6922 Amperex PQ White label... D or O-getter? Holland or Hicksville?

Is the "deep low end of the 7308" an actual phenomenon or merely the perceived effect of less midrange emphasis?

Rodman99999... Delighted to take you up on your offer. I sent you a PM.

I don't mean the 7308 may have a diminished or attenuated midrange. It's a question of balance. The suggestion has been made (ie. Joe's Tube Lore) that some iterations are more "midrange forward" than others. However, with respect to sound, I suppose perception is reality. I'm especially interested in a 6922 iteration that has a palpable midbass.

I should think that, by now, it goes wuithout saying "in my system...," yet, why bother talking at all if useful genralizations cannot be made about tubes. 

There ought to be an Audiogon general disclaimer page, perhaps referenced by an asterisk or numerical code (ie. pertaining to the use of the common term "best"). It's beyond tedious to have to keep returning to these qualifications. 

So which tube has the most palpable midbass/low midrange 200-500 HZ response?

How does the PCC88 and PCC189 sound compared to the 6922 variants?

In my system, I found the USA Amperex white label PQ large O-getter 6922 to have richer tonality than the USA Amperex orange label O-getter 7308, but weaker bass. Also, the former has a considerably flatter, less dimensional soundtage than the latter -- everything is more "forward" in presentation. I'd ike to find an iteration that has both saturated tonality and dimensional soundstage with tight palpable bass response. Is that a Siemens cca?