tube tester opinion

[001]

Hi

I`m looking for tube tester for ecc83 and el34 ONLY! No perfoboard and patches!

Anybody?

[MaxFrister]

Perhaps you can say a bit about what you are looking for in a tester.

Testers are diagnostic instruments.  Every tester tests the tubes under different conditions and the results can be different than in the actual circuit.  HP service manuals actual recommend you test in the circuit, i.e., don't use a tube tester.  I've seen tubes test "good" and not work, and tubes test "bad" and work.

If all you want to know is if your amplifier tubes are bad, than purchasing a couple of new tubes will cost far less than a tester.

If you are trying to match tubes or something else, then we can discuss which tube tester might help.

[cvanc]

There is a sort of "roadie's tube tester" made by Orange, it seems nice for what it is.  Could something like it be what you're looking for?

https://orangeamps.com/products/accessories/amplifier-management/valve-tester/

[Johnny10]

I do not like that web page orangeamps.com too much happening to focus on content.

If you build the utracer from DOS4EVER you can have just two sockets exactly the way you want.

Also you would have much better information for a bit less money.

[001]

I do not like that web page orangeamps.com too much happening to focus on content.

If you build the utracer from DOS4EVER you can have just two sockets exactly the way you want.

Also you would have much better information for a bit less money.

yEA orangeamps sucks

utracer looks interesting
Did You build one?

[Johnny10]

Yes,
The uTracer was my first DIY build..

Ronald designed a great kit!
Well documented, great support, complete except for the case. If you look at the Testimonials section of his site you will see just how many ways you can set this unit up.

[AllTheGearNoIdea]

I’m all for buying gear. I have three tester including AVO Hitchcock and a Tailor. I work on valve gear all the time and haven’t used any of the testers in years. The valve your talking about are commonly available the best valve tester is the actual equipment the valve  design to work in.  For the price of the test you can buy a lot of spare valves, just swap them out if the proglem goes away you have a bad valve.   I have in the past swapped out valves that read low emission and work fine in the application. I installed tested good valves especially oscillator mixers etc that read fine and won’t work.

That’s my experience. But more test gear is better than less. Go for it if it makes you happy.

I forgot my Mullard high speed tester

Regards Chris

[001]

I’m all for buying gear. I have three tester including AVO Hitchcock and a Tailor. For the price of the test you can buy a lot of spare valves

Yea
I got some monster Siemens tube tester from my cheef at 1970th and it still work
But it actual monster for weight and overdesigned for my simple tests
I`m looking for ideas  to build something new for fun and update

[cvanc]

I`m looking for ideas  to build something new for fun and update

Oh, I didn't know you wanted to build something.  Then the uTracer is the way to go, definitely.

[rhb]

I`m looking for ideas  to build something new for fun and update

Oh, I didn't know you wanted to build something.  Then the uTracer is the way to go, definitely.

I'll second that.  I have a rather large stock of NOS tubes which I need to sell off, some of which go for a silly amount of money.   So I bought a Hickock TV-7B/U.  But I'm considering building the uTracer to test and match the $$$ tubes.

[chris_leyson]

Tube transconductance is set by the mechanical cathode grid spacing and the cathode emission, more or less. If you are going to match tubes then a simple emission test is probably close enough. I've got a lot of CV4044 and 6BW6 tubes I need to test so I would go for a simple emission test as a first pass and then wire up a test jig to test the tubes for transconductance.

[innkeeper]

there's a brand new tube tester you might consider
Orange VT1000 Valve Tester.
pretty idiot proof, and since this new and under warranty, you're not worrying about if its working right.
the downside is its around 500 bucks

[KungFuJosh]

Hi,

Sorry to bump an old thread, but... I've had a much different experience with the uTracer and I think people should be aware it isn't as amazing as claimed. I think it's utter garbage. It's a sorta nice idea, but poorly implemented, and poorly manufactured. I've been working with, soldering, and designing PCBs for decades. The quality of the traces and vias on the uTracer is the absolute worst I've seen since the classic single layer Crybaby circuit boards with traces lifting straight off the board. Need to rework something or try a different component? Get ready to bodge it.

Some of the other issues (and there are plenty) include that there are ZERO tests under real world conditions. Everything is based on pulses and algorithms, and if you don't have other test equipment to compare it to, you're working on 100% faith. It's also nearly useless for testing EL34s, or EF86s, or most pentodes. The only tests I felt were ever reliable were maybe standard 12AX7s, but I still think I was going on faith, and only because it was pretty close to the datasheets. Both the V3+ and V6 uTracers are prone to oscillations, and the V6 is said to be much worse (though I haven't tried it).

I thought purchasing the uTracer was a less expensive way to get a good piece of equipment...but I was dead wrong. The time investment, and extra expenses over the years of trying to improve it made it silly.

Now I'm either going to try a RoeTest or an Amplitrex. The Amplitrex obviously has the benefit of being a popular, well tested unit. The RoeTest seems to me like a much better executed uTracer type tester...which I hope isn't too insulting to the RoeTest making that comparison. The RoeTest claims to test tubes under real world conditions, full voltages (not limited pulses like the uTracer), and it should be able to do this like give transconductance and mu of pentodes, which the uTracer falls dead short on in the QuickTest mode.

On top of that, I've communicated with the creator of the uTracer over the past few years, and he was never helpful. Seriously frustrating to talk to. He's a walking ego that can't handle feedback or questions that imply his device is nothing but utopian perfection. I mentioned to him the flaws in his board manufacturing, and he got offended! He didn't manufacture them, he designed them. Apparently he's too dense to understand the difference. I sent him photos of the lifted traces, and included photos of other PCBs with PTH vias (plated through hole), and he couldn't care less.

I honestly wish I never bought the uTracer trash. I haven't decided yet whether I will burn it or smash it with a hammer. If I go that route, I'll probably post a video. Ohhhh, I could do both! Smash it with a hammer, and then burn it. That would be quite satisfying at this point.

Thanks,
Josh

[khutch004]

All I can say is that my experience with the uTracer and the people who make it has been vastly different from yours. I don't use it or any other tube tester a great deal but the uTracer works very well. It agrees well with the data sheet on NOS tubes and it confirms the reports of other tube testers on old, worn out tubes. I've had no issues with the quality of the PCB or the other components supplied with the kit. Dealing with the supplier has always been a delight. Mine is a 3+ and I have no significant need for the 6 but if the fancy to get one should strike me at some point I would not have any qualms about ordering one.

I would note that pulsed testing was the common method used on the professional grade semiconductor testers that I used back when I was young. There is nothing disreputable about pulsed testing but I would suppose that in some cases it could produce results that need an engineer's mind to interpret correctly. Testing an electronic device to its full instantaneous peak power limits under DC conditions has the very significant disadvantage of risking the destruction of the device under test! That is why pulsed testing was devised, many decades ago....

But to each his own. I am genuinely sorry that your experience with the uTracer has been a disappointment even though I have no responsibility for that at all. If other devices look more suitable to you then I hope that one of them satisfies you!

[jonpaul]

The Triplett are one of the best, the Hickock are also OK.

These tube testers were made in 1950s...1960 but still going strong,


Jon

[Dwaine]

I would just grab a tube tester off ebay.   I have a old heathkit tube tester.   It's great.

[SoundTech-LG]

Yes. The Heath TT-1 is wonderful, and the Weston 981 which is what the Heath is based on. Having both to compare with...  excellent.

http://www.kw.igs.net/~knickerson/heathkit.html

https://vintagetubeelectronics.com/weston-981-type-3-tube-tester/

[wizard69]

I do not like that web page orangeamps.com too much happening to focus on content.

I refuse to do business with companies that have bad web sites.   That page is absolutely terrible.

If you build the utracer from DOS4EVER you can have just two sockets exactly the way you want.

Also you would have much better information for a bit less money.

The original posters question makes me wonder if he needs something portable to go on the road with.   That could result in an interesting mechanical build.