Page 9 of 12
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:54 pm
by monkeybob_Archive
I think you'll also find that everyone is for the most part helpful, friendly, funny and knowledgeable.
Hmm, well after my first couple of posts I was dismissed as a 'kid' with a 'toy'. Not the most friendly introduction, but we'll see!
My point about the expensive amps is that often people aren't honest about their own equipment, because they can't bear to admit that they thing they've just spent loads of money on isn't much cop. That's why harmony central reviews have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Just post a link to your LPs - we wanna hear what you've got going on. We wanna hear your sound. Not Santago's. Yours. Then we 'geeks' might have reason to change our minds...
Ok, I didn't know what you meant by LPs! My band's stuff is here:
http://myspace.com/sevenyearson
Let me know if their are any particular guitar tones on any of the tracks you particularly like or dislike, and I'll tell you what what used to play them.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:55 pm
by beancakes_Archive
If any of you want to be helpful, I'll take recommendations for a cheap tube amp that's under 50 watts and sounds decent. (Under $300)
----
A solid tube amp in the $300 range is the Fender Super 60 . It's a member of the dreaded "Red Knob era" fender amps. (However, not all of them actually have red knobs) These all-tube amps were made in the mid 80's thru early 90's and designed by Rivera when he worked a Fender. They have a clean channel that sounds very much like a twin and an overdrive circuit that will blow you away. It uses 6L6 tubes on the output and sounds very similar to a old MKII boogie when overdriven. This amp really has a great lead tone and tons of crunch.
I've owned 2 Boogies, a JC 120, several Fender tubes amps so I'm not making bogus comparisons. This amp sounds great.
So why can you find these for $300?
1- These amps were mass produced and have circuit boards that are fairly difficult to repair. (make sure you test it before buy it!)
2- Most of the other "red-knob" fenders are crap. This one is a stand out.
3- It only has one set of tone controls shared between the clean and OD channel. Going from a nice clean shimmer to metal solo requires some knob turning on the fly. Not the greatest for a live situation. (but not uncommon with older tube amps)
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:57 pm
by zom-zom_Archive
The Fender 75 was also Rivera-designed, has no PC boards and they also sell for around $300. A much, much better amp for the same price.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:06 pm
by vockins_Archive
madlee wrote:vockins wrote:AB165 Fender Bassmans go for that in good shape. They are great.
that seems hard to believe.
I've seen two in the last month in private sales. Ebay is a little higher, but not by much.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:34 pm
by Derek
The 60s/70s Sunn heads other than the Model T (i.e. Sorado, Solarus, Spectrum) are still consistently in the $250-$400 range. I think most of them are rated at 60 watts though.
One of my amps is a '68 Solarus with a boost switch, reverb and tremolo. Good, loud, clean.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:01 pm
by scott_Archive
I would say the AB165 (Blackface) Bassman head would easily be had for $300, if it was in bad shape cosmetically or if it had been modded at some point, stuff like that. A stock one in nice cosmetic condition is gonna be closer to $450, I think.
If you bump that $300 price tag up to $350, I've bought the following tube amps, for that price, in the past three years or so:
1990's Laney VC30 (two, actually)
60's Traynor YBA-1 (two of these as well)
60's Traynor YBA-1A
70's Traynor YBA-1A
60's Traynor YVM-1
70's Traynor YBA-2A
60's Traynor YSR-1
2000's Traynor YCV40
And I'm not sure if it was closer to $400, but I'm gonna put it down here anyway
1969 Ampeg B25
And honestly, if you can get together $300, you can get together $400. Maybe it will take you an extra 3 months, or an extra year, hell, I dunno. At Chicago prices, that extra $100 is like 15 packs of cigarettes. Quit smoking for a month, or don't buy that new videogame or the new pair of shoes, whatever it is, and save up the extra money. It can be well worth it.
I'm pretty sure if you watch eBay and craigslist long enough, every one of those amps I listed could be had for under $400, even with today's market. The only one that isn't a great guitar amp in its stock form is the YVM-1.
The hardest part about getting a good deal on a tube amp on the eBay is to buy an amp without playing it first, and end up with something you're happy with. I've either done a great job of getting the right amps, or maybe I've just been really lucky. The worst failure I've had was the Sound City 120, which I got for right around $500, a little less if I remember right.
I've never bought a boutique amp like a Dr Z, though I look at auctions for them, Top Hat, Bad Cat, Matchless, Soldano, VHT, and maybe some others I'm forgetting. I always think "how can this amp cost $2000?? And performance-wise, can it even come close to my (also hand-wired) YBA-1A??"
The first amp I ever owned was a Crate. B80XL. It got me through the first year or so that I played music.
The last time I bought a solid-state amp was probably about four months ago. A Traynor TS-120, with cabinet, for $150 or 200 or so. It's not like I think all solid state amps suck. It's just in terms of tone and touch-sensitivity, they never come close to a tube amp. It only took me about 13 years of playing before I really understood the difference. That's mostly because I had only solid state amps for the first 8 years or so, and then got a Twin which may as well be solid state with its super-clean sound. It wasn't until a friend sold me his YBA-1A that I finally understood the reason tube amps are never going to be replaced by solid state.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:36 pm
by ubercat_Archive
mr.arrison wrote:monkeybob wrote:Most of my tone comes from pedals anyway
After listening to the linked material, I must concur. Sorry. I guess I'll be the bad guy in this thread...
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:44 am
by monkeybob_Archive
That's very vague - which particular guitar tones didn't you like? There's two guitarists in the band and we're using very different equipment. I'm genuinely interested to hear opinions, might give me something to think about for next time we record.
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:00 am
by Antero_Archive
My cheap tube amp: Silvertone 1484 head. 30-ish watts, nice tremolo, exactly the right amount of break-up for my tastes.
Solid state amps are good for some things. See
Entertainment!. Hard to hate on that sound.
monkeybob wrote:Let me know if their are any particular guitar tones on any of the tracks you particularly like or dislike, and I'll tell you what what used to play them.
There's a distorted rhythm tone in "I'll Take My..." and "Impossible" that's really thin and unfocused. If I was guessing, I'd say it was a Strat with a distortion pedal with the drive up too high - it's all going spreading OUT instead of FORWARD, if you catch my meaning?
Is it absurd that we re still using vacuum tubes in amps?
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:39 am
by monkeybob_Archive
Antero wrote:There's a distorted rhythm tone in "I'll Take My..." and "Impossible" that's really thin and unfocused. If I was guessing, I'd say it was a Strat with a distortion pedal with the drive up too high - it's all going spreading OUT instead of FORWARD, if you catch my meaning?
On "I'll take My chances" do you mean the guitar in the left or the right? There's only two guitars on there, each panned about 50% each way. There's only two guitars on "Impossible" too, but they're not so clearly seperated.