Building a Tube Amp
Jon Slaughter
going to go ahead and order the parts.
Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
sound also.
I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or low
quality.
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<G%%Ik.2248$pr6....@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
2 x 807 zero bias drive?
Jon Slaughter
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gd258f$8fk$1...@aioe.org...
It's going to be class A but I'm not sure exactly what tubes I'm going to
use. Probably try to make it switchable for different power settings.
Basically the "stock" guitar amp tubes are the 6L6, 12AX7, EL34, EL84 and a
few variants.
http://www.vacuumtube.com/guitartubes.htm
Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard types
I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
The main thing right now is to find a good transformer... looks like I'll
end up spending more to build an amp than just buy a good one ;/ (which is a
real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
Eeyore
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
> mostly they are similar to transistor amps.
Not even remotely.
> But I, of course want a decent sound also.
The best output transformers are in Europe IMHO. Lundahl and Sowter for example
but hardly cheap. SS amps don't need output transformers.
But why do you want to add tube distortion to the sound ?
May I suggest you Google 'gainclone' for something half decent ?
Graham
Eeyore
Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day it happened "Jon Slaughter" wrote
>
> >I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> >going to go ahead and order the parts.
> >
> >Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> >etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
> >mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
> >sound also.
> >
> >I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or low
> >quality.
>
> 2 x 807 zero bias drive?
Mischief !
Graham
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<b31Jk.5322$Ws1....@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>> 2 x 807 zero bias drive?
>
>It's going to be class A but I'm not sure exactly what tubes I'm going to
>use. Probably try to make it switchable for different power settings.
>Basically the "stock" guitar amp tubes are the 6L6, 12AX7, EL34, EL84 and a
>few variants.
807very popular here, 2 make for 100W.
'Zero bias' drive, here an example:
http://www.triodeel.com/mi12246.gif
Near class A:
http://www.montagar.com/~PATJ/mi12188a.htm
You may want to read this:
http://www.webace.com.au/~electron/tubes/screens.htm
>http://www.vacuumtube.com/guitartubes.htm
>
>Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard types
>I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
EL84 is rather low power, I used those in a guitar amp once, 4 IIRC.
>The main thing right now is to find a good transformer... looks like I'll
>end up spending more to build an amp than just buy a good one ;/ (which is a
>real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
That is why I spend say about 100$ on a Chinese 2 x 100W RMS transistor amp.
Cheaper, better, and faster too, as it came working.
Just forget about tubes :-)
And the voltages can byte you too.
Jon Slaughter
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48F49F9E...@hotmail.com...
FYI, Tube's break up differently than SS. Tubes have even order harmonic
distortion which is much more pleasent than odd order. This has to do with
how they clip... hence tubes are prefered over SS any time distortion is
involved. (and with the need for an overdriven sound for guitar it is
necessary)
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<cE1Jk.2258$pr6...@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
Jon Slaughter
Huh?
You do realize that overdriven guitar amps purposely distort the signal?
I guess you guys don't know much about guitar amps?
Jon Slaughter
I guess I wasn't clear(actually I don't see that I mentioned it). The amp is
specifically for guitar and not hi-fi.
John Larkin
Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
commercial stereo amp? That would save a ton of money and give you a
lot of versatility to tune the sound. You don't get a lot of choice or
tunability from a pile of tubes and transformers.
John
GregS
Seems like you can make a lot of money marketing your device.
Seems like overdriving the power output stage might not
have the same irregularities as a low level stage.
Guitars can be played with any kind of amp and don't necessarily
need to be driven into distortion. Thats determined by the artist.
The type of speaker distortion is also part of the power output
stage.
greg
bill....@ieee.org
> "Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:gd29ge$rue$1...@aioe.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:59:13 -0500) it happened "Jon
> > Slaughter"
> > <cE1Jk.2258$pr6....@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
>
> >>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
That doesn't follow. What we do know is that it is lot cheaper to
distort a signal with semiconductors and subsequently amplify it with
semiconductors than it is to amplify and distort it with valves.
Semiconductors have the additional advantage that you can have a lot
more control over the nature of the distortion you introduce and the
signal level where it becomes perceptible, if you happen to know what
you are doing.
Since you seem to be planning on building a valve amplifier for your
guitar, you presumably don't have a clear idea of what you are doing.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Jan Panteltje
zekf...@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote in
<gd2ecp$n32$1...@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>:
>>You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
>>and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
>>Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
>
>Seems like you can make a lot of money marketing your device.
Nah, all been done likely.
>Seems like overdriving the power output stage might not
>have the same irregularities as a low level stage.
Possible, but that is not what I suggested.
>Guitars can be played with any kind of amp and don't necessarily
>need to be driven into distortion. Thats determined by the artist.
>The type of speaker distortion is also part of the power output
>stage.
Sure, google 'guitar distortion box' without the quotes.
Only 212000 hits.
:-)
Just typed:
# killall -KILL tubophiles
# tubophiles: no process killed
mm
Oh well.
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<9y2Jk.2515$Ei5....@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com>:
START:
>> You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
>> and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
>> Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
>
>Huh?
>
>You do realize that overdriven guitar amps purposely distort the signal?
>
>I guess you guys don't know much about guitar amps?
GOTO START
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<Xz2Jk.2516$Ei5....@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com>:
>>>real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
>>
>> That is why I spend say about 100$ on a Chinese 2 x 100W RMS transistor
>> amp.
>> Cheaper, better, and faster too, as it came working.
>>
>> Just forget about tubes :-)
>> And the voltages can byte you too.
>>
>
>I guess I wasn't clear(actually I don't see that I mentioned it). The amp is
>specifically for guitar and not hi-fi.
For 'amplification' one would like as little distortion as possible.
For wave shaping, it is better done at lower power levels.
If you can specify the waveform (distortion type) you want,
then you can can make that either digitally or analog at a low
level, and then use a HiFi power amp.
At least you would have a decent amp :-)
Guy Macon
Jon Slaughter wrote:
>
>Jan Panteltje wrote...
>
>>Jon Slaughter wrote:
>>
>>>FYI, Tube's break up differently than SS. Tubes have even order harmonic
>>>distortion which is much more pleasent than odd order. This has to do with
>>>how they clip... hence tubes are prefered over SS any time distortion is
>>>involved. (and with the need for an overdriven sound for guitar it is
>>>necessary)
>>
>> You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
>> and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
>> Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
>
>Huh?
>
>You do realize that overdriven guitar amps purposely distort the signal?
>
>I guess you guys don't know much about guitar amps?
There are a bunch of recording studios in Los Angeles that seem
happy enough with my knowledge of guitar amps; the checks clear...
Where is it written in stone that the distortion has to be in
the final output power stage and not in the preamp stage?
Yes, I am well aware that purists insist on all tubes, but it
isn't, as a rule, because they can hear any difference. The
gold standard for evaluating audio claims is the double blind
A-B-X listening test under controlled conditions. Anyone who
claims that there is or isn't a difference without doing that
sort of test is selling snake oil.
BTW, I am also aware that the distortion isn't the whole
story; for example, tube output stages can modify the sound
be way of microphonics in a way that a signal generator,
dummy load and oscilloscope will not see. Again, a double
blind A-B-X listening test with a real guirar will reveal
such effects in a way that any engineer will accept.
You might find this web page t be interesting...
http://www.trueaudio.com/at_eetjlm.htm
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
Tim Wescott
They have books on building and servicing guitar amps, too.
Be careful with their parts: sometimes the quality is excellent,
sometimes it's cheap Chinese or 40-year-old NOS parts that weren't kept
in dry storage.
Overall I'm pleased with them, however.
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Guy Macon
GregS wrote:
>Seems like overdriving the power output stage might not
>have the same irregularities as a low level stage.
There is a group of people with special skills who can
make it so that the low level stage *does* have the
same "irregularities" as the power output stage.
They call us "Engineers"...
BobW
"Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G%%Ik.2248$pr6....@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
I've posted a Fender Deluxe Reverb service manual in the schematics group.
It may give you some ideas.
Sorry, I don't know where to get parts. I do know two guys that do this, so
if you can't find the parts then post and I'll find out where they get
theirs.
Bob
--
== All google group posts are automatically deleted due to spam ==
Jim Thompson
I'm curious why anyone would want to build a toooob amplifier these
days. Other than an antique curiosity??
Distorted/"warm" sound... "warm" for sure... lots of heat.
When I was a kid, 50-60 years, I did build toooob amplifiers, because
that was pretty much all there was. But, by 1957, I was designing and
building solid state up to 30 Watts.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food
Jon Slaughter
You can't... the components in a tube amp react completely different than
digital algorithms. Analog solid state tends to end up sounding very
harsh(because of the way they clip as I mentioned).
If you don't believe me go to your local music store and ask one of the guys
to show you how a real tube amp sounds. Compare it to a solid state amp and
then to a modeling amp. The tube amp wins in sound quality.
Supposedly there are many factors in tube amps that make them sound better
such as the power transformer "sagging", the tubes themselfs, etc... I do
not know how much is true but what I do know is that tube amps sound much
better than solid state... although some of the newer modeling amps do sound
decent but still are not "reactive" to the playing. (they are not dynamic or
"organic" as it's still just a simple algorithm that reacts the same way
every time)
(Remember, I'm specifically talking about distortion here... but even then
many people claim hi-fi tube amps are the best. (and I've seen research that
claims they are))
Jon Slaughter
"John Larkin" <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:crd9f4hdnte8mv0k4...@4ax.com...
They have these but generally the power amp distortion(along with speaker
distortion) is also needed. A simple preamp tube driver with solid state
doesn't sound all that great.
You would be supprised what they do with tube guitar amps though.
check out
http://www.mesaboogie.com/Product_Info/Rectifier_Series/roadking/roadking.htm
and look at the back for all the switching possibilities.
Tim Wescott
> Jon Slaughter wrote:
>> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think
>> I'm going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>
>> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of
>> course mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course
>> want a decent sound also.
>>
>> I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced
>> and/or low quality.
>>
> If you're in the US try Antique Radio Supply: http://www.tubesandmore.com.
>
> They have books on building and servicing guitar amps, too.
>
> Be careful with their parts: sometimes the quality is excellent,
> sometimes it's cheap Chinese or 40-year-old NOS parts that weren't kept
> in dry storage.
>
> Overall I'm pleased with them, however.
>
(usually) what you're getting. Just pay attention.
Tim Wescott
That argument could easily be applied to building violins out of
plastic, or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of
a string orchestra.
Yet somehow, when I go to the symphony it's all flesh-and-blood people
playing wooden instruments.
Circa 1985 you couldn't build a solid state 'distorter' that would
satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
You may be able to now, but it takes a tremendous amount of work to
design. There's a lot of dynamic nonlinearities at work, in the tubes,
in the transformers and in the speakers. And it's not limited to the
audio path -- even the power supply sag modifies the sound ("adds
crunch", per the folks who study this).
Even today, if you want the genuine vacuum tube sound the easiest way by
far is to build a genuine vacuum tube amp. There may be value in
learning all of the little details of an amp and replicating it (and,
AFAIK, it's done and marketed for high-end guitar amps) -- but there's
still a lot of value in making them the old way, as witnessed by all the
new vacuum tube guitar amps out there.
So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no
sense. But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral
part of rock & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube
amps can really be replaced.
Jan Panteltje
<t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote in
<4POdnbMrieKWTGnV...@web-ster.com>:
>That argument could easily be applied to building violins out of
>plastic, or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of
>a string orchestra.
Maybe you have not noticed, but whole orchestras come out of the paper cone of your loudspeaker,
and the plastic membranes of your headphone.
>Yet somehow, when I go to the symphony it's all flesh-and-blood people
>playing wooden instruments.
Probably amplified by ....
>Circa 1985 you couldn't build a solid state 'distorter' that would
>satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
Ah come on!!!!
>You may be able to now, but it takes a tremendous amount of work to
>design. There's a lot of dynamic nonlinearities at work, in the tubes,
>in the transformers and in the speakers. And it's not limited to the
>audio path -- even the power supply sag modifies the sound ("adds
>crunch", per the folks who study this).
And that would be difficult?
Hell the only limiting factor doing it all digitally was the introduced delay.
Today, with GHz FPGAs and very fast DSPs, I think there is hardly any problem
doing simple things like that.
>So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no
>sense. But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral
>part of rock & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube
>amps can really be replaced.
I like that article that Guy Macon pointed to:
http://www.trueaudio.com/at_eetjlm.htm
That whole tube stuff is marketing, just like oxygen free cables.
Some will prefer to ride horses as those feel so 'soft' versus driving
in a car I guess.
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<244Jk.4905$be....@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>:
Well, dear Jon, I have build several tube amps, how many did you build?
But really I would not recommend tube amps, unless you like to look
at red hot glowing anodes, those look nice, and show you that it is time to
turn the volume down.
And, if you have limited experience with electronics, the voltages in tube amps
can kill, so better make something that works on 2 x 40 V with transistors.
Tim Wescott
> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:04:12 -0700) it happened Tim Wescott
> <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote in
> <4POdnbMrieKWTGnV...@web-ster.com>:
>
>> That argument could easily be applied to building violins out of
>> plastic, or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of
>> a string orchestra.
>
>
> Maybe you have not noticed, but whole orchestras come out of the paper cone of your loudspeaker,
> and the plastic membranes of your headphone.
If you would be so kind as to point me to a wholly synthesized rendition
of Beethoven's 5th that is entirely synthesized, and is generally
recognized as sounding better than an orchestral version generated by
real people?
>> Yet somehow, when I go to the symphony it's all flesh-and-blood people
>> playing wooden instruments.
>
> Probably amplified by ....
>
>> Circa 1985 you couldn't build a solid state 'distorter' that would
>> satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
>
> Ah come on!!!!
You have one that was built in 1985 and enjoyed any kind of acceptance
at all by serious musicians?
>> You may be able to now, but it takes a tremendous amount of work to
>> design. There's a lot of dynamic nonlinearities at work, in the tubes,
>> in the transformers and in the speakers. And it's not limited to the
>> audio path -- even the power supply sag modifies the sound ("adds
>> crunch", per the folks who study this).
>
> And that would be difficult?
> Hell the only limiting factor doing it all digitally was the introduced delay.
> Today, with GHz FPGAs and very fast DSPs, I think there is hardly any problem
> doing simple things like that.
Not so. Yes, the technology enables it, but that leaves the limiting
factor of our understanding of the mechanisms at work modifying the
sound, and the labor involved in replicating them in DSP.
I think it can be done (I think it _has_ been done), but it'd be a hell
of a lot of work for a very talented team. If you think you can do it
on your own with a few lines of Verilog, then get cracking -- there's a
river of money to be had if you make it work cheaply.
So if you're making a bazillion (and you think you can market it to
guitarists) then you can plan on amortizing all that engineering expense
over a bunch of units, and it makes sense. If you're building one --
get some tubes, buddy.
>> So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no
>> sense. But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral
>> part of rock & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube
>> amps can really be replaced.
>
> I like that article that Guy Macon pointed to:
> http://www.trueaudio.com/at_eetjlm.htm
>
> That whole tube stuff is marketing, just like oxygen free cables.
> Some will prefer to ride horses as those feel so 'soft' versus driving
> in a car I guess.
Yup. And my 2000 Ford Escort (and anything else with a motor) will
climb right past those horses going up that 45 degree slope with those
8" rocks cluttering the 18" wide trail.
Sure.
Yea.
Verily.
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
> sound also.
>
> quality.
Here's how to get your vacuum tubes:
http://paillard.claude.free.fr/video.mp4
;-)
--
Paul Hovnanian pa...@hovnanian.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have gnu, will travel.
Jan Panteltje
<t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote in
<OJadnbdjBOCjRWnV...@web-ster.com>:
>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:04:12 -0700) it happened Tim Wescott
>> <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote in
>> <4POdnbMrieKWTGnV...@web-ster.com>:
>>
>>> That argument could easily be applied to building violins out of
>>> plastic, or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of
>>> a string orchestra.
>>
>>
>> Maybe you have not noticed, but whole orchestras come out of the paper cone of your loudspeaker,
>> and the plastic membranes of your headphone.
>
>If you would be so kind as to point me to a wholly synthesized rendition
>of Beethoven's 5th that is entirely synthesized, and is generally
>recognised as sounding better than an orchestral version generated by
>real people?
You are confusing 2 things, first there is the input from the *player*,
then there is the sound of the *instrument*.
Naturally both are tightly coupled, but I am pretty sure (well assumption),
that if Stradivarius played some run of the mill made in Mechico violin,
he could still keep an audience in awe.
>>> Yet somehow, when I go to the symphony it's all flesh-and-blood people
>>> playing wooden instruments.
>>
>> Probably amplified by ....
>>
>>> Circa 1985 you couldn't build a solid state 'distorter' that would
>>> satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
>>
>> Ah come on!!!!
>
>You have one that was built in 1985 and enjoyed any kind of acceptance
>at all by serious musicians?
That is a straw man.
The issue is 'can we make a tube sound at low level'.
Well any diode clipper does that.
Now you can add other stuff, like 'sagging supply', quite easily, by doing a peak detection
and lowering the diode biases, etc etc.
Asymmetric? Can be done too, the 'Joerg way', couple of discretes,
some JFETS, what not.
There is no problem there.
The problem is in their idiotic specs, 'soft', colourful', 'sexy', 'fuzzier',
'warmth', 'alive', 'organic' hey, what does it mean?
Does it mean the same thing to person A as to person B?
So you first have to come up with some real tests, scope it,
see what is different, and recreate that with some hardware, software,
lookup tables if you must (AD EPROM DA for curve, now there is hardly latency),
etc.
Formulate the exact problem, and you have the solution.
>> And that would be difficult?
>> Hell the only limiting factor doing it all digitally was the introduced delay.
>> Today, with GHz FPGAs and very fast DSPs, I think there is hardly any problem
>> doing simple things like that.
>
>Not so. Yes, the technology enables it, but that leaves the limiting
>factor of our understanding of the mechanisms at work modifying the
>sound, and the labor involved in replicating them in DSP.
Sure, right.
>I think it can be done (I think it _has_ been done), but it'd be a hell
>of a lot of work for a very talented team. If you think you can do it
>on your own with a few lines of Verilog, then get cracking -- there's a
>river of money to be had if you make it work cheaply.
No way, I do not like to sell snake oil, and I do not want to stimulate anybody
to believe in snake oil.
And I would have to advertise in their snake oil language to sell it.
Simple as that.
>So if you're making a bazillion (and you think you can market it to
>guitarists) then you can plan on amortizing all that engineering expense
>over a bunch of units, and it makes sense. If you're building one --
>get some tubes, buddy.
Personally I think very few real guitarist give a dime.
They can play, and use the instrument to express themselves.
A lot of others will just go for some sort of special sound, well it is not that
what makes music, Hendrix burned his guitar on stage IIRC, good thing too.
(am I gone hear about this LOL).
>>> So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no
>>> sense. But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral
>>> part of rock & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube
>>> amps can really be replaced.
>>
>> I like that article that Guy Macon pointed to:
>> http://www.trueaudio.com/at_eetjlm.htm
>>
>> That whole tube stuff is marketing, just like oxygen free cables.
>> Some will prefer to ride horses as those feel so 'soft' versus driving
>> in a car I guess.
>
>Yup. And my 2000 Ford Escort (and anything else with a motor) will
>climb right past those horses going up that 45 degree slope with those
>8" rocks cluttering the 18" wide trail.
Oh, did not know that.
To each his own ;-)
kevin93
> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> FYI, Tube's break up differently than SS. Tubes have even order harmonic
Not if you are using push-pull, the even harmonics cancel, leaving the
odd-harmonics as with solid-state.
kevin
Rich Grise
> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
> mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
> sound also.
>
> I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or low
> quality.
Good Luck finding transformers! The logical thing to do here is to start
browsing surplus stores, I'd think.
Let us know how it comes out!
Cheers!
Rich
John Larkin
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
Umm, nothing audiofoolery surprises me any more. Except occasionally
the prices.
>
>check out
>
>http://www.mesaboogie.com/Product_Info/Rectifier_Series/roadking/roadking.htm
>
>and look at the back for all the switching possibilities.
>
>
>
Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
signal-level electronics. They certainly don't go through tube power
amps in the signal chain!
John
Guy Macon
Jon Slaughter wrote:
>You can't... the components in a tube amp react completely different than
>digital algorithms.
Evidence, please.
>Analog solid state tends to end up sounding very
>harsh(because of the way they clip as I mentioned).
Everyone else here is talking about a transistorized final
power stage that is running well below clipping, with the
yube-style clipping happening before the final stage. The
fact that you are taking about a transistorized final power
stage that is clipping show that you aren't listening to
what is being told to you.
>Supposedly there are many factors in tube amps that make them sound better
>such as the power transformer "sagging", the tubes themselfs, etc...
..all of which can be modeled with digital algorithms.
John Larkin
Absurd. Tubes aren't magic.
John
Tam
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:42j9f491if8jfno4g...@4ax.com...
I suspect if you really wanted to, you could take a 100W transistor amp and
make it sound like a 50W tube amp. Just put in the tube type distortion
before the transistor amp goes non linear. I think the tube amps also used a
lot less audio feedback and had higher output impedance.
Tam
Tim Wescott
Are you kidding? I have a friend whose first job was as a field
engineer for a company that made sound panels for recording studios; he
ended up babysitting new installations during a number of recording
sessions in the late 60's, early 70's.
The "low level signal processing" chain went guitar -> amp -> speaker ->
air -> microphone -> sound panel -> tape.
So they certainly _did_, and most likely certainly still do.
John Larkin
wrote:
And they used springs for reverb [1]. Nothing has changed in 40 years?
John
[1] or in at least one case, a speaker and a mic in a men's room.
angus
"Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
> mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
> sound also.
>
> I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or low
> quality.
Dr. Z has forgotten more about tube amps than I'll ever know. I've been
to his shop and know that he has specially made transformers, Capacitors
(orange drops) and other components made for his amps. He is so into
vintage tube sounds that when Sprague changed from polystyrene to
polyester or vice versa) insulation in their caps, he had special runs
made with the older material. He claims he can hear the difference.... I
can't. You may be able to talk him into selling the parts you need if
you are really intent in building your own tube amp.
John
Jim Thompson
Those of us "in-the-know" realize that HEADROOM is where it's at!
>
>If you don't believe me go to your local music store and ask one of the guys
>to show you how a real tube amp sounds. Compare it to a solid state amp and
>then to a modeling amp. The tube amp wins in sound quality.
>
>Supposedly there are many factors in tube amps that make them sound better
>such as the power transformer "sagging", the tubes themselfs, etc... I do
>not know how much is true but what I do know is that tube amps sound much
>better than solid state... although some of the newer modeling amps do sound
>decent but still are not "reactive" to the playing. (they are not dynamic or
>"organic" as it's still just a simple algorithm that reacts the same way
>every time)
>
>
>(Remember, I'm specifically talking about distortion here... but even then
>many people claim hi-fi tube amps are the best. (and I've seen research that
>claims they are))
>
>
...Jim Thompson
Adrian Tuddenham
> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> etc...) and maybe have any tips?
Random tips:
1) If you intend over-driving a push-pull output stage, use a
long-tailed pair for the phase splitter.
The type of phase splitter which derives its balance from the centre
point of the grid resistors of the output valves will produce horrible
L.F. effects when those valves run into grid current. A phase splitter
of the type with with equal anode and cathode load resistors has unequal
driving impedances and will also give bad-sounding distortion on
overload.
2) Valve circuits are only the same as transistor circuits in their
overall function, in all other respects they are very different indeed.
3) Never leave a valve amplifier output open-circuited *ever*!!!
...not even for a millisecond. It is so easy to generate very high
voltages in the transformer winding which will cause a flashover and
ruin the transformer, the valves or the valveholders (or start a fire or
give you a nasty jolt).
4) Valves need high voltages, high voltages kill. If you only think
you know what you are doing, get someone who really does know how to
handle high voltages to help you.
5) The size of the output stage dictates many other things such as the
size and type of power supply, the type of driver stage, the overall
configuration, the overall gain and feedback ratios. (There is nearly
always far less overall feedback in valve amps than there is in
transistor amps.) Start your design with a specific output stage and
work forwards and backwards from there.
6) Read as many books on basic electronics from the 1950s as you can.
They were written by people who designed things with valves because they
only had valves, not because they were fashionable. They had to make
them to a price, make them work properly and make them meet
specifications, not look pretty with reams of bullshit to sell them.
In the U.K. try to find and study:
"The Foundations of Wireless" - M.G.Scroggie
"High Quality Sound Reproduction" - James Moir
"Circuits for Audio Amplifiers" - Mullard Ltd.
"Wireless World" - Iliffe (any editions you can get your hands on)
No doubt U.S. readers can suggest similar publications.
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Robert Baer
>
> Jon Slaughter wrote:
>
>
>>I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
>>going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>
>>Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>>etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
>>mostly they are similar to transistor amps.
>
>
> Not even remotely.
>
>
>
>>But I, of course want a decent sound also.
>
>
> The best output transformers are in Europe IMHO. Lundahl and Sowter for example
> but hardly cheap. SS amps don't need output transformers.
>
> But why do you want to add tube distortion to the sound ?
>
> May I suggest you Google 'gainclone' for something half decent ?
>
> Graham
>
"Tube distortion"????
When i was i the Army (1960's) 3 of us got together, designed and
built an amplifier around "midnite requisition" tubes and transformers.
Used regulated DC filaments turned on before B+, cascode B+ regulator.
THD and IMD was not measureable via the HeathKit meters; total hum
and noise was better than -60dBm and did not change with open or shorted
input.
Oh yes, nominal output rating was 80 watts if i remember correctly
(push-pull paralell KT66 as KT88s were not available via midnite
requisition).
Tim Wescott
and swear by it.
And plenty of bands that are all transistor.
Guy Macon
John Larkin wrote:
>Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
>signal-level electronics. They certainly don't go through tube power
>amps in the signal chain!
That's not true. I do a fair amount of work in recording studios,
and a guitar amp with a microphoe in front of it is a common sight.
Guy Macon
Robert Baer wrote:
> "Tube distortion"????
> When i was i the Army (1960's) 3 of us got together, designed and
>built an amplifier around "midnite requisition" tubes and transformers.
> Used regulated DC filaments turned on before B+, cascode B+ regulator.
> THD and IMD was not measureable via the HeathKit meters; total hum
>and noise was better than -60dBm and did not change with open or shorted
>input.
> Oh yes, nominal output rating was 80 watts if i remember correctly
>(push-pull paralell KT66 as KT88s were not available via midnite
>requisition).
..which has absolutely nothing to do with guitar amplifiers, which
are, by design, driven well into clipping in order to get the sound
often referred to as "guitar distortion."
a7yvm1...@netzero.com
> Well, dear Jon, I have build several tube amps, how many did you build?
> But really I would not recommend tube amps, unless you like to look
> at red hot glowing anodes, those look nice, and show you that it is time to
Michael A. Terrell
Real tubes are ceramic, and water or forced air cooled.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.
Michael A. Terrell
Jim Thompson wrote:
>
> Those of us "in-the-know" realize that HEADROOM is where it's at!
Some people need more headroom than others. In fact, their heads ar
so big that they need a shoehorn to get their head through the doorway.
Luckily, I have them kill filed. ;-)
Tam
"Tim Wescott" <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:3sOdnVpzCP4WmWjV...@web-ster.com...
> John Larkin wrote:
>>
>
> Are you kidding? I have a friend whose first job was as a field engineer
> for a company that made sound panels for recording studios; he ended up
> babysitting new installations during a number of recording sessions in the
> late 60's, early 70's.
>
> The "low level signal processing" chain went guitar -> amp -> speaker ->
> air -> microphone -> sound panel -> tape.
>
Always wondered if there was such a thing as a live rock concert.
Tam
Tam
<a7yvm1...@netzero.com> wrote in message
news:b1cf7219-dbd2-4b44...@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com...
Real men build amps where the plates are at least cherry red. If they don't,
you are not pushing the envelope.
Tam
Jon Slaughter
Um... actually I have build one guitar amp for my friend when he brought a
kit and couldn't get it to work... How many guitar maps have you built my
friend Jan?
JosephKK
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:gd258f$8fk$1...@aioe.org...
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 07:07:43 -0500) it happened "Jon
>> Slaughter"
>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>> <G%%Ik.2248$pr6....@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
>>
>>>I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
>>>going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>>
>>>Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>>>etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
>>>mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
>>>sound also.
>>>
>>>I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or
>>>low
>>>quality.
>>
>> 2 x 807 zero bias drive?
>
>It's going to be class A but I'm not sure exactly what tubes I'm going to
>use. Probably try to make it switchable for different power settings.
>Basically the "stock" guitar amp tubes are the 6L6, 12AX7, EL34, EL84 and a
>few variants.
>
>http://www.vacuumtube.com/guitartubes.htm
>
>Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard types
>I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
>
>The main thing right now is to find a good transformer... looks like I'll
>end up spending more to build an amp than just buy a good one ;/ (which is a
>real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
>
What is going to kill you is the output transformer. Hint, learn,
calculate it and wind it yourself. Buying them one or two at a time
is quite cost prohibitive and very time consuming to find.
By the way, what is wrong with class AB1 push-pull with "ultralinear"
transformers.
JosephKK
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:gd28h7$n79$1...@aioe.org...
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:23:00 -0500) it happened "Jon
>> Slaughter"
>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>> <b31Jk.5322$Ws1....@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>>
>>>> 2 x 807 zero bias drive?
>>>
>>>It's going to be class A but I'm not sure exactly what tubes I'm going to
>>>use. Probably try to make it switchable for different power settings.
>>>Basically the "stock" guitar amp tubes are the 6L6, 12AX7, EL34, EL84 and
>>>a
>>>few variants.
>>
>>
>> 807very popular here, 2 make for 100W.
>> 'Zero bias' drive, here an example:
>> http://www.triodeel.com/mi12246.gif
>>
>>
>> Near class A:
>> http://www.montagar.com/~PATJ/mi12188a.htm
>>
>>
>> You may want to read this:
>> http://www.webace.com.au/~electron/tubes/screens.htm
>>
>>
>>>http://www.vacuumtube.com/guitartubes.htm
>>>
>>>Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard
>>>types
>>>I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
>>
>> EL84 is rather low power, I used those in a guitar amp once, 4 IIRC.
>>
>>
>>>The main thing right now is to find a good transformer... looks like I'll
>>>end up spending more to build an amp than just buy a good one ;/ (which is
>>>a
>>>real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
>>
>> That is why I spend say about 100$ on a Chinese 2 x 100W RMS transistor
>> amp.
>> Cheaper, better, and faster too, as it came working.
>>
>> Just forget about tubes :-)
>> And the voltages can byte you too.
>>
>
>I guess I wasn't clear(actually I don't see that I mentioned it). The amp is
>specifically for guitar and not hi-fi.
>
And the difference is what? Think about it.
bg
Tim Wescott wrote in message
<4POdnbMrieKWTGnV...@web-ster.com>...
>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:59:13 -0500) it happened "Jon
Slaughter"
>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>> <cE1Jk.2258$pr6...@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
>>
>>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:48F49F9E...@hotmail.com...
>>>>
>>>> Jon Slaughter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think
>>>>> I'm
>>>>> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>>>>> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of
>>>>> course
>>>>> mostly they are similar to transistor amps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But I, of course want a decent sound also.
>>>> example
>>>> but hardly cheap. SS amps don't need output transformers.
>>>>
>>>> But why do you want to add tube distortion to the sound ?
>>>>
>>>> May I suggest you Google 'gainclone' for something half decent ?
>>>>
with
>>> how they clip... hence tubes are prefered over SS any time distortion is
>>> involved. (and with the need for an overdriven sound for guitar it is
>>> necessary)
>>
>> You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
>> and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
>> Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
>
>That argument could easily be applied to building violins out of
>plastic, or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of
>a string orchestra.
>
>playing wooden instruments.
>
>satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
>
>design. There's a lot of dynamic nonlinearities at work, in the tubes,
>in the transformers and in the speakers. And it's not limited to the
>audio path -- even the power supply sag modifies the sound ("adds
>crunch", per the folks who study this).
>
>Even today, if you want the genuine vacuum tube sound the easiest way by
>far is to build a genuine vacuum tube amp. There may be value in
>learning all of the little details of an amp and replicating it (and,
>AFAIK, it's done and marketed for high-end guitar amps) -- but there's
>still a lot of value in making them the old way, as witnessed by all the
>new vacuum tube guitar amps out there.
>
>So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no
>sense. But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral
>part of rock & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube
>amps can really be replaced.
>
>
>Tim Wescott
>Wescott Design Services
>http://www.wescottdesign.com
>
>Do you need to implement control loops in software?
>"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
>See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Most excellent post tim,
I'd like to add that a tube guitar amp is about art, not engineering. I
think if there was an alternative, any guitarist would gladly dump these
overpriced and overweight clunkers any day.
JosephKK
Hell yes. If i want the tremendously loud 1 watt average acoustic
(+120 dBA) in a living room, i will choose very efficient speakers,
and an about 400W per channel and 1000 W suborder amplifier. BTW 10
W acoustic fills a sports stadium nicely.
I expect that you know, for good broadband performance most
microphones and speakers are less that 0.1% efficient. Good mic's are
about -60 dB.
Decent music audio has about a 4:1 to 6:1 crest factor and about 20 dB
dynamics. Better audio is even higher. This is where headroom comes
into play. If i want 1 mW rms in my headphones, i require a 20W or
more amplifier to meet these conditions.
JosephKK
wrote:
>In article <gd29ge$rue$1...@aioe.org>, Jan Panteltje <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:59:13 -0500) it happened "Jon Slaughter"
>><Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>Seems like you can make a lot of money marketing your device.
>
>Seems like overdriving the power output stage might not
>have the same irregularities as a low level stage.
>
>Guitars can be played with any kind of amp and don't necessarily
>need to be driven into distortion. Thats determined by the artist.
>The type of speaker distortion is also part of the power output
>stage.
>
>
>greg
>
I disagree, the speaker distortion is dominated by the speaker
characteristics.
ZACK
"Adrian Tuddenham" <popp...@ukonline.invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:1iotn48.169eb61vl58moN%popp...@ukonline.invalid.invalid...
> Jon Slaughter <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think
>> I'm
>> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>
>> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>> etc...) and maybe have any tips?
>
> Random tips:
>
> 1) If you intend over-driving a push-pull output stage, use a
> long-tailed pair for the phase splitter.
>
> The type of phase splitter which derives its balance from the centre
> point of the grid resistors of the output valves will produce horrible
> L.F. effects when those valves run into grid current. A phase splitter
> of the type with with equal anode and cathode load resistors has unequal
> driving impedances and will also give bad-sounding distortion on
> overload.
>
> 2) Valve circuits are only the same as transistor circuits in their
> overall function, in all other respects they are very different indeed.
>
> 3) Never leave a valve amplifier output open-circuited *ever*!!!
> ...not even for a millisecond. It is so easy to generate very high
> voltages in the transformer winding which will cause a flashover and
> ruin the transformer, the valves or the valveholders (or start a fire or
> give you a nasty jolt).
theres a fix for that.
a series of power diodes on each plate, anode to
ground and high voltage disk cap across them
plate to ground, stops back emf from transformer
from flashing over the tubes.
Jon Slaughter
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:59:13 -0500) it happened "Jon
>> Slaughter"
>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>> <cE1Jk.2258$pr6...@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com>:
>>
>>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:48F49F9E...@hotmail.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think
>>>>> I'm
>>>>> going to go ahead and order the parts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>>>>> course
>>>>> mostly they are similar to transistor amps.
>>>> Not even remotely.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But I, of course want a decent sound also.
>>>> The best output transformers are in Europe IMHO. Lundahl and Sowter for
>>>> example
>>>> but hardly cheap. SS amps don't need output transformers.
>>>>
>>>> But why do you want to add tube distortion to the sound ?
>>>>
>>>> May I suggest you Google 'gainclone' for something half decent ?
>>>>
>>> FYI, Tube's break up differently than SS. Tubes have even order harmonic
>>> distortion which is much more pleasent than odd order. This has to do
>>> with how they clip... hence tubes are prefered over SS any time
>>> distortion is involved. (and with the need for an overdriven sound for
>>> guitar it is necessary)
>>
>> You are aware, I hope, that you can make any waveform at low level,
>> and then amplify it by a normal transistor amp (without it clipping)?
>> Seems like you have been bitten by a tubophile !
>
> or just using sampled violin sounds in a synthesizer instead of a string
> orchestra.
>
> Yet somehow, when I go to the symphony it's all flesh-and-blood people
> playing wooden instruments.
>
> Circa 1985 you couldn't build a solid state 'distorter' that would
> satisfactorily replicate the sound of a tube amp.
>
> You may be able to now, but it takes a tremendous amount of work to
> design. There's a lot of dynamic nonlinearities at work, in the tubes, in
> the transformers and in the speakers. And it's not limited to the audio
> path -- even the power supply sag modifies the sound ("adds crunch", per
> the folks who study this).
>
> Even today, if you want the genuine vacuum tube sound the easiest way by
> far is to build a genuine vacuum tube amp. There may be value in learning
> all of the little details of an amp and replicating it (and, AFAIK, it's
> done and marketed for high-end guitar amps) -- but there's still a lot of
> value in making them the old way, as witnessed by all the new vacuum tube
> guitar amps out there.
>
> So yea, for reproduction the "vacuum tube sound" probably makes no sense.
> But given that the distortion of the amplifier is an integral part of rock
> & roll guitar, I think it'll be a while before vacuum tube amps can really
> be replaced.
>
I'm supprised most of these guys here think that a transistor or tube can be
simply modeled with a formula. The real think going on is quite complex and
the modeling is only an approximation. Even passive components contribute
to modifying the sound in some way. (For example, maybe the Johnson noise
sorta acts as a dither)
I don't know how much of it is hocus pocus but what I do know is that a tube
amp sounds better to play on than digital. Digital tends to not "feel"
alive. I guess these guys are not musicians and can't appreciate the finer
aural aspects of such things. What I do know is that there are quantitative
differences between as simple tube amplifier and a transistor amplifier. I
also know that almost all professional rock guitarists who rely on
distortion will not use solid state.
It's similar to your example with classical instruments. Those performers
don't send hundreds of thousands on instruments just because they want too.
Also there has been much investigation to the sound of stradivarius
instruments showing quantitative differences.
One quick link: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/696
I guess the real question is just how much is the difference. I have heard
some decent modeling amps(and had one) and I'd say it's about 90% of a tube
amp. But when you are playing on it day in and day out that 10% starts
eating away at you.
Adrian Tuddenham
> "Adrian Tuddenham" <popp...@ukonline.invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1iotn48.169eb61vl58moN%popp...@ukonline.invalid.invalid...
> > Jon Slaughter <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 3) Never leave a valve amplifier output open-circuited *ever*!!!
> > ...not even for a millisecond. It is so easy to generate very high
> > voltages in the transformer winding which will cause a flashover and
> > ruin the transformer, the valves or the valveholders (or start a fire or
> > give you a nasty jolt).
>
> theres a fix for that.
> a series of power diodes on each plate, anode to
> ground and high voltage disk cap across them
> plate to ground, stops back emf from transformer
> from flashing over the tubes.
A Metrosil always struck me as the most appropriate way to do the job,
but they were not obtainable in small quantities when I needed them. I
have made an anode-to-anode spark gap from two battery carbons on a
ceramic tag strip.
People who have never worked with valve designs on a day-to-day basis
need to be told these things before they find out the hard way - and I
don't know of any textbook from the valve era which mentions this
because it was so well-known at the time.
My own preference for P.A. amplifiers is a fixed dummy load, chosen to
just keep the voltages within safe limits and wired directly across the
transformer terminals. You lose a bit of power that way, but you don't
lose the amplifier when someone trips over the speaker wiring.
This can't happen with a built-in guitar amplifier until:
a) The loudspeaker goes O/C
b) Someone adds a switched extension loudspeaker socket and plugs in a
disconnected speaker.
...but you can still get an accidental O/C with a prototype on the bench
if you are not careful.
Eeyore
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard types
> I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
Everything to do with tubes of any worth costs an arm and a leg. It's audiophool
land you see.
Graham
Eeyore
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> I guess I wasn't clear(actually I don't see that I mentioned it). The amp is
> specifically for guitar and not hi-fi.
OH ! That's different. I almost mentioned that in my last post.
What do you want ? Fender sound or Marshall sound ? The schematics are all over
the place.
The Fender 'twin' and JPM100 are the classics.
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
> commercial stereo amp?
That would you give you the 'jazz guitar' sound. I suspect he wants rock.
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> "Jon Slaughter" wrote:
> >"John Larkin" wrote
> >>
> >> Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
> >> commercial stereo amp? That would save a ton of money and give you a
> >> lot of versatility to tune the sound. You don't get a lot of choice or
> >> tunability from a pile of tubes and transformers.
> >>
> >> John
> >
> >They have these but generally the power amp distortion(along with speaker
> >distortion) is also needed. A simple preamp tube driver with solid state
> >doesn't sound all that great.
> >
> >You would be supprised what they do with tube guitar amps though.
>
> Umm, nothing audiofoolery surprises me any more. Except occasionally
> the prices.
This isn't audiophoolery. Guitar amps are a special case where the valve
characteristics are used to intentionally 'colour' the sound. A guitar pickup
going through low distortion amplification can sound very bland but is however
often favoured by jazz guitarists who are seeking a different clearer sound. And
as Jon says, those colourations include speaker distortion. For example you want
paper edge suspension speakers for guitar as opposed to linen or synthetic. It's
about creating harmonics, softish clip and a degree of compression.
> >check out
> >
> >http://www.mesaboogie.com/Product_Info/Rectifier_Series/roadking/roadking.htm
> >
> >and look at the back for all the switching possibilities.
>
> Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
> signal-level electronics.
Pure nonsense. It's created by the amp. Shame you're so far away, I'd take you to
some gigs and sessions and show you how it's done.
> They certainly don't go through tube power
> amps in the signal chain!
Actually some special 'retro' recording desks DO have tubes in them but that's
another story. I have actually been asked to design a tube based desk.
A studio I know also has 'antique' EMI germanium and tube based desks for that
'special sound'.
Graham
Eeyore
Tim Wescott wrote:
> I'll bet there are bands out there that still use all the "old stuff",
> and swear by it.
I could tell you a story about that. I ended up swearing at Mark Knoppler's guitar
tech (privately). Idiot cunt.
Graham
Eeyore
Tam wrote:
> "Tim Wescott" wrote
> > John Larkin wrote:
> >
> > Are you kidding? I have a friend whose first job was as a field engineer
> > for a company that made sound panels for recording studios; he ended up
> > babysitting new installations during a number of recording sessions in the
> > late 60's, early 70's.
> >
> > The "low level signal processing" chain went guitar -> amp -> speaker ->
> > air -> microphone -> sound panel -> tape.
>
> Always wondered if there was such a thing as a live rock concert.
>
> Tam
Very much so, but not the modern girly bands who just mime. But that's not ROCK
!
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> Tim Wescott wrote
> >
> >Are you kidding? I have a friend whose first job was as a field
> >engineer for a company that made sound panels for recording studios; he
> >ended up babysitting new installations during a number of recording
> >sessions in the late 60's, early 70's.
> >
> >The "low level signal processing" chain went guitar -> amp -> speaker ->
> >air -> microphone -> sound panel -> tape.
> >
> >So they certainly _did_, and most likely certainly still do.
>
> And they used springs for reverb [1].
In guitar amps yes.
> Nothing has changed in 40 years?
The guitar amp itself ? Relatively little. In the studio. an engineer from the 60s
would barely recognise it. He'd probably be worried about the lack of tape recorders
for one !
Graham
Eeyore
Guy Macon wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
>
> >Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
> >signal-level electronics. They certainly don't go through tube power
> >amps in the signal chain!
>
> That's not true. I do a fair amount of work in recording studios,
> and a guitar amp with a microphoe in front of it is a common sight.
It's the norm.
Graham
Eeyore
bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> "Jon Slaughter" wrote:
> >
> > I guess you guys don't know much about guitar amps?
>
> That doesn't follow. What we do know is that it is lot cheaper to
> distort a signal with semiconductors and subsequently amplify it with
> semiconductors than it is to amplify and distort it with valves.
Wrong type of distortion. Compare the transfer characteristics. Tubes produce more
even-order harmonic distortion, transistors odd. And odd order sounds horrible.
That just gives the 'fuzz box' sound.
Graham
Eeyore
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Jon Slaughter wrote:
> >
> >> I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think
> >> I'm going to go ahead and order the parts.
> >>
> >> Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
> >> etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of
> >> course mostly they are similar to transistor amps.
> >
> > Not even remotely.
> >
> >> But I, of course want a decent sound also.
> >
> > The best output transformers are in Europe IMHO. Lundahl and Sowter for
> > example but hardly cheap. SS amps don't need output transformers.
> >
> > But why do you want to add tube distortion to the sound ?
> >
> > May I suggest you Google 'gainclone' for something half decent ?
>
> FYI, Tube's break up differently than SS. Tubes have even order harmonic
> distortion which is much more pleasent than odd order. This has to do with
> how they clip... hence tubes are prefered over SS any time distortion is
> involved. (and with the need for an overdriven sound for guitar it is
> necessary)
Now I know what you're looking for you want to try and source something like a
Fender or Marshall copy (or rebuilt) output TX. These are WILDLY different
from the ones the hi-fi audiophools use.
Graham
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<L6eJk.4965$be....@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>> Well, dear Jon, I have build several tube amps, how many did you build?
>> But really I would not recommend tube amps, unless you like to look
>> at red hot glowing anodes, those look nice, and show you that it is time
>> to
>> turn the volume down.
>> And, if you have limited experience with electronics, the voltages in tube
>> amps
>> can kill, so better make something that works on 2 x 40 V with
>> transistors.
>>
>
>Um... actually I have build one guitar amp for my friend when he brought a
>kit and couldn't get it to work... How many guitar maps have you built my
>friend Jan?
Well, do not remember the exact number, but the one with 4 EL84 I build
has much to my surprize become a classic item:
http://www.drzamps.com/maz38.html
That is pretty much my configuration:-)
Considering I designed an build that one in my high school days for
the band, and really knew a lot less about electronics then I do now,
amazing they still use the concept.
I remember when it was finished the lead guitar player came to me and said: "No, it is not load enough' or
something like that.
Then 10 minutes later he came back: 'It is just what we want, this sound'.
Remember EL84 x 4 is at most 35 W.
So, design a classic and come back :-) LOL.
Now that really propped up my ego.
Eeyore
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> I guess you guys don't know much about guitar amps?
I most certainly do. I used to service and repair them. I even have hand written
schematics somewhere.
Unfortunately as is often the case your OP was vague and didn't explain it was
for guitar !
Graham
Jan Panteltje
a7yvm1...@netzero.com wrote in
<b1cf7219-dbd2-4b44...@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com>:
>On Oct 14, 12:24 pm, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Well, dear Jon, I have build several tube amps, how many did you build?
>> But really I would not recommend tube amps, unless you like to look
>> at red hot glowing anodes, those look nice, and show you that it is time to
>It's the cathodes that are supposed to glow.
Yep, but they are so hard to see.
Jan Panteltje
<t-ta...@comcast.net> wrote in
<kcmdnRHlDp1tw2jV...@comcast.com>:
I have seen them melt the glass.
Eeyore
bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> Since you seem to be planning on building a valve amplifier for your
> guitar, you presumably don't have a clear idea of what you are doing.
On the contrary, you Bill are as usual the one without a clue.
Graham
Jan Panteltje
<youwill...@home.com.au> wrote in
<48f59369$0$28215$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>:
>> 3) Never leave a valve amplifier output open-circuited *ever*!!!
>> ...not even for a millisecond. It is so easy to generate very high
>> voltages in the transformer winding which will cause a flashover and
>> ruin the transformer, the valves or the valveholders (or start a fire or
>> give you a nasty jolt).
>
>theres a fix for that.
>a series of power diodes on each plate, anode to
>ground and high voltage disk cap across them
>plate to ground, stops back emf from transformer
>from flashing over the tubes.
VDR (Voltage Depndent Resistors) across the transformer?
Jan Panteltje
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
<dvgJk.3605$ZP4....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>I'm supprised most of these guys here think that a transistor or tube can be
>simply modeled with a formula.
You have never used spice?
Eeyore
Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> My own preference for P.A. amplifiers is a fixed dummy load, chosen to
> just keep the voltages within safe limits and wired directly across the
> transformer terminals. You lose a bit of power that way, but you don't
> lose the amplifier when someone trips over the speaker wiring.
>
> This can't happen with a built-in guitar amplifier until:
> a) The loudspeaker goes O/C
> b) Someone adds a switched extension loudspeaker socket and plugs in a
> disconnected speaker.
>
> ...but you can still get an accidental O/C with a prototype on the bench
> if you are not careful.
In my 'rougue's gallery' I have a pair of KT88s, one where the anode has
actually started to MELT from that kind of activity. During the 'tune up' on
stage too ! It was the roadie what did it ! I was there at the time and saw the
light show from the rear of the amp.
It actually killed FOUR KT88s and I had to let the poor guy pay me in
installments for the repair ! Damn lucky it didn't kill the OPT too. It would
have done on a Marshall.
It was an Orange 200 bass amp btw. They were superbly built (individual bias
trim on each output tube with locking collar for example and rack mounting
format) but I guess no-one thought of that problem.
Graham
Jan Panteltje
<rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in
<48F5D0FD...@hotmail.com>:
You should read 'semiconductors' in the widest sense.
As I pointed out AD - EPROM[s}- DA can make any curve,
and those are semiconductors too.
I used that to make gamma curves for a lightshow, it works for
audio too.
You could perhaps do that in FPGA and use blockram, and have different curves
selectable on the fly.
Or just use SRAM and some multiplexers in good old 74HCXXX logic, done
that too, have the PC or a micro write the curves to the SRAM.
Not so many points for 16 bit audio, although for guitar 8 bits would do likely ;-)
mm maybe they even only use 20 dB dynamic range....
hehe
John Larkin
I suppose that people who don't know much about electronics can do all
sorts of weird stuff.
Have any big hits been done this way?
Guitar distortion seems to be another fringe thing.
John
John Larkin
<rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>John Larkin wrote:
>
>> "Jon Slaughter" wrote:
>> >"John Larkin" wrote
>> >>
>> >> Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
>> >> commercial stereo amp? That would save a ton of money and give you a
>> >> lot of versatility to tune the sound. You don't get a lot of choice or
>> >> tunability from a pile of tubes and transformers.
>> >>
>> >> John
>> >
>> >They have these but generally the power amp distortion(along with speaker
>> >distortion) is also needed. A simple preamp tube driver with solid state
>> >doesn't sound all that great.
>> >
>> >You would be supprised what they do with tube guitar amps though.
>>
>> Umm, nothing audiofoolery surprises me any more. Except occasionally
>> the prices.
>
>This isn't audiophoolery. Guitar amps are a special case where the valve
>characteristics are used to intentionally 'colour' the sound. A guitar pickup
>going through low distortion amplification can sound very bland but is however
>often favoured by jazz guitarists who are seeking a different clearer sound. And
>as Jon says, those colourations include speaker distortion. For example you want
>paper edge suspension speakers for guitar as opposed to linen or synthetic. It's
>about creating harmonics, softish clip and a degree of compression.
>
No, I want none of that.
John
John Larkin
So, there are nonlinear transfer functions that only overloaded tube
amps and speakers can make?
John
Boris Mohar
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>I've been wanting to build my own tube amp for a while now and I think I'm
>going to go ahead and order the parts.
>
>Anyone know a good source of parts(transformers, tubes, tube sockets,
>etc...) and maybe have any tips? I have a few old tube books and of course
>mostly they are similar to transistor amps. But I, of course want a decent
>sound also.
>
>I know one can buy "kits" but these tend to be either over priced and/or low
>quality.
>
http://www.viatrack.ca/Misc/Crowhurst%20Cooper%201956%20High%20Fidelity%20Circuit%20Design.pdf
--
Boris Mohar
John Larkin
wrote:
>John Larkin wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:43:56 -0700, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:52:58 -0500, "Jon Slaughter"
>>>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "John Larkin" <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:crd9f4hdnte8mv0k4...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:07:57 -0500, "Jon Slaughter"
>>>>>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jan Panteltje" <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:gd28h7$n79$1...@aioe.org...
>>>>>>>> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 08:23:00 -0500) it happened "Jon
>>>>>>>> Slaughter"
>>>>>>>> <Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> <b31Jk.5322$Ws1....@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 x 807 zero bias drive?
>>>>>>>>> It's going to be class A but I'm not sure exactly what tubes I'm going
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> use. Probably try to make it switchable for different power settings.
>>>>>>>>> Basically the "stock" guitar amp tubes are the 6L6, 12AX7, EL34, EL84
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> few variants.
>>>>>>>> 807very popular here, 2 make for 100W.
>>>>>>>> 'Zero bias' drive, here an example:
>>>>>>>> http://www.triodeel.com/mi12246.gif
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Near class A:
>>>>>>>> http://www.montagar.com/~PATJ/mi12188a.htm
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You may want to read this:
>>>>>>>> http://www.webace.com.au/~electron/tubes/screens.htm
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.vacuumtube.com/guitartubes.htm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although I'd like potentially to "branch" out into other non-standard
>>>>>>>>> types
>>>>>>>>> I also don't want to pay an arm and a leg for crappy tubes.
>>>>>>>> EL84 is rather low power, I used those in a guitar amp once, 4 IIRC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The main thing right now is to find a good transformer... looks like
>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>> end up spending more to build an amp than just buy a good one ;/ (which
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> real shame since labor isn't even factored in ;/)
>>>>>>>> That is why I spend say about 100$ on a Chinese 2 x 100W RMS transistor
>>>>>>>> amp.
>>>>>>>> Cheaper, better, and faster too, as it came working.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just forget about tubes :-)
>>>>>>>> And the voltages can byte you too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I guess I wasn't clear(actually I don't see that I mentioned it). The amp
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> specifically for guitar and not hi-fi.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
>>>>>> commercial stereo amp? That would save a ton of money and give you a
>>>>>> lot of versatility to tune the sound. You don't get a lot of choice or
>>>>>> tunability from a pile of tubes and transformers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>> They have these but generally the power amp distortion(along with speaker
>>>>> distortion) is also needed. A simple preamp tube driver with solid state
>>>>> doesn't sound all that great.
>>>>>
>>>>> You would be supprised what they do with tube guitar amps though.
>>>> Umm, nothing audiofoolery surprises me any more. Except occasionally
>>>> the prices.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> check out
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.mesaboogie.com/Product_Info/Rectifier_Series/roadking/roadking.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> and look at the back for all the switching possibilities.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
>>>> signal-level electronics. They certainly don't go through tube power
>>>> amps in the signal chain!
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>> Are you kidding? I have a friend whose first job was as a field
>>> engineer for a company that made sound panels for recording studios; he
>>> ended up babysitting new installations during a number of recording
>>> sessions in the late 60's, early 70's.
>>>
>>> The "low level signal processing" chain went guitar -> amp -> speaker ->
>>> air -> microphone -> sound panel -> tape.
>>>
>>> So they certainly _did_, and most likely certainly still do.
>>
>> And they used springs for reverb [1]. Nothing has changed in 40 years?
>>
>> John
>>
>> [1] or in at least one case, a speaker and a mic in a men's room.
>>
>I'll bet there are bands out there that still use all the "old stuff",
>and swear by it.
Of course. We are talking about the subjective opinions of people who
are probably drugged-out most of the time and hearing-impaired all of
the time. None of which involves electronic design.
John
a7yvm1...@netzero.com
> On a sunny day (Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:07:15 -0700 (PDT)) it happened
> <b1cf7219-dbd2-4b44-8710-60cf171af...@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >On Oct 14, 12:24 pm, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Well, dear Jon, I have build several tube amps, how many did you build?
> >> But really I would not recommend tube amps, unless you like to look
> >> at red hot glowing anodes, those look nice, and show you that it is time to
> >It's the cathodes that are supposed to glow.
>
> Yep, but they are so hard to see.
Depends. Not all tubes are designed to have cool anodes, some run the
anodes quite hot, like x-ray tubes. Some have spinning anodes to
prevent spot heating.
But in a discussion about the modest power levels for an audio amp (as
long as it's not PA) I'm guessing glowing anodes are a bad thing.
As for pushing the envelope, glass envelopes benefit tremendously from
reduced operating temperature, so running anodes red hot in a glass
tube is a bad idea IMO.
Glowing cathodes are easy to see on tubes like the 6080. I'm guessing
the reason people don't put coolers over power tubes is that they want
to see the glow...
Jim Thompson
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:48:53 -0500, "Jon Slaughter"
<Jon_Sl...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
>If you don't believe me go to your local music store and ask one of the guys
>to show you how a real tube amp sounds. Compare it to a solid state amp and
>then to a modeling amp. The tube amp wins in sound quality.
>
[snip]
Nonsense! You compared a toooob amplifier against some cheesy Radio
Shack solid state amplifier.
If you prefer the "warm" sound of a toooob amplifier go right ahead,
but don't offend our sensibilities with words like "sound quality".
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
Liberals are so cute. Dumb as a box of rocks, but cute.
TheM
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 22:11:16 +0000, Guy Macon
> <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>John Larkin wrote:
>>
>>>Consider commercial recordings. Any guitar distortion is produced by
>>>signal-level electronics. They certainly don't go through tube power
>>>amps in the signal chain!
>>
>>That's not true. I do a fair amount of work in recording studios,
>>and a guitar amp with a microphoe in front of it is a common sight.
>
> I suppose that people who don't know much about electronics can do all
> sorts of weird stuff.
Hey, at least its galvanically isolated ;)
M
Jim Thompson
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 07:34:04 -0700 (PDT), a7yvm1...@netzero.com
wrote:
I'm trying to remember now. I believe it was KT88's that I set the
bias just at the hint of a plate glow ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food
a7yvm1...@netzero.com
Web-Site.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to remember now. I believe it was KT88's that I set the
> bias just at the hint of a plate glow ;-)
>
How long do they last?
John Larkin
wrote:
There have been some acoustic-based isolated power couplers, usually
solid-rod piezo things. Probably more efficient than a
tube-amp/speaker/microphone combo.
John
Tim Wescott
>
> Tim Wescott wrote:
>
>> I'll bet there are bands out there that still use all the "old stuff",
>> and swear by it.
>
> tech (privately). Idiot cunt.
>
> Graham
>
Actually I was thinking about you as I was dating my information, and
puffing off theory with little recent practical knowledge.
What _is_ current usage? (or do they let you into the recording
studios?) I would assume that the Euro-pop bands are all over the DSP
stuff, but I also assume that there's going to be more inertia among
'traditional' rock musicians.
I knew a guy (only 10-year old information!) who was in a Seattle
grunge-rock style band who used Great Big Tube Amplifiers along with a
volume control made out of the heating element from an oven. Basically
they treated the gain control on the amp as a "tone" control, then used
power attenuators before the speakers to fit the sound down to the size
of the hall.
But what gets used "normally", if you can pick just a few examples of
"normal"?
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Jim Thompson
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:19:20 -0700 (PDT), a7yvm1...@netzero.com
wrote:
This was, like, 1958... they lasted until I became a solid state
convert ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
Liberals are so ignorant...
They don't even know the definition of ignorant
Tam
Ever hear of a 6L6 operating upside down in a pail of water, running 800 V
on the plate?
Tam
Rich Grise
> Eeyore wrote:
>> Tim Wescott wrote:
>>
>>> I'll bet there are bands out there that still use all the "old stuff",
>>> and swear by it.
>>
>> I could tell you a story about that. I ended up swearing at Mark Knoppler's guitar
>> tech (privately). Idiot cunt.
>>
>
> But what gets used "normally", if you can pick just a few examples of
> "normal"?
If you want a sample of one, I can email my brother and ask what his band,
Tamarak, uses:
http://www.tamarak.iwarp.com/
but I don't know how long he'll take to reply.
Cheers!
Rich
Jan Panteltje
<t-ta...@comcast.net> wrote in
<8sOdnQ8BENEoi2vV...@comcast.com>:
>Ever hear of a 6L6 operating upside down in a pail of water, running 800 V
>on the plate?
>
>Tam
No, but I do remember a similar tubes in the Ampex quadruplex video recorder VR1000
head drive mounted upside down, and un-soldering themselves from the socket, falling down.
That happened when the cooling fan failed, and the air flow detection (some vane)
also failed.
http://www.pharis-video.com/p4455.htm
If you like tubes, look at the cabinet to the left of the recorder console,
see the capstan and head drive amps, modulator, demodulator, servo...
Had to keep that lot running.....
Rich Grise
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:07:25 -0700, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com>
>>>
>>and swear by it.
>
> Of course. We are talking about the subjective opinions of people who
> are probably drugged-out most of the time and hearing-impaired all of
> the time. None of which involves electronic design.
My "little" brother (who turns 54 or so this year) has been a musician
for decades. He has a little story about that. They used to play while
high - he says, "It sounded real good to _us_! Then we heard ourselves
on tape while we were straight, and all said, "OOps!"" (or something
to that effect.)
Cheers!
Rich
John Larkin
OK, now imagine you're an audio electronics designer, and these kinds
of people are deciding if your stuff is any good or not.
No thanks.
John
Eeyore
Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Remember EL84 x 4 is at most 35 W.
Not in a Vox AC30 it isn't, despite the name.
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> >John Larkin wrote:
> >
> >> Why not build a low-level distortion box and pipe it into a cheap
> >> commercial stereo amp?
> >
> >That would you give you the 'jazz guitar' sound. I suspect he wants rock.
>
> So, there are nonlinear transfer functions that only overloaded tube
> amps and speakers can make?
There have been attempts to re-create them in DSP (including in marketed
products) but they're a pale shadow of the real thing.
The speaker plays a very large part too. They are almost intentionally 'low
quality'.
Graham
Guy Macon
JosephKK wrote:
>I expect that you know, for good broadband performance most
>microphones and speakers are less that 0.1% efficient.
I will leave the microphone claim for someone else to have
fun with, but a typical home speaker is around 1% efficient
(electrical watts to acoustic watts). A JBL Model 4675C 1200W
cinema screen loudspeaker system is 6.3% efficient.
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> Guitar distortion seems to be another fringe thing.
No it's totally mainstream. You have it exactly the wrong way round.
Graham