12AX7/ECC83: Mullard, T'Funk, and ARS

[E.rOk.stA]

A while back, I decided to swap out the stock tube in my TLA-100A for fun and hear what gives with the NOS hype. I aquired a NOS Mullard from '61. I noticed a change in sound immediately. Now in the Summit, the stock tube is an ARS. Since I track mostly vox with it, I usually only reduce gain by about 3-5db and with the ARS, things stayed pretty open, even with the GR.

BTW, What I am NOT doing is knocking the ARS. It is the noisiest of the 3 even though that noise will not cause a problem with most normal operation.

So, I've been using the Mullard for the past 6 months and because of the high-end rolloff and the thicker midrange, I started to only reduce gain by 1-3db. You may know that the Summit uses the tube in the gain reduction circuit, so the more gain reduction, the more the tube saturates. I can see where this may be desirable for bass but for my application, I was not retaining enough of the high-end.

About a month ago, I started to think about Telefunkens. I got the Mullard from Bowie and when I did that, he dropped some knowledge on me about different tubes and their general characteristics. Well, the Mullard sounded exactly how he had explained that it would so drawing from that, I thought that the T'funk, based on his and other descriptions, would fit the bill for what I'm doing.

It came today so I decided to do a test. It wasn't scientific, I just took the 3 tubes and did a vocal take with an average of -3 reduction and -7 on each. I matched them as close as possible, enough to be able to tell a distict difference between them.

My results were this (and I record mostly Rap/Hip Hop/some singing):

The ARS has a more even response to my ears but is the dirtiest of the 3. It has a cool sound though, definitely not a throwaway.

The Mullard is darker and has a very rich, mid range harmonic thing going on. It's awesome. I may put it in a mic specifically for certain voices, I'm definitely not getting rid of it.

The Telefunken is more detailed in the lows AND highs and I can see why folks prefer them. They also have very good transient response. This is the one I'll keep in the Summit. Even under more GR, it still doesn't lose the high end.

If anyone is interested, I'll post all 6 .wavs so you can hear what I'm talkin' about. It's just my voice rappin', but you can get a good idea tonally what's going on. I don't think that this kind of test needs to be scientific to give the listener a good idea of what each one offers.

Let me know. Peace.

EDIT: Here's a link to the files 'cause they were just a little to big to attach here. Tube Test.zip - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

[Butcha]

RCAs might be worth a look too, as they are quite low noise. Consider contacting fellow slut Bowie, as he sells nos tubes and can usually make a suggestion about what works where best.

[E.rOk.stA]

Originally Posted by Butcha

RCAs might be worth a look too, as they are quite low noise. Consider contacting fellow slut Bowie, as he sells nos tubes and can usually make a suggestion about what works where best.

Bowie is my tube dealer!!

[E.rOk.stA]