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.
DR. DIMENTO'S MICRO TUBE AMP EXPERIMENT
- Thread starter luknfur
- Start date
Fab has a spkr he designed with Weber that he thinks might work well with bass. But he suggested I talk directly to Weber and maybe have him custom make one.
Weber SIG 10" ceramic is what Fab uses with just a couple modifications made to it by Weber
Weber SIG 10" ceramic is what Fab uses with just a couple modifications made to it by Weber
Rvl said:
Well the good news is we're on the same plain. The bad news is I thought maybe you had a different spin and I was going to learn something I didn't know about distortion.
Will be interested to hear how the mic'ing goes, especially in a live environment. I think mic'ing will add a whole new dimention to tone exploration. Never messed with a mic myself - but it's coming.
Rvl said:
Bass 1, mids 10, treble 1 is your answer I'd say. There's nothing going on there below 80 Hz (E guitar string) and it basically sounds like a guitar not a bass in the first clip. All I could get from the second clip sounded like sliding a pick down a roundwound and didn't listen to the 3rd and 4th cuase clip 2 trashed my ears so recovery time is in order. I don't use headphones often enough to remember they're way louder than they seem.
At any rate, you wouldn't need a bass amp to reproduce those frequencies and I highly doubt you'd even need a bass guitar speaker if that's what you're shooting for.
When you go looking for low frequency musical instrument speakers you'll find that astoundingly FEW 15's drop to 40 Hz, fewer 12's, a handful of 10's, and a few JBL 8's. About the most optimal frequency response you can expect is 40 Hz - 5 kHz. The majority of the low-end drivers are 45 Hz - 2 to 5 kHz. Many are in the 50-55Hz for the lowest frequency. 4 string bass range is roughly 41 Hz - 9 kHz (maybe 7 kHz at minimum and 13 kHz optimally).
Personally, if I'm going to chop something on bass from a players perspective, I'd rather chop the top cause that's guitar range anyway. Plus I don't hear a significant difference when the top is cut but I hear it when the bottom is cut. But below 80 Hz is where all the problems and compromises occur in reproducing and hearing long wavelengths, they eat all the power, and are the least audible range so that's what gets cut. Tuning/porting and damping is used to compensate on the reproduction end.
Car speakers are really more optimally designed for bass than insrument speakers in terms of their parameters.
Listened to the last two clips and the last dropped to a low D on my guitar which is actually tuned up a bit for tapes, so that clip is actually a step or so lower. You will get harmonics off the fundamental if it's played even if the fundamental itself is not reproduced and that gives that sort of upright sound with a hollow/woody bottom end to the note. Basically what goes on in those speakers that don't drop to that frequency. And you won't get such tone out of standard guitar. But just the scale length and string make-up of a bass will make the timbre bass-like for an identical note.
That distortion is particularly appealing in that last clip and so quite useable I'd say. I'll try setting the THD like that and see what it does and I'll compare that to going into the lead channel but I suspect it will basically sound like the lead channel but will see.
That distortion is particularly appealing in that last clip and so quite useable I'd say. I'll try setting the THD like that and see what it does and I'll compare that to going into the lead channel but I suspect it will basically sound like the lead channel but will see.
I am very happy with my Gjika mini-amp. (www.gjika.com). It runs at 120 (or240) Volts.
It works like this:
in --> 12AX7 pre --> EL84 power tube based amp --> power tranny --> attenuator --> out
You use it like this:
(Bass)guitar --> Gjika Mini Amp --> Normal (Bass)Guitar amp (that is: preamp+poweramp) --> speakers.
It works like this:
in --> 12AX7 pre --> EL84 power tube based amp --> power tranny --> attenuator --> out
You use it like this:
(Bass)guitar --> Gjika Mini Amp --> Normal (Bass)Guitar amp (that is: preamp+poweramp) --> speakers.
doublestop said:
First I've heard of that gadget. Out of curiosity what's the price tag on it cause I know the THD attenuators alone go for $200 and above used on ebay. I need to pickup some EL power tubes. Heard especially good things about 34's. Guess I should look into some distortion settings on the THD in general. I just don't play anything that requires distortion at this time.
Also, here's a handy 12ax7 sub chart:
http://cydathria.com/fdm/12AX7_sub.html
very interesting thread...
i have a pair of collins monoblock tube amplifiers
2 6v6 and 2 7722 tubes in each, they are supposed to be 8 watts
each, they were last teched by matchless amps when they were around
great sounding, real lound and clear.
been wondering what to do with them....
cheers
d
i have a pair of collins monoblock tube amplifiers
2 6v6 and 2 7722 tubes in each, they are supposed to be 8 watts
each, they were last teched by matchless amps when they were around
great sounding, real lound and clear.
been wondering what to do with them....
cheers
d
luknfur said:
The Gjika Mini Amps are expensive. About US$ 700. I use mine with electric guitar (not bass), and I think of it as a cheap boutique amp! For guitar it is amazing, the most transparent overdrive that I know. You know that AC/DC guitar sound? Dirty, but cleanish at the same time? That is the sound of hard working power tubes, which is really different from the more 'buzzy' sound of overdriven pre-amp tubes. To put it simple, power tube distortion = Eric Clapton, Gary Moore,whereas pre-amp distortion is more like nu-metal. (To complicate things further, IMO the best distortion sound is a little bit of pre-amp plus a healthy dose of power amp distortion.........).
I haven't used it a lot with bass (since my bass rig is not complete yet, see other thread), but a buddy of mine does and he likes it a lot. He does not use it to get distortion, but to get that 'organic power tube warmth'.
Anyway, the original poster's idea of
small tube amp --> small speaker in a box--> mic --> big amp --> big speakers
is interesting as well, since he adds the element of speaker distortion.
Yet, personally, I would think this is more interesting for guitar than for bass, but that is only because I don't want too much distortion in a bass sound. Power tube warmth yes, speaker distortion no. So I would use an attenuator instead of the speaker/mic combination, but that is just me.
Keep us posted!
Peter
doublestop said:
These two pieces hung me up for a bit because I thougt you were talking about replacing the speaker/mic with an attenuator but you were talking about getting the distortion from the tubes instead of the speaker thruough the use of an attenuator. The THD has an attenuator built in to it.
Rvl said:
Here's the dudes response. I'm not sure if it answers the question but it's more information anyway:
=========
I can tell you that my amp-repair buddy designed a single-ender with TWO output tubes parallel (Bivalve-like). He orignally designed it thinking KT88, then after it was basically built he tried EL34s and other tubes. He's settled on KT66. Which is a 6L6 in different guise, I think it'll jump a little more juice and it's biases differently. It'll use higher voltage but he's tamed it down a lot. But, this is a guitar amp, crunch factory.
Bassists seem to go for KT88/6550 but Mesa put out one with 6 x 6L6-- a sort of SVT thing.
=========
I've got a 6L6 and 5881 (military version of 6L6 from what I can gather) and I can't say as I could tell any significant difference in the output from the KT88. As least I didn't notice if so. I've pretty much just kept the KT88 in since installing it for no particular reason so no exploration of any significance regarding tone/distortion/ and the like.
Whoever asked about distortion (I can't remember and too lazy to look)
I just got a Sans Di and that's an angle you might think about. Now there's a switch, running SS pre into power tubes. I just got it this afternoon so all new but I've run into the QSC and THD and it sounds noticeably warmer and less hi-fi with the same setting into the THD. Although it's pretty tubey going into the QSC on some settings. One particualr tone into the THD was a lot like a Tuba with that deep raspy brass quality to it but warmer, little muddier, and without the air.
Lot of control with the Sans and colors tone for sure but I ran a Dearmond HB and a Shur noiseless J into it and the Sans picked up a lot of the character of the tone of each. When I first plugged it in my first thought was very decent useable tone but probably every bass you play will sound the same through it - but it's nowhere near that extreme.
It also can really deepen/thicken tone and boost volume significantly. Doesn't seem to be a lot of useable flexibility distortion-wise (more like 3 maybe 4 distinct variations) but perhaps as much as you'd pull from a given amp. More versatility in cleaner sounds to me. The presence is very useful for altering tone both clean and distortion wise and is quality for slap. Gets a little noisie with treble and/or presence near pegged - but not much doesn't. A bit on the cheesy side construction wise it seems but initially it's strikes me as piece worth having around and no suprise at it's popularity.
If you pick one up used for around $100 you won't have any problem moving it on for that. It's external and you don't have to change a thing so if you don't like, ease it on down the road.
I've also got a MXR M80 headed this way so will be interesting to see how they compare through my gear.
Mov'n on up, little more progress.
Got some mics. Audix F12 (40Hz - 10kHz dynamic), F10 (50-12kHz dynamic), and F15 (100-20kHz condenser) - package deal.
Really drum mics but seem to fit the bill. Like a speaker, hard to find mics made for bass, that drop to 40Hz (actually the F12 drops below and is flat+ at 40), and doesn't cost a kidney. And I really have no use for frequencies above 10K. Most mics like the shurs only drop to 50Hz and the Audix are fairly flat frequency to boot - with a slight dip in the mids to cut boom. Condenser mics and 20Hz - 20kHz seems on the overkill side but haven't had one so can't say. Output is definetly more on the audix condensers but they take the 48+ phantom power on the MP.
Didn't have much time for the initial trial so just to get something fired I ran the THd > micro cab and an audix > Art MP > Poly combo for amplification. Not much output which was fine cause didn't sound worth listening to anyway. But the frequency spreads on the 3 mics were appropriate enough with the F12 being deeper than the F10 and the F15 condenser being thinner and on the airy side - amp settings constant. So that much checked out.
Later with more time I switched the QSC 1450 over to parallel and ran the audix F12 > Art MP > QSC 1450 > Aguilar GS 112 channel 1 and L'acoustics DSOT 15" to channel 2. Fired the THD up and it was pretty decent - espcially for starters. And that French 15 never sounded better. Plenty loud and seemed like pretty accurate reproduction through the audix mic. In the process of doing a review on a Bill Lawrence EB-60 dual blade pole P pup and it sounded like a P for a fact.
It was a trip to cut the QSC and barely be able to hear the actual volume coming out of the micro cab.
So the system is nearing completion in trial format as soon as I pick up a Clarus.
Also got some more pre tubes to experiment with today, 12av7, 12ay7, and 6211 (a 12at7 variant). Couple blackplates in the mix so a little more exploration there.
Got some mics. Audix F12 (40Hz - 10kHz dynamic), F10 (50-12kHz dynamic), and F15 (100-20kHz condenser) - package deal.
Really drum mics but seem to fit the bill. Like a speaker, hard to find mics made for bass, that drop to 40Hz (actually the F12 drops below and is flat+ at 40), and doesn't cost a kidney. And I really have no use for frequencies above 10K. Most mics like the shurs only drop to 50Hz and the Audix are fairly flat frequency to boot - with a slight dip in the mids to cut boom. Condenser mics and 20Hz - 20kHz seems on the overkill side but haven't had one so can't say. Output is definetly more on the audix condensers but they take the 48+ phantom power on the MP.
Didn't have much time for the initial trial so just to get something fired I ran the THd > micro cab and an audix > Art MP > Poly combo for amplification. Not much output which was fine cause didn't sound worth listening to anyway. But the frequency spreads on the 3 mics were appropriate enough with the F12 being deeper than the F10 and the F15 condenser being thinner and on the airy side - amp settings constant. So that much checked out.
Later with more time I switched the QSC 1450 over to parallel and ran the audix F12 > Art MP > QSC 1450 > Aguilar GS 112 channel 1 and L'acoustics DSOT 15" to channel 2. Fired the THD up and it was pretty decent - espcially for starters. And that French 15 never sounded better. Plenty loud and seemed like pretty accurate reproduction through the audix mic. In the process of doing a review on a Bill Lawrence EB-60 dual blade pole P pup and it sounded like a P for a fact.
It was a trip to cut the QSC and barely be able to hear the actual volume coming out of the micro cab.
So the system is nearing completion in trial format as soon as I pick up a Clarus.
Also got some more pre tubes to experiment with today, 12av7, 12ay7, and 6211 (a 12at7 variant). Couple blackplates in the mix so a little more exploration there.
FWIW:
Some more pre tube swapping to inspect new incoming. Man, do tubes make a big difference, both power and pre. Like changing pups out sometimes (and I've swapped over 75 pup sets to know). That 6211 is bit of a rare tube and reportedly good for taking harshness out of tone. I'll say, deep and mellow in THD used as the "input" with the Amperex 12ax7 as a "driver" and KT88 for power.
Need to make a list of questions and call up THD. To be honest, I don't even know what an input and driver is and I need to for speculative tube swapping.
Left the Emerson 6211 input and pulled the Amperex driver and put in a GE 12ay7 in and that effectively swapped the accent on low end to top half. By using the attitude control on the THD it added a blatant woodieness to tone. Interesting becuase with the Amperex in the driver and a 12at7 input attitude control had a compression effect.
No real play with mic location to speak of although it's obvious from using the mic that location alters tone considerbly - thinning/trebling tone as it's moved from the center of the speaker cone out.
More components en route. An 8" Vifa speaker that was used in a Mackie Monitor that's like 35Hz-4kHz and a Studio Projects VTB1 mic preamp.
Some more pre tube swapping to inspect new incoming. Man, do tubes make a big difference, both power and pre. Like changing pups out sometimes (and I've swapped over 75 pup sets to know). That 6211 is bit of a rare tube and reportedly good for taking harshness out of tone. I'll say, deep and mellow in THD used as the "input" with the Amperex 12ax7 as a "driver" and KT88 for power.
Need to make a list of questions and call up THD. To be honest, I don't even know what an input and driver is and I need to for speculative tube swapping.
Left the Emerson 6211 input and pulled the Amperex driver and put in a GE 12ay7 in and that effectively swapped the accent on low end to top half. By using the attitude control on the THD it added a blatant woodieness to tone. Interesting becuase with the Amperex in the driver and a 12at7 input attitude control had a compression effect.
No real play with mic location to speak of although it's obvious from using the mic that location alters tone considerbly - thinning/trebling tone as it's moved from the center of the speaker cone out.
More components en route. An 8" Vifa speaker that was used in a Mackie Monitor that's like 35Hz-4kHz and a Studio Projects VTB1 mic preamp.
FWIW:
Some update.
Got the VTB1 tube preamp within the last week and esthetically it's an improvement I suppose, has a few more whistles than the Art, but I've yet to see it do anything for me the Art would'n't and the Art was less than half the price. The Art is more than 1/3 smaller too. The Art doesn't have a balanced out, send/return, or a seperate tube blend (although can't say as that's been of use yet).
Through the same setup the VTB1 is significantly brighter, cleaner, thinner sounding than the Art but that may be the tube (or something else since the VTB1's knew to me). Assume the VTB1 has the stock tube cuase I haven't cracked it open yet and it's suppose to be some kind of special design for it but who knows. I changed the Art tube to an Amperex but even with the stock tube the Art ws darker/thicker toned than the VTB1.
Got the Vifa speaker and dropped it in. Specs are:
WOOFER MODEL - P22WP
Nominal Basket Diameter
8" / 200mm
Impedance
4 ohms
RMS Power Rating
100 Watts
Program Power 200 Watts
Frequency Response
35Hz - 4.0kHz
Voice Coil Diameter
1.5" / 38.1mm
Magnetic Weight 30 oz.
Mounting Information
Overall Diameter
8.75" / 222.25mm
Baffle Cutout Diameter-
7.5" / 190.5mm
No. Of Mounting Holes
6
Net Weight 2.75 lb. / 1.34 kg.
Materials
Basket
Die Cast
Cone
Mineral Polycone
Surround
Butyl Rubber
Magnet Ferrite
Thiele-Small Parameters
Resonant Frequency (fs)
29.5 Hz
Impedance (Re)
5.8 ohms
BL Factor (BL) 10.2
Mechanical Q (Qms)
2.2
Electrical Factor(Qes) .31
Total Q (Qts)
.27
Comp. Equivelant Vol. (Vas)
2.72 ft3 /77 Liters
Voice Coil Overhang (Xmax)
6.0 mm
Surface Area of Cone (Sd) .0235 m2
This model was used in a Mackie Monitor and is the first polycone I've had. Very pliable, not stiff at all. Pooched out like a balloon from the air being compressed when I slid the speaker box into the cabinet. Nice too see cause the fit of the cabinet seemed as snug as I could get it but doing the same thing didn't budge the Pioneer.
Pretty decent tone. Decent bass, and seems much brighter with more clearly defined tones than the Pioneer without the tendency to be boxie. Very hi-fi sounding. Specs for the two are fairly similar. The highs on the Pioneer are much less focused and on the airy side.
Fact is, the tone coming out of the Vifa in the micro cab sounded better to me than coming out of the Aguilar GS 112 when the Vifa was mic'd. Had that GK slap tone to it using the Dearmond HB in bridge position with a fairly new set of TI's (still have the round ring). Darker sounding out of the Aggie without the edge and bite. Attenuator on the Aggie's at halfmast though and I didn't dink with it. Guess I should have but I was just goofing around.
Since I've got multiple mics now and two mic amps, I ran stereo out of the QSC. Set an Audix F12 (40Hz-10kHz) and F15 condenser (100Hz-20kHz) side by side in front of the Vifa and ran the F12 to the L-acoustics DSOT 15" and F15 to the Aguilar GS-112. Obviously a lot more tone flexbility and control than running a single F12 to the QSC and parallel out with the same signal to both speakers. Haven't messed with it enough to know if the variation is of much significance. Even ran parallel, there are independent filters on the QSC and seperate gain controls to each channel and you can do a lot with just that - plus the attenuator on the Aggie.
So stumbling along bit by bit.
Some update.
Got the VTB1 tube preamp within the last week and esthetically it's an improvement I suppose, has a few more whistles than the Art, but I've yet to see it do anything for me the Art would'n't and the Art was less than half the price. The Art is more than 1/3 smaller too. The Art doesn't have a balanced out, send/return, or a seperate tube blend (although can't say as that's been of use yet).
Through the same setup the VTB1 is significantly brighter, cleaner, thinner sounding than the Art but that may be the tube (or something else since the VTB1's knew to me). Assume the VTB1 has the stock tube cuase I haven't cracked it open yet and it's suppose to be some kind of special design for it but who knows. I changed the Art tube to an Amperex but even with the stock tube the Art ws darker/thicker toned than the VTB1.
Got the Vifa speaker and dropped it in. Specs are:
WOOFER MODEL - P22WP
Nominal Basket Diameter
8" / 200mm
Impedance
4 ohms
RMS Power Rating
100 Watts
Program Power 200 Watts
Frequency Response
35Hz - 4.0kHz
Voice Coil Diameter
1.5" / 38.1mm
Magnetic Weight 30 oz.
Mounting Information
Overall Diameter
8.75" / 222.25mm
Baffle Cutout Diameter-
7.5" / 190.5mm
No. Of Mounting Holes
6
Net Weight 2.75 lb. / 1.34 kg.
Materials
Basket
Die Cast
Cone
Mineral Polycone
Surround
Butyl Rubber
Magnet Ferrite
Thiele-Small Parameters
Resonant Frequency (fs)
29.5 Hz
Impedance (Re)
5.8 ohms
BL Factor (BL) 10.2
Mechanical Q (Qms)
2.2
Electrical Factor(Qes) .31
Total Q (Qts)
.27
Comp. Equivelant Vol. (Vas)
2.72 ft3 /77 Liters
Voice Coil Overhang (Xmax)
6.0 mm
Surface Area of Cone (Sd) .0235 m2
This model was used in a Mackie Monitor and is the first polycone I've had. Very pliable, not stiff at all. Pooched out like a balloon from the air being compressed when I slid the speaker box into the cabinet. Nice too see cause the fit of the cabinet seemed as snug as I could get it but doing the same thing didn't budge the Pioneer.
Pretty decent tone. Decent bass, and seems much brighter with more clearly defined tones than the Pioneer without the tendency to be boxie. Very hi-fi sounding. Specs for the two are fairly similar. The highs on the Pioneer are much less focused and on the airy side.
Fact is, the tone coming out of the Vifa in the micro cab sounded better to me than coming out of the Aguilar GS 112 when the Vifa was mic'd. Had that GK slap tone to it using the Dearmond HB in bridge position with a fairly new set of TI's (still have the round ring). Darker sounding out of the Aggie without the edge and bite. Attenuator on the Aggie's at halfmast though and I didn't dink with it. Guess I should have but I was just goofing around.
Since I've got multiple mics now and two mic amps, I ran stereo out of the QSC. Set an Audix F12 (40Hz-10kHz) and F15 condenser (100Hz-20kHz) side by side in front of the Vifa and ran the F12 to the L-acoustics DSOT 15" and F15 to the Aguilar GS-112. Obviously a lot more tone flexbility and control than running a single F12 to the QSC and parallel out with the same signal to both speakers. Haven't messed with it enough to know if the variation is of much significance. Even ran parallel, there are independent filters on the QSC and seperate gain controls to each channel and you can do a lot with just that - plus the attenuator on the Aggie.
So stumbling along bit by bit.
FWIW:
little more incoming for anyone interested. Got a mix of 5 pre tubes which turns out are all Russian - something I've actually been avoiding but was too ignorant to know the difference - at least in this case. Apparently like everything else these days, the manufacturer is no indication of location. Westinghouse in partiular here.
12a_7: T7, U7, X7LPS, Y7, Z7A
Can't say that I'm disappointed at all. There's a definite negative bent on the net toward East European and Chinese tubes. All the tubes up to this point have been U.S, Canada, Western Europe. Maybe I just haven't hit killer tubes but I don't hear any difference in quality variation by region. The Eastern tubes appear much newer/better condition as a group so maybe that is part of it. But most if not all of the other tubes were in good test range according to the seller (I have no way to verify that aside from installation) but unless the batch of Eastern tubes is an indicator, I've have nothing to indicate anything otherwise.
I have a friend that knew a guy that used to just buy cheap tubes and he would just throw away one of every 3 or so. Maybe there's something to that or maybe the Eastern thing is just outdated - vintage tube thing. And maybe it has more to do with QA. Seems PBG it was mentioned that 40% of old US tubes used to be disgarded in testing. So maybe, they didn't used to do that in Russia/wherever and got a bad rap for putting out junk tubes.
By the way, these tubes as the others exhibited some distinct variations in tone quality - clarity, brightness, dirt, and the like
little more incoming for anyone interested. Got a mix of 5 pre tubes which turns out are all Russian - something I've actually been avoiding but was too ignorant to know the difference - at least in this case. Apparently like everything else these days, the manufacturer is no indication of location. Westinghouse in partiular here.
12a_7: T7, U7, X7LPS, Y7, Z7A
Can't say that I'm disappointed at all. There's a definite negative bent on the net toward East European and Chinese tubes. All the tubes up to this point have been U.S, Canada, Western Europe. Maybe I just haven't hit killer tubes but I don't hear any difference in quality variation by region. The Eastern tubes appear much newer/better condition as a group so maybe that is part of it. But most if not all of the other tubes were in good test range according to the seller (I have no way to verify that aside from installation) but unless the batch of Eastern tubes is an indicator, I've have nothing to indicate anything otherwise.
I have a friend that knew a guy that used to just buy cheap tubes and he would just throw away one of every 3 or so. Maybe there's something to that or maybe the Eastern thing is just outdated - vintage tube thing. And maybe it has more to do with QA. Seems PBG it was mentioned that 40% of old US tubes used to be disgarded in testing. So maybe, they didn't used to do that in Russia/wherever and got a bad rap for putting out junk tubes.
By the way, these tubes as the others exhibited some distinct variations in tone quality - clarity, brightness, dirt, and the like
FWIW:
Putting a conclusion and nail in the coffin to this experiment in case someone were to pull it up at some point and wonder.
Tone wasn't bad but no better than I could get otherwise. It was fun and interesting and I basically broke even cash wise - to date, still a few remnants to move down the road but 95% there.
.....Amen!
Putting a conclusion and nail in the coffin to this experiment in case someone were to pull it up at some point and wonder.
Tone wasn't bad but no better than I could get otherwise. It was fun and interesting and I basically broke even cash wise - to date, still a few remnants to move down the road but 95% there.
.....Amen!
seamonkey said:
Its been a month since I moved the stuff on so not fresh in mind. Had a problem with getting logged back onto TB till I changed ISPs so I was sort of exiled since February.
Anyway, other gear I had would get equally appealing tone, albeit different.
In terms of tube tone, a Sans Di is actually pretty decent for tube tone emulation, not distortion. You can vary the tube effect with it with the mix of gain and blend on it. Make it thinner or fatter. Anyway, Sans DI >Art MP tube > QSC 1450> pair GS 112s was passable enough tube wise. Not the tube tone variation available with the Uni but even with the variation the Uni still sounded like what it was - the same piece of gear. And although the setup for the Uni was small and flexible for a tube setup, it was on the cumbersome/complex side.
Another issue with the Uni was that it only put out the low frequencies on the clean channel which is also lower output. Even though the cab was micd, sufficient output was still an issue with lower gain pre tubes which meant volume had to be cranked then distortion became an issue, even though volume was low. Distortion from it was not appealing. The hi output channel had ample output and was useable for some bass, but not most. Hi gain just didnt have the fat low end.
On paper there were a lot of appealing aspects to the project, getting decent tube tone at low volume being one. In all, I pretty much concluded I had explored enough to draw my conclusions to look elsewhere. Tonewise, the affect of altering power tubes was minimal, much more apparent in pre tubes.
Very Interesting!!!
I bought a THD univalve about 6 weeks ago and I got a Euphonic Audio Whizzy 10 especially to use with the Univalve.
I have both a KT88 and 6L6. The KT88 is lots louder, but the 6L6 absolutely kills the KT88 in terms of tone.
I decided that I just couldn't get enough bottom with the Uni, so I purchased a dtar equinox parametric preamplifier. It works OK until you punch in the 20 db gain..then it absolutely kills with the uni and the whizzy.
The dtar gives me the ability to boost or cut 3 bands of frequencies and control the bandwidth and center freq. of each band..true 3 band parametric, but less than $300.
I also have a phil jones bass buddy, and it sounds pretty good thru the whizzy acting as a mini power amp. However it's pretty lame sounding compared to the uni.
I have an ampeg B12 with a weber 12 speaker and the uni/whizzy/dtar has a wider range of tones and it definitely has quicker response and can sound either cleaner or dirtier than the Ampeg.
The uni/whizzy/dtar is one hell of a mini rig in my opinion and it works beautifully with both the dark star pickup and the piezo on my bass. so it seems to cover a lot of bases for me.
I'd like to experiment with a few different tubes, particularly the preamp tubes, but so far I haven't had that opportunity
glad to see someone else is playing with the uni as a bass amp.
I sent an e-mail to THD asking if they'd consider revoicing the uni as a bass amp, but no response.
I bought a THD univalve about 6 weeks ago and I got a Euphonic Audio Whizzy 10 especially to use with the Univalve.
I have both a KT88 and 6L6. The KT88 is lots louder, but the 6L6 absolutely kills the KT88 in terms of tone.
I decided that I just couldn't get enough bottom with the Uni, so I purchased a dtar equinox parametric preamplifier. It works OK until you punch in the 20 db gain..then it absolutely kills with the uni and the whizzy.
The dtar gives me the ability to boost or cut 3 bands of frequencies and control the bandwidth and center freq. of each band..true 3 band parametric, but less than $300.
I also have a phil jones bass buddy, and it sounds pretty good thru the whizzy acting as a mini power amp. However it's pretty lame sounding compared to the uni.
I have an ampeg B12 with a weber 12 speaker and the uni/whizzy/dtar has a wider range of tones and it definitely has quicker response and can sound either cleaner or dirtier than the Ampeg.
The uni/whizzy/dtar is one hell of a mini rig in my opinion and it works beautifully with both the dark star pickup and the piezo on my bass. so it seems to cover a lot of bases for me.
I'd like to experiment with a few different tubes, particularly the preamp tubes, but so far I haven't had that opportunity
glad to see someone else is playing with the uni as a bass amp.
I sent an e-mail to THD asking if they'd consider revoicing the uni as a bass amp, but no response.
Latest posts
-
Does the truss rods engagement add stability to the neck?- Latest: Zootsuitbass
-
-
-
-