SVT cl and V models

[johnk_10]

IMO, if you want an SVT, either get a vintage one or the VR. non of the others sound like a real SVT to me (and i've had lots of them).

 

[megadan]

The VR has a better tone, for sure, IMHO.
The CL doesn't distort at the low setting because it is a different design - plus pre and master gain knobs means you can get it quieter in a "normal" way, the VR is gain only, as it should be (IIRC)

 

[coreyfyfe]

I still give that a . I was under the impression it was a reproduction of the SVT with the addition of a protection circuit on the power amp. ...damn marketing guys mislead me.

Not necessarily misleading. As Jimmy said, the 12DW7 is just half a 12AX7 and half a 12AU7 so there really isn't any difference.

I'll second the notion that if they're selling it for $1500 it's definitely either used or a demo model that's been beat to hell.

 

[johnk_10]

I'll second the notion that if they're selling it for $1500 it's definitely either used or a demo model that's been beat to hell.

i bought my VR brand new in the factory sealed box for $1500 in december of 2007, so there are some pretty good deals on them out there if you look hard enough.

 

[coreyfyfe]

i bought my VR brand new in the factory sealed box for $1500 in december of 2007, so there are some pretty good deals on them out there if you look hard enough.

But at a store that's selling a new CL for $1600 right next to it? Especially two years after launch, if it's that cheap there's probably a reason.

 

[JimmyM]

But at a store that's selling a new CL for $1600 right next to it? Especially two years after launch, if it's that cheap there's probably a reason.

I tend to agree with you, Corey. That's a bit of a red flag, made more red by Suraci's problem with distortion at lower volumes.

Honestly, while I think the VR/vintage is the way to go FOR ME, Suraci's PM's to me suggest that he'd prefer the CL. And there ain't a thing in the world wrong with the CL.

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

I dunno.

The VR/SVT has a lower gain in first stage than the CL, so it's unlikely to be some sort of overload....... UNLESS the OP is using the -15 dB input on the CL, which there isn't one of on the VR/SVT.

There is also a chance that if he plays very hard, he may be seeing the effect of no master..... the volume is "it" on the VR/SVT. But it seems that with a passive bass, he would have to play pretty hard even so.

The bad tube is a possible problem. A flat-out defective unit is a possible problem, wrong part(s) in there somewhere maybe.

You have to wonder why they want to get rid of that one so much......... Maybe even the GC people noticed it....... In which case it must be pretty bad.....

My question is whether BOTH VR channels do it........ The two have different circuits, as the SVT does as well, and a problem in the mid of channel 1 (normal) could cause a lot of extra distortion. if the Bright channel (#2) doesn't do it, well........

 

[suraci]

I dunno.

The VR/SVT has a lower gain in first stage than the CL, so it's unlikely to be some sort of overload....... UNLESS the OP is using the -15 dB input on the CL, which there isn't one of on the VR/SVT.

There is also a chance that if he plays very hard, he may be seeing the effect of no master..... the volume is "it" on the VR/SVT. But it seems that with a passive bass, he would have to play pretty hard even so.

The bad tube is a possible problem. A flat-out defective unit is a possible problem, wrong part(s) in there somewhere maybe.

You have to wonder why they want to get rid of that one so much......... Maybe even the GC people noticed it....... In which case it must be pretty bad.....

My question is whether BOTH VR channels do it........ The two have different circuits, as the SVT does as well, and a problem in the mid of channel 1 (normal) could cause a lot of extra distortion. if the Bright channel (#2) doesn't do it, well........

"A lower gain stage... in the VR"??? Meaning what?

Why do I seem to like the cl a little better? It seems more subtle with the svt tone

 

[meatwad]

"A lower gain stage... in the VR"??? Meaning what?

Why do I seem to like the cl a little better? It seems more subtle with the svt tone

You may like the CL tone better, because it sounds better to you. I know I prefer my CL over the vintage SVTs I've owned. Thing is, my CL can either sound clean or mean, and has a more inherent "modern" tone than my old vintage ones, even though when I changed tubes last year to Winged "C"s, it darkened the tone just a bit more towards the vintage era.

Does my CL sound like an SVT? Of course it does, because they don't sound that much different from each other in the first place. They may behave a little differently due to the gain knob, but if one can understand how to operate the "standby" switch, then the gain knob concept shouldn't be too hard to grasp.

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

"A lower gain stage... in the VR"??? Meaning what?

Someone speculated that the difference in circuits could make that happen.... The input tube in an amp typically has no controls, whatever comes in is amplified and passed onwards.

If that tube gets overloaded, the only control you have on the signal is the instrument volume, and your picking style.

But on the VR, that "uncontrolled" stage amplifies less, and is less likely to overload than the same stage in the CL. Meaning that there is no "inherent difference" in the VR that would cause it to overload more...... and in fact, it should overload LESS easily.

If you like the CL, fine. Nobody HAS to like any amp, no matter how many other players DO like it.

But, when a normally more expensive amp is selling at a low price, AND you find what seems to be a problem with it, you have to wonder if it is really a good example of its type.......

I have NO IDEA why that VR seems so different. bad tube, messed up parts, your expectations and settings, whatever.

Generally, you should NOT find that difference. They are different, but not in that way.

Turn down the instrument volume...... see what happens. It's seeming more likely to me that that VR has "issues".

 

[Jim C]

Do they only have one VR to try?
Seems like a comparison with 2 VR's with the same cabinet and bass would be the defining moment.
Haven't played them both side by side but don't recall ever having a problem like you describe.

 

[MikeyB]

Yea, you may personally dig the CL tone more and that's fine.

I was operating from the perspective of which amp was going to get you to that tone that most players associate with the SVT. That would be the VR.

Might be a moot point as it sounds like it has issues and you may prefer the CL tone.

However - I would HIGHLY encourage anyone to check these amps out at a real gig. Very different IMHO.

-M

 

[suraci]

Great advice from all

 

[Rickett Customs]

1500? VR?, watch out it could be "B" stock, just sayin'. I bought my brand new VR 1600 in the box (100% sure it's not "B" stock). Like it's already been said, the CL will not compete, in the "Vintage Vibe", that the VR possesses.
IMO, between the CL and VR, I feel like I can get good tone out of it (VR), without having to "tweak" with it, alot faster than the CL.