KR Audio PX25 vs 242 vs the rest...

Mike

Mike

Audioshark
Staff member
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
30,269
Location
Sarasota, FL
5c9bcc5574ad34fbef0349faa7b3cedd.jpg


002e133d96cc353732370ba4a15110ca.jpg


d6840c4e18707dd08e587d4521fb5fe0.jpg


242 is dynamic as hell.
PX25 doesn't give up much to the 242 and adds 300b mids.

Do we have a winner? Maybe. Gain is VERY high. Sonically, a bit of a bite on the top. Need to give it some hours to see if it smooths out. I would call it "300b on crack". A little aggressive out of the box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
548ca81aa3f044e6e07d80b936491da0.jpg


061caf74527a5e53a957f171c3863863.jpg


1926e77caf1129003f3b28a9ed2019ee.jpg


And in case you're wondering...

PX25 = 300b setting
242 = 101d setting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is going to be my final tube rolling weekend...for the time being.

After having identified the Takatsuki 274b as the clear winner for the recti position, I want to find out more of the strengths and weaknesses of the output tubes (no 242 at hand unfortunately, only px25)
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 299
My PX 4 , replace 242 , to strong in my setup.
Will keep 101d replicas and PX 4 .
KR 5u4g as recti.

I asked Lukasz about the difference between PX 25 an PX 4 and he said the amplification factor of PX 25 is about 50 % higher.
This is why I ordered PX 4.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    597.5 KB · Views: 80
  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    547.3 KB · Views: 76
Mike said:
242 is dynamic as hell.
PX25 doesn't give up much to the 242 and adds 300b mids.

Do we have a winner? Maybe. Gain is VERY high. Sonically, a bit of a bite on the top. Need to give it some hours to see if it smooths out. I would call it "300b on crack". A little aggressive out of the box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

PX4 is lower gain PX25.
 
Gentlemen,

after having myself familiarized with the px25 over the last week or so, I was curious to give all my other output tubes another run for their money.
I really got to enjoy the px25 which needs to be run on the 300b setting. So in order to save myself valuable time I choose the Erog 300b as the first candidate...
I put on Bruckner symphony no.9 and a piece from a Madeleine Peaureux album.

The Elrog is probably the most beautiful tube by the look of it, but overall I don't think it's the best match for my system or for my taste.
While it doesn't really have any shortcomings, I just prefer a bit more dynamic presentation with more air between the instruments.
I just love to be able to follow each instrument on a virtual stage. I like that cleanliness. That gives me just more enjoyment than a bit more midrange lushness.
In my system the 300b has that really nice tonal color at the expense of some mushiness in the overall presentation.
I guess I am just not a 300b guy in general...what can I say....

I am thinking of letting the Elrog go to someone whose system and taste is a better match for this great tube.
Let me know if you're interested. The tubes still have a warranty of several months and are from the last batch.

Next up was the 45 Globe mesh anniversary, also a rare breed...
For me it's a better fit for my system and it draws me more easily into the music. I will.keep it installed for a while now and listen to all kinds of music over the next few days before going back to the px25 and also try the 101d replica again....
 
khonfused said:
Gentlemen,

after having myself familiarized with the px25 over the last week or so, I was curious to give all my other output tubes another run for their money.
I really got to enjoy the px25 which needs to be run on the 300b setting. So in order to save myself valuable time I choose the Erog 300b as the first candidate...
I put on Bruckner symphony no.9 and a piece from a Madeleine Peaureux album.

The Elrog is probably the most beautiful tube by the look of it, but overall I don't think it's the best match for my system or for my taste.
While it doesn't really have any shortcomings, I just prefer a bit more dynamic presentation with more air between the instruments.
I just love to be able to follow each instrument on a virtual stage. I like that cleanliness. That gives me just more enjoyment than a bit more midrange lushness.
In my system the 300b has that really nice tonal color at the expense of some mushiness in the overall presentation.
I guess I am just not a 300b guy in general...what can I say....

I am thinking of letting the Elrog go to someone whose system and taste is a better match for this great tube.
Let me know if you're interested. The tubes still have a warranty of several months and are from the last batch.

Next up was the 45 Globe mesh anniversary, also a rare breed...
For me it's a better fit for my system and it draws me more easily into the music. I will.keep it installed for a while now and listen to all kinds of music over the next few days before going back to the px25 and also try the 101d replica again....
Click to expand...

That's good to know.
I for one love my 242 I suppose you cannot try it in your system.

Do PM me what you want for the Elrog, I might be interested.
 
I can't say I'm loving the PX25. It just too aggressive. Almost too dynamic, over the top, if there is such a thing. I'm going to go back to the 242 now and compare.
 
242's back in. Much better. Back to the Lampi EML 45's next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It's a toss up between the Lampi 45's and KR 242's. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. The 242 is a dynamic champ. It has this drive and this level of dynamics which pushes everything to the max, but never over it like the PX25. It would be wonderful for classical music. Really toe tapping. The Lampi 45's absolutely nail instrument tone, vocals, sweetness on top, etc. They are smoother and more laid back, but never syrupy of slow sounding. Listening to Eva Cassidy with the 45's would give you chills.

If you're into Jazz and Classical - the 242 is a champ.
If you're into female vocals, acoustic, etc. - the 45 is a champ.
 
Great review MIKE , thanks for posting the details of them.
Did you post hiw recti effect the drivers. ???
also what digital engines do you have in yours ?
As I have two devices there seems to be changes in sound scape for tubes .
Lastly in your words what make the tak best and why , does this seem to be in all tubes ?
Sorry for many questions I do trust your views verymuch as well as the time you put into this product .
 
Alrainbow said:
Great review MIKE , thanks for posting the details of them.
Did you post hiw recti effect the drivers. ???
also what digital engines do you have in yours ?
As I have two devices there seems to be changes in sound scape for tubes .
Lastly in your words what make the tak best and why , does this seem to be in all tubes ?
Sorry for many questions I do trust your views verymuch as well as the time you put into this product .
Click to expand...

Thanks Al. I have tried so many rectifiers, I've forgotten most: WE274b, WE422a, EML 5U4G, KR 5U4G, Psvane 274b replica, Phillips Metal Base Z34 and the list goes on. I have never tried the Takasuki 274b, but know others who have. I'm sure its terrific.

I switch between my Lumin and Aurender network players as the mood arises. As far as my Lampi, I have a SE Big 7 with the latest R2R. I need a firmware upgrade to enable to single chip seamless PCM/DSD switching.

I would like to get the PX4 tubes in to try next. I'm very happy with the Lampi EML 45's and the KR 242's. I have tried numerous output tubes including the WE300b, Psvane 300b Replica's, Psvane 101d replicas, EML Anniversary Globe 45's and dozens of others.

The 242 has such amazing drive and edge of your seat dynamics, but gives up a little in the midrange. The Lampi EML 45's give up a little in dynamics and drive, but they absolutely nail tonality and midrange, with top end sweetness thrown in.

It all comes down to system synergy and musical tastes. I can see how even the PX25 would be a great tube in a overly warm, syrupy system in desperate need of dynamics and resolution. The 242 is a step down from the PX25 in terms of dynamics (in a good way). I found the PX25 quite aggressive with bite to be honest. The 242 retains 95% of the PX25's dynamics and resolution, without going over the top. The Lampi EML 45 is a different animal all together. Rich in tonality and pitch perfect.
 
Thanks for all these thoughts, Mike. How would you compare the PX25 to the Psvane 101D replica's? Those are pretty detailed, dynamic, and resolved as well. But it sounds like PX25 do dynamics in a meatier way? Based on your recommendation of looking to PX25 to counter an overly warm system, that's kind of what I would think 101D replicas would be recommended for as well. But somehow I suspect PX25 and 101D replicas are substantially different sounding. Care to comment?
 
The PX25 has more meat on the bones than the Psvane Replica 101d, but the 101d never went over the edge. I would put the 101d in a "fat" sounding system. They will thin it out. The PX25 is best for a system lacking dynamics, that's rolled off and also lacks resolution and could use a titch more "meat on the bones" as well. Given this odd combo, I think its proper application will be rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
The PX25 has more meat on the bones than the Psvane Replica 101d, but the 101d never went over the edge. I would put the 101d in a "fat" sounding system. They will thin it out. The PX25 is best for a system lacking dynamics, that's rolled off and also lacks resolution and could use a titch more "meat on the bones" as well. Given this odd combo, I think its proper application will be rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder if the right thing is to complement a system's characteristics or to supplement them
 
Mike said:
The PX25 has more meat on the bones than the Psvane Replica 101d, but the 101d never went over the edge. I would put the 101d in a "fat" sounding system. They will thin it out. The PX25 is best for a system lacking dynamics, that's rolled off and also lacks resolution and could use a titch more "meat on the bones" as well. Given this odd combo, I think its proper application will be rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Your mind could change after the latest R2R FW update. Al is loving the Px25!!!!
He also prefers it on the Dac with the updated FW vs the HeadDac with early FW. Both R2R.
 
wisnon said:
Your mind could change after the latest R2R FW update. Al is loving the Px25!!!!
He also prefers it on the Dac with the updated FW vs the HeadDac with early FW. Both R2R.
Click to expand...

The PX25 is a great tube, don't get me wrong, BUT....as with all things, very system dependent.
 
Damn mike is my system that bad or am I hearing impaired lol.
If someone's system is able to tell one tube from another including recti is there sysem lacking resolution. Also where does resolution leave off and transparency pick up.
In a direct comparison with the 101d mentioned I can see why some say it's a 101d on steroids. It has the hyper details of a 101 d but carries the meat of a 300 b.
But what you or anyone else has not said has me a bit perplexed
it's background is black more than any other tube I own more than my msb is back much more really
with the msb I could tell what the low noises are and now with this and the new B7 and these tubes is off the charts
the new r2r is PCM at its best I ever heard bar non
anyone who gets it will be screaming on here. I own a Stevie ray on sacd set love the music but it's PCM is clean clear and so outright dynamic it's sharpness cuts my ears up. I can play that music at live volumes so loud I can hear the hum in the studio when the music is stopped lol. For me r2r new non SW is a major imporovmet and it's dsd is very good but perhaps chipless is better but it's very close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top