ARC Ref 3: Tung-Sol 6550 in power supply?

"Assumptions are often incorrect in this hobby. Experimentation is what helps us progress."

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.

"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

Guidocorona - Which Tung Sol 6550 have you tried ? The original NOS Black Plate from the 50s that or the current "Tung Sol 6550 reissue" ?

Elberoth2, I tried the current reissue. I am not terribly inclined in delving in superannuated and proportionally priced NOS at this time.

Oneobgyn,

You have tried them all? Really? Which have you tried?
What amazes me is that people spend 10,000 on a preamp and then are offended that the best sounding tubes cost a lot of money. There are some good current production tubes but I do not know of one example where they are not bested by NOS. In most cases the disparity is huge. Elberoth, when you try that NOS Tung Sol, let us know how you liked it.

Bart