Ruby tubes reliability report

Overdrive Special, Steel String Singer, Dumbleland, Odyssey, Winterland, etc. -
Members Only

Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal

frischmann
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:03 pm

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by frischmann »

I have a set of STR's in my Super Reverb. They are just huge sounding. Sent the black pates paking in a hurry.
User avatar
ChrisM
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada.

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by ChrisM »

Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
User avatar
Bob-I
Posts: 3791
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Hillsborough NJ

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Bob-I »

ChrisM wrote:Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
The only pair of Winged C I tried had one fail shortly, not a large enough test to determine if this is a real problem or just a bad tube.

The TAD quad I tried sounded huge, big and fat, but I found I liked a set of Chinese 6L6's better as the TADs were simply too fat and the Chinese are brighter and more transparent.

I haven't tried JAN Phillips or Tung-Sol. Good luck.
User avatar
ChrisM
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada.

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by ChrisM »

Bob-I wrote:
ChrisM wrote:Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
The only pair of Winged C I tried had one fail shortly, not a large enough test to determine if this is a real problem or just a bad tube.

The TAD quad I tried sounded huge, big and fat, but I found I liked a set of Chinese 6L6's better as the TADs were simply too fat and the Chinese are brighter and more transparent.

I haven't tried JAN Phillips or Tung-Sol. Good luck.
Cool, thanks for the input. I think I got a good selection of tubes most people seem to like around here.

I hear of all these tubes failing in these D amps. Why is this, any idea? At 440V on the plates are the design parameters being push, I would think not?
User avatar
Structo
Posts: 15446
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Structo »

Well I think just about any of us can say we had a current production tube fail right out of the gate or one that crapped out after just a few hours of run time.

That being said, I do like the Winged =C= 6L6GC I had in my D'Lite.

The JJ 6L6 I tried seemed kind of dull, lifeless.

The Sovtek 5881 are alright but nothing to write home about.

I really liked the TAD 6L6 tall bottles, nice round full tone.
But one of those redplated so I've been scared to try those again.

Currently I really lucked out on a pair of RCA 6L6GC Blackplates.
Now I know what all the fuss is about with these tubes. Simply the best I have ever heard in this amp.
I can see why they go for the big bucks.
They are out of a 1959 Baldwin organ. :D
Tom

Don't let that smoke out!
frischmann
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:03 pm

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by frischmann »

Bob-I wrote:
ChrisM wrote:Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
The only pair of Winged C I tried had one fail shortly, not a large enough test to determine if this is a real problem or just a bad tube.

The TAD quad I tried sounded huge, big and fat, but I found I liked a set of Chinese 6L6's better as the TADs were simply too fat and the Chinese are brighter and more transparent.

I haven't tried JAN Phillips or Tung-Sol. Good luck.

I always thought the TADs were rebranded shuguangs...Which Chinese tubes are you talking about ?
User avatar
Bob-I
Posts: 3791
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Hillsborough NJ

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Bob-I »

frischmann wrote: I always thought the TADs were rebranded shuguangs...Which Chinese tubes are you talking about ?
IF they are, they're not the same tube. They look and sound completely different.

I'm assuming the chinese are shuguangs but I don't know. I bought 8 of them on ebay cheep to use as test for new builds. Turned out they sound great so they're all in gigging amps now.
User avatar
Bob-I
Posts: 3791
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Hillsborough NJ

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Bob-I »

ChrisM wrote:I hear of all these tubes failing in these D amps. Why is this, any idea? At 440V on the plates are the design parameters being push, I would think not?
I don't think this is any different than tubes have ever been. I remember buying tubes for amps in the 60's and going back to the store with dead ones. Fairly common occurance.
User avatar
butwhatif
Posts: 544
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:27 am
Location: upmi

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by butwhatif »

How true, i saw the same, but the long term reliability of most new tubes is not the same i still see fenders from the '50s now and then with the orig tung sol 5881s intact
User avatar
Structo
Posts: 15446
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Structo »

Yeah, no kidding.

That Hammond organ amp I converted to a guitar amp had all Sylvania tubes except the 5U4GB rectifier which is an RCA.

Two silver topped Sylvania 6V6GT's :D

I think I figured that amp was from 1959?

They might not be the original tubes but I'm thinking they most likely are.

They are obviously not from this decade and they still sound great too! :D

I was really surprised at the difference in tone that the RCA 6L6's gave me.
You always hear these rumors and reviews but until you hear it for yourself it really doesn't mean anything.

So now I know. Black Plates rule! :D
Tom

Don't let that smoke out!
User avatar
ChrisM
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada.

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by ChrisM »

Glad you like those RCAs Tom. A friend lent me a pair a while ago and I was also very impressed with them.

I like trying NOS tube's as well. I have experimented a bit with NOS 6V6s, 6L6s , 12AT7s and 12AY7s.

My gripe is with those damn 12AX7s. I cant bring myself to spend $100 (that's the very low end :? ) for a glass bottle that I know will eventually need to be replaced. Damn tone, damn supply in demand.
User avatar
Structo
Posts: 15446
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Structo »

No kidding.

So far I haven't really been that impressed with any NOS or used preamp tube I have paid big money for.

Here's a little secret that most of you probably know.

These organ companies (Hammond, Lowery, Baldwin, etc) would have tubes that are relabeled with there brand name on them.

Many times these may be Tung Sols, Raytheon's, Sylvania's, etc.

If you can find a good source of those and don't care what is printed on the tube, then they can be had for much less $$ than the ones with the actual manufacturers name on them.

I have bought several tubes from Brent Jesse. He seems honest and charges a fair price (I guess).
I don't think a lot of people know about him.
You can tell him what position the tube is going in and he will screen the tubes for that type of use.
He also has a lot of interesting comments about NOS and used tubes plus other useful information.
http://www.audiotubes.com/
Tom

Don't let that smoke out!
User avatar
Structo
Posts: 15446
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Structo »

Brent has a couple YouTube videos where he discusses the differences in various NOS manufacturers of popular tube designations.
Very informative.

First is about the 6V6 tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00s-CpWZ ... r_embedded

This one is about the 6L6GC tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tnYpD9F ... r_embedded
Tom

Don't let that smoke out!
Grog
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:20 am

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Grog »

ChrisM wrote:Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
User avatar
Structo
Posts: 15446
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Ruby tubes reliability report

Post by Structo »

Grog wrote:
ChrisM wrote:Just made an order for these tubes today. What do you guys thing of the following output tubes?

JAN-Philips 6L6WGB (NOS)
TAD 6L6WGC-STR
Winged "C" (SED) 6L6GC
Tung-Sol 6L6GC-STR
JAN, haven't tried them

TAD 6L6GC-STR, this was the pair where one redplated after 8 hours.
They sounded quite good though before one blew.

Winged =C= 6L6GC, I like these tubes a lot.

Tung Sol 6L6GC, haven't tried these.
Tom

Don't let that smoke out!
Post Reply