On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 09:19:23 -0600, boomer#6877250@none.com wrote:>What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage >output? > >I have gotten some powerful sound from four 6L6 tubes in push-pull >parallel. but I want more. I know it's possible to use eight 6L6 tubes, >which I believe is called " push-pull parallel - parallel", but I'm >looking into other possible tubes. > >At one time, I thought the 807 tube was more powerful than the 6L6, but >after careful research, it's almost identical, but with a different >envelope (plate on the top cap). > >I'm looking to get a full 500W RMS (or more) output (per channel), from >all tubes, .... With four 6L6 tubes in PPP, I can only get around 120W >RMS (per channel).How about a high AVERAGE output wattage ? :) boB
What is the most powerful audio output tube?
Started by ●December 8, 2016
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On 12/08/2016 11:55 AM, John Larkin wrote:> On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 09:19:23 -0600, boomer#6877250@none.com wrote: > >> What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage >> output? >> >> I have gotten some powerful sound from four 6L6 tubes in push-pull >> parallel. but I want more. I know it's possible to use eight 6L6 tubes, >> which I believe is called " push-pull parallel - parallel", but I'm >> looking into other possible tubes. >> >> At one time, I thought the 807 tube was more powerful than the 6L6, but >> after careful research, it's almost identical, but with a different >> envelope (plate on the top cap). >> >> I'm looking to get a full 500W RMS (or more) output (per channel), from >> all tubes, .... With four 6L6 tubes in PPP, I can only get around 120W >> RMS (per channel). > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Tubes/833.jpg > >The ex-Soviet version GU-48 are pretty cheap on eBay...
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 21:19:52 +0200, Tauno Voipio wrote:> On 8.12.16 19:44, Tim Wescott wrote: >> On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 09:19:23 -0600, boomer#6877250 wrote: >> >>> What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage >>> output? >>> >>> I have gotten some powerful sound from four 6L6 tubes in push-pull >>> parallel. but I want more. I know it's possible to use eight 6L6 >>> tubes, >>> which I believe is called " push-pull parallel - parallel", but I'm >>> looking into other possible tubes. >>> >>> At one time, I thought the 807 tube was more powerful than the 6L6, >>> but after careful research, it's almost identical, but with a >>> different envelope (plate on the top cap). >>> >>> I'm looking to get a full 500W RMS (or more) output (per channel), >>> from all tubes, .... With four 6L6 tubes in PPP, I can only get around >>> 120W RMS (per channel). >> >> AM Radio stations used some that would do 50,000W, I believe. Is that >> sufficient? >> >> You don't want the "most powerful" tube -- you just want one that fits >> your wimpy (relative to "big radio") requirements. >> >> If you're serious about this, get this book. It'll provide hours of >> drooling entertainment if you're just a fanboy, so it'll still be worth >> it: >> >> https://www.tubesandmore.com/products/rca-transmitting-tube-manual-tt-5 >> >> > Eimac's 'The Care and Feeding of Power-grid Tubes' is also very good, > if it is somewhere to be found. > >> A pair of 4-1000A tubes would be dandy, but I don't know where to find >> them (I'm a fanboy, not an expert). > > For Class-B push-pull a pair of zero-bias triodes is much easier to > handle, e.g. 3-500Z or 3-1000Z. The kilowatt tubes are a bit of overkill > for 500 W output.May not be the best sounding result if you're going for audiophoolery. Low-mu triodes with the grid voltages negative would be best then, or AB1 beam tubes, maybe. -- Tim Wescott Control systems, embedded software and circuit design I'm looking for work! See my website if you're interested http://www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 10:20:51 AM UTC-5, boomer#...@none.com wrote:> What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage > output? > > I have gotten some powerful sound from four 6L6 tubes in push-pull > parallel. but I want more. I know it's possible to use eight 6L6 tubes, > which I believe is called " push-pull parallel - parallel", but I'm > looking into other possible tubes. > > At one time, I thought the 807 tube was more powerful than the 6L6, but > after careful research, it's almost identical, but with a different > envelope (plate on the top cap). > > I'm looking to get a full 500W RMS (or more) output (per channel), from > all tubes, .... With four 6L6 tubes in PPP, I can only get around 120W > RMS (per channel).Long time ago we used to run 10KW into a vibrator made by Altec (the speaker company). The two tubes were ceramic with clamps instead of pins, sitting in a water jacket. The water went to a cooling tower on the roof. The vibrator was basicaly a giant speaker coli made of copper tubing with coolant flowing thru it. Also a by de-gaussing coil. They glowed the coolest red.
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 4:19:36 PM UTC-5, Tim Wescott wrote:> > May not be the best sounding result if you're going for audiophoolery. > Low-mu triodes with the grid voltages negative would be best then, or AB1 > beam tubes, maybe. > > -- > Tim WescottIt seems to me that the most economical approach to having a tube sounding high power amp would be to build a low power tube amplifier to get the sound desired and follow that with a high fidelity high power class D amplifier. That would give you the sound wanted and not have the problems of a high power tube ampliier. Of course you would have to add a lot of weight to make it suitable for some people. Dan
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:42:32 -0800 (PST), makolber@yahoo.com wrote:> >> > What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage >> > output? >> > >> >> > >You want a pair of 6427's like WABC used to run > >http://hawkins.pair.com/wabc.shtml > >(RMS watts is a misnomer)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHjcwIoTiY
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 16:49:29 -0800, dcaster@krl.org wrote:> On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 4:19:36 PM UTC-5, Tim Wescott wrote: >> >> May not be the best sounding result if you're going for audiophoolery. >> Low-mu triodes with the grid voltages negative would be best then, or >> AB1 beam tubes, maybe. >> >> -- >> Tim Wescott > > It seems to me that the most economical approach to having a tube > sounding high power amp would be to build a low power tube amplifier to > get the sound desired and follow that with a high fidelity high power > class D amplifier. That would give you the sound wanted and not have > the problems of a high power tube ampliier. Of course you would have to > add a lot of weight to make it suitable for some people. > > DanI'm not sold on the fidelity of class D amps (but maybe I'm behind the times). Toob purists won't sign up for it unless there's a toob in there. -- www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●December 8, 20162016-12-08
On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 19:58:15 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> wrote:>On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 16:49:29 -0800, dcaster@krl.org wrote: > >> On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 4:19:36 PM UTC-5, Tim Wescott wrote: >>> >>> May not be the best sounding result if you're going for audiophoolery. >>> Low-mu triodes with the grid voltages negative would be best then, or >>> AB1 beam tubes, maybe. >>> >>> -- >>> Tim Wescott >> >> It seems to me that the most economical approach to having a tube >> sounding high power amp would be to build a low power tube amplifier to >> get the sound desired and follow that with a high fidelity high power >> class D amplifier. That would give you the sound wanted and not have >> the problems of a high power tube ampliier. Of course you would have to >> add a lot of weight to make it suitable for some people. >> >> Dan > >I'm not sold on the fidelity of class D amps (but maybe I'm behind the >times).Audiophools never are. ;-)> >Toob purists won't sign up for it unless there's a toob in there.Or have oxygen-free, Litz, speaker cables.
Reply by ●December 9, 20162016-12-09
>"AM Radio stations used some that would do 50,000W, I believe. Is thatsufficient? " But that is class C. not quite audiophile I would say.
Reply by ●December 9, 20162016-12-09
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 13:29:40 -0800 (PST), sdy <sdeyoreo@hotmail.com> wrote:>On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 10:20:51 AM UTC-5, boomer#...@none.com wrote: >> What is the most powerful audio output tube, as far as RMS wattage >> output? >> >> I have gotten some powerful sound from four 6L6 tubes in push-pull >> parallel. but I want more. I know it's possible to use eight 6L6 tubes, >> which I believe is called " push-pull parallel - parallel", but I'm >> looking into other possible tubes. >> >> At one time, I thought the 807 tube was more powerful than the 6L6, but >> after careful research, it's almost identical, but with a different >> envelope (plate on the top cap). >> >> I'm looking to get a full 500W RMS (or more) output (per channel), from >> all tubes, .... With four 6L6 tubes in PPP, I can only get around 120W >> RMS (per channel).> >Long time ago we used to run 10KW into a vibrator made by Altec (the speaker company). The two tubes were ceramic with clamps instead of pins, sitting in a water jacket. The water went to a cooling tower on the roof. The vibrator was basicaly a giant speaker coli made of copper tubing with coolant flowing thru it. Also a by de-gaussing coil. They glowed the coolest red.That reminds me of a shake table a local company, the amplifier at least made by Altec (LTV Ling) with noise generator and many channels of graphic EQ to adjust the shake spectrum. Pretty darn impressive. Lots of power but don't remember how much if I ever did know... boB
