|
Vintage Asylum Classic gear from yesteryear; vintage audio standing the test of time. |
|
|
|
Vintage Asylum Classic gear from yesteryear; vintage audio standing the test of time. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Signaling the End of the Vintage Audio Hobby? posted by Peter Breuninger on November 20, 2005 at 17:47:52:
"These things are still way undervalued :sonically:"Actually, they are widely appreciated by those who regularly frequent this and similar forums. Of this group, only those with the knowledge and skill needed to restore and/or upgrade them (or with the money and a willing upgrader) will be able to benefit from the purchase of one of these.
These amplifiers are not a short (circuit?) cut to the audio holy grail. It takes a lot of work and knowhow. IME, Eico products, in general, suffer more from age than most vintage tube equipment. Eico went after the budget end of the kit market and many of the parts used were necessarily lower grade (but well chosen) parts. Hence the common need for rather extensive restoration. However, the circuits, critical parts and transformers were often quite good, kind of like a 50's NAD. An unrestored HF-81 (and most vintage tube amplifiers) will almost certainly have many issues needing to be addressed. Common problems include leaky power supply electrolytics, out-of-spec carbon comp resistors, oxidized input jacks and speaker terminals, oxidized contacts on the input selector switch, tube sockets and the cheap slider switches. Those built from a kit often have marginal soldering. If the unrestored amplifier actually runs, it will exhibit the sound associated with these problems. It may also be a fire hazard. These were nice amplifiers, and with restoration and/or upgrading, can sound remarkably good. You can't help but grin at the great sound emerging from a box that only a vintage nut could love (don't expect a good WAF).
"I think the old 6bq5 amps have better sonics than the low powered SETs. Gosh, did I write that? See the EICO HF 81 review in late winter :)"The 6BQ5 is a nice sounding tube and many prefer its sound to that of other tubes, but there are many who prefer 6CA7's, 6550's etc. Nobody is right here, except in a personal (preference) sense. Use the one you prefer. Just like ss vs tubes, or ribbons vs electrostatics vs horns. With respect to amplifier topology, same thing.
I am glad you have found both the 6BQ5 and the HF-81 to your liking. Enjoy! Better than SET's? That's your opinion and preference. Fine, enjoy! I will listen for myself and choose the sound that I like the most. Will it be the same choice that you or others make? Some yes, some no. Immaterial really.
I look forward to reading your review. I do think that it would be a good idea to include photos from before and after restoration, and an objective, detailed discussion of how the unit sounds and what it took to restore it, so that others can decide if this is something they would like to try. As a group, I suspect that most of your readers who are in the market for a 'starter' tube amplifier will want to know how the HF-81 compares with some of the lower priced tube equipment (both assembled and kits) currently being produced.
Regards,
Bob
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- HF-81: The Audio Holy Grail? - AstroSonic 11/21/0518:23:56 11/21/05 (1)
- Re: HF-81: The Audio Holy Grail? - Peter Breuninger 15:52:13 11/22/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
