Lab12 Melto 2 - tube rolling


Just acquired a well cared for Melto 2. Wanted to give a tube phono stage a try in my system. 
The unit comes with stock 2 Electro Harmonics 6922 and 2 OTK1 Russian military 6n23p EB tubes. 
I’d like to hear from the Melto 2 owners, or owners of phono stages that utilize 6922 tubes, about your experience with replacing EH 6922 with better tubes.

Sound characteristics - what changed, what was the improvement?

Considering current production Gold Lions as I remember liking them in the Rogue line stage…but those were 12AU7 and not 6922. 

Table/cart - VPI Prime X/Hana Umami Blue

Cables - kimber carbon phono from table to Melto2, kimber carbon XLR from phono stage to integrated

Any thoughts? 

audphile1

Lalitk, You wrote, 

"The tubes in output stage in theory has no voltage gain as @lewm pointed out but in real world, they behave quite differently.  A cathode follower has no voltage gain, it’s there to lower output impedance, provide current and buffer stages. So on paper, it shouldn’t influence the sound much, right…lol! 

But in real world, it still does. Tubes differ in transconductance and behavior under load, which affects microdynamics and low-level detail. They also shape the distortion profile, influencing tone, texture, and decay. Since a cathode follower is about current delivery not gain, how a tube handles dynamic current impacts attack, ease, and overall musical flow."

What you say here is quite true, but you are conflating differences among different tube types with differences among different brands of 6922 and its congeners. The performance of a CF is very dependent upon its plate resistance, mu, and most of all transconductance.  The output impedance of a CF is roughly equal to the inverse of its transconductance.  So to achieve the lowest output Z and the max current delivery at the output, you want tubes of highest transconductance. For this purpose, the 6922 and other high Gm/low Rp triodes are best. I like to use the 5687 as a CF but it does require lots of current, which is among its virtues as a CF but also puts demands on the PS.  This is also why the 12AX7 makes a terrible CF. (Very low current handling and very low Gm.) Among tube types, yes, performance as a CF will differ, but among 6922s that are performing within RCA manual spec, there should not be much difference.

That leads me to my next point.  I have found that any sonic differences among decent CFs can be ameliorated by adding a constant current source (CCS) between the cathode of the tube and ground.  The CF per se is a nonlinear device, and therefrom derives its character if it has any.  The CCS stiffens it up, makes it much more linear and transparent.  I have done this at least 3 or 4 times in different gear and always with a noticeable uptick in SQ. The caveat is you need enough cathode voltage to support the CCS itself. I realize that not many are going to try this, but K&K used to sell very compact solid state CCS kits, small enough to fit in most tube gear.  I've installed many of their kits. You won’t hear the dreaded sound of solid state, because a CCS by definition has a super high impedance, meaning the audio signal does not pass it.

@billstevenson 

Your recommendations on CH P10 and CJ Art phono’s are well noted. Unfortunately, they’re a bit outside my budget especially new, though I might get lucky on the used market. I’m trying to keep the phono stage under $20K so I can properly allocate funds toward the two cartridges….the Etsuro Gold and the Murasakino Sumile Mono which is already a $20K commitment.

Another reason I’m not leaning toward CH is that I want at least one tube component in an otherwise solid-state system, and the phono stage is really my only opportunity to do that. The rest of my setup is pretty much locked in.

That said, I’m keeping an open mind and really appreciate your input. At the end of the day, it’s all about finding that one piece that puts a big smile on your face.

among 6922s that are performing within RCA manual spec, there should not be much difference.
 

should is the key word there @lewm 

I heard a pretty substantial difference last night between the Siemens and EH. 
But then again I hear differences between power cords, Ethernet cables and usb cables…and there shouldn’t be any…

i have literally a couple hundred 6dj8/6922 type tubes from years of running c-j and arc gear, mostly collected in the 80s 90s 00s - usa western eastern european as well as japanese origins

happy to help if there are some varieties folks here may want to try

 

Audphile, were those all new in box tubes you compared?  Differences can be due to age of the tube. Tubes lose transconductance as they age.  But I certainly do not doubt you hear what you hear. I hear differences between a 12AU7 and a 12FQ7 used as a CF in my Quicksilver preamp, even though those tubes have identical specs.  The FQ does draw twice the filament current of the AU, so somewhere in there may be a key to the sonic differences.  The difference is decidedly in favor of the FQ way over the AU, in this case.  My other point was that the sonic difference probably would be lessened in the presence of a CCS, and for the overall better than eithr tube without a CCS.