I would dislike Harley logos on an Ampeg. IMO ymmv.
But I am not in the market so I'll shut up now.
I was thinking maybe Harley should make an Ampeg bike...
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
2013 Ampeg V-4B 100W Reissue
- Thread starter z11111
- Start date
- Status
I was thinking maybe Harley should make an Ampeg bike...
I will wait for the techies to chime in but with tube heads matching ohms is much more important that SS stuff.....
those new clips are WOW. long live the V4B, no amp ever made by anybody can give you That tone, and they nailed it. haha the sound of speakers tearing, hat's off gentlemen! noon and below is where i live, and it sure sounds like it has enough clean for my needs. this new V4B head just shot to the very top of my bucket list
maybe I'll need to get one of these to use with my late model V4B and bring the house down every time we play
Yeah and the manual doesn't cover this setup.
If I was just looking at the back of the amp, I'd stick one 8 ohm cab into an 8 ohm jack and a pair daisied into a 4 ohm jack. But the manual says don't do that...
I think what I've heard is SS = don't go under impedance rating, tube = don't go over tap impedance. So 2.67 would go to the 4 ohm tap if you follow that. But 2.67 is nominal and likely closer to 2 ohm actual minimum.
Please correct me if I'm wrong here.
I have a similar question about 5.33 into the original V4B (16 ohm speaker and an 8 ohm speaker). 2 or 4 ohm position?
Yes that is generally the rule. A well designed OT should be able to handle a mismatch like this in either direction, but it's also an expensive part to be fooling around with if it's not necessary. Either way will stress your tubes more than a matched load, running 2.67 on 4 ohms is less likely to damage the transformer (there's a good technical explanation here, go to the part on OT matching) versus running 2.67 on the 2 ohm tap. Also, keep in mind speakers aren't exactly single impedance loads and vary with frequency, so the nominal rated impedance is kind of a ball park figure in itself.
Just to add my 2 cents as an owner/user of an original 1971 V4B. The sounds on the Ampeg TV demo from the re-issue head really sound a lot like what my amp can produce. I play primarily finger style and palm muted thumb style- the thud that the original is capable of is incredible with the right cabinet. Never liked it for slap style tone though due to the slow response and lack of speaker dampening.I've always been impressed by the variety of sounds available due to the great EQ and active mid-range circuit. One thing I have always done is split my signal to go to both inputs; gives an added fatness definitely. The new V4B doesn't allow this but hey it has a XLR out and great output jack options. I had a lot of trouble with my amp for a long time. Guess what it was. A faulty NOS 12DW7 that was bad from the manufacturer. As soon as I subbed in a 12ax7 , the problem was instantly corrected. I came very close to selling the old beast for a pittance when I had a bad back injury, but now that it is doing it's thing again I am happy I still have it. I agree with PGK that there is something very special about the old V4B's and I hope the re-issued ones build upon that legacy.
In an old one, I'd still replace the 12ax7 with a 12dw7 because it's the way the amp was designed. I'd go NOS, though...new ones are crap.
Thanks JimmyM- you are right as usual. Keeping in the 12ax7 in that position makes the power amp out jack a little too hot and noisy. I agree that the new tubes can be crap. I totally re-tubed my V4B when I got it, and had 2 power tube failures within a year. Back went in the old Phillips originals which are still doing good. And that faulty NOS 12DW7 was a real jinx for the longest time- goes to show that those premium prices for NOS tubes doesn't mean a thing until you put it in your circuit to see if it really works!
That's exactly right! NOS tubes are no guarantee that you'll get one that doesn't crap out soon after you buy it by any means, but generally I find them more reliable, especially where 12dw7's are concerned.
And I wasn't sure what the 12dw7 powers in the old V4B, but apparently the 12au7 side of the 12dw7 does the power amp out
And I wasn't sure what the 12dw7 powers in the old V4B, but apparently the 12au7 side of the 12dw7 does the power amp out
Right again JimmyM. The 12DW7 is a dual triode. As you say the side that's like a 12AU7 powers the power amp out, so you want the lower amplification factor ( 30-60 X ? as opposed to 12ax7 which is 100 X ? ) Someone correct me if I'm wrong here but I think the other side of the 12DW7 is connected to the P.I. ? By the way, guys what is the pre-amp tube line-up of the re-issue? Does it retain the SK11 fat tube for the mid-range? Sorry if I missed the spec somewhere in the pages or video....
Ya, pre's two 12ax7's, driver section is a 12ax7 and 12au7, power tubes are 4 6l6gc's. Pretty unrealistic to use much else these days...these are the tubes you can get new that are available in a big enough bulk for Ampeg, and even if they still make the old tubes that are rare, they usually end up sucking.
Do you guys think the tube driven mid range circuit of the original V4B is part of it's distinct character ? Along that line, how did Ampeg implement the mid-range in the 90's V4B-H ? Why didn't guys like that iteration and what will differentiate this new head from the 90's version?
I am sure the '90's model was a great amp - but it was not really a V4B reissue. The preamp section was basically the same as the B15R's and the SVT Classic.
The power section was also 6l6 IIRC
The power section was also 6l6 IIRC
Can't answer the last two due to no experience with the V4BH, but the first I can...the tube driven mid is a big character supplier in Ampegs.
having had both I can say from a tone perspective the 90s version was awesome. it sounded great! but.... it wasn't the original. it did not have the same balls to it. I had a vintage one that sounded GLORIOUS in a loud rock band and could hang with the big boys. the V4bh ran out of gas and didn't have the same great overdrive. it was just a different 100 watt amp with similar letters on it.
Thanks Bass45. I didn't realize that about the pre-amps of the B15R and SVT Classic. The consensus seemed to be that the V4B-H was underpowered, not gutsy. Consequently all the questions about the new V4B re-issue's strength, grind, loudness before break-up , etc. Guess it's all about how hard they are going to drive those 4X6l6GC's , just like somebody discussed earlier in the thread. I know from the schematic on my V4B, the B+ is 540V. That's getting up there eh? Yet those 7027A tubes hardly even get warm. Maybe my V4B is overbiased. I know on my 1969 Fender Superbassman, the 4 6L6GC's get real toasty! Yet it doesn't compare for all over tone against the Ampeg. The Fender always sounds so clean and almost brittle. A lot less tone control too. But for sheer volume the Superbassman is way louder.
6k11 is the same as a 12ax7 plus one triode of a 12au7 (1/2). It could be that the combo of the two in the RI do the same job as the 6k11?
12dw7 is missing too isn't it? What was its job?
12dw7 is missing too isn't it? What was its job?
- Status
