Raysonic CD168 connects directly to Power Amp

Only you can tell whether the Raysonic sounds better direct or via your SF
preamp. It should be pretty easy to tell, if my Raysonic 128 (no volume
control) is representative of the breed. Mine sounds distinctly worse used
into a passive preamp than into an active (Aesthetix Calypso in my case). The
"direct" sound is transparent enough but lacks the body,
authority, and musicality I hear through the Calypso. I've not heard the 168.

I'm using 6DJ8 "Bugle Boy" tubes in the outer pair that feeds the XLR outputs
(the inner pair of tubes serves the RCA outputs, at least in the 128). I'm using
Morrow Audio XLRs and find them excellent, but YMMV -- there are plenty of
options out there. Good luck, Dave

I liked my 168 better through a Calypso pre also for basically the reason Dopogue did.
I preferred the tighter sound of the Amperex US 7308 PQ or US 6922 PQ besides the 168 didn't like the higher heater current of the 6DJ8 and became slightly hotter than normal.

Heater current:
6922-----300ma
7308-----335ma
6dj8-----365ma

Dave and Samhar - Thanks for sharing.

My initial impression with direct connection to the amp was very positive. To confirm my impression, I should switch back to connecting the CD168 via the SFL-2.

I did not care for the original EH 6922. The 6DJ8 Bugle boy is very musical but the dynamic and focus is not as sharp as the Amperex Orange A frame. The next is to get the Amperex 6922 white label to try out.

The 6922 should run cooler than 6DJ8. In comparing the EH6922 with Amperex 6DJ8, they both are luke warm as I touch the aluminum surface. I can't tell much difference.