In my view, simply dropping an ECC88 into an ECC83 circuit is not engineering, even when done by an EE. It might be fun, but its not engineering. At least the OP had the wisdom to ask if it would work.
If you actually prefer an 88 in an 83 circuit, then either the circuit was badly designed for an 83 or you like listening to distortion. Either is possible - there are a lot of bad circuits out there, and tests back in the 1950's showed that most people prefer their sound slightly distorted. An example may be a guitar amp, where the aim is to produce pleasant distortion rather than fidelity.
My political and religious views are not relevant to this forum, but I will admit to preferring truth to error.
If you actually prefer an 88 in an 83 circuit, then either the circuit was badly designed for an 83 or you like listening to distortion. Either is possible - there are a lot of bad circuits out there, and tests back in the 1950's showed that most people prefer their sound slightly distorted. An example may be a guitar amp, where the aim is to produce pleasant distortion rather than fidelity.
My political and religious views are not relevant to this forum, but I will admit to preferring truth to error.
I bought an amp 2nd hand which had been mis-valved with ECC83s in place of where ECC81s should be. I decided to simulate this particular signal stage (an SRPP) with both and the ECC83 actually worked better than the ECC81 despite being specced for it. The ECC83 worked a lot better at the low currents that the stage worked at, so I left them in!
Well, I never said it is good engineering🙂 But the guy asked if it could be done. I actually decided not to bother answering a guy who can't even look up a data sheet, and that's the least you should be able to do if diy is for you, but then some of the others started answering ambigously-(spell check please)...and then I threw in my positive 'lets give the guy a chance' answer. Then....then you come along and push my button....man....asking for it!
Anyway...
I did it to find out if the 6922 could function satisfactory for guitar usage. Starting off with low current and high anode resistor, gradually changing the resistance values till better OPs for that tube. I ended the experiment concluding the 6922 is better than the 12AX7....in my ears.
Sorry for pushing your button. We all have buttons!!
Modifying a circuit to see if a different valve may work better (or at least differently) is part of the fun. When the valves are as different from each other as 88 and 83 then some rethinking may be needed - not just swap a few resistor values. My concern was just that there seems to be, in some quarters, an orthodoxy that some valves (and circuits) are Good and others are Bad. ECC88 is Good, and ECC83 is Bad, in their estimation. So putting an 88 in an 83 circuit must be a Good Thing. That is what I meant by 'fashion engineering'. I guess that is one of my buttons!
Modifying a circuit to see if a different valve may work better (or at least differently) is part of the fun. When the valves are as different from each other as 88 and 83 then some rethinking may be needed - not just swap a few resistor values. My concern was just that there seems to be, in some quarters, an orthodoxy that some valves (and circuits) are Good and others are Bad. ECC88 is Good, and ECC83 is Bad, in their estimation. So putting an 88 in an 83 circuit must be a Good Thing. That is what I meant by 'fashion engineering'. I guess that is one of my buttons!
Anyone tried these ?
ECC83 12AX7 12AU7 To 6N2 6N6 6DJ8 Vacuum Tube Amp Convert Socket Adapter | eBay
ECC83 12AX7 12AU7 To 6N2 6N6 6DJ8 Vacuum Tube Amp Convert Socket Adapter | eBay
Why would anyone even think about it ? All of the above tubes are in current production, none of them is in short supply and all is reasonable cheap.
If any of the above is bad, replacement by an similar one is a reasonable action.