• 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.

The Sushi Box FX Secret Society

#1,281
fivestringgecko said:
That looks quite nice! I'll be interested to see how this one ends up.

Curiosity question, since I've never tried an LA-1A: What's the benefit of having three tubes in there, as opposed to just one?

Also, an idea for another Sushi Box pedal, since you don't have any envelope filters at the moment... What about your take on an EHX Tube Zipper? Seems like something that would totally be down your street! (you know, because you don't have enough to do... lol)
Click to expand...

I'll look into the Tube Zipper, see if I can get it into (counting on fingers) June?

As for the multiple tubes, the two 12AU7 are actually completely in parallel, so you can absolutely pull one out and the pedal will still work. Effectrode says they did this because running tube stages in parallel works to reduce noise, which is absolutely true. It also changes the impedance of the circuit, affecting the tone and making it "fatter." The third tube (12AT7) is the recovery stage post-compression and also controls the boost. They also ran the two halves of the 12AT7, so they basically have 4 parallel stages and 2 parallel stages, meaning the whole thing could absolutely be done with a single tube if all you're looking at is number of triodes involved, but it would sound very different.

Just for fun I tried running my LA-1A without the second 12AU7 and it worked just fine and still sounded good, but not as good as it did with all three tubes. I was hoping it wouldn't be a noticeable difference so I could justify leaving out a tube, but it is absolutely noticeable. Effectrode did their homework and they chose the right number of tubes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKBassman, shaggy45, gh0st42 and 4 others
#1,282
Oh, and on another note, The X Series has now been completely verified. I made a stupid (but easily fixed) mistake on Lab Rat, but I was able to fix it on the prototype with a wire running along the bottom. So all the X Series are good to go, and I think I'll open up ordering for the next month or two either tonight or tomorrow.
126114130_127674478884745_5359429858357591906_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKBassman, Bassgeer, Lammchop93 and 8 others
#1,283
Sushi Box FX said:
Oh, and on another note, The X Series has now been completely verified. I made a stupid (but easily fixed) mistake on Lab Rat, but I was able to fix it on the prototype with a wire running along the bottom. So all the X Series are good to go, and I think I'll open up ordering for the next month or two either tonight or tomorrow.
View attachment 4058966
Click to expand...
Another X-Series pedal to replace my regular pedal. Lol. I guess I’ll be buying a slot in March.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sushi Box FX and TwototheValley
#1,284
Sushi Box FX said:
I'll look into the Tube Zipper, see if I can get it into (counting on fingers) June?

As for the multiple tubes, the two 12AU7 are actually completely in parallel, so you can absolutely pull one out and the pedal will still work. Effectrode says they did this because running tube stages in parallel works to reduce noise, which is absolutely true. It also changes the impedance of the circuit, affecting the tone and making it "fatter." The third tube (12AT7) is the recovery stage post-compression and also controls the boost. They also ran the two halves of the 12AT7, so they basically have 4 parallel stages and 2 parallel stages, meaning the whole thing could absolutely be done with a single tube if all you're looking at is number of triodes involved, but it would sound very different.

Just for fun I tried running my LA-1A without the second 12AU7 and it worked just fine and still sounded good, but not as good as it did with all three tubes. I was hoping it wouldn't be a noticeable difference so I could justify leaving out a tube, but it is absolutely noticeable. Effectrode did their homework and they chose the right number of tubes.
Click to expand...
Yeah but what would it sound like with 4 tubes?! Might as well one em up lol. Nice work, can't wait to hear it. I have enough tube warmth and dislike compressors so I'll be on the side lines. The Watson on the other hand, sounds alot like what I want. Just wish you would X that one up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sushi Box FX and shaggy45
#1,284
kranahan said:
Another X-Series pedal to replace my regular pedal. Lol. I guess I’ll be buying a slot in March.
Click to expand...

Very much looking forward to my LU-X....would really like to directly compare it to an actual AD200B....does anyone in this thread actually own that amp?

I’ve played through one before, but currently don’t have access to one (or can even play for that matter)....
 
  • Like
Reactions: kranahan, Sushi Box FX and shaggy45
#1,285
So. Question. And I know this has been touched on before but since the X series is about to be unleashed I thought I would ask… Besides being able to swap tubes, and the power draw, Is there any practical reason to choose the X series over the mini tube versions?

Do they sound better/different? Do they have more headroom? Higher Fideity for recording? Lower noise? Cooks bacon faster?

I really like the idea of the mini-tube pedal because it something different. I have a bunch of gear with 12AX7’s so one of the things I initially liked about these pedals was again, just that they were something a little different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sushi Box FX, TwototheValley, Lowendtech and 2 others
#1,287
letsgethandsome said:
So. Question. And I know this has been touched on before but since the X series is about to be unleashed I thought I would ask… Besides being able to swap tubes, and the power draw, Is there any practical reason to choose the X series over the mini tube versions?

Do they sound better/different? Do they have more headroom? Higher Fideity for recording? Lower noise? Cooks bacon faster?

I really like the idea of the mini-tube pedal because it something different. I have a bunch of gear with 12AX7’s so one of the things I initially liked about these pedals was again, just that they were something a little different.
Click to expand...


I’d like to know the same! Also, are all pedals going to have an X option? My bank wants you to say no to a Wattson X
 
  • Like
Reactions: letsgethandsome
#1,288
letsgethandsome said:
So. Question. And I know this has been touched on before but since the X series is about to be unleashed I thought I would ask… Besides being able to swap tubes, and the power draw, Is there any practical reason to choose the X series over the mini tube versions?

Do they sound better/different? Do they have more headroom? Higher Fideity for recording? Lower noise? Cooks bacon faster?

I really like the idea of the mini-tube pedal because it something different. I have a bunch of gear with 12AX7’s so one of the things I initially liked about these pedals was again, just that they were something a little different.
Click to expand...
So honestly the #1 reason I did the X series was because I wanted to test my tube-mounting system before I committed to doing it on the Deep Dish, then I thought it was really neat so I kept going :P

You already listed 95% of the benefits over the mini tubes, current draw and the option to swap tubes for different tones (as I've mentioned before 6N21B can be swapped, but they all sound the same so there's no real point). 12AX7 has a higher amplification factor than 6N21B (100 vs 75) so they actually have a little more gain i.e. less headroom. I would say the only other real factor is microphonics. Not all 6N21B are microphonic, but they are more likely to be than 12AX7. I don't know specifically why, but this seems to be very common in all types of mini tubes.

I wouldn't say the X series sound better or worse, but I'm one of those pesky tube rollers that will go through 20 tubes to find the one that sounds 1% better, so depending on the tube you have in it I will say it has the potential to sound different. But the additional cost isn't because it's "better," the cost is completely because they are more expensive and more work to build.

And for the record, 6N21B will cook your bacon a lot faster, 12AX7 don't heat up as much as 6N21B.

Lammchop93 said:
I’d like to know the same! Also, are all pedals going to have an X option? My bank wants you to say no to a Wattson X
Click to expand...
I'm still on the fence on the others. The single tube versions were no-brainers in my opinion as I can still fit them in the same form factor as my typical top-mount pedals. If I were to go to a dual tube I would definitely need to go another size up. I'm not completely ruling it out, especially because Dr. Wattson is turning into another pedal that people are really liking, but it's not going to happen by January for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKBassman, letsgethandsome, kranahan and 2 others
#1,289
Sushi Box FX said:
I'm one of those pesky tube rollers that will go through 20 tubes to find the one that sounds 1% better, so depending on the tube you have in it I will say it has the potential to sound different.
Click to expand...
The exact reason I'm replacing all of my regulars with X's.
Sushi Box FX said:
And for the record, 6N21B will cook your bacon a lot faster, 12AX7 don't heat up as much as 6N21B.
Click to expand...
I can verify the 6N21B in the smaller/side jack enclosure can cook bacon the fastest!
 
  • Like
Reactions: shaggy45, TwototheValley, letsgethandsome and 1 other person
#1,292
  • Like
Reactions: mikeGJ, shaggy45, TwototheValley and 1 other person
#1,294
kranahan said:
I received my PA with top jacks. It sounds the same and looks great! More importantly, it barely fits in the space I put it.

This picture is for @Sonicblaze. I hope you use up all of your cellular data looking at it! :laugh:
Click to expand...

I'm really curious about the comparison between the Accelerator and the Slampegg. Can you share some thoughts on how they compare? The main difference is the EQ type (Fender style vs. Baxandall, yeah? Apologies if I have that wrong)... But can you expand with any thoughts/comparison between the two? I was *this* close to an Accelerator, but went with the Slampegg. Would be curious to hear thoughts from you since you have both!

Also, how do they do for heat wedged in right next to each other like that?

5sg.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kranahan and Rocksolid
#1,296
fivestringgecko said:
I'm really curious about the comparison between the Accelerator and the Slampegg. Can you share some thoughts on how they compare? The main difference is the EQ type (Fender style vs. Baxandall, yeah? Apologies if I have that wrong)... But can you expand with any thoughts/comparison between the two? I was *this* close to an Accelerator, but went with the Slampegg. Would be curious to hear thoughts from you since you have both!

Also, how do they do for heat wedged in right next to each other like that?

5sg.
Click to expand...
The Slampegg is pretty amazing. It’s more flexible. It can cover B-15 and SVT tones. The Slampegg is actually my favorite pre pedal on my board. It really nails some good Ampeg tones. It can achieve a nice little breakup as well.

That being said, the PA still sounds fantastic. It has more volume and gain on tap. It definitely seems it could drive a power amp. I’m not sure if anyone has confirmed this. The PA has its own color that makes it unique. It’s hard to explain especially since I’ve never owned an Alembic pre to compare it to. There is a tight window where you can find a very punchy breakup when cranking the gain (gain 3:30/vol 7:30-8) Otherwise, don’t crank the gain. It can be very harsh and unpleasant.

There are some similarities and I attribute them to both having 6N21B tubes inside.

The heat is not an issue with the bigger enclosures. The smaller enclosures with side jacks get much hotter. Don’t get me wrong, they still get pretty warm.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BunchyMutt, fivestringgecko, TwototheValley and 1 other person
#1,297
kranahan said:
The Slampegg is pretty amazing. It’s more flexible. It can cover B-15 and SVT tones. The Slampegg is actually my favorite pre pedal on my board. It really nails some good Ampeg tones. It can achieve a nice little breakup as well.

That being said, the PA still sounds fantastic. It has more volume and gain on tap. It definitely seems it could drive a power amp. I’m not sure if anyone has confirmed this. The PA has its own color that makes it unique. It’s hard to explain especially since I’ve never owned an Alembic pre to compare it to. There is a tight window where you can find a very punchy breakup when cranking the gain (gain 3:30/vol 7:30-8) Otherwise, don’t crank the gain. It can be very harsh and unpleasant.

There are some similarities and I attribute them to both having 6N21B tubes inside. They both have a similar sound in that regard.

The heat is not an issue with the bigger enclosures. The smaller enclosures with side jacks got much hotter. Don’t get me wrong, they still get pretty warm.
Click to expand...
There is a huge amount of output on tap with the PA. It easily drives my Berg IP310 powered cab.

So the Slampeg doesn't have the same amount of output?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fivestringgecko and kranahan

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back