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


At the risk of getting slammed by those that think all tubes should sound the same in a properly designed circuit, I was wondering if anyone can comment on their experiences and the differences they have heard between the EL-34 tubes and the 845's and 211's. I've used the EL-34 for many years but have been advised that I should seek out a good 845 mono block to use with my super sensitive KHorns. Is the 845 more powerful sounding? Does it have or can it match the natural 'beauty' inherent to the EL-34?
stickman451
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?
It's like I said earlier - an 845 will (in almost any implementation) have that "lit from within" DHT glow in the midrange. For many, that is the ultimate in beauty.

EL34s have a sort of creamy midrange too, one that is possibly more euphonic, but not as clear.

I would argue the DHSET mid is both more transparent (clear) and more beautiful.

The CJ MV-60 is a fave amp of mine, with a 'glowing', beautiful midrange, but there's no doubt it's euphonic (cloudy) as well.

You really need to hear the amps for yourself. These things can't be adequately put into words.
Seeing as you have "super sensitive KHorns", you might consider the Art Audio Carissa. 16 watts but single ended, a little more magic in the midrange. If you need 50 watts, I'd say the Quartets would be an excellent choice. I used them occasionally with my Maggies.

Paulfolbrecht

>> EL34s have a sort of creamy midrange too, one that is possibly more euphonic, but not as clear. <<

As I've no doubt that is your exp, I have to say I feel the context of the application will determeine more so the qualities of the presentation... not merely the tubes being implemented.

Triode, triode, triode. I feel that is where the truly intrinsic differences in the sound of tubes begins. I've not had the opportunity to hear 300b, or 845 designs. Not in single tube operation or in PP.

From what I've heard recently of CJ and some other's, I also must say what I'm hearing over the past few years is a decided bent on becoming more SS like. Finding a glorious harmonic sound being presented from a tube amp today seems the exception.

In my ultralinear configured amps using CED winged C EL34 tubes, I can discern as much if not more detail and resolution with them as I did using any SS or Hybrid amp... in truth, I feel a bit more perhaps. Their midband is very well appointed and supplies a great deal of speed and immediacy. All the subtleties and nuamsce are there and easily revealed. Little euphony lives in that ultralinear configuration.

Perhaps more to the point is how tubes should sound or differ within a certain context, in particular, a certain amp. Or in a particular design topology. I tend to think these CED winged Cs run in triode would sound much different than they do running in ultralinear.

I could be far off the path here but I'd venture a guess that some other triode only tubes sound different when in Push Pull. or that with significant negative feedback a tube which sounds one way without any, might sound quite different with some.

Lastly ... what one designer can do with a tube is at times beyond what another can do with the exact same tube in terms of sound alone. Tubes by their very nature determine output. I've found so far, brand and vintage more of a thunbprint for tubes than merely their type.