Tubes, old and new


I sat down next to Tim Pavaracini in a room at T.H.E. Show in Irvine weekend before last, and listened to him talk about tubes. He told me that in the 50's and 60's the various tube companies would swap tubes amongst themselves when they ran low of a certain model, putting their own logo on the glass of a competitors tube. It would therefore behoove tube enthusiasts to learn the internal physical characteristics specific to each make, especially when spending big money on them. Tim's personal favorites are Mullards. He had nothing good to say about ANY tubes being manufactured today, feeling the guys and gals on the tube assembly lines have not apprenticed long enough to learn the skills necessary to build a quality tube, that they are not career professionals, but merely temporary employees. Buy your tubes from an honest, knowledgeable tube vendor!
128x128bdp24
I think that's a pretty safe assumption! Kavi Alexander had Tim design the tube electronics for the microphones and tape recorder he uses to make his Water Lily albums, some of the best recordings ever made. Roger Modjeski says Tim is one of the other (beside himself ;-) engineer/designers working in Hi-Fi he respects. An unsafe assumption is that I spelled Tim's last name correctly (it's actually Paravicini), even though it's right there on the faceplate of my EAR 868 pre-amp. Duh.
I don't question his reputation as a designer as I like his stuff…I simply think he's utterly wrong about modern tubes, many of which are superb.
Keith Herron, another good one, is with you on the subject, putting current Sovtek tubes in his products, which sound mighty good, and advising against substituting "better sounding" vintage tubes. Modjeski himself says a tube doesn't have an inherent sound, that what a circuit sounds like with any particular set of tubes in it is a function of those tubes performance curves (conductance, voltage, noise, etc.), not an inherent sound per se. I always listen to a products designer when using his product.