Tube rolling in ModWright PS 36.5 - any thoughts?

JG2 · « **Reply #40 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 05:40 pm »

Brent Jesse or Brendan at Tube World would only sell a 'true' Mullard or Amperex (Philips production) 5AR4. This is for anyone buying from E-bay or perhaps a tube seller who doesn't care as much as these guys.

I have 2 Amperex branded Bugle Boy 5AR4's. One is an Amperex with a L code (Philips production in Holland) the other is a Mullard with a B code (Mullard Blackburn production). This link shows the various Philips produced tubes.............. Philips, Amperex, Minwatt, Valvo, etc. with X & L production codes and the Mullard production generally (?) with a B production code. Note: the Philps production code can be etched in the glass or stamped in the bottom of the base.

http://www.tube-classics.de/TC/Tubes/Valvo%20GZ34/GZ34.htm

JG2 · « **Reply #41 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 05:51 pm »

Here is an example of a pair of 'Amperex' branded Mullard 5AR4's:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Amperex-Bugle-Boy-Pair-GZ34-5AR4-Tube-Amp_W0QQitemZ160303356522QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item160303356522&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1234%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50

Look at the etching on the second line. It begins with a 'B' (not an E as the seller stated) for Blackburn, UK Mullard production. These are indeed very nice Mullards, but not Amperex. They are also marked 'Made in Gt. Britain' and they were.

rydenfan · « **Reply #42 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 06:14 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 11 Dec 2008, 05:13 pm

Remember I have a bid in on an Amperex set.....hang tight till Monday

Oh, forgot about that one

I am not going to pull the trigger until my one box is on it's way back to Dan to be converted (hopefully soon) but I prefer to be prepared

ted_b · « **Reply #43 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 06:20 pm »

Quote from: JG2 on 11 Dec 2008, 05:51 pm

Here is an example of a pair of 'Amperex' branded fat base Mullard 5AR4's:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Amperex-Bugle-Boy-Pair-GZ34-5AR4-Tube-Amp_W0QQitemZ160303356522QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item160303356522&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1234%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50

Look at the etching on the second line. It begins with a 'B' (not an E as the seller stated) for Blackburn, UK Mullard production. These are indeed very nice Mullards, but not Amperex. They are also marked 'Made in Gt. Britain' and they were.

Good catch That's the one I have a sniper in on, but lowered it now that you tell me it's fat base pair, not Amperex. Thanks!!

JG2 · « **Reply #44 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 06:35 pm »

Hi Ted,

It is a very good pair of Mullards with matching production codes and pretty good test results...........just not Amperex Holland production with L or X code.

This is what makes tube hunting/buying/rolling fun as well as frustrating!

funkmonkey · « **Reply #45 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 08:27 pm »

not to nit pick or anything but I don't think the tubes in question are "fat base" either. They look like they were produced later than that. The "fat base" version came immediately after the "metal base," and then those more common "black base" jobs.
You can see the difference in the bases here:
http://natubes.com/data/images/product/large_673.gif

I am no expert on tubes, but I am starting to learn the subtle differences as I shop around for them.

Cheers
-Greg

JG2 · « **Reply #46 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 09:33 pm »

Greg/Funk

As the 'kids' like to say: "My Bad!"

You are absolutely correct, these are your basic f32 (second version) 1964 Mullard, NOT a fat base! I was trying to distinguish the Mullard/ Amperex production that I didn't look closely enough at the base. The year and version should have been the clues as the fat base are all earlier and also many have a f31 production code.

Thanks, Greg!

funkmonkey · « **Reply #47 on:** 11 Dec 2008, 11:07 pm »

Has anyone noticed any sonic differences between the fat and black base versions of the Mullard?
I own a '61-"fat base" (from Brent Jesse) and have noticed that they tend to sell for a slightly higher price than the mid-late 60's version (which I have not heard). Just curious if it's worth the extra scratch for the "fat".
Thanks.

ted_b · « **Reply #48 on:** 12 Dec 2008, 01:49 am »

I can't tell the difference in the TP but that's all I've tried them in. My regular black base is a single o top getter; the fat being a classic double o.

Timo · « **Reply #49 on:** 13 Dec 2008, 01:00 am »

Hey ted_b and rydenfan:

I pulled the trigger and bought a matched quad of the Reflektor "Super Tubes" from Parts Connexion. Got them for 2x$165 less 15% + $10 for matching a quad. Am already chubbin' and don't even have them yet. Brian took good care of me and matched them perfectly.

ted_b · « **Reply #50 on:** 13 Dec 2008, 01:07 am »

Timo,
Good job man! Let us know how they sound. They will be very different from the stock.

rydenfan · « **Reply #51 on:** 13 Dec 2008, 01:09 am »

Timo, sweet! I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the impact they have. Obviously report back...

BudhaNl · « **Reply #52 on:** 28 Feb 2009, 12:43 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 25 Nov 2008, 10:22 pm

You did good!

Welcome to the AC and the Club!!!

But, to make sure you actually did good...let us know how it all sounds. Give the tubes 100 hrs or so.

Ted

It's been a while, but I thought it would be good to give some feedback on my experiences with the new tubes. One disclaimer needs to be made: in the meantime, I also added a Powerplant Premier to my system. That's also a great investment in my situation. Oh, and lateron I added a Acoustic System International powercord to the LS36.5, which also helps

.

On to the tubes. As mentioned previously, I moved in Reflektor DR's and a Mullard GZ34 into my one-box 36.5. I'm of the 'install and forget' kind, so I haven't A/B'ed at all. I do feel that the tubes have been a great improvement in my system. Bass extension and definition have greatly improved, and I also feel that the soundstage has become much more 'open', making it easier to discern the different parts of the music in order to better experience the 'whole'.

Glad I did the upgrade, thanks to all for posting their experiences so I could do so withouth taking too much of a risk!

ted_b · « **Reply #53 on:** 19 May 2009, 02:24 am »

Well, thanks to David (Rydenfan)'s loan of his EML to me for a few days I've been able to try our great beacons in the PS 36.5. The lid is off, the monuments glow on either side of center, and the sound, well...it's very very nice. It has all the dynamics of the metal bases, but just takes better care of the frequency extremes. not so in your face, not so front row. And the soundstage depth is remarkable; probably a 30% improvement in that area over even the great dual metal bases. Detail is improved, also..which is surprising, as I thought the mb's were quite good, but I think the noise floor is lower and more micro-detail is emerging. And no midbass hump that the mb's tend to produce on certain music. For example, Ike Quebec's wonderful Blue Note classic Bossa Nova Soul Samba is a great jazz album, rife with midbass energy. With the EML's it sounds warm and inviting; with the mb's it's a bit over the top, fun but bassy.

Net/net, I may go ahead and ask Dan/John to produce for me a PS lid with larger holes. It's way easier than the TP cuz the lid is only a portion of the PS top. My lid could be used in another PS. Stay tuned.

AB · « **Reply #54 on:** 19 May 2009, 04:29 am »

Quote from: ted_b on 19 May 2009, 02:24 am

Well, thanks to David (Rydenfan)'s loan of his EML to me for a few days I've been able to try our great beacons in the PS 36.5. The lid is off, the monuments glow on either side of center, and the sound, well...it's very very nice. It has all the dynamics of the metal bases, but just takes better care of the frequency extremes. not so in your face, not so front row. And the soundstage depth is remarkable; probably a 30% improvement in that area over even the great dual metal bases. Detail is improved, also..which is surprising, as I thought the mb's were quite good, but I think the noise floor is lower and more micro-detail is emerging. And no midbass hump that the mb's tend to produce on certain music. For example, Ike Quebec's wonderful Blue Note classic Bossa Nova Soul Samba is a great jazz album, rife with midbass energy. With the EML's it sounds warm and inviting; with the mb's it's a bit over the top, fun but bassy.

Net/net, I may go ahead and ask Dan/John to produce for me a PS lid with larger holes. It's way easier than the TP cuz the lid is only a portion of the PS top. My lid could be used in another PS. Stay tuned.

Ahhh, You beat me to it.

If I could post pics, I would post pics of my 36.5 with its new enlargenized holes. Haven't tried the EMLs yet. I will soon.
I am glad they are working out. It would suck if they didn't.

ted_b · « **Reply #55 on:** 19 May 2009, 11:31 am »

Quote from: AB on 19 May 2009, 04:29 am

Quote from: ted_b on 19 May 2009, 02:24 am
Well, thanks to David (Rydenfan)'s loan of his EML to me for a few days I've been able to try our great beacons in the PS 36.5. The lid is off, the monuments glow on either side of center, and the sound, well...it's very very nice. It has all the dynamics of the metal bases, but just takes better care of the frequency extremes. not so in your face, not so front row. And the soundstage depth is remarkable; probably a 30% improvement in that area over even the great dual metal bases. Detail is improved, also..which is surprising, as I thought the mb's were quite good, but I think the noise floor is lower and more micro-detail is emerging. And no midbass hump that the mb's tend to produce on certain music. For example, Ike Quebec's wonderful Blue Note classic Bossa Nova Soul Samba is a great jazz album, rife with midbass energy. With the EML's it sounds warm and inviting; with the mb's it's a bit over the top, fun but bassy.

Net/net, I may go ahead and ask Dan/John to produce for me a PS lid with larger holes. It's way easier than the TP cuz the lid is only a portion of the PS top. My lid could be used in another PS. Stay tuned.

Ahhh, You beat me to it.

If I could post pics, I would post pics of my 36.5 with its new enlargenized holes. Haven't tried the EMLs yet. I will soon.
I am glad they are working out. It would suck if they didn't.

How did you enlargenize them?

AB · « **Reply #56 on:** 19 May 2009, 02:29 pm »

Quote from: ted_b link=topic=56330.msg630252#msg630252

How did you enlargenize them?

We used a horizontal mill with an adjustable boring head.

Worked like a charm.

ted_b · « **Reply #57 on:** 20 May 2009, 06:16 pm »

Well, an update on the dual EML's in the PS 36.5. Not only do they look cool (even with the lid off...thinking a nice glass or clear plexi lid would be cool) but as i emailed Dan last night they take the dual mono 36.5 to a different level entirely. If there is one slight drawback to the 36.5 compared to other great tube pre's (which each have more than it's share of drawbacks) it is a slight aggressive leading edge to the music, which can show up especially on midfi recordings. The substitution of the EML's as dual rectifiers in the PS 36.5 remove that drawback entirely. The soundstage, detail, imaging, bandwidth, and tonal accuracy is incredible. I've added several addtional new Realtraps, and a couple GIK art panels (I now total 25 traps in my room!!) to my newly renovated setup and the bass response is the best it's ever been. Now with the new EML-based 36.5 the low frequency capability of the pre might be right up there with the best that even ss preamps can offer, IMO. (Note: I have a new SOTA ss preamp being loaned to me in the next few days so it will be fun to try and knock the newly buffed out champion of his pedestal when it comes to lf). Very very highly recommended!

Philistine · « **Reply #58 on:** 20 May 2009, 06:31 pm »

I finally bit the bullet and have a single box 36.5 being shipped today.

I have two pairs of 6H30DR's looking for a good home aa
Based on your post Ted I've just ordered my EML 5U4G, thanks for the heads up

Time to get out my trusty conduit punch

funkmonkey · « **Reply #59 on:** 20 May 2009, 07:11 pm »

Hey Phil, you can use the DRs in the 36.5 (or is that what you were implying?). Looking forward to hearing what you think of the 36.5.