What makes Telefunken tubes sound better?


I've reached the point in sampling 12AU7 tubes below $100 per tube where I'm having to buy tube crates to keep the pairs I've sampled. I've tried NOS and new, but out of all I end up back with Telefunkens as having the least distortion and fastest transient response. Yet the Telefunken internals are not the best materials/quality; NOS Mullard CV4003 or the new Gold Lions have higher build quality for materials and precision.

Are there links somewhere that talk to what is different for the internal design/construction of a Telefunken tube? I'd like to support newer tube manufacturers based on educated consumerism, and hope that we can get someone to replace Telefunken at an affordable cost before NOS stock is no longer an option.
128x128davide256

Showing 1 response by kirkus

While I've had some wonderful batches of Telefunken-branded tubes of many types, I think the idea of Telefunken being the "best" needs some qualification. I think this may have some validity when looking at a certain period of production in the mid-20th century Noval preamp tubes . . . the "flat-plate" 12AX7 and 12AU7.

But looking more broadly . . . there was an incredible quantity of high-quality tubes produced in this era in Western Europe, the U.K., and the U.S.. For audio power tubes, transmitting tubes, TV-sweep tubes, RF receiving pentodes, rectifier diodes . . . on out to picture tubes, image orthocons, thyratrons, compactrons, nuvistors . . . on and on and on . . . the "Telefunken" brand was a great one, but it could never be considered the singular champion in a broader sense.

Indeed, these were the glory years of all thermionic devices. Lots of investment (Marshall Plan and Cold War defense), skilled people returning from war needing jobs, and huge technical improvements from wartime R&D budgets. It's not simply a matter of somebody now deciding to copy a single device, the whole industry is a tiny little shadow of what it was in those years.