Garrard 301 - Project

Dover, Please lighten up. I was quoting Lalitk. That is why the words were in quotation marks.  Evidently Lalitk experiences the TFK ECC83 as tonally rich. As we all know, one's impressions of the SQ of any single item in a system are dependent upon what else is in the system and what is in the caput of the listener. Although I have to say that I preferred the sound of TFK ECC83s against any other congener in my Quicksilver preamplifier, I also hold with noromance that you can adjust tonality elsewhere, such as by careful choice of output coupling capacitor, and etc. I used the TFKs in the Q because I have owned a quad of them since the 1970s, and I figured I ought to at least give them a try.  The Quicksilver is a superb sounding unit, in my opinion, but these days it just sits on the shelf.  Mullards were underwhelming in the Quicksilver, not even second choice. I am in general not a fan of tube rolling at all.

Do you find that your preference for Telefunken or Mullard shifts depending on the type of music you’re listening to or is it the system’s overall tonal balance?

No. I listen to mostly Jazz & Classical.

My preferences are for maximum speed and transparency. I very seldom have any issues with system balance - having multiple arms/cartridges is enough.

One thing I cannot stand is slowness or aberrations/colourations - I find that ultimately they grate on you over time. Best to build a balanced system to start with.

In terms of tube choice - its the particular application that can determine tube variant in my experiences - specifically with classic circuits eg Marantz you have tubes that perform gain functions and tubes that are used in a cathode follower application ( no gain, used as buffer to generate a low impedance output ).

Occasionally I have found that the 2 best tubes in those positions are not the same.

@lewm

I used to distribute Quicksilver, I have owned them years ago - the QS preamp runs the tubes very very hard. 

@dover

Your focus on speed and transparency aligns perfectly with your preference for a balanced and revealing system. It’s great that your approach to tube selection considers the nuances of classic circuit design. That level of detail ensures optimal synergy and performance without introducing unwanted coloration or sluggishness.

My journey into analog so far has been nothing short of amazing experiences. There is still lot more work ahead as I look forward to receiving the elusive Woodsong plinth + implementation of 2nd tonearm and Mono cart by Spring 2025.

Dover, I own the old QS preamp that has a built in MM phono stage, along with its linestage, not the newer models that I think are separates, a phono stage and a separate linestage.  Since I have measured the voltages across the tubes, and thereby also calculated plate current and plate dissipation, I can assure you that the early 1990s era QS does not run the tubes "very hard". The plate dissipation is well within spec. Upgrading the capacitors in the RIAA filter and the output coupling capacitors does wonders for the sound.

@lewm 

Dover, I own the old QS preamp that has a built in MM phono stage, along with its linestage, 

Yes - that's the one I'm talking about. In hindsight it may have been the power supply feeds to the tubes that had some design foibles that were precarious. I have the circuit diagrams here with updates by Mike ( there were several updates to that pre ), but my tech was not happy. He did explain to me the design issue, but I can't remember the detail - its some years ago.

Its an ok preamp.