GE 6AQ5 comparison
Darryl
(about 2 watts per channel) into small t-line speakers.
I had been using some GE JAN-6005W valves in the outputs, and really loved it's
sound, right from first turn on.
I tried some GE 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves, and they sounded harsh... all the sweetness
was gone. I thought it was because they were new (NOS) so I left them there few
a week. They were powered up for at least 50 hours, probably more, in that
week. I kept using them hoping they would come good. Tonight they annoyed me
sooo much that I put the 6005w's back. Cool sweetness returned.
It's almost like they are a different valve!!
I'm glad I stocked up on the 6005's while they were cheap.
Dazz
Darryl
You were saying......
I should add that the 6005's were NOS as well. It frightens me a little to
think that the quality of sound we get from our amps is sooo dependant on
variations in valve's that may never be reproduceable in a new valve.
Dazz
JAMES MCSHANE
Darryl <dkl...@removethisbit.ieee.org> wrote in message
news:qdumjsg5u5r9l2aab...@4ax.com...
> >I had been using some GE JAN-6005W valves in the outputs, and really
loved it's
> >sound, right from first turn on.
I have some 6005 in stock if anybody needs any. They are nice, although an
RCA 6AQ5 is very nice also.
I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube.
Jim McShane
Need NOS or Current Production Tubes? Got a Harman-Kardon Citation Amp?
See my web pages at http://pages.prodigy.net/jimmcshane
Darryl
You were saying......
>I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube.
If only they didn'took so puny! I am tempted to light up an old ST shaped tube
in front of them just to make the amp look right... anyone got some old used
2A3's or 45's that still light up? :-)
Dazz
carolbeach
Did I miss something here by your regard for the 6AQ5A?
Darryl said:
"I tried some GE 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves, and they sounded harsh... all the
sweetness was gone."
I took this to mean that Darryl was not happy with the 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves but
delighted with the GE JAN-6005W instead. So I'm wondering why you followed up
with:
"I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube."
But I'm even more befuddled by his follow-up to your comment where he
seemingly agrees with you by saying:
"If only they didn't look so puny! I am tempted to light up an old ST
shaped tube
in front of them just to make the amp look right... "
Forgive me if I overlooked something here but, if so, would you please
enlighted me?
Thanx,
John
JAMES MCSHANE wrote:
> Darryl <dkl...@removethisbit.ieee.org> wrote in message
> news:qdumjsg5u5r9l2aab...@4ax.com...
>
> > >I had been using some GE JAN-6005W valves in the outputs, and really
> loved it's
> > >sound, right from first turn on.
>
> I have some 6005 in stock if anybody needs any. They are nice, although an
> RCA 6AQ5 is very nice also.
>
> I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube.
>
JAMES MCSHANE
carolbeach <cjb...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:393D76D4...@pacbell.net...
> Hi Jim,
>
> Did I miss something here by your regard for the 6AQ5A?
>
> Darryl said:
>
> "I tried some GE 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves, and they sounded harsh... all the
> sweetness was gone."
>
> I took this to mean that Darryl was not happy with the 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves
but
> delighted with the GE JAN-6005W instead. So I'm wondering why you followed
up
> with:
>
> "I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube."
I like 6AQ5s a lot. I think RCAs and Sylvanias are a bit better than regular
GE, but man, those little suckers put out some power from that little
bottle! My reply was directed to his whole post which included a 6005
reference. I was referring to 6AQ5/6005s as a group, not singling out one
type/brand.
> But I'm even more befuddled by his follow-up to your comment where he
> seemingly agrees with you by saying:
>
> "If only they didn't look so puny! I am tempted to light up an old ST
> shaped tube
> in front of them just to make the amp look right... "
>
> Forgive me if I overlooked something here but, if so, would you please
> enlighted me?
I think he just meant they are so physically small they aren't visually
engaging, so his plan is to camouflage it. I suspect it was tongue-in-cheek.
Darryl
You were saying......
>>
>> "I tried some GE 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves, and they sounded harsh... all the
>> sweetness was gone."
>>
>> I took this to mean that Darryl was not happy with the 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves
>but
>> delighted with the GE JAN-6005W instead. So I'm wondering why you followed
>up
>> with:
>>
>> "I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube."
>
>I like 6AQ5s a lot. I think RCAs and Sylvanias are a bit better than regular
>GE, but man, those little suckers put out some power from that little
>bottle! My reply was directed to his whole post which included a 6005
>reference. I was referring to 6AQ5/6005s as a group, not singling out one
>type/brand.
Exactly, and my posting was intended to provoke some discussion on 6AQ5 types in
general and which sound the best.
>
>> But I'm even more befuddled by his follow-up to your comment where he
>> seemingly agrees with you by saying:
>>
>> "If only they didn't look so puny! I am tempted to light up an old ST
>> shaped tube
>> in front of them just to make the amp look right... "
>>
>> Forgive me if I overlooked something here but, if so, would you please
>> enlighted me?
>
>I think he just meant they are so physically small they aren't visually
>engaging, so his plan is to camouflage it. I suspect it was tongue-in-cheek.
>
You suspect correctly. :-)
Dazz
Darryl
You were saying......
>"I tried some GE 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves, and they sounded harsh... all the
>sweetness was gone."
>
>I took this to mean that Darryl was not happy with the 6AQ5A/6HG5 valves but
>delighted with the GE JAN-6005W instead. So I'm wondering why you followed up
>with:
>
>"I'm with Darryl, I think a 6AQ5 is a cool little tube."
Because the 6005 and 6AQ5 are plug-in replacements for each other. Virtually
the same tube, and people just refer to 6AQ5-type tubes to include them both.
BTW: due to rumours that 6V6's are also very similar, my next amp will be a 6V6
SE (that can be used to try 6L6's as well.
>
>But I'm even more befuddled by his follow-up to your comment where he
>seemingly agrees with you by saying:
>
>"If only they didn't look so puny! I am tempted to light up an old ST
>shaped tube
>in front of them just to make the amp look right... "
>
>Forgive me if I overlooked something here but, if so, would you please
>enlighted me?
>
Yes, I like the sound, but they do not appeal visually (compared with some of
the bigger octal tubes) being little skinny 7 pin miniatures.
Dazz