I doubt parasitics were all that
big a deal.
>The Philbrick op amp was a big deal and I would
>like to learn more about it.
Teledyne/Philbrick is still around and still making op-amps, I believe.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Eric Haney
gary longrie wrote:
>
<snip>
> I have been digging for source material about
> the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
> And you come along and just casually toss it
> out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
Used _many_ of these units in guidance system test sets (dating back
to the late 50's). The trick to keeping the little plastic modules
running well was ensuring that the power supplies were stable. When the
power supplies worked, they worked well. We matched many 12AU7 tubes
with a Tek 570 curve tracer and then put the pairs on a burn-in fixture
for 2 or 3 days - checked again and then installed them.
The Service Life Extension Program lasted until 1986 when all the
testers (and Philbrick amps and power supplies) went to Uncle Sam's junk
yard.
(BTW, does Elmo Thomas still work at NRL? Got a kick out of talking
to him when renting hydrophones.)
--
Eric Haney
............................................
mghaney...@worldnet.att.net
Richard Brown
I have a bunch of these tube opamps available . I have about 15 or 20.
$20 for the lot.
Rich
Kalman Rubinson
> gary longrie wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> > I have been digging for source material about
> > the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
> > And you come along and just casually toss it
> > out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
> <snip>
I have a copy of the 2nd edition of the Philbrick "Applications Manual for
Operational Amplifiers" which dates dates from 1969 and casually refers to vacuum
tube and solid-state opamps. It has a neat picture of a tube-based opamp.
Kal
gary longrie
Eric, thanks for your reply. That was good info.
I looked in the NRL directory but couldn't find an
Elmo Thomas. But we're a big place, over 3000, and
he might be here as a contractor. Do you wish for me
to dig a little further?
regards
gary
gary longrie
Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
> >As I understand it, the Philbrick was the first
> >op amp. Others tried to copy it, with limited
> >success, maybe back then they didn't fully
> >understand the importance of layout and parasitics
> >to performance.
>
> I dunno. The Hewlett-Packard ones came out at about the same time.
> And the Ft on these things was so low that I doubt parasitics were all
> that big a deal.
>
Thanks for your reply Scott. I first learned about these things
just a couple of years ago. Maybe it was in one of Bob Pease's
linear design columns. One of the things that the author said
sticks in my mind. It was that TD had great success with these
things, and that their competitors had such a difficult time
trying to get them to work, even when copying the layout! This
is all intriguing of course. Probably of some interest to most
in r.a.t. An important piece of technological history.
Do you have some of these yourself, and would you consider
letting a few go? My interest is historic, play around with
them, and maybe report back to r.a.t.
regards
gary
Ned Carlson
gary longrie <lon...@mmace.nrl.navy.mil> wrote:
>Ned
>
>I have been digging for source material about
>the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
>And you come along and just casually toss it
>out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
Well, it looks like you found your man (Mr.Dorsey)!
At any rate, I ran across that bit from a Time-Life
book on "Alternative Computers"..I'll post some
excerpts from it, but it's not real detailed.
The same book claims that hybrid analog-digital
computers are still being used for certain types
of real-time simulations and guidance systems
where digital still isn't fast enough. Makes sense,
a Cray might be kind of tough to stuff in a missile,
and there might not be time to reboot the sucker
if something goes wrong...
>
>As I understand it, the Philbrick was the first
>op amp. Others tried to copy it, with limited
>success, maybe back then they didn't fully
>understand the importance of layout and parasitics
>to performance.
I doubt that, I think people were plenty cognizant
of layout and parasitics back then.
I think there were competitors to Philbrick,
but the applications for (thus the potential
market) the devices were rather limited as compared
to digital devices.
>
>The Philbrick op amp was a big deal and I would
>like to learn more about it.
Me too!
Ned Carlson
klu...@netcom.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>What kind would you like data on? I have a bunch of them around, and
>Teledyne/Philbrick probably still has schematics available.
Would they be any good as a line-level audio amplifier?
Has Dick Olsher reviewed one yet? ;-)
BTW, if anyone has a schematic, I'll be happy to post on my
web site.
>I dunno. The Hewlett-Packard ones came out at about the same time. And
>the Ft on these things was so low that I doubt parasitics were all that
>big a deal.
How low was the Ft?
Ned Carlson
gary longrie <lon...@mmace.nrl.navy.mil> wrote:
>Ned
>
>I have been digging for source material about
>the Philbrick tube op amp for over a year now.
>And you come along and just casually toss it
>out in conversation. Do you have any more info?
I meant to mention, if anyone wants to see
a vacuum-tube computer, there was one on
display at the Museum of Science & Industry
in Chicago, last time I went.
Eric at Svetlana Electron Devices
Email back to me if you want documentation about
tube opamps (and Philbrick K2s in particular).
I have the 1956 APPLICATION GUIDE FOR PHILBRICK
OCTAL-PLUG-IN COMPUTING AMPLIFIERS, plus schematics
of them and various other tubed opamps.
Also check my article in GLASS AUDIO back in 1992.
Building them is easy, even though they use positive
and negative feedback. No stability issues. I've built
quite a few of them on homemade PCBs and used them
with well-filtered, unregulated +-150vdc supplies.
T Loizeaux
FS: 2 nos RCA 5963 tubes in original boxes $22. ea.
Tom