I thought the SVT VR was a reissue?

[Rockbobmel]

I was poking around and read this:

Preamp: Tube (2 x 12AX7, 1 x 12AU7)
Driver Tubes: (1 x 12AX7, 2 x 12AU7)
Power Amp: Tube (6 x 6550)
RMS Power Output: 300-Watts @ 2 ohms
RMS Power Output: 300-Watts @ 4 ohms
Tone Controls: Bass, Mid, Treble
Mid Tone Control: 3-Position Rocker Switch
Ultra Low/High Boosts: Yes
Speaker Connections: Neutrik Speakon® and 1/4"
Balanced Line Out: Yes (Transformer)
Preamp Out/Power Amp In: Yes
Dimensions (W x H x D inches): 24 x 11.5 x 12.75
Weight: 85 pounds

Now, from what I remember the original tubes included 2 12BH7As and a6C4 for pi and driver tubes.

 

[pablomigraine]

I was poking around and read this:

Preamp: Tube (2 x 12AX7, 1 x 12AU7)
Driver Tubes: (1 x 12AX7, 2 x 12AU7)
Power Amp: Tube (6 x 6550)
RMS Power Output: 300-Watts @ 2 ohms
RMS Power Output: 300-Watts @ 4 ohms
Tone Controls: Bass, Mid, Treble
Mid Tone Control: 3-Position Rocker Switch
Ultra Low/High Boosts: Yes
Speaker Connections: Neutrik Speakon® and 1/4"
Balanced Line Out: Yes (Transformer)
Preamp Out/Power Amp In: Yes
Dimensions (W x H x D inches): 24 x 11.5 x 12.75
Weight: 85 pounds

Now, from what I remember the original tubes included 2 12BH7As and a6C4 for pi and driver tubes.

**Closest replication possible with commonly available tubes***

 

[Rockbobmel]

Invalid Link Removed

and

http://www.tubedepot.com/nos-6c4.html

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3771019&postcount=10

 

[Fealach]

But aside from a minor difference in tubes, it's a reissue, right?

The original had

"Speaker Connections: Neutrik Speakon® and 1/4"
Balanced Line Out: Yes (Transformer)"

...pretty advanced for the 60's!

Either that, or Marketing thought "SVT VR" was a sexier name than "SVT-CL Version 2." No, that couldn't be it.

 

[BassIan]

I believe it was intended as a reincarnation with modern improvements such as the transformer balanced DI and the Speakon connectors. The point was to get as close to the sound of the original as possible, but to make it modern and easy to work with for the common usage it would see for users in this decade.

Do you not want a nice DI or a Speakon output?

 

[sedan_dad]

I'm pretty sure amps and cabinets over 300 watts have to have the speakon connectors to be sold in Europe.

 

[Rockbobmel]

So It's not a "Vintage Reissue" really . More like an "SVT 2", or "Classic"......... I don't have a problem with bringing a classic forward with "modern" appointments. I just think it has all been done before. So really, there is nothing new here. Maybe the original rocker switches and "blue line" graphics.
A real (true to the original) SVT would be spec. out to the original, with the same wiring, tubes, caps, trannys, etc. and went to 2 ohms (different tranny windings). Not just a dressed up "Classic" with "blue line graphics" and rocker switches. It just seems like a marketing ploy. Vintage equipment is just that. "vintage".

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

I dont think it is just a ploy. In direct comparison they apparently sound near identical to the vintage SVTs, which, unless you hadnt noticed, neither the SVT-2 Pro or SVT-CL do.

Also, if you want to be really anal about it, the original SVTs also had different power tubes.

Listen with your ears, not with eyes.

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

So It's not a "Vintage Reissue" really . More like an "SVT 2", or "Classic"......... I
A real (true to the original) SVT would be spec. out to the original, with the same wiring, tubes, caps, trannys, etc. and went to 2 ohms (different tranny windings). Not just a dressed up "Classic" with "blue line graphics" and rocker switches. It just seems like a marketing ploy. Vintage equipment is just that. "vintage".

Dude......... This has been discussed before......

The unit is not an absolutely "identical copy", for various reasons, safety agency issues, avaialability issues, and some desire to provide modern conveniences, like DI and speakons.

Besides, we didn't want to try to make a "fake vintage" unit, and we couldn't get a good formula for that "30 years of bars" smell anyway.

BUT it is the same unit electronically, with a couple of tube re-arrangements to UN-DO some things that Ampeg did towards the end of production, and provide a produceable unit.

The "signal path" is the same.....

The gain structure is the same....

Hey, the SOUND is the same..... according to independent folks who report here.

I am kinda not appreciating a factually wrong slam of the unit as a "CL clone".

You might hate the unit, that's fine. But if you do, you should do it on the basis of your experience, not bad information.....

Tube stuff:

We un-did the "12AX7 mod", replacing the 12DW7 with a half 12AX7 and a half 12AU7, which is all that is in a 12DW7 anyhow. 12DW7 have been hard to find, and may be again...... that's why Ampeg DID the 12AX7 mod, to get rid of the 12DW7 when they got hard to find and bad quality.

The 6C4 is now a half of a 12AU7..... its a "cathode follower", no big deal. Why use one relatively uncommon tube?

And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal....

But if you think it's "the same as a 'CL except for paint", OK, whatever winds your watch... leaves more for the others who want one.

 

[BassIan]

Dude......... This has been discussed before......

The unit is not an absolutely "identical copy", for various reasons, safety agency issues, avaialability issues, and some desire to provide modern conveniences, like DI and speakons.

Besides, we didn't want to try to make a "fake vintage" unit, and we couldn't get a good formula for that "30 years of bars" smell anyway.

BUT it is the same unit electronically, with a couple of tube re-arrangements to UN-DO some things that Ampeg did towards the end of production, and provide a produceable unit.

The "signal path" is the same.....

The gain structure is the same....

Hey, the SOUND is the same..... according to independent folks who report here.

I am kinda not appreciating a factually wrong slam of the unit as a "CL clone".

You might hate the unit, that's fine. But if you do, you should do it on the basis of your experience, not bad information.....

Tube stuff:

We un-did the "12AX7 mod", replacing the 12DW7 with a half 12AX7 and a half 12AU7, which is all that is in a 12DW7 anyhow. 12DW7 have been hard to find, and may be again...... that's why Ampeg DID the 12AX7 mod, to get rid of the 12DW7 when they got hard to find and bad quality.

The 6C4 is now a half of a 12AU7..... its a "cathode follower", no big deal. Why use one relatively uncommon tube?

And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal....

But if you think it's "the same as a 'CL except for paint", OK, whatever winds your watch... leaves more for the others who want one.

Big +1 on this.

Do your research before you write it off as being the same. It's been discussed a lot here.

 

[8mmOD]

Dude......... This has been discussed before......

The unit is not an absolutely "identical copy", for various reasons, safety agency issues, avaialability issues, and some desire to provide modern conveniences, like DI and speakons.

Besides, we didn't want to try to make a "fake vintage" unit, and we couldn't get a good formula for that "30 years of bars" smell anyway.

BUT it is the same unit electronically, with a couple of tube re-arrangements to UN-DO some things that Ampeg did towards the end of production, and provide a produceable unit.

The "signal path" is the same.....

The gain structure is the same....

Hey, the SOUND is the same..... according to independent folks who report here.

I am kinda not appreciating a factually wrong slam of the unit as a "CL clone".

You might hate the unit, that's fine. But if you do, you should do it on the basis of your experience, not bad information.....

Tube stuff:

We un-did the "12AX7 mod", replacing the 12DW7 with a half 12AX7 and a half 12AU7, which is all that is in a 12DW7 anyhow. 12DW7 have been hard to find, and may be again...... that's why Ampeg DID the 12AX7 mod, to get rid of the 12DW7 when they got hard to find and bad quality.

The 6C4 is now a half of a 12AU7..... its a "cathode follower", no big deal. Why use one relatively uncommon tube?

And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal....

But if you think it's "the same as a 'CL except for paint", OK, whatever winds your watch... leaves more for the others who want one.

Jerrold, you seriously must get worn out repeating yourself

 

[Rockbobmel]

You're right. I did not do the research, and shot from the hip. Sorry. About 6 years ago I bought an SVT II Pro (B stock, that had problems, so I returned it for another. It had problems too. So I got a new SVTII pro, It had low power and sounded mushy. I gave up until I said to myself ("I'll get a real one") so I bought a used one on evilbay, It had BIG problems, so I had it fixed.... FOUR TIMES!, It never was right. (popping loud) so I had a store sell it and I just threw in the towel. Since then I have seen 2 bands live with vintage SVTs and they sounded glorious! But I think that I just can't have one for whatever reason. So yeah, I'm sore. I tried... HARD... to love this amp, but it would not let me.

My 1972 (Magnavox) V-4 is another story. I bought it cheap, had a cap job done 10 years ago, Love it, no problems, and still play it a lot, but it is not powerful enough for my band. BTW, it still has the tubes that were changed in 1984 in it.!!

 

[Psycho Bass Guy]

And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal....

Now, now; no fibbing. There are demonstrable differences between the two types in the driver application, mainly that a 12AU7 won't drive the output section as hard as a 12BH7 and the VR won't get that last bit of volume that the old ones can. It won't make that big a difference in tone, but it IS a departure nonetheless.

If I get to try one, I'll give my honest review of an SVT VR as compared to the old ones, but I'll never buy one because I choose not to support Loud's management decisions.

 

[okabass]

"And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal...."

I don't agree. I wrote that some week ago. Please, correct, if I'm wrong.
P.S. I got the 8x10" measurments.

"There might be some very rough grid current situation, where the 12BH7 survives better than the 12AU7. The 12AU7s plate resistance is almost 45% higher than 12BH7s. 7700 ohm vs. 5300 ohm. That means the 12BH7 is a lower impedance source, and can perhapse therefore perform better."

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

"And the 12BH7 are 12AU7. Same deal...."

I don't agree. I wrote that some week ago. Please, correct, if I'm wrong.
P.S. I got the 8x10" measurments.

"There might be some very rough grid current situation, where the 12BH7 survives better than the 12AU7. The 12AU7s plate resistance is almost 45% higher than 12BH7s. 7700 ohm vs. 5300 ohm. That means the 12BH7 is a lower impedance source, and can perhapse therefore perform better."

Which could make a difference in some places, but in this case, they drive 3 x 47,000 ohms..... not exactly a super high current load.....

In any case, you can swap them for 12BH7s if it is that big a deal to you.

So that isn't a make it or break it deal-buster.