Stick with what ARC provides Guido |
"If evryone took oneobgyn's approach to this hobby, nobody would learn anything on this forum" That is a laughable comment. I have probably done more tube rolling in my 40 years in this hobby than you can imagine. I have a friend who also has a Ref 3 and has rolled just about every tube imagineable. When all was said and done his analysis was similar to mine. All you are doing is creating a different "flavor", most far from euphonic and many with tube bloom. I am not saying "don't experiment". I am saying that I have been there and done that. BTW, I am surprised that none of you have tried KT 88's of different manufacturers in place of the 6550. I have always asked myself when I change a piece of equipment or roll a tube, "am I hearing something different, or am I hearing something better?" That is what experience has taught me. But heck, that is just me. |
I'll say again Guido
Stick with what ARC gives you |
I hate to be repetitive but IMO there is absolutely no reason to use any other than the ARC recommended tubes |
Guido
it seems to me that you, as I, have experimented and have found no appreciable gain with tube rolling on the Ref3. I still maintain my stance on that as you and I have found changes that involve tube bloom etc. Again, differences will be heard, BUT everyone must ask of themselves "did I hear something better or did I just hear something different"
Strange that no one is offering comments on swapping a KT88 for the 6550C |
So Posbwp555
It seems to me that so far most of the people that have been doing tube rolling on their Ref3's are coming back to the ARC tubes.
Once again there is a difference b/n hearing something different than hearing something better and I still maintain that tube rolling on this unit is unnecessary..but heck what do I know? |
"Assumptions are often incorrect in this hobby. Experimentation is what helps us progress." I completly agree. What I did say was "been there, done that and decided originals were best for my ears". Others seem to have the same feeling. BTW by the time your NOS collection is gone today's stock tubes will be the NOS tubes of tomorrow. Just a thought but perhaps you should be stockpiling some current generation tubes for listening 30 years from now. |
"That's correct. . . and that's why I gave Tungsol 6550 a valiant try for several weeks. . . then went back to 6550C for good. G." so now let's recap. Other than Posbwp555 is there anyone here who agrees that there is a better choice on the Ref3 than the ARC installed 6550C. I have tried them all and when all is said and done IMO there is absolutely no reason to tube roll on the Ref3. BTW, I posed a question to all the tube rollers that is yet unanswered has anyone tried a KT88 in place of all of the different 6550's? Posbwp555 I am glad that you have stockpiled a collection of $20,000 NOS tubes. Given that most tubes can go easily 5000 and probably 20,000 hours you can leave the balance of your collection to your grandchildren. I also commented in all sincerity that you should be stockpiling today's tubes as in 20-30 years they will be the NOS tubes of tomorrow |
Posbwp555
If you are so correct how is it that all of us here who own this preamp ( I assume you don't)have done some tube rolling and come back to the stock ARC 6550C
And BTW, why haven't you answered my question about using a KT88 instead of a 6550? I believe you talk the talk but you don't walk the walk. I have asked this question several times in this thread and all you do is try to show how knowledgeable you are in NOS tubes. You obviously both don't know and presumably have not ventured out and tried a KT88....have you? |
"Bart, if you have some experience with tube rolling for Ref 3 that we have not covered yet, please enlighten us" The short answer is that he can't He can't even answer me whether he has tried a KT88 instead of the 6550 I would like to make it clear once again that I would never discourage tube rolling. I merely said that when all was said and done it seems that those of us who own the Ref3 (he doesn't) come back to the stock 6550C. I have also stated that tube rolling will produce a "different" sound but not always a "better" sound and that is what we leave to our ears, judgment and most of all experience |
I know Ethannn and find him to be an honest audiophile. He has been to my house several years back and is an ardent tube roller. What he says about the mid range is exactly what I found and for those who love mid range any and all KT88's instead of the 6550 is the way to go BUT at the expense of deep bass. So pick your poison. How come Posbwp555 was unable to answer my question with all of his $20K in stockpiled NOS tubes. |
I am interested as well (rightly or wrongly) how so much magic happened to Elberoth's Ref3 after only 10 hours of tube burn in. Psychoacoustics or real?? |
Thanks Marco.
My bet is that even at 100 hours or more you will still prefer the original 6550C.
I spoke to the people at ARC severalweeks ago about retubing having read the comments that this should be done sooner rather than later and the person with whom I talked said there is absolutely noreason to retube before 4000-5000 hours. I also asked about tube rolling. he suggested that this is OK but that in their opinion the very best 6550 tube is already being used.
I have been in that camp throughout this entire thread as has Guido. |
i didn't ask re PC's but FWIW I use Valhalla throughout my system...nonetheless I think we are now talking apples and oranges (tubes with PC's) |
Marco
From your post it seems to me that you are hearing something different rather than something better. The loss of bass with your tube IMO is one of the reasons ARC goes with their provided 6550C and then for you to have to adjust speaker position suggests to me that whatever difference you heard was not related to the 6550 Tungsram but rather speaker realignment. It makes no sense to me that by changing a tube you have to change speaker position and the feet on the Ref3 for better listening pleasure. I might suggest to you to put the original 6550C back in, keep the speakers where you now have them and keep the tweak on the preamp feet and I would bet your bass is again back to where you like it and overall the sound is better. By inference therefore the speaker repositioning and tweak is what changed, nothing more. |
Being involved in this hobby for well over 35 years has always shown me that when something is changed I always ask "did I hear something different or did I hear something better"
Perhaps the chaanges in your system is what minimized fatigue as you were hearing something different, not neecessarily better. Nonetheless hearing from you about your conclusions will be informative |
Marco
beautiful looking room |
ARC says you easily get 5000 + hours before retubing is necessary |
