EAT Tubes vs. NOS Tubes

[Suteetat]

Hmmm, so it seems that nobody has really compare EAT tubes to the usual top NOS tubes so far.
Personally, I don't care much for rebranding specially selected tubes as it is unlikely that EAT or anybody
would have large enough stash of the usual suspects like pinched waist amperex, Siemens Cca, Tele diamond mark Cca
or anything like that. Also each lot of tubes are likely to be different just like Gold Aero brand.
I was hoping that they manufacture brand new tubes so there is an alternative source of high quality
tubes that would be consistant in quality.

 

[Marcus]

Hmmm, so it seems that nobody has really compare EAT tubes to the usual top NOS tubes so far.

I will. These beauties came today...

 

[mep]

I will. These beauties came today...



View attachment 12736

What?? No gold pins??

 

[LL21]

Hi Marcus...congrats! Any initial thoughts?

 

[thedudeabides]

Mark,

Mine has gold pins.

Marcus, look forward to your thoughts.

GG

 

[mep]

Mark,

Mine has gold pins.

Marcus, look forward to your thoughts.

GG

GG-I thought all of the EAT 6922 tubes had gold pins which was why I was shocked to see the above pair.

 

[Marcus]

EAT Ecc88 v Amperex 6922 PQ white label

For starters I would like to point out that both of these tubes are VERY quiet. When I compared the cj »original« Electro Harmonix and JJ Gold Pins a few weeks ago, I thought JJ's were very quiet but this pair is in another league. You can hear only a very faint hiss 20cm from the tweeter, beyond that there is only a black silence. Well, as far as silence is concerned I can't pick a winner.

The sound of these tubes is something else though. Amperex is silky smooth and refined, bass is full and strong and the soundstage is well defined, wide and very deep. The perspective is like in the row 8. When I substituted Amperex with the EAT, I thought at first it was louder but it was not. The perspective has changed to the row 2, there was this...«fresh air« feeling , the soundstage seemed more illuminated but it was not wider nor deeper. Music sounded more potent with greater dynamic contrasts and the bass was even stronger and better defined. One reason I bought Amperex PQWL is it's great bass, but EAT's bass is even better. But...EAT can't match the Amperex in smoothness, liquidity and balance. Upper range is very open and defined but a little bit too forward for my taste and I miss a bit the refinement of Amperex...

 

[LL21]

EAT Ecc88 v Amperex 6922 PQ white label

For starters I would like to point out that both of these tubes are VERY quiet. When I compared the cj »original« Electro Harmonix and JJ Gold Pins a few weeks ago, I thought JJ's were very quiet but this pair is in another league. You can hear only a very faint hiss 20cm from the tweeter, beyond that there is only a black silence. Well, as far as silence is concerned I can't pick a winner.

The sound of these tubes is something else though. Amperex is silky smooth and refined, bass is full and strong and the soundstage is well defined, wide and very deep. The perspective is like in the row 8. When I substituted Amperex with the EAT, I thought at first it was louder but it was not. The perspective has changed to the row 2, there was this...«fresh air« feeling , the soundstage seemed more illuminated but it was not wider nor deeper. Music sounded more potent with greater dynamic contrasts and the bass was even stronger and better defined. One reason I bought Amperex PQWL is it's great bass, but EAT's bass is even better. But...EAT can't match the Amperex in smoothness, liquidity and balance. Upper range is very open and defined but a little bit too forward for my taste and I miss a bit the refinement of Amperex...

Great stuff!!! Thanks for posting. I have both the stock CJ EHs and the Amperex 6922 USPQWLs...I think you and I agreed off-line about how the Amperex and EH compared so the comparison of Amperex to EAT is very helpful for me. Have you heard the Telefunken 6922s?

 

[MylesBAstor]

EAT Ecc88 v Amperex 6922 PQ white label

For starters I would like to point out that both of these tubes are VERY quiet. When I compared the cj »original« Electro Harmonix and JJ Gold Pins a few weeks ago, I thought JJ's were very quiet but this pair is in another league. You can hear only a very faint hiss 20cm from the tweeter, beyond that there is only a black silence. Well, as far as silence is concerned I can't pick a winner.

The sound of these tubes is something else though. Amperex is silky smooth and refined, bass is full and strong and the soundstage is well defined, wide and very deep. The perspective is like in the row 8. When I substituted Amperex with the EAT, I thought at first it was louder but it was not. The perspective has changed to the row 2, there was this...«fresh air« feeling , the soundstage seemed more illuminated but it was not wider nor deeper. Music sounded more potent with greater dynamic contrasts and the bass was even stronger and better defined. One reason I bought Amperex PQWL is it's great bass, but EAT's bass is even better. But...EAT can't match the Amperex in smoothness, liquidity and balance. Upper range is very open and defined but a little bit too forward for my taste and I miss a bit the refinement of Amperex...

Marus-I may have missed it but what is the rest of your system?

How many hours of playing did the tubes have under their belts when you listened?

 

[Suteetat]

Marcus, thanks for your description. I wonder if EAT may improve a bit more after more playtime as it seems that you only recently recently received EAT. However, from your description, I would say that you can definitely get more bass, slam, dynamic while retaining all the
Amperex PQ White label virtue if you can find US Amperex pinched waist (the one with gold pins). Holland Amperex pinched waist, will have a tad more dynamic, slam than PQ but its strong suite is more about liquidity, smoothness and full body sound. The only bad thing about pinched waist 6922 is that I think most of the major tube suppliers can't keep them for long as they are gone very quickly once listed and on ebay, I would say more than half are fake.

 

[LL21]

has anyone compared tungsram to telefunken 6922s? I am debating between the 2 based on strong recommendations for the Teles...but have read from Upscale that the Tungsrams are dead quiet and can work well in systems which need that (like mine). I understand from Upscale the sounds are similar, and if anything Tungsrams may be a little sweeter. Thanks for any other feedback!

 

[Marcus]

Marus-I may have missed it but what is the rest of your system?
How many hours of playing did the tubes have under their belts when you listened?

My system:
Kuzma XL4/4Point/Benz LP-S MR
Zanden 1200 Mk3
Conrad-Johnson GAT
Karan KAM-2000
Avalon Time
Cardas Clear & Clear Beyond
Finite Elemente HD Master Reference

Here's a photo: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?12298-My-(SMT)-room

Amperex have 80 hours, EAT only 30. So, EAT tubes may improve a bit more after more playtime. Will report if that happens.

 

[thedudeabides]

Marcus,

Thanks for the info.

I haven't had the opportunity to compare the EAT to a high quality NOS but I find your description of the EAT to be consistent with my impressions. I probably have under 50 hours on mine and haven't noticed any major changes in its sonic signature after say the first few hours following initial install.

GG

 

[LL21]

My system:
Kuzma XL4/4Point/Benz LP-S MR
Zanden 1200 Mk3
Conrad-Johnson GAT
Karan KAM-2000
Avalon Time
Cardas Clear & Clear Beyond
Finite Elemente HD Master Reference

Here's a photo: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?12298-My-(SMT)-room

Amperex have 80 hours, EAT only 30. So, EAT tubes may improve a bit more after more playtime. Will report if that happens.

Hi Marcus...thought I would check in to see how the EATs are coming along on the refinement bit relative to the Amperex. Thanks!

 

[Mendel]

Marcus, thanks for your description. I wonder if EAT may improve a bit more after more playtime as it seems that you only recently recently received EAT. However, from your description, I would say that you can definitely get more bass, slam, dynamic while retaining all the
Amperex PQ White label virtue if you can find US Amperex pinched waist (the one with gold pins). Holland Amperex pinched waist, will have a tad more dynamic, slam than PQ but its strong suite is more about liquidity, smoothness and full body sound. The only bad thing about pinched waist 6922 is that I think most of the major tube suppliers can't keep them for long as they are gone very quickly once listed and on ebay, I would say more than half are fake.

Agreed! The Amperex pinch waist 6922 D getter code 7L2 delta7A is the best 6dj8/ecc88/e188cc/6922/7308 I have ever used in my phono stage, and I have pretty much tried all the NOS types. Pretty much unobtainable these days, I got mine from a contact I made at a hamfest for $10. Neither him or myself knew what he had at the time, we thought it was just a run of the mill gold pin Amperex--only later did I discover it was a pinched waist. I ran it for 2 years but it now tests a little on the low side. May put it back in anyways to try, it was the best.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Agreed! The Amperex pinch waist 6922 D getter code 7L2 delta7A is the best 6dj8/ecc88/e188cc/6922/7308 I have ever used in my phono stage, and I have pretty much tried all the NOS types. Pretty much unobtainable these days, I got mine from a contact I made at a hamfest for $10. Neither him or myself knew what he had at the time, we thought it was just a run of the mill gold pin Amperex--only later did I discover it was a pinched waist. I ran it for 2 years but it now tests a little on the low side. May put it back in anyways to try, it was the best.

You're lucky. I heard they're far from the quietest tube

 

[Suteetat]

You're lucky. I heard they're far from the quietest tube

Hmmm...in CJ GAT, it is at least as quiet as CJ stock tubes if not more so. I also use them in input stage of Lamm M2.2
and have not noticed any increased noise floor over other NOS tubes that I tried (and I tried about 5-6 different kinds, tele, Mullard, Mazda, Gold Aero etc)
as well as Lamm stock tubes.

In phono unit, my Thoeress uses PCC88 which is very similar and pretty much interchageable with 6922. I also uses pinched waist PCC88 there and has no problem with noise.

 

[LL21]

Agreed! The Amperex pinch waist 6922 D getter code 7L2 delta7A is the best 6dj8/ecc88/e188cc/6922/7308 I have ever used in my phono stage, and I have pretty much tried all the NOS types.

You're lucky. I heard they're far from the quietest tube

Hmmm...in CJ GAT, it is at least as quiet as CJ stock tubes if not more so. I also use them in input stage of Lamm M2.2 and have not noticed any increased noise floor over other NOS tubes that I tried (and I tried about 5-6 different kinds, tele, Mullard, Mazda, Gold Aero etc)
as well as Lamm stock tubes.

Funny...I love the Amperex US PQ, but in my GAT, they were ultimately noisier with greater lower-level hiss than my Mullard CV2493s. I had 2 sets of Amperexs and both ended up about the same. Even with all the gain I have in my system, I needed to stand with my ear turned to my tweeters at about 3-6 inches in order to hear any hiss. a good thing. Though I preferred the sounds of the Amperexes by a small margin, the much lower level of hiss and generally far less crackly nature of the Mullards I found...means I have kept the Mullards in for 2 years now. I do use the Amperex US PQ White Label 7308 in my Zanden DAC.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I'll hopefully have a pair of EATECC88s for my GAT in a week.

 

[Mendel]

I should point out that my pinched waist was a delta made in Holland Amperex. The US made Amperex 6922s are very good, but IMO their Holland made tubes are even better. Found this to be true across the board. As for noise, I never really noticed it being noisy. Maybe not the quietest tube I ever used there, but there is more to a tube than quietness. The ARC supplied Sovtec tube was the quietest tube I have used in the SP14, but don't get me started on the sound.....