Quiet Low Wattage Recording Tube Amps
Rafko
amp less noisy and usable for recording purposes, I am also interested
to find out what low-wattage amp options are available for getting that
complex (nice low end and beautiful highs) Fender Princeton-like clean
tone for recording at low volume levels. Not having any knowledge in
electronics, I am only interested in new amps.
I read about several that I am more than certain would be okay
tone-wise (Savage Rohr or Allen Sweet Spot), but they are beyond my
budget for the time being.
Are there any less expensive alternatives to these boutique amps for
getting that complex clean tube tone - I really don't care neither
for the versatility of amp or for its overdriven/distorted sounds?
I heard about new Princeton, but I don't really need all the features
that this amp has (compressor, overdrive, direct out, etc).
The only other imperative is that the amp should be quiet, which, from
what I've read so far, might rule out options such as Fender Pro
Junior. I have a nice spring reverb (TBS Spring Reverb) and a tremolo
pedal, so these are definitely not a must.
I forgot to add that I have a Celestion G-12H cab a my disposal, so if
there are any tube head alternatives, I would be interested in hearing
about these as well.
Rafko
Tramp Stamper
Check into THD Yellow Jackets for your output tubes.
jh
Rafko schrieb:
Rafko,
what´s the reason, that you limit your possibilities to "new" amps only?
your bassman´s not new either.....
jochen
Tramp Stamper
Pt
Rafko wrote:
> While I am looking into possible ways to make my '59 Bassman Reissue
> amp less noisy and usable for recording purposes, I am also interested
> to find out what low-wattage amp options are available for getting that
> complex (nice low end and beautiful highs)
Check your capcicators.
Bad caps can make an amp noisy.
Same with preamp tubes.
I don't think there are many newer affordable amps that will give you
the sound you want.
There are several older small watt Gibson and Supro amps on ebay that
are affordable.
You can get a very nice amp for under $350.
Better and cheaper than botiques.
Gibson GA-5 and GA-19 are nice choices.
Pt
Pt
Pt wrote:
> Check your capcicators.
In english the word is....
capacitors?
Pt
RichCI
I'll second that.
I have an old blackface Champ that sounds great. I replaced the
nonoriginal speaker that came with it with a Weber 8A100T and it sounds
much bigger than what you would expect from an 8" speaker. I went with
a blackface for my own less-than-practical reasons which is more
expensive, but the silverfaces are the same thing; you should be able
to pick one up for around $250-300.
tomb...@jhu.edu
Yeah, but capcicators sounds like it would be good on an Italian sub.
Edward A. Oates
tomb...@jhu.edu at tomb...@jhu.edu wrote on 9/29/06 12:21 PM:
The proper term for most of us is cazapators, because that's what happens
when you fool around inside electronics with a bunch of un-discharged ones
;-
--
Ed Oates
http://homepage.mac.com/edoates
DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com
dunlop212
with a larger speaker IIRC.
I used to own one. These are wired "in the air" and are probably the
quietest tube amps ever made.
RickH
have it gone over by a repair guy. I love mine and it fits exactly the
kind of sound you describe. I like a 6V6 sound for vintage tone, it's
more silky smooth and rounder than the higher powered tubes. Maybe
because a 6V6 is less likely to operate outside the dynamic range of
it's output transformer. Beautiful tone, a 6V6 Ampeg will not go real
loud, but it's hum and noise level is undetectable. My 1962 Ampeg is
in fact quieter than my brand new SS amps, no bull. The Ampeg guy was
a stickler for stability and noiseless design. The 62 reverb rocket
also used 6SN7 and 6SL7 for preamp tubes, no microphonics and sweeter
sounding than the ubiquitous 12AX7.
The new Ampegs are not good, because they pretty much "follow the
pack", are easily overdriven, etc., nothing special, boring, same old
same old, same as the next guy. New Ampegs are NOT old Ampegs in any
way shape or form, that magic is lost in the new ones as the Ampeg
founders principles of "clean" are no longer respected by whoever owns
Ampeg today. Sad.
Pt
RickH wrote:
> If you can find an early 1960's Ampeg Reverb Rocket R12, get it, and
> have it gone over by a repair guy. I love mine and it fits exactly the
> kind of sound you describe. I like a 6V6 sound for vintage tone, it's
> more silky smooth and rounder than the higher powered tubes. Maybe
> because a 6V6 is less likely to operate outside the dynamic range of
> it's output transformer. Beautiful tone, a 6V6 Ampeg will not go real
> loud, but it's hum and noise level is undetectable. My 1962 Ampeg is
> in fact quieter than my brand new SS amps, no bull. The Ampeg guy was
> a stickler for stability and noiseless design. The 62 reverb rocket
> also used 6SN7 and 6SL7 for preamp tubes, no microphonics and sweeter
> sounding than the ubiquitous 12AX7.
>
> The new Ampegs are not good, because they pretty much "follow the
> pack", are easily overdriven, etc., nothing special, boring, same old
> same old, same as the next guy. New Ampegs are NOT old Ampegs in any
> way shape or form, that magic is lost in the new ones as the Ampeg
> founders principles of "clean" are no longer respected by whoever owns
> Ampeg today. Sad.
Several name brand amps from the late 40's to the early 60's used 6V6's
and 6S?7 tubes.
Some even had field coil speakers.
They sound fantastic.
I can't understand why amp companies today don't use the tried and
proven tubes and circuitry from the past.
Probably costs too much to build.
Pt
Really..it's me....
>If you can find an early 1960's
There are so many such old fart amps out there, but Ampeg used good iron,
above the Kay/Valcro/whatever. FIND an old fart amp, get the RIGHT tubes
(with Ampeg OFA, U have no choice) and U got a GEM..a friend.. Low $$.
AND if you want to Bogota boogie around, it's easy woik, with NO NFB
and all types of bible thumping KNOW HOW shoved down ya 5 fingers, so
MAYBE said fingers will fall outside the T/Rod behind the Iron age..
>The new Ampegs are not good,
It's the only truck shop strip club open at the moment. Better
then most. SLM has taken Ampeg far beyond what was handed them,
for chump change. When @ PV, EVH used PV amps, but bass was
handled by Ampeg. PV made some cute Bass amps (tweed Classic 400)
things, that were just too kool 4 u'all. Mike A listened to them,
I stood outside the door. He wanted to do it. But nope, SVT's..
With all well n good. SVTs 2day are, um, capable amps..
There is a fine line separating PV/SLM/Asian/FMIC from each other.
ANYONE but me look at the MESA amp in GP..? Sure, I want to support
said wimp on the road. R.S. is no idiot, but maybe his know how of
Tech spit on the price point he goes after. He knows better..
..but, let no one forget..it's $ that drives what you have to make up
ur sound over. Da 'man' will tell ya your history..the MoJo you need
to be told..then, said 'man' will sell you what the papers show U @ 11:11.
Said spew works from 1950-200x...
"..learn...or, be sold to...again..on cue..."
JJTj
...It is history in the making...
......and it's in the Key of ' A '..
...what more could any civilized man want...
Rale
Futile writing style exercises, or, the pathological nonsense as usual; even
if one was to judge solely by taking a brief look at the number of postings
you make using different stage names, one could only conclude that you are
desperately dependent on it. And these kinds of dependencies fall more into
the domain of medicine. In other words, this kind of narcissistic,
self-absorbed, compulsive, and predictable writing reveals nothing more than
a type. .
Rafko
"Really..it's me...." <3...@890.cof> wrote in message
news:jm7rh2h9s2j5a11vt...@4ax.com...
Really..it's me....
Hi...
>Futile writing style exercises, or, the pathological nonsense as usual; even
>if one was to judge solely by taking a brief look at the number of postings
>you make using different stage names, one could only conclude that you are
>desperately dependent on it. And these kinds of dependencies fall more into
>the domain of medicine. In other words, this kind of narcissistic,
>self-absorbed, compulsive, and predictable writing reveals nothing more than
>a type. .
I wonder why you seem to care? I use one service, from any of 4 PCs
they have screen names. Maybe 2, but I sign JJTj..to them all.
So, I conclude that if you don't like what I type, maybe that
new fangled thingie called a 'kill file' can save you the trouble.
And then, perhaps find someone who cares...
JJTj
I am frolicsome, I am easy,
Good tempered and free,
And I don't give a single pin' me boys
What the world thinks of me.
Rale
put at display your limited capacity to manipulate and mislead, your begging
for the attention deserved to be acknowledged for what it was. And that's
where my interest for you and your writings end.
Rafko
"Really..it's me...." <3...@890.cof> wrote in message
news:76ksh2tj22oc4rq06...@4ax.com...
Ludmila Borgschatz-Thudpucker, MD
"Really..it's me...." <3...@890.cof> wrote in message
>
> I wonder why you seem to care?
Because you took a potentially informative thread and managed to make it all
about you?
Beret
Why Ludmila you Gladys Kravitz wannabe you, it's a mildly amusing
perma-male quirk. Alway has been, always will be. Now *LICK* that space
between my sack and turdcutter, bitch! Just before I splatter a hot load
into your beehive hairdo, I'll give you the the standing on one foot
toe-spread signal accompanied by a loud, slow greasy fart. Go girl! mvm
Really..it's me....
>put at display your limited capacity to manipulate and mislead, your begging
>for the attention deserved to be acknowledged for what it was. And that's
>where my interest for you and your writings end.
...kool...
Really..it's me....
ok, I guess U might have a point there..
But hey... my bad..
JJTj
Beret
>> Why do I care? Well, since you replied to a couple of postings I made, and
>> put at display your limited capacity to manipulate and mislead, your begging
>> for the attention deserved to be acknowledged for what it was. And that's
>> where my interest for you and your writings end.
>
> ...kool...
>
>
>
> JJTj
People who snap-yap at others about "begging for the attention" are
usually suffering from severely-homosexual-bitch-slap-me-quick!-itus. I
like to oblige their confused serial killer lazy eye with a thumb
sunk deep to the knuckle-- but I'm quirky that way ;-)
Ludmila Borgschatz-Thudpucker, MD
"Beret" <SloBurninMojo@5F6A-NOS'd.edu> wrote in message
news:fnyTg.1219$v43.694@fed1read02...
>
> Why Ludmila you Gladys Kravitz wannabe you, it's a mildly amusing
> perma-male quirk.
Your Mommie must be so proud.
I'll bet her tail is just a-wagging to beat Hell.
Souffle
> "Beret" <SloBurninMojo@5F6A-NOS'd.edu> wrote in message
> news:fnyTg.1219$v43.694@fed1read02...
>> Why Ludmila you Gladys Kravitz wannabe you, it's a mildly amusing perma-male quirk. Alway has been, always will be. Now *LICK* that space between my sack and turdcutter, bitch! Just before I splatter a hot load into your beehive hairdo, I'll give you the the standing on one foot toe-spread signal accompanied by a loud, slow greasy fart. Go girl! mvm
>
> I will keep one lazy eye on your toes. My ears and uni-nostril await your flatulence, sir!
Atta gimp! I'll be jerkin' it up here. Lick faster1 Ohhhhh-
Souffle
outta the snotty end of any phucstick on line
or life support!
I say, let her bitch! SPLOOEY PAINT THAT BEHIVE and let her type
24/7/365! :-)
icarusi
news:1159476479.6...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Are there any less expensive alternatives to these boutique amps for
> getting that complex clean tube tone - I really don't care neither
> for the versatility of amp or for its overdriven/distorted sounds?
http://www.matamp.co.uk/minimat.htm
icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
Phil Wilson
http://amptone.com/#lowwattamps
--
Phil Wilson
"Rafko" <raf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1159476479.6...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Jim
> While I am looking into possible ways to make my '59 Bassman Reissue
> amp less noisy and usable for recording purposes, I am also interested
> to find out what low-wattage amp options are available for getting that
> complex (nice low end and beautiful highs) Fender Princeton-like clean
> tone for recording at low volume levels. Not having any knowledge in
> electronics, I am only interested in new amps.
Have the THD Univalve and Bivalve been mentioned yet?
TD Madden
Rafko
David Wright
@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
>Thanks to all of you who replied to my posting. Rafko
>
Really? I looked through all the posts, and couldn't find anything less than
$500. That is, new ones.
Pt
You might find some older Gibson amps in your price range.
GA5 is about 5 watts.
GA19 is about 15 watts.
There are several on ebay.
Pt
David Wright
<1159982452.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>:
5 watts is hardly quiet! I guess I could take it to gigs, but then I couldn't
practice with it, since it would not do output tube saturation.
tom walls
David_...@spra.com says...
Huh? If 5 watts isn't a low wattage amp, what is?
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] >
[] > 5 watts is hardly quiet! I guess I could take it to gigs, but then I couldn't
[] >
[]
[] Huh? If 5 watts isn't a low wattage amp, what is?
As Phil posted, there's a lot of lower powered amps:
http://amptone.com/#quiet
http://amptone.com/#lowwattamps
----
"The best way out is always through"
- Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963).
Remove X's from my email address above to reply
[These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]
Jim
Five watts into an efficient 4x12 is DAMNED LOUD.
Five watts into an inefficient speaker is tolerable.
These threads consistently leave out a factor that is AS IMPORTANT as
power rating itself: SPEAKER EFFICIENCY.
tom walls
says...
> >>
> >>5 watts is hardly quiet! I guess I could take it to gigs, but then I couldn't
> >>practice with it, since it would not do output tube saturation.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Huh? If 5 watts isn't a low wattage amp, what is?
>
> Five watts into an efficient 4x12 is DAMNED LOUD.
>
> Five watts into an inefficient speaker is tolerable.
>
> These threads consistently leave out a factor that is AS IMPORTANT as
> power rating itself: SPEAKER EFFICIENCY.
>
Must remember not to crosspost.
Random Excess
>Huh? If 5 watts isn't a low wattage amp, what is?
Gilmore Jr. 1/2 watt.
Tejas Pedro
tom walls
tepid...@aol.com says...
nm...@wt.net
Edward A. Oates wrote:
> >>
> >>> Check your capcicators.
> >>
> >> In english the word is....
> >> capacitors?
> >
> > Yeah, but capcicators sounds like it would be good on an Italian sub.
> >
>
> The proper term for most of us is cazapators, because that's what happens
> when you fool around inside electronics with a bunch of un-discharged ones
Here in Tejas, they are usually referred to as "cowpasitures" cuz they
always have a tendency to turn to horsechips when old and dried out.
MK
Harrison Ford Prefect
> tom walls wrote:
...
>> Huh? If 5 watts isn't a low wattage amp, what is?
>
> Five watts into an efficient 4x12 is DAMNED LOUD.
>
> Five watts into an inefficient speaker is tolerable.
>
> These threads consistently leave out a factor that is AS IMPORTANT as
> power rating itself: SPEAKER EFFICIENCY.
Give the man a Snickers Bar! Or whatever!
5 watts is fairly low power compared to 100 watts or more.
5 watts is a lot compared to , say, 1/5 watt or less.
But whether it's loud or quiet depends on the speaker[s],
where you play, and what you play into it. But yeah,
the big variable for most folk is the speaker cab, with
speaker efficiency the huge factor.
A 5W into that big, sensitive 4x12 in the average bedroom
is more than enough to get the cops called on you by irate
neighbors even as it damages your hearing. It won't be enough
to keep up with a loud drummer in a live situation unless
you stand right in front of it and mic it.
But it can still be steenking loud.