Tube 'Characteristics' - EL-34 and 845 and 211

The Gold Lion KT77s surprised the heck out of me. I had earlier tried JJ KT77s TWICE (the first pair plagued by various well-known teething problems) and assumed the Gold Lions would be similar. Instead, they took all the best qualities of the Mullard xf1's and bettered them -- better dynamics, clarity, openness, with no downsides I can find. I should point out, though, that my Mullards were not exactly fresh tubes (unknown hours) and tested just barely into the "good" range on my Eico tester.

Paul, I've never heard an 845 SET amp sound "fuzzy, rounded, or rolled off," but I guess if you say so, they must be out there. Wimpy trannies maybe?

"can it match the natural 'beauty' inherent to the EL-34?"

I won't say that the 845 isn't a quality tube capable of making beautiful music in the right design, but to answer your question very specifically, and with the understanding that "beauty" is in the ears of the listener: When I hear someone ask for a beautiful sounding tube, the 845 doesn't spring to the forefront of my thoughts. One might call it a different beauty, somewhat akin to the difference between incandescent light and the flickering light of a fire.

Now there is an outstanding point.

I've heard a few EL34 based amps and all have had a quite different sonic signature. One set in triode, two others in Pentode, Not sure which #34 tubes in each. JJ's or someother popular brand I think... nothing high priced or NOS.

To date... the Thor 30wpc mono with two 34s in each block running in tri, have been the ones to beat IMHO!

Thanks for the tips on the 77s.

I ran the Air Tights in triode only.The UL improved bass,but the mids suffered.I used all NOS Siemens in mine.

So, When you say:
"When I hear someone ask for a beautiful sounding tube, the 845 doesn't spring to the forefront of my thoughts"

So, exactly how does one explain/describe the difference between an EL-34 and and 845?