300b amps bettering the midrange of the Cary 300b

The output transformer's low turns ratio(8:1), it's quality and circuit simplicity of the Cary will always keep it in the lead sonically(WELL- someone is certain to outperform it eventually, BUT-at what cost?). In these forums you'll find a lot of people with diverse tastes with regard to sound. Very few that love the realities of music. You mentioned "Hi-Fi sound" and the WE tubes, both which indicate to me at least some familiarity with the real thing(the only reason I'm replying to this thread). Of course the beauty of the SET is it's lack of crossover distortion and the resultant(potential) adherence to musical truth in the midrange where MOST of the music resides. A fair comparison with other amps would require that all be stuffed with the same driver tubes(if possible) and either the WE or KR-300B LSX that the Cary SE came with originally. There's no loop negative feedback in the Cary SE. The cathode resistor of the input triode pair is fully decoupled, and the output transformer secondary feeds signal only to the loudspeaker terminals. A great deal of stability with complex speaker loads results from that design philosopy, and is achieved without any Zobel or frequency/phase shaping networks. The Cary also has the edge over most with regards to power reserves. As you know: It can still be improved upon by rolling the caps/resistors/etc with newer designs. Had you tried any NOS 6SL7's while you had the Carys(like the TungSol round plate VT-229)? NO- I've not compared the Carys with a number of other amps. I tried Cary triodes for a time(and I'm still using Cary monoblocks) and love the musicality, but am also addicted to high power and SPLs(the result is a long story).

Rodmann you seem to be very familiar with the Cary design and how it accomplishes what it does.

Speaking of transformers I was told that after the first generation they used off shore trannies that were of lesser quality than the originals. However I read others say they did make them bigger afterwards and that alleviated some of the bass issues. The person that I'm buying the amps from has owned the originals and later sigs and preferred the originals with the single 6sl7 driver.

I did try the Sylvania brown base 6sl7wgt and it gave the amp much more drive and bass than the Jan/Philips. I'll have to try some VT-229's.

By the way, I read a post back in December at Diyaudio that someone else who owns them said that the first filter capacitor after the 5u4 rectifier is an insane 1000uf. I don't have much of an electronics background so would you or anyone else know anything about this and if I should think about changing it out to a smaller value. Also getting the capacitor banks but not sure where in the design they fall and its relevance to this issue.

Mr F: Regarding caps in the power supply(like that 1000uF): The more capacitance, the greater the dynamic range/headroom of the amp. If I were going to mod the power supply: I'd find Sanyo OS-CONs(http://www.diyparadise.com/oscon.html) of the same value as what was used. Whether the later X-formers were built off-shore, I can't Say(you might contact Dennis and ask him). I do know they are manufactured with grain-oriented Hypersil Alloy(http://www.mag-inc.com/pdf/twc-s2.pdf), and lots of it to avoid saturation. There are a number of other reasons(OFC close-wound conductors/air gap/acrylic insulation)for their quality, but the proof is in the listening. The preferences/opinions of the previous owner of your amps may have been influenced by a numer of factors, IE: Did he check the caps in both designs? Cary used oil-filled caps in a few different models/production runs, and they sometimes tend toward a euphonic presentation. Were both designs stuffed with the same tubes? Was all ancillary equipment exactly the same? If you liked the Sylvania 6SL7WGT, you'll love the TungSol 40's, round plate, bottom gettered, VT-229. Especially in the sound stage depth, mid-range liquidity and low level detail departments.

Thanks for the insight.

Enjoy your music!