• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

AM Radios - HD Radios

Actually the 6V6 was the first one that popped into my mind, don't know why I didn't include it. Some higher priced 40's sets also used the 6L6.
 
I remember working on one AM "table radio" that had push-pull parallel 6V6's in it! That's four audio output tubes. The only reason for doing that would be higher power handling capacity and (perhaps) lower distortion, but in this particular case I doubt it made much difference. There was nothing spectacular about the power supply and the audio output transformer wasn't anything unusual.

A real limiting factor would have been the built in loudspeaker, in this case an 8" version that would probably blow up if it ever saw 10 watts for any length of time. I suspect the high tube count was more of a marketing tool. The more tubes, the better, and it made it easier to justify a high price tag. Still, it was a nice sounding radio.
 
I sold a Midwest 1935 Gi-normous console with parrallel push pull 42s.

Loud as all get-out, but I'm more in love with the push pull dual-triode 6A3 sound of my 1936 Philco consoles.

Certain triodes were two tubes in one...the 45, the 2A3, the 6A3...

The low impedance of triodes creates a sound like no other.
 
Many people in the audiophile mags say the jump from single ended amps using 300B or 2A3 outputs from push-pull amps is like going from solid state to tube PP.It is that much better if mated to high efficent loudspeaker.
 
KB1OKL said:
Zach said:
Is today's RCA Superadio the same internally then as the older GE branded models?

If you're talking about the first two generations, no, they were analog. I have two of them, very good radios, people that compare them to the digital Superadio III say these are better.

There is no such thing as a Digital Superadio III.

The current RCA-branded Superadio is even worse than the first versions of the GE SR3 (towards the end, that model got a bit better).

Audio is "thinner", dial calibration is worse, you have to wait for voltages to "ramp up" (so when you first turn the radio on, you hear it quickly go through the entire dial until it settles to where the varactor tuning pot is set to).
 
StephanieNYC said:
KB1OKL said:
Zach said:
Is today's RCA Superadio the same internally then as the older GE branded models?

If you're talking about the first two generations, no, they were analog. I have two of them, very good radios, people that compare them to the digital Superadio III say these are better.

There is no such thing as a Digital Superadio III.

The current RCA-branded Superadio is even worse than the first versions of the GE SR3 (towards the end, that model got a bit better).

Audio is "thinner", dial calibration is worse, you have to wait for voltages to "ramp up" (so when you first turn the radio on, you hear it quickly go through the entire dial until it settles to where the varactor tuning pot is set to).

Yeah, I meant digital readout and looking at one I see they don't have that either.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom