• 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.

Uncle GAS Needs You: Help Design an All Tube Amp!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
#341
jokerjkny said:
very good question...

well, voicing for one thing. again, IMHO, an EQ section on a guitar amp just isnt correctly voiced or "Q"ed in the right freq's like a true bass amp.

also, while smaller power tubes are fine for most guitar amp, IMHO, the 6550 is still king to my ears, tho the SA200 is slowly changing that idealogue within me.
Click to expand...

He's right. This amp will be voiced for lower frequencies and be able to handle the low end more than a guitar amp is required to.
 
#342
Fretless5verfan said:
I agree totally about the EQ, but we haven't even started on the voicing yet...and the SA200 is already changing your mind about the tube. So i'm thinking we're safe from becoming traitors anytime soon :p :smug:

Once the OD/Channel thing is settled i think the EQ voicing should be next on the list. I think that might be the single most important part of the amp. :)
Click to expand...

He's right. The voicing thing is a field of study in and of itself. Which brings me to a point that I was wanting to ask you guys. Since I'm using a Baxandall tone stack (Bass and Treble), do you guys NEED a Mid control? And if so, do you need a Mid Shift as well?

I know that sounds completely stupid to ask, but I noticed that the B15N does not have a Mid control and people seem to LOVE that amp.

Had to ask.
 
#343
JacksonAmpworks said:
Actually this is part of my thinking. Why design the same wheel twice? I might be able to use this same size chassis on a new guitar amp that I've been thinking on. It always plans to think ahead. :)
Click to expand...

FWIW:

just want to toss out that to me it's a smart move to generate player input from a source like this before actually building an amp. There are some sharp players with valuable experience in this (and other TB) forums. The thread has also derailed some early predictions I had that 1) it was just re-inventing the wheel and 2) I expected the thread to become a Donnie Brook of sorts. Pleasantly, neither has come to pass.

It's kind of a hi-tech early Leo Fender approach. I'm guessing the time you're spending in this thread will pay-off in the long run. I don't know if anybody has done it before but I haven't witnessed the approach if so.

Regardless, it's always good to have manufucturer input in these forums, at least I know I appreciate it and I wanted to say as much. And you've handled response with admiral diplomacy so it's good PR at worse. That can't hurt.
 
#344
luknfur said:
FWIW:

just want to toss out that to me it's a smart move to generate player input from a source like this before actually building an amp. There are some sharp players with valuable experience in this (and other TB) forums. The thread has also derailed some early predictions I had that 1) it was just re-inventing the wheel and 2) I expected the thread to become a Donnie Brook of sorts. Pleasantly, neither has come to pass.

It's kind of a hi-tech early Leo Fender approach. I'm guessing the time you're spending in this thread will pay-off in the long run. I don't know if anybody has done it before but I haven't witnessed the approach if so.

Regardless, it's always good to have manufucturer input in these forums, at least I know I appreciate it and I wanted to say as much. And you've handled response with admiral diplomacy so it's good PR at worse. That can't hurt.
Click to expand...

luknfur, your kindness is greatly apprecitated. I already feel that the time that I have invested here has already paid off. Honestly this is one of the most open and welcoming forums I've ever been on.

Regarding the product, I feel that the product that we are all collaborating on will pay off for each of us. Personally I will benefit from offering a product that has been shaped by the desires and opinions of some great working musicians, and the players will benefit from owning an amp that they themselves had a hand in designing.

Seems like a win-win to me. :)

Thank you again.
 
#345
JacksonAmpworks said:
Remember the second channel CAN be used for overdrive, but it will most likely be used a separate channel that can be re EQ'ed for your taste.

I think this would be the most flexible configuration.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY... which is why I would vote for the 2nd channel. One eq'd for my fretless, and one for the fretted. Or.. whatever the need may be for that gig.
 
#347
JacksonAmpworks said:
He's right. The voicing thing is a field of study in and of itself. Which brings me to a point that I was wanting to ask you guys. Since I'm using a Baxandall tone stack (Bass and Treble), do you guys NEED a Mid control? And if so, do you need a Mid Shift as well?

I know that sounds completely stupid to ask, but I noticed that the B15N does not have a Mid control and people seem to LOVE that amp.

Had to ask.
Click to expand...

I think a mid control is VERY important. Selectable or sweepable mids are just that much better.
 
#349
I'd leave the mid control off the "clean" channel, but have one on the other. I know a lot of guys here like to be able to tweak everything but with a Baxandall tone stack, just two bands really ARE better sounding. That's part of the B15 tone and you will lose that if you include a midrange control.
 
#350
Psycho Bass Guy said:
I'd leave the mid control off the "clean" channel, but have one on the other. I know a lot of guys here like to be able to tweak everything but with a Baxandall tone stack, just two bands really ARE better sounding. That's part of the B15 tone and you will lose that if you include a midrange control.
Click to expand...

Yea i'm thinking along psycho's line of though here. If you REALLY want the B15 tone i don't think you can put a mid control on channel 1...BUT, do we want that channel to be the Stingray of pre-amp channels? :p I think you have to decide if that channel is intended for pure B15 tone and nothing else or a B15-ish tone with some flex in it.


And one quick ? Would the tone stack be boost only or boost/cut?
 
#351
If you do the one channel with gain boost only, then I would like to see a midrange control. But if you do the two channel approach, then having mids on the "SVT channel" makes sense, and not having it on the "B-15 channel" also makes sense. Just don't forget about that EQ bypass option! ;)

As for the SVT channel option, I like your idea of adding a seperate master volume control. My main gripe with vintage SVT's is that their best tone (IMHO) doesn;t kick in unless you run them at least 75% wide open, meaning that I found myself struggling to get a good tone at lower volumes. Of course, the 100w/200w/300w option will help, but I like the ability to control gain and volume seperately.

Oh, and two more names for you: "Kong" which I think might be even more appropriate if there werent' another remake in the works (though I am hopeful that Peter Jackson will do another great job), or "The Double Triple." This relates to both the two banks of three tubes, and the two channels modeled after three character named amps (B-15 and SVT).
 
#352
IMHO, lacking a mid control on a bass amp is kinda archaic. on most 3 band EQ's, i usually crank the mids for a stout sound, pull back a little on the treb's to ease that middy harshness, then push up just enough bass to fill in the booty.

but then again, i'm in love w/ Sadowsky's two band onboard pre, so what do i know? ;)
 
#353
I think it might be a good idea to test it out and see what the mids sound like first. I did the same thing as you do with my old Peavey, but now with my SVP i don't really have to. All i have to do is cut the treble a little. And if i'm feeling expecially thumpy i'll flick on the Ultra-lo :D

And the second channel definately needs a mid control as a last restort if nothing else. I'd like to have selectable mids, but that isn't really too crucial for me.
 
#354
Joker,
With the type of tone stack he is proposing, the mids will actually sound BETTER and be MORE adjustable. In a Baxandall tone stack, you can affect the midrange far more with a bass and treble control than with the same circuit but having a dedicated midrange conrtol. I know it doesn't seem to make sense, but somewhere on the net, I have seen an ocsilloscope plot contrasting mid versus no, and you actually have MORE mid control without it.
 
#355
Psycho Bass Guy said:
Joker,
With the type of tone stack he is proposing, the mids will actually sound BETTER and be MORE adjustable. In a Baxandall tone stack, you can affect the midrange far more with a bass and treble control than with the same circuit but having a dedicated midrange conrtol. I know it doesn't seem to make sense, but somewhere on the net, I have seen an ocsilloscope plot contrasting mid versus no, and you actually have MORE mid control without it.
Click to expand...

I know this wasn't addressed to me.. but..
WOW....... that sounds completely impossible.

However; I will defer to your experience and expertise!!
 
#356
Psycho Bass Guy said:
Joker,
With the type of tone stack he is proposing, the mids will actually sound BETTER and be MORE adjustable. In a Baxandall tone stack, you can affect the midrange far more with a bass and treble control than with the same circuit but having a dedicated midrange conrtol. I know it doesn't seem to make sense, but somewhere on the net, I have seen an ocsilloscope plot contrasting mid versus no, and you actually have MORE mid control without it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if this is right, but i was thinking about this earlier. Don't you actually get a mid boost when you cut the treble and bass in this type of set-up? I viewed it as a conservation of volume type deal where if one frequency is cut, some other is boosted. Am i on the right track or am i de-railed completely? :hiding: :ninja:
 
#358
FWIW:

Seems many 2 channel amps I've seen have a bass/treble for clean and mids thrown in for lead - I assume there's a reason for that. From experience, well designed bass/treble controls don't need a mid. I think what will matter is the sound that results and not the controls to get you there. To me, the less tweaking to get tone, the better. Also seems to be a lot of passive control for tube bass amps. I don't know if something like a push/pull mid engage/disengage thing is a possibility or not but, if so, a compromise for thought maybe. To my ears, you can't adjust any band without it affecting another. One of my SS amps with active controls clearly boosts trebles in the process of boosting bass - fine by me becuase it becomes clearer rather than muddy.

As for a name, usually with any of my projects, they name themselves during the evolution. Not something I have to think about - a real plus. And it's always a more appropriate name than anything I might have invisioned from the outset. Little different process when you're getting outside input though.

Since design/construction aspect is out of my league and I've only witnessed what's transpired from the grandstands, the self-names that arose to me were along the lines of: Talkbass, Forum 300, Forum 123, TB 123 - something along those lines. The 300 and 123 refering to output. I assume the length of the name is a factor in cost (always a consideration) and that, like want adds, the more words the more coin. So I guess the shorter the better. I doubt anybody who would buy a 3k amp is going to give much consideration to the name - at least I hope not. The manufacturer they're going to seriously consider.
 
#360
Fretless5verfan said:
Yea i'm thinking along psycho's line of though here. If you REALLY want the B15 tone i don't think you can put a mid control on channel 1...BUT, do we want that channel to be the Stingray of pre-amp channels? :p I think you have to decide if that channel is intended for pure B15 tone and nothing else or a B15-ish tone with some flex in it.


And one quick ? Would the tone stack be boost only or boost/cut?
Click to expand...

Baxandall tone stacks are purely frequency cut. You would have to use active devices to add frequencies. You guys have touched on an issue regarding the mids that the Baxandall really does a great job of address. I'll post on this further down as it will be more appropriate. Stay tuned.... :ninja:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back