• 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.

Which preamp tube would you choose?

Which 12ax7?

  • Tung Sol

    Votes: 25 40.3%

  • Mullard

    Votes: 14 22.6%

  • JJ

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Total voters
    62
#41
For a modern amp I would go with JJ's I spent so much money tube chasing it's embarrassing but I did come to the conclusion that NOS tubes in modern amps come with a negligible to zero sound difference over modern manufactured tubes at least to my ears.
 
#42
JN8642 said:
Hey there,

I'm re-tubing my Mesa Bass 400 (6550) soon and am sold on Tung Sol for the power section.

Just wondering what you guys think of these that are in the poll and why you'd choose them for the pre-amp section.

Currently, it has the Mesa brand pre-amp tubes which I heard are just re-branded Sovtek's or something and Sovtek power tubes. It was last re-tubed in 2009 by the previous owner and I've it for over a year now and have used it a ton and think it'd about time for some new tube goodness.

Thank in advance!
Click to expand...
Some of the BEST TUBES MADE I been working with tubes for many many MOONs.
Tung Sol (NOS) if you can get them at a good price.
 
#43
I am a big fan of reissue Tung Sols and they are a great choice for pre amp tubes in any amp. I also regularly use their power tubes in my THD amps.

Sovteks might not be a good choice for your power tubes though - Mesa Boogie amps are fixed bias and it's generally best to stick with their branded power tubes as they are in spec.
 
#48
coreyfyfe said:
I've bought tubes from a lot of online and physical vendors. The microphonic gold lion 12AX7s I got from the tube store dot com. In my experience they do minimal testing at best and their matching has been pretty spotty.
Click to expand...

Too bad your Gold Lions were microphonic as the ones I have rolled sounded really good.

The premium Genalex ECC83/B759 is Russian made and has the spiral wound heater. I found this tube to have a very detailed and articulate mid range and extended highs. It wound up being my second choice several times for V1 and it was a very close decision. Ultimately I went with the Mullard ECC83 but the choice was always a trade off. The upper mid range contour of the Genalex is a bit more even and neutral, but I really like the extra punch and focus across the low end of the Mullard. I felt with a bit of a mid range boost I could get the Mullard's mid range close to the Genalex. With a bit of bass boost, the Genalex lows are more like a Sovtek 12AX7LPS in my application...a bit too woolly for my taste. I think this tube would be a good choice for V1 in the Mesa 400 because you could add a little low mid punch with the graphic...but they cost >$40.

The standard Genalex ECC83/12AX7 is Chinese made and it sounds like a really good Sino 12AX7B. Low noise with lots of gain; extended but even highs and lows with very articulate mids; a slight boost in the upper mids, but softer than the Tung Sol. I selected this tube for V2 in one bass amp and one guitar amp. I really love it in the OD channel of a Trace Elliot V8. The overdrive with this tube is mellow and even and the distortion comes on very linearly with great touch sensitivity. This tube would be a good choice anywhere you need a premium Chinese 12AX7. Price >$26
 
#50
Jay2U said:
It's not just the tube brands. Also the surrounding components matter, as well as the voltage levels. So a tube that performs well in one amp may be a second choice for another amp and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Very true. Otherwise I would chose the same tube for every position, and that is definitely not the case. Some tubes sound awful in one position and great in another within the same amp. Additionally, sometimes you get a bit of synergy where the characteristics of two dissimilar tubes in a given circuit really compliment each other in a very flattering manner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay2U
#51
Thanks for the replies guys! After hearing your responses I think I'll go for the JJ's or the Mullards! I've heard a lot of people say JJ's just seem to work well with the 400 and 400+ and even though everyone seems to be digging the Tung Sol's the most, hearing that they're on the bright side concerns me since I use my bright switch as a big part of my tone and that plus my overall setup might make it overkill on the brightness scale since my tone's already very bright.
 
#52
JN8642 said:
Thanks for the replies guys! After hearing your responses I think I'll go for the JJ's or the Mullards! I've heard a lot of people say JJ's just seem to work well with the 400 and 400+ and even though everyone seems to be digging the Tung Sol's the most, hearing that they're on the bright side concerns me since I use my bright switch as a big part of my tone and that plus my overall setup might make it overkill on the brightness scale since my tone's already very bright.
Click to expand...

Cool! If you find that you are not getting the pick attack you want with the new tubes, throw a Tung Sol in V1 and you will probably be good to go. Let us know how it turns out.
 
#56
gregmon79 said:
Yeah that's why I'm going with Sovtek next time. That's what was in there when I got it and it was a mean, LOUD, machine. Not that it's not now. But it seemed to me that a lil something was lost when I swapped tubes out.
Click to expand...

Low end and low mid loss was really pronounced with the Buster bc that amp has a master volume and an EQ I can kick in and out.
Also I'm running across a lot of guitar focused "amp techs" that want to grit up my tube bass amps as if they were were Fender Twins.

They don't need help "singing" at high volume.

Amp has Mesa tubes in it, I just wanted the pots sprayed out.
I guess I'm doing it myself.
 
#60
somebrains said:
Low end and low mid loss was really pronounced with the Buster bc that amp has a master volume and an EQ I can kick in and out.
Also I'm running across a lot of guitar focused "amp techs" that want to grit up my tube bass amps as if they were were Fender Twins.

They don't need help "singing" at high volume.

Amp has Mesa tubes in it, I just wanted the pots sprayed out.
I guess I'm doing it myself.
Click to expand...

IMHO the problem with having some techs replace your preamp tubes is they have a favorite tube that they think works in all applications for all people. I totally agree that the Tung Sol 12AX7 is an awesome V1 tube, but it doesn't typically give me the sound or feel that I want in either guitar or bass amps. I had my JCM 800 Super Lead retubed a few years back and thought it sounded awesome when I got it back. Tech installed three Tung Sol 12AX7s.

A few weeks back one of the Tung Sols started loosing gain and changing character. At first this was an improvement because Super Leads go from almost off to way too loud when you turn up the gain on the lead channel. Eventually the tube drifted enough to start sounding off. I rolled a few tubes through the amp and found I liked it better with a Svetlana 12AX7 in V1 and a JJ ECC83s in V2 as this combination reduced gain and softened/mellowed the top end a bit. The Tung Sol made the cut in V3.

With this tube combination the amp's volume is far more manageable and the tone is less peaky. In the event that I could or would play this amp loud enough to push the output section into compression or drive, I am confident the Tung Sol in V1 would be a better choice to get the desired Marshall crunch. I would probably stick with the JJ ECC83s in V2, or maybe a Ruby 12AX7 (Chinese) that also sounded really good in that position.

Some techs will interview you to get an idea of the desired sound a feel, and roll tubes to give you what you want...the problem is they either have to know a formula the creates the desired results in your amp, or they have to have a variety tubes and spend time to figure it out. From an economic standpoint, this is not very practical.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back