Manley Chinook SE MK2

I am user of a Phon' and DAC that uses 2 x 6922/ECC88 Tubes.

The Chinook has 4 x 6922 in the circuit. I would class this as fortunate as seeking out a quad matched tube set can be a challenge but not impossible.

I have done extensive Tube Rolling along with a friend with a similar device using 2 x ECC88's.

Our discoveries have been Jaw Dropping in relation to how a Tubes influence can transform the presentation and create a sonic not wanting to be changed.

There is good news and bad News in the earlier Trials, it was Tubes from the early 1960's that proved to be the very best selection.

My friend who is a Two Generation Tube collector, has continued trying different Brands and discovered a Tube easier to acquire, that offers a substantial amount in comparison to the Vintage Tubes.

My suggestion is, before the Chinook is demo'd against a more expensive Phon' Model, it may be well worth the time and nominal expense to experience the Phon' with different Tubes.

Disclaimer: Both myself and friend use Valve Power Amp's and ESL Speakers and are adverse to Valve Bottom Frequency Bloom, as well as a Projected Presence of the Upper most Frequencies.

We both share an attraction for what would be considered, a Bias toward the Mid Range and Upper Frequencies being in Harmony with each and the Bass has a clear defined edge at it decays.      

@pindac  the Chinook came with Tungsram as these were the choice of tubes by Upscale. I believe this is why it was named the SE MK2. Now it comes with EH I think because NOS is getting scarce.  

@tablejockey thank you for the information 😁.  PL offers great value. 

There are two tubes that would make a difference so far as "matching" goes. Those are the tubes that provide gain in the L and R channels, respectively. In the Steelhead these provide the "top half" of a cascode where the bottom half is probably an FET. The other two tubes are used to create an output stage that is very low in output impedance; in effect they form an unusual type of cathode follower (a stage that turns voltage into current). There is no added gain in the output stage, so the sound of tubes in a cathode follower is generally thought of as not a prominent factor in the overall presentation. I think tube matching is overrated, because tubes are aging as we use them, and no two tubes will age in exactly the same way or rate. So what "matches" today may not match tomorrow. And yet, I am guilty of perceiving that some tubes of any type sound better than other tubes of the same type. In my Steelhead, I use Siemens CCa, I think. I would not shed a tear, however, if some day I had to use some other brand.

By the way, as regards the autoformers in the Steelhead, I get the feeling that my Steelhead sounds best through its MM outputs, where there is no autoformer in the signal path. Interestingly, in the Steelhead, I have read (never tried it) that you can get up to the max 65db of phono gain via the MM outputs.  To me that suggests the autoformers are more for impedance matching to MC cartridges than for their potential to step up voltage.  Also, if you look inside, you can see that for each input R setting available via the rotary switch, there are discrete pairs of resistors whose values match the choices offered via the rotary switch. (If the autoformers were used like SUTs, you would think that the different input impedances would be mostly the product of what pair of primaries is selected.)  It's a bit of a mystery to me.  Manley are very secretive and certainly will not provide a schematic; I have asked.

By the way, as regards the autoformers in the Steelhead, I get the feeling that my Steelhead sounds best through its MM outputs, where there is no autoformer in the signal path. Interestingly, in the Steelhead, I have read (never tried it) that you can get up to the max 65db of phono gain via the MM outputs.  

This has been widely reported-that the MM input with MC often sounds best-by various reviewer and owners. I have tried it and agree.