Dr. Toobz said:Interesting. I have a 6N13S/6H13C tube in my Crack and my perception has been that electrically, it appears identical to the 6AS7 and 6080 tubes I have, but certainly different than the 5998. I know this because when experimenting, it acted the same way into a low-impedance load (Grados) as the 6AS7 family of tubes, whereas plugging in the 5998 led to a pronounced difference in bass and upper-midrange frequencies, presumably due to the higher gain (which leads to a lower output impedance in the cathode follower). The 6N13S seems to be a warmer and less sharp-sounding tube than the 5998. I'm not sure if this is due simply to the fact that it seems to act like a 6AS7 and yield a higher output impedance, which may interact differently with my headphones, or the fact that some have stated the tube has uneven curves, which may suggest higher levels of second harmonic distortion compared to the 5998 or even a "proper" 6AS7.
In any case, I think these are a good deal, as they can be had rather cheaply compared to even a good NOS 6AS7, let alone the WE 421a.
Not hearing either of the Russian tubes, I was comparing mainly the gain differences and, to a small degree, the description of the bass being apparently accentuated with the 6H5 compared to the 6H13. However, if I recall properly, when discussing the differences in bass response related to lower output impedance of the 5998, Paul J mentioned that the differences between the 6AS7 and 5998 were unlikely to do with the lower output impedance of the 5998 and rather due simply to the sonic difference between the tubes themselves. THis discusssion should be a page or 2 or 3 back in this very thread.