KT120 vs 6550 / KT88

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 40057 times.

rpf

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #20 on: 18 May 2013, 04:35 pm »
Not entirely correct. The cheaper Rogue tube amps need to be upgraded to Magnum status to take KT120s.

Yes, you are correct that the non-Magnum Atlas and Cronus can not use KT120s. My bad.   :oops:   :duh:

dangerbird

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #21 on: 18 May 2013, 05:50 pm »
I have owned three Quicksilver amps; the 8417, the Silver 60s and I still own my GLA.  I also own a Rogue Stereo 90 with Super Mag upgrade.  The Quickie sound is very neutral with no major flaws anywhere.  I find their house sound to be a little bland personally.  The GLA is the only one I've kept for any length of time (I guess 6 years now).  It was their entry level amp when new but I find it very satisfying.  Both the 8417s and the Silver 60s were sold within a year of taking ownership.  I was just looking for a bit more tube magic and 'ZIP' (Silver 60s) and more authority in the bass (8417s).  I think I get both of those qualities with my Rogue Stereo 90.  I'm very happy with the amp but I haven't yet tried the KT120s in it.  Very soon, I hope.  I had a slight issue with the 8417 once (don't remember exactly what happened, burnt resistor or similar) but I never had a single issue with the Silver 60s, GLA or Rogue amp...knock on wood!

I have a GLA that I don't think that I'll ever part with,,would you be so kind as to share your favorite tube compliment in ther GLa,, I'm using the Treasure 6CA7's in mine. I've heard that it can also handle KT88's,,not sure about the KT 120's.

jarcher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1940
  • It Just Sounds Right
Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #22 on: 18 May 2013, 06:29 pm »
Still not sure why it's a problem to put a KT120 where a 6550 or KT88 would go.  My tube tech talked about raising the B+ voltage to come up to & maximize the power capabilities of the KT120, but there didn't seem to be a problem running these tubes with the stock voltage - you just won't get all the power the KT120's are capable of. Running them below their max capability would also seem to extend the life of the tube.

When I was testing out the CJ MV75A1 with stock 6550's, it definitely ran a lot cooler (both tubes + transformers) than my Manley Stingray.  Doesn't seem like those massive transformers would have a problem handling the KT120's, even if the B+ voltage was raised.

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #23 on: 18 May 2013, 06:46 pm »
The problem with the KT-120 is current filament draw is higher than 6550/KT88.  Many power supplies simply can't handle it.

medium jim

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #24 on: 18 May 2013, 07:33 pm »
The problem with the KT-120 is current filament draw is higher than 6550/KT88.  Many power supplies simply can't handle it.

Actually, the idle current...

Jim

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #25 on: 18 May 2013, 07:38 pm »
No.
 
 It's filament current as well. Look it up at DIY audio.

medium jim

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #26 on: 18 May 2013, 08:00 pm »
Actually it is both...bias too low and it becomes and issue of too much idle current, bias too high and pop goes the transformers...

Jim

Ericus Rex

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #27 on: 18 May 2013, 11:13 pm »
If you're not sure your amp can take the KT120 I have heard from a reliable source that you can pop them in and monitor the temp of the power transformer.  If the tube pulls too much current for the power supply to handle the transformer will heat up.  You can then turn it off and remove the tubes before any damage is done.  Only do this if you're absolutely sure your amp can handle 6550s/KT88s.  I don't know if I'd personally try this, maybe not all amps can safely run the KT120 for ANY length of time.  But I thought I'd pass on the information.  Don't kill the messenger if something bad happens....

GT Audio Works

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #28 on: 19 May 2013, 12:02 am »
If you're not sure your amp can take the KT120 I have heard from a reliable source that you can pop them in and monitor the temp of the power transformer.  If the tube pulls too much current for the power supply to handle the transformer will heat up.  You can then turn it off and remove the tubes before any damage is done.  Only do this if you're absolutely sure your amp can handle 6550s/KT88s.  I don't know if I'd personally try this, maybe not all amps can safely run the KT120 for ANY length of time.  But I thought I'd pass on the information.  Don't kill the messenger if something bad happens....
Would not want to kill you..maybe just stick your tounge in a tube socket !!! :lol:

medium jim

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #29 on: 19 May 2013, 12:12 am »
This thread sort of reminds me of Tim Allen on Tool Time... :roll:

Jim

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #30 on: 19 May 2013, 01:34 am »
Actually it is both...bias too low and it becomes and issue of too much idle current, bias too high and pop goes the transformers...

Jim

No. You are confusing bias current with filament current.  Two different things.  The problem with using KT-120's is that it draws more current, and some power supplies will not be able to handle the excess filament current.

Ericus Rex

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #31 on: 19 May 2013, 01:41 am »
Would not want to kill you..maybe just stick your tounge in a tube socket !!! :lol:

Well, I heard that from Roger Modjeski in the Music Reference circle.  I think he knows a thing or two about tube amps.  Now, I can't remember exactly if he was solely talking about his own amps or if he said it was safe to do this with anyone's KT88 amp.  Your call.

Ericus Rex

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #32 on: 19 May 2013, 01:44 am »

No. You are confusing bias current with filament current.  Two different things.  The problem with using KT-120's is that it draws more current, and some power supplies will not be able to handle the excess filament current.

Would it be less confusing if we said 'plate current' instead of filament current?  When I hear 'filament' I immediately think of DHTs.  Maybe that's where the 'bias-filament' confusion is stemming from?    :dunno:

medium jim

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #33 on: 19 May 2013, 01:44 am »

No. You are confusing bias current with filament current.  Two different things.  The problem with using KT-120's is that it draws more current, and some power supplies will not be able to handle the excess filament current.

Sorry, but it was explained to me by Kalvin @ Audio Research that while you can use KT120's in lieu of 6550/KT88's that the risk is that if you let the bias drop too low that there will be too much idle current which can cause damage.  In other words, the tubes wouldn't be drawing enough filament current which in turn will create too much plate voltage.

Best to go with the original type output tubes.

Jim

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #34 on: 19 May 2013, 01:51 am »
Read this:
 
http://vinylsavor.blogspot.com/2012/03/filament-bias-part-1-concept.html
 
This should straighten out the understanding.

poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 4019
  • Science is not a democracy - Earl Geddes
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #35 on: 19 May 2013, 02:00 am »
Fellas. The KT120 is an IDHT not a DHT.

That means that the KT120 has completely separate pins to the filaments. It's not shared with the cathode. Okay?

Best,

Anand.

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #36 on: 19 May 2013, 02:02 am »
Yes.  I was trying to show the difference between DHT and KT-88 types.

poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 4019
  • Science is not a democracy - Earl Geddes
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #37 on: 19 May 2013, 02:16 am »
Yes.  I was trying to show the difference between DHT and KT-88 types.

Yes! I know you know! :wink:

Best,
Anand.

Freo-1

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #38 on: 19 May 2013, 02:21 am »
Here is some (hopefully) clarifying explanation:  " The KT120 has a taller glass bottle, longer internal plate structure, and much larger control grid cooling fins than current production KT88 tubes. Because the KT120 draws 100-300 mA more filament current than a standard 6550/KT88, check with your amp manufacturer to ensure you have the additional filament headroom to power these tubes. This new production Tung-Sol tube is manufactured in Russia for New Sensor. "

 

medium jim

Re: KT120 vs 6550 / KT88
« Reply #39 on: 19 May 2013, 02:30 am »
Here is some (hopefully) clarifying explanation:  " The KT120 has a taller glass bottle, longer internal plate structure, and much larger control grid cooling fins than current production KT88 tubes. Because the KT120 draws 100-300 mA more filament current than a standard 6550/KT88, check with your amp manufacturer to ensure you have the additional filament headroom to power these tubes. This new production Tung-Sol tube is manufactured in Russia for New Sensor. "

Again, it is best to stay with what the amp was designed for.  There is no real net gain by using KT120's in an amp designed for 6550/KT88's.  I will hazard to bet that the transformers are rated for the 6550/KT88's, so there will be no added wattage to be gained. Only added stress on the amp.  So even if the tubes will last longer, at what price?

The Audio Research VS-110 uses 6550's and while rated at 100 watts per side is really 110 when biased at 65ma as per the manual.  Whereas, the VS-115 uses KT120's and is rated at 120 watts per side.  Having heard both, the tonal difference and feel are strikingly similar.

Jim