tubeswell wrote:The 5G9 trem just has the most hypnotic slam.
I read an old post of yours about the trem knocking you into next week. I always wanted to try time travel and it's been many a moon since I had a trem amp to play with, so the 5G9 got moved to the top of the list.
240-0-240 to 340 is pretty much 1.4X, so I think I'll need 200V-220V to keep it at ~300V for a 6K6. That's going to have to be custom as I'll need Euro taps too. What happens to the sound as you go up and down on the B+? Does it matter much?
I got the 6G15 as a PTP all drawn out, and on the list. No money for parts but plenty of time for drawing. Once they're drawn in 1:1 scale and triple checked I can knock 'em out like a machine. I'm real curious to see how a PTP reverb works out. This one might just be the one that bites me on the butt.
Kazooman, I have a brown 6G15 just like your pic. Mine's a '62, not quite as clean as yours.
There is a difference between the 6G15 and the built in BF version. 6G15 (at least my brown one, there are later black ones too) seems to me bigger, more "lush" if that's the right word. Others might say "overblown" or "too surfy". All depends on what you like in a reverb, and what you're used to.
Personally I seem to like "lush" "overblown" AND "surfy" except I wouldn't do that with a Marshall!
With my matching '62 Deluxe it's a marriage made in heaven, especially with the Deluxe's tremelo on too! '62 prom night, eat your heart out!
Oh, and +1 on the 6K6GT. They're correct AND way cheaper than NOS 6V6GT.
rp wrote:240-0-240 to 340 is pretty much 1.4X, so I think I'll need 200V-220V to keep it at ~300V for a 6K6. That's going to have to be custom as I'll need Euro taps too. What happens to the sound as you go up and down on the B+? Does it matter much?
It has a bit more headroom with a higher voltage. You can also bias the stages to be centre-biased to avoid clipping. The thing is to keep the reverb signal as clean as possible with as minimal a noise floor as possible. That's why shielding, grounding, and even going to FW rectification are important (as is using a whole-of-supply CLC filter to remove any residual hum ripple (because the reverb transformer is single ended. Although it might be a neat experiment to try a PP reverb transformer, but that means adding an extra 6V6 and a PI stage, and is probably overkill)
Last edited by tubeswell on Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
I know what you mean about "THE" sound of the original reverb units.
I think it also has something to do with components not just the circuitry. I built my clone following the original circuit with the exception that I used the current full-wave bridge rectifier rather than the original diodes in series. It sounds very good, but not a nice as the vintage model. I have compared voltages, swapped tubes, swapped reverb tanks, etc. Still there is an audible difference.
I play mine through a variety of amps including a blonde/oxblood Bandmaster 1 X 12 with the tone ring that I have owned almost forever. Getting older is a bitch, but at least you have a personal source for some nice vintage gear!
Kazoo, I think that almost 50 years of ageing has a lot to do with the tone, especially iron, reverb pan and tubes.
Are you using NOS, or at least old US or Euro tubes in your clone? If not, that should make a big difference. I have an RCA short gray plate 12AX7, a Sylvania 12AT7 and the original '61 RCA 6K6GT in my '62. I have better 12AT7s than the Sylvania but I don't want to burn them out as a reverb driver.
By "swapped tubes" I meant that I had taken the tubes and pan from the vintage unit and tried them in the clone. not much of a difference in the effect. The new reverb just has a bit harsher tone to it. If you didn't have the two side by side to compare you would be happy with either.
