In Reply to: Micanol sockets are they better sounding than ceramic? posted by -3db on November 10, 2006 at 00:10:04:
-3db, hi. Water absorbtion or lack thereof isn't the issue. Ceramic has higher tolerance to high temperatures. The dialectric constant of micanol (and variants) is better than plain moldable phenolics but is superior because of the mineral loading it contains (mica). Another issue is the quality of ceramic sockets of current manufacture (Sino). I much prefer the quality of socket pins in OS or NOS micanol type UX4 for example. The socket grips the tube pins better. I don't know what the metal is in Sino ceramic sockets but suspect it isn't anything special. How nice it would be to have a micanol tube socket with copper pins or perhaps silver. There is an advantage having the tube base and socket not as rigid as ceramic - similar densities. The only Teflon sockets are the ones made by Yamamoto (as far as I know). Complaints about these tend to focus on pin gripping. Anything mechanical won't please everybody. I do have a pair of Yamamoto for WE 101, but have not put them in service yet.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Micanol sockets are they better sounding than ceramic? - elektron 11/10/0607:30:23 11/10/06 (0)