new tung-sol 6550

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by John Marat, Dec 27, 2004.

  1. John Marat

    John Marat Supporting Member

    Mar 29, 2004
    Phoenix, AZ
    Has anyone tried these or heard anything about them? I am going to retube my db728 soon and would like to try somthing new! tubes I have tried already sovtek 6550we, ehkt88, svetlana 6550c(now sed).

    thanks jb...
  2. James Hart

    James Hart

    Feb 1, 2002
    Endorsing Artist: see profile
    I've been told that they are just about the *exact* tube as the Sovtek KT88 and usually priced about 25% higher.

    I've just ordered the Sovtek.

    Why are you retubing? I'd heard those things come with some good quality tubes.
  3. John Marat

    John Marat Supporting Member

    Mar 29, 2004
    Phoenix, AZ
    the tubes that are in it are great. I have had them for over a year now. they still work great ,I just want to try somthing new!
  4. Rockbobmel

    Rockbobmel Supporting Member

  5. ...same maker, same tube, different name and higher price; that's all the difference.
  6. James is referring to the fact that both tubes are made in the same factory on the same assembly line. Both use the same bottle. Both have triple getters and not surprisingly they measure and sound very, very similar. There is however quite a difference in price if you want to pay for the name.

    Ooops - PBG beat me to it!
  7. Pickebass

    Pickebass Supporting Member

    Jul 12, 2004
    San Antonio, TX
    How did you like the svetlana's? I have the ruby tubes in my 728 and will be retubing my 359 soon...

    BTW... I got almost three years of use out of the original tubes in my 359
  8. John Marat

    John Marat Supporting Member

    Mar 29, 2004
    Phoenix, AZ
    I really liked the svetlana's. I had a set in a svt II pro as well. they seemed to have a tighter low end than the sovtek 6550 we's that they replaced. I'm a little confused now about the svetlanas. First they changed the name to S.E.D. and now there is another tube being manufactured under the name Svetlana. I think the new tube is made by Sovtek and the S.E.D.'s are the old Svetlanas the alot of manufactures have been using. Do I have my story straight????
  9. Bongolation


    Nov 9, 2001
    No Bogus Endorsements
    This is really loathesome.

    Genuine vintage US Tung-Sol 6550s are terrifically expensive and are considered by many the holy-grail 6550.

    For some dirtbag to buy the name and stick it on garden-variety Russian junk in order to deceive the unwary is really disgusting, if that's indeed what's going on here. :mad:
  10. Many Russian tubes are state of the art in current-production tubes, and these are among (if not absolutely) the best made nowadays. They are a reasonably accurate reproduction of the original. It just happens that their Sovtek KT88 is a truly exceptional bargain. They make no secret of the fact that the Tung-Sol branded 6550 version is "Made in Russia" by SovTek, and the price is still very reasonable.

    If these were cheap Chinese-made tubes pretending to be and labelled as "Made in the U.S.A.", like the Mullard 12AX7-M branded by Groove Tubes, then I could see your position.
  11. Bongolation


    Nov 9, 2001
    No Bogus Endorsements
    Yes, that may be true, but that isn't saying much. Current state of the art in the old ComBloc factories is behind the previous western state of the art by a substantial margin.

    That's simply untrue.

    No current production tube is made to the same standards with the same quality materials as the best tubes made in the west during the '60s and early '70s.

    Reference for expert and extensive explanations, including engineering discussions.
  12. Unfortunately there is no current "western state of the art".

    This was never in dispute, or did you purposely ignore "current-production" plastered all over my post? Please feel free to shell out the big bucks for vintage with my blessing.
  13. You need to quit believing everything you read. The Sovtek KT88 is SUPERIOR to the Tungsol 6550 in almost every respect. I have new examples of both. It wasn't so long ago, late 70's- early 80's that Tungsols were considered "inferior industrial junk." It was only when hi-fi tube dealers discovered they could sell them for outrageous amounts of money in the early 90's that they aquired their "coveted" status.

    And you base that observation on what? As I said before, I have new examples of both, and they're very nearly visually identical, but no Tungsol 6550 could ever run at 730 volts plate and screen, like the set of Sovtek KT88's in my Trace Elliot VR400 has been happily doing for the past six years of road gigging.

    If you think those guys are experts, you need a SERIOUS wake-up call. The ONLY argument to be made is not of materials but of grid alignment, microphony, and cathode wire consistency, but even GE had serious grid aligment problems with their 6550's and 8417's in the 70's. Microphony could be screened out of current production tubes, but the factories operate in bulk sales, not quality. Back in the day, the big US tube factories destroyed and rebuilt twice as many audio tubes as they sold, but they were subsidized by the US government to screen them.
  14. Bongolation


    Nov 9, 2001
    No Bogus Endorsements
    As far as the expertise on r.a.t and r.a.p goes, I will say that I've gotten far more informed information from those sources than I ever have on this forum on the same subjects. YMMV.

    Part of what you say above regarding the vintage tubes is true, part of it simply isn't and part remains to be seen..but the one thing that is 100% indisputable is that these new tubes are not real Tung-Sols (whatever you may personally think of the genuine items) and the label is being applied for one reason only and that's purely to trade on a name that presently has some currency. It's pure marketing hocus-pocus and disgusting.

    That was my primary original point and I'm sticking to it.
  15. Please educate me. I said "reasonably accurate reproduction" which seems clear enough. What part of this is "untrue". Are they unreasonably accurate reproductions? Reasonably inaccurate? Exactly what?

    Precisely which part of PBG's post IS true, ISN'T true and "remains to be seen"? In your own opinion of course. We can't learn anything if you aren't more specific. Or did you not come here to share?
  16. So I take it that they tell you more things that you like to hear? Good for them and you; that doesn't make them any more factual.

    That would be all of it.

    ...which you conveniently do not specify. If you're going to call me liar, at least do me the courtesy to say exactly WHAT it is that you're accusing me of making up.

    Remains to be seen??? We're talking vintage tubes here. Are you expecting some major breakthrough in time travel or the discovery of some huge cache of super NOS tubes? While your prose may sound impressively poetic, it makes little sense.

    New Sensor legally purchased the trademark of a defunct company (Mullard too, BTW) and now makes tubes that are as close as possible and even improve upon the orginal item, but they're not "real" because you don't like them? I agree that it's a marketing ploy which many people seem to have wholeheartedly bought into, but the Sovtek KT88 has been in production for several years and is a good tube that deserves better consideration than what it's previously been given. If the label "Tungsol" accomplishes that, so what?

    There is NO Tungsol in case you haven't noticed. New Sensor clearly marks the new tubes "Made in Russia," so what exactly is your gripe? Unless you have the money to reopen the old Tungsol factory in New Jersey I don't see why you could complain that anyone is at least USING the old name.