Forums - Print Page

Forums
https://www.decware.com/cgi-bin/yabb22/YaBB.pl
AUDIO FORUMS >> General Discussion and Support >> Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
https://www.decware.com/cgi-bin/yabb22/YaBB.pl?num=1740235120

Message started by Sxmthuan on 02/22/25 at 14:38:40

Title: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by Sxmthuan on 02/22/25 at 14:38:40

Hi all,
I have a new built SE84UFO entry model. I just try to roll the input tube with NOS Amperex PQ 6922 USA made. The sound is just muddy, way too warm, not as crystal clear as stock 6N1P. Anyone happy with 6922/6DJ8 input tube?
Amp connects to KHorn
Thanks
Thuan

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by JOMAN on 02/22/25 at 15:31:00

What are the other tubes in the UFO?

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by CAJames on 02/22/25 at 15:31:44

Interesting. "Muddy, way too warm" was not my experience with 6922 tubes in my UFOs at all. I tried a lot of tubes and 6922/E88CCs were some of my favorites, esp. the Tesla E88CCs with rhodium/silver pins. I tried Amperex PQ 6922s and they were transparent and dynamic, not may favorite tube but certainly not muddy or too warm. If anything they leaned to the brighter side.

So I wonder what the backstory is with your tube? Is it actually new? If so it may need several hours to burn in before it starts sounding "right." Or it might be a bad tube because I don't think even brand new out of the box a Amperex 6922 would sound muddy and way too warm.

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by Alan Arkin on 02/22/25 at 16:04:48

I have a Rachael and just replaced the 6N1P with 6922. I think it still needs a lot of burn in but it is definitely not muddy. It is a lot less warm, with a lot more detail. I am using NOS JAN 6922s from Sylvania.

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by JOMAN on 02/22/25 at 16:12:51

Quote:

it might be a bad tube because I don't think even brand new out of the box a Amperex 6922 would sound muddy and way too warm.

I'm thinking that it's probably a bad tube for the same reason. I had to look through the raft of PCC88's, TF PCC189, Siemens E88CC of particular vintage etc, etc, etc that I still have but do not use. I had a NOS Amprex BB which I don't know what happened to, but it was not muddy although not my favourite in the UFO. One of my favourites was an ADZAM E188CC SQ quality.

I would try another tube.

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by Sxmthuan on 02/22/25 at 19:44:05

Thank you all,
Other tubes in my UFO are stock, this is first tube roll I try.
I have a lot of 6922/7308/6DJ8 NOS, being Conrad Johnson big fan :)
Good to know everyone happy with 6922.
Will try other tubes I have to see any better
Happy listening [smiley=icqlite20.png]

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by MikeinMontana on 02/22/25 at 20:38:03

My favorites so far are the 6n23p (70's) both Voskhod and Reflektor and the stock 6n1p-ev

Title: Re: Input tube rolling 6922 instead 6N1P sound?
Post by Blue360Cuda on 02/25/25 at 02:03:47

You may want to check if that Amperex 6922 is counterfit - There's lots of bogus PQ white label and other "Amperex" tubes out there. I recently found some orange globe 7308 for a too good to be true price- and they were. In my SE84 CKC the russian input tubes do sound the best overall - slightly warm and very smooth. My real deal Beckman labeled Amperex 6922 is a bit more dynamic but slightly harsh up top compared to the ruskie tubes. I did like the sound of my red-tip medical rated Sylvania 6922 though. Check out audiotubes.com for a nice selection of stuff at fair prices. The owner is very approachable and will make recommendations based on your sound preferences / system.