From pbunn62–(at)–eleplex.net Sun May 11 21:58:20 CDT 1997
Article: 30468 of rec.audio.tubes
Path: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.teleplex.net!usenet
From: pbunn62–(at)–eleplex.net (Pat Bunn)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tubes
Subject: Re: 6L6 = ??
Date: 12 May 1997 01:06:36 GMT
Organization: STF Electronics
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <5l5qes$hb--(at)--ews.teleplex.net>
References: <19970509140601.KAA1395--(at)--adder02.news.aol.com> <33739eba.63013--(at)--ews.worldlinx.com> <3374D337.629--(at)--nterramp.com> <3375475a.105851--(at)--ews.spry.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dp07.teleplex.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu rec.audio.tubes:30468
In article <3375475a.105851--(at)--ews.spry.com>,
triodee–(at)–pam_in_a_can.interserv says…
>
>
>>I beleive this is incorrect the 5881 is a 6L6WGB NOT WGC. The WGC is
>>rated for a higher plate voltage than the WGB or 5881. The Sovtek 5881
>>is rated for the higher plate voltage, but any NOS 5881 should not be
>>assumed to handle the voltage in an amp that specifies WGC. Check your
>>plate voltage, and the rating of the particular tube you are using.
>>Vince.
>I believe “-WGC” is a suffix Sovtek folks invented for their 5881, so
>as to induce people to use their 5881 (which ain’t exactly a 5881,
>really it’s a separate Russian tube number) in place of 6L6-GC
>(which often they can), easier for dealers to sell to their tube-
>guitar-amp customers that way.
>I have never heard of US mfr 6L6-WGC, only 6L6-WGB…
>note later model 5881 or 6L6-WGB had same guts as 6L6-GC,
>just smaller bottle, thus in reality nearly same ratings as
>well (cheaper to buy all the guts for both types all the same)
>altho smaller bulb might affect dissipation rating, essentially
>the same beast despite what books say. Note most books were
>written in 1960’s, most of 6L6-WGB on market were made in 1980’s.
>Tube mfrs weren’t too concerned if old specs jived with new tubes,
>so long as customer would take ’em.
>Ned
>Ned Carlson
>
Ned:
Thanks for trying to set the record striaght. I get at least one
comment a week about the 6L6WGB being rated too low in plate voltage and
comparing it with an ancient 6L6GB.
All the Phillips 6L6WGBs I have appear to have the same internal
structure that the Phillips 7581s have. They were made in the same
general time frame. I think they are the best buy available for 6L6GC
replacement. I sell them at $29 per matched pair plus postage.
Pat Bunn
STF Electronics
From Le–(at)–euron.uchc.edu Mon May 12 10:22:56 CDT 1997
Article: 30498 of rec.audio.tubes
Path: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!nutmeg.uchc.edu!not-for-mail
From: Les Bernstein
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tubes
Subject: Re: 6L6 = ??
Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 09:26:46 -0400
Organization: Univ of CT Health Center
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <33771A96.455--(at)--euron.uchc.edu>
References: <19970509140601.KAA1395--(at)--adder02.news.aol.com> <33739eba.63013--(at)--ews.worldlinx.com> <3374D337.629--(at)--nterramp.com> <3375475a.105851--(at)--ews.spry.com> <5l5qes$hb--(at)--ews.teleplex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 155.37.16.149
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; U)
Xref: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu rec.audio.tubes:30498
Pat Bunn wrote:
>
> In article <3375475a.105851--(at)--ews.spry.com>,
> triodee–(at)–pam_in_a_can.interserv says…
> >
> >
> >>I beleive this is incorrect the 5881 is a 6L6WGB NOT WGC. The WGC is
> >>rated for a higher plate voltage than the WGB or 5881. The Sovtek 5881
> >>is rated for the higher plate voltage, but any NOS 5881 should not be
> >>assumed to handle the voltage in an amp that specifies WGC. Check your
> >>plate voltage, and the rating of the particular tube you are using.
> >>Vince.
> >I believe “-WGC” is a suffix Sovtek folks invented for their 5881, so
> >as to induce people to use their 5881 (which ain’t exactly a 5881,
> >really it’s a separate Russian tube number) in place of 6L6-GC
> >(which often they can), easier for dealers to sell to their tube-
> >guitar-amp customers that way.
> >I have never heard of US mfr 6L6-WGC, only 6L6-WGB…
> >note later model 5881 or 6L6-WGB had same guts as 6L6-GC,
> >just smaller bottle, thus in reality nearly same ratings as
> >well (cheaper to buy all the guts for both types all the same)
> >altho smaller bulb might affect dissipation rating, essentially
> >the same beast despite what books say. Note most books were
> >written in 1960’s, most of 6L6-WGB on market were made in 1980’s.
> >Tube mfrs weren’t too concerned if old specs jived with new tubes,
> >so long as customer would take ’em.
> >Ned
> >Ned Carlson
> >
>
> Ned:
>
> Thanks for trying to set the record striaght. I get at least one
> comment a week about the 6L6WGB being rated too low in plate voltage and
> comparing it with an ancient 6L6GB.
>
> All the Phillips 6L6WGBs I have appear to have the same internal
> structure that the Phillips 7581s have. They were made in the same
> general time frame. I think they are the best buy available for 6L6GC
> replacement. I sell them at $29 per matched pair plus postage.
>
> Pat Bunn
> STF Electronics
Sorry Pat, but the record here is far from straight. As a 6L6 hobbyist,
allow me to add to the fray. The difference between a true 5881 and a
true 6L6WGB is in the spacers– mica vs. ceramic. I am not aware
(although I could be convinced) that any 6L6WGB’s or “late” 5881’s EVER
contained the same guts as a true 6L6GC. I would insist on
documentation and not go by looks. The Sovtek 5881 is not, as you
correctly stated, a true 6L6 at all. It is, however, a fine substitute.
The max plate voltage is not the 250v claimed in an earlier posting.
That is the result of a common but understandable misreading of the
poorly written spec sheet on the Sovtek. The Sovtek’s are routinely run
at up to 550v on the plate. I understand that in guitar amps, the
Sovtek’s are not generally desirable. In “hi-fi” applications they seem
quite nice. I use them routinely. They are inexpensive, quite rugged
and a fine audio tube. I purchased a matched pair for all of $22.00 and
in my application (vitage hi-fi) they leave little to be desired even
when compared to “true” 6L6GC’s and “true” 5881’s. For a complete
history of the 6L6, I suggest Eric Barbour’s fine article in VTV #4.
Les
