Guitarist and Amp in separate rooms?

Sounds interesting. So the signal goes in, gets SS boosted a little, sent to some SS "voicing", then to a tube stage for clipping, then to more "voicing", the back to the second tube stage, then through the PI onto the power section? Crazy! I will honestly reserve judgement until I try one in person. But wtf is wrong with just a basic tube driven preamp section? Amps have been doing that for decades and sound great doing it. I certainly don't know anything about amp design, but I have learned that juggling a few caps and resistors have a massive impact on the gain and sound. And it's simple.

Honestly, a lot of amps sound mediocre or just plain bad these days, and I don't think it's coincidence that they've also become a billion times more complicated than they need to be.

Right! Going to go on a bit now! First off, "juggling a few caps...Is simple" Sure, IN ISOLATION! But in a commercial amplifier the circuitry is synergenic, i.e. change a C or R in a voicing circuit and it changes the load on the previous stage and the level sent to the next . That changes the (mild) distortion characteristics, not often for the better OR/and you find you have buggered up the range of the treble/bass/mid control or all three! And once you have spent days maybe a weeks getting an overall, working voicing that has to be specified and kept on specc for 1000s of samples.

"Complication" is what some people want Greg. Look at that .pdf attached. Yes, you COULD do all that with valves but not in the same sized cab and the extra heat and power required would mean the S1 104 would weigh as much as the S1 200 because of the bigger power transformer!

Then for all that a valved 104 would be a buzzy, hissy beast prone to instability.
B's use op amps for what they do best. Very low noise amplification, no heater hum, no microphony, virtually no heat and it does not hurt that they cost cents! They also almost never go wrong!

Valves of course "have a sound" 'swhy they are there. But an ECC83 does not even start to distort until you hit it with about a volt peak signal and the triode does not give flying fck WHERE that clean volt comes from.

The company also knows that valves are expensive and it is getting ever harder to buy good ones (I used to get 5 83s quiet enough for an A30 front end from a box of 50 new stock) The circuits do everything within reason to protect them and extend their life. Preamps are DC heated and regulated. Support components are overengineered so if an OP valve blows it is very unlikely to damage other circuitry and cost the customer more cash. All the S1 range an most of the HT range have "no load" protection.

Sorry if that all sounds like an ad puff but it really isn't. Blackstar do not think they make the "best" amps in the world. They know plenty of people just don't like them (some on principle having heard just one on The Toob on PC speakers!) . But they also know that it does not matter HOW great an amp sounds if it does not fekking work on the night!

Dave.
 

Attachments

  • Series-One-104EL34-Suggested-Settings.pdf
    868.8 KB · Views: 3
Right! Going to go on a bit now! First off, "juggling a few caps...Is simple" Sure, IN ISOLATION! But in a commercial amplifier the circuitry is synergenic, i.e. change a C or R in a voicing circuit and it changes the load on the previous stage and the level sent to the next . That changes the (mild) distortion characteristics, not often for the better OR/and you find you have buggered up the range of the treble/bass/mid control or all three! And once you have spent days maybe a weeks getting an overall, working voicing that has to be specified and kept on specc for 1000s of samples.
I do understand and agree that changes in one stage affect the others, but that's what engineers are for. At this stage in the game it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to create a usable preamp and tone stack. I get it though that it's difficult to be all things in some of these modern amps. But therein kind of lies the problem with these "voiced" amps IMO. They try to be too many things at once, then they actually do none of them very well.

"Complication" is what some people want Greg. Look at that .pdf attached. Yes, you COULD do all that with valves but not in the same sized cab and the extra heat and power required would mean the S1 104 would weigh as much as the S1 200 because of the bigger power transformer!
Yes indeed. Some people do want all the bells and whistles. I myself have one of Marshall's technological marvels - the JVM 410. 4 channels, 3 modes per channel, individual volume controls, two master volumes, shit tons of gain, 4 reverbs, effects loops, etc. It's got everything, including 9 tubes and gigantic transformers and lots of heat. But it's not any bigger or significantly heavier than anything else. It's circuit boards and schematic look more like a computer than an amp, and I'm sure it's got some of the transistorized mumbo jumbo you were talking about earlier. And it sounds good. Real good. But it doesn't sound as good as a good ol single channel "vintage" style circuit. It's not quite as "organic" and responsive as a "vintage" style single channel circuit.....but it does lots of stuff.

Then for all that a valved 104 would be a buzzy, hissy beast prone to instability.
B's use op amps for what they do best. Very low noise amplification, no heater hum, no microphony, virtually no heat and it does not hurt that they cost cents! They also almost never go wrong!
The inherent noise in high gain tube amps is an issue. I've never heard one that's all natural but quiet. If yall can beat the noise with your op amps, then more power to ya.

Valves of course "have a sound" 'swhy they are there. But an ECC83 does not even start to distort until you hit it with about a volt peak signal and the triode does not give flying fck WHERE that clean volt comes from.
It might not care where it comes from, but it certainly seems to care how it gets there. Some of the mid life Marshalls from the 80s and 90s used diode clipping in the preamp to boost the gain when guitar players were wanting more and more gain. I always thought these amps sounded harsh and unnatural when pushed hard. I had two of them. Technically it's no different than hitting the front of the amp with an overdrive pedal, but Marshall never seemed to get it exactly right IMO with the internal diode clipping. Some people love it though. I think those amps sound better with the internal clipping dialed out and just hitting the front end with a boost pedal.

The company also knows that valves are expensive and it is getting ever harder to buy good ones (I used to get 5 83s quiet enough for an A30 front end from a box of 50 new stock) The circuits do everything within reason to protect them and extend their life. Preamps are DC heated and regulated. Support components are overengineered so if an OP valve blows it is very unlikely to damage other circuitry and cost the customer more cash. All the S1 range an most of the HT range have "no load" protection.
That's a great feature. I don't know why more amp companies don't implement things like a signal short to ground or something when there's no speaker load plugged in. I'm on the fence about tubes. I'm not a big believer in overpriced NOS glass and all that shit. I'm sure it matters to small degree, but I feel that regular production tubes aren't doing me any harm. I'm not old enough to have good ol days experience with tubes though. All I know is what's been around over the past 10 years or so. Before that I paid no attention to any of this. I just plugged into anything and blasted off without a care in the world. I miss those days sometimes.

Sorry if that all sounds like an ad puff but it really isn't. Blackstar do not think they make the "best" amps in the world. They know plenty of people just don't like them (some on principle having heard just one on The Toob on PC speakers!) . But they also know that it does not matter HOW great an amp sounds if it does not fekking work on the night!

Dave.
Ha, no it's cool. Good info. It seems to me that most modern amps are built pretty well these days. I gig kind of a lot, not on a pro level or anything, and I don't ever see anyone's gear breaking down. Sure some are more solid than others, but they all seem to work pretty well. Amp boards aren't overflowing with people having problems that a simple tube swap doesn't fix. In fact, most of the tech problems on message boards are for the old amps that I love the most. :D

I've told you that, for me, my problem with Blackstar is that they don't really sound like anything spectacular. They work as advertised, but they just sound generic to me. Like a Jet City or Bugera or Egnater. They're all okay, but they all have kind of the same mid-level generic tube amp sound. They don't have any of their own character like a Mesa or Marshall or Orange, etc. I guess it's not Blackstar's fault. The classics have been around so long that their sound has become a permanent part of music's DNA. So Blackstar tries to make up for that with tricks, and they just don't seem to do anything for me. But others do seem to like them, and I've heard them sound very good in pro settings with good players. So probably it's just me that sucks. I can suck and still sound awesome through my Marshalls. :D :D
 
" But therein kind of lies the problem with these "voiced" amps IMO. They try to be too many things at once, then they actually do none of them very well."

Sorry Greg? Virtually all guitar amplifiers are "voiced"!
I have found a schematic for certain 1977 50 watter (just down the M1 from me. Went for a job there once. Din't get it!). In no particular order and not the last word in voicing are .....C's 102, 103, 2, 3, 5.
R's 104,102,10, 9...........Then there is the tone stack and there is no way to get a "flat response with that BMT setup.

Diode "clippers": Don't use them. But then neither do virtually anybody else in the amp business (I believe the Tube Screamer has one?) . Peeps varder a PCB, see a couple of 1N4008s and go "Arrgh! Diode *&^%$!! clipper!" It ain't, it is a non-linear feedback amplifier and the closest name to call it might be "a poor man's compressor"!

See, you need to drive them triodes hard but not TOO hard. As I said "control", that is the trick.

The amp market has and is changing. Home recording is huge! Then people want amps for studio work that are very versatile but also very quiet (in the S/N ratio sense!) .
B's have never produced a single ended amp. One reason is that it is hard to keep them hum free (also "the Top Men" don't like the sound of most SE amps) .
So, when a very low power design was mooted the remit was straight to push-pull and the 12BH7. Add a DC balance (hum null) pot and you have the quietest 5 watt amp on the planet. Maybe the quietest valve guitar amp extant?

Probably slowed a bit now but for years "we" could not make HT-5s fast enough!

If all this produces amps some people don't like the sound of? Well "all the peeps all TT?!!"

Keep rockin' Greg.

Dave.
 
" But therein kind of lies the problem with these "voiced" amps IMO. They try to be too many things at once, then they actually do none of them very well."

Sorry Greg? Virtually all guitar amplifiers are "voiced"!
I have found a schematic for certain 1977 50 watter (just down the M1 from me. Went for a job there once. Din't get it!). In no particular order and not the last word in voicing are .....C's 102, 103, 2, 3, 5.
R's 104,102,10, 9...........Then there is the tone stack and there is no way to get a "flat response with that BMT setup.
No, I get that. I'm talking about amp features, like that ISF thing Blackstar does, but it's not just Blackstar. Lots of amps try stuff like that. It's not a bad feature and it's a cool idea, but it just falls a little flat to me.

Diode "clippers": Don't use them. But then neither do virtually anybody else in the amp business (I believe the Tube Screamer has one?) . Peeps varder a PCB, see a couple of 1N4008s and go "Arrgh! Diode *&^%$!! clipper!" It ain't, it is a non-linear feedback amplifier and the closest name to call it might be "a poor man's compressor"!
Maybe "diode clipper" is the wrong term. I don't really know. I'm mainly talking about a SS boost in the preamp. Back in the day they sounded kind of ugly, and you're right not many amps do that anymore that I know of. Or maybe some still do and have just gotten better at it.



The amp market has and is changing. Home recording is huge! Then people want amps for studio work that are very versatile but also very quiet (in the S/N ratio sense!) .
B's have never produced a single ended amp. One reason is that it is hard to keep them hum free (also "the Top Men" don't like the sound of most SE amps) .
So, when a very low power design was mooted the remit was straight to push-pull and the 12BH7. Add a DC balance (hum null) pot and you have the quietest 5 watt amp on the planet. Maybe the quietest valve guitar amp extant?

Probably slowed a bit now but for years "we" could not make HT-5s fast enough!

If all this produces amps some people don't like the sound of? Well "all the peeps all TT?!!"
I'm one of the guys that is not a fan of the little amp trend! I do know that not many people have the ability to blast 100 watters though. I understand. It's like drums. Not many people can play or record live drums in their living situations. They're loud as shit. A 5 watt amp is loud too though. That's where I shake my head. They can sound good for dinking around at TV volumes, but you're not pushing the speaker very hard. Speakers gotta move some air to sound their best. And often they're paired with one speaker in a tiny little cab. Ugh, they sound small and flat. I'd personally rather use a sim than a small amp not moving any air.

Keep rockin' Greg.

Dave.
Thanks I will try!
 
" but you're not pushing the speaker very hard. Speakers gotta move some air to sound their best. And often they're paired with one speaker in a tiny little cab. Ugh, they sound small and flat. I'd personally rather use a sim than a small amp not moving any air."

Sorry Greg but this is just another myth like the "clipper" (you did NOT get the term "wrong" everybody does it) .

Our (not yours!) very own Celestion tell us that you do NOT have to drive the bllx off a speaker for it to sound good and there are many top players and technicians, some are both, that will tell you the same. You may not like the Five and that is your prerogative but it is not anything to do with "moving air" Fork! A Cellie V30 puts out 100dBSPL for just ONE watt input and that is loud but the speaker is barely being tickled.

Guitar amp speakers should be rated for at least 50% above specc'ed amp output and preff' 100% and this is even more important for valved amplifiers.

I have been told the myth started with the Vox AC30 where the speaker rating is only about 30 watts total and they WERE known to blow them!

Dave.
 
I don't care about specs or technical details. I go by sound. Sure a Vintage 30 pumps out 100 decibels at one meter with one watt pushing it. But I'm sorry, it doesn't sound the same as 25, 50, or 100 watts pushing it. Power doesn't equal volume, but it does equal power. If one watt hitting one speaker pumping out 100 decibels is all there was to it then everyone could successfully gig with one watt amps and a 1x12 cab. Good luck with that. Lol. It's no myth that a small amp's lack of headroom and inability to drive a single speaker hard in it's little box results in less-than-great sound quality. It's all subjective of course.
 
I don't care about specs or technical details. I go by sound. Sure a Vintage 30 pumps out 100 decibels at one meter with one watt pushing it. But I'm sorry, it doesn't sound the same as 25, 50, or 100 watts pushing it. Power doesn't equal volume, but it does equal power. If one watt hitting one speaker pumping out 100 decibels is all there was to it then everyone could successfully gig with one watt amps and a 1x12 cab. Good luck with that. Lol. It's no myth that a small amp's lack of headroom and inability to drive a single speaker hard in it's little box results in less-than-great sound quality. It's all subjective of course.

Well I HAVE to care about technical matters and speccs' cos that's how I made a living (and there can be NO art without technology!)

Sure a V30 sounds good as you push it. 15W is going to give you 110dB at a mtr. Less at the audience and 110 is not subjectively all that much louder than 100dB. Also 15W is getting into the thermal compression range of the driver and all manner of weirdness'esss start to happen.

I KNOW some people don't like "answers" to things they think of as "magic" but it is only way I know of to progress. So, Blackstar amps don't sound they way you want them to but due to their systematic approach I reckon the designers could tell you WHY they sound as they do!

The history of valve guitar amps is pretty much a design (Fender) straight out of The Book and a series of happy accidents by Marshall and others who copied the designs and tweaked them a bit.

What a way to run a railroad!

Dave.
 
No doubt there. Pretty much everything branches off those early Fender designs as far as I know. My beloved Marshalls started as Bassman copies with British parts..

From my layman player's perspective, the "magic" is what matters most. I trust and believe the science behind all of this, but there's a point where what actually happens defies what the book tells you it should do. I think it's too black-and-white to simply say a Vintage 30 only needs one watt to make 100 decibels. While that is technically true, that one watt 100 db sound will not feel or sound the same to the player or the audience as a more powerful and with more headroom can. This probably a very bad analogy, but I think of it like a drag car vs a econo compact. Both vehicles can do 60 mph no prob. The drag car will hit 60 mph in 2 seconds and go way beyond. The econobox will hit 60 in 15 seconds and not go much more. :D
 
Maybe "diode clipper" is the wrong term. I don't really know. I'm mainly talking about a SS boost in the preamp. Back in the day they sounded kind of ugly, and you're right not many amps do that anymore that I know of. Or maybe some still do and have just gotten better at it.
You aren't wrong. The JCM 900's had exactly that in them, which is what made them sound thinner and crappier than the 800's. It was an attempt to build in a Tube Screamer, which is what a lot of people were sticking in front of the JCM 800's to get a little more gain. Not sure how, but they screwed the pooch with that. But I think there were other changes made to the amps around the same time which didn't help. The same kinds of things that made the early 800's sound different than the later 800's.

Things get confusing because of Marshall tends to change the amp about a year before they change the name. Which is why you have JMP's with master volumes and 800's with the diode clipper from the transition years.

ECC83 said:
Also 15W is getting into the thermal compression range of the driver and all manner of weirdness'esss start to happen.
The weirdness is what sounds good.
 
There are actually two different ideas here Greg.
My comment was that you do not have to drive a speaker all that hard to get a good tone and that is the opinion of not just THE major guitar speaker mnfctr but many in the industry and I say that to kill the myth and prevent people from putting speakers, possibly amps and hearing in danger.
The "classic" is a 4x12 by V30s and a 100wattter and so each speaker will get less than half its full rated power and Cellies are conservative anyway so all is safe.

Of course we need more than 1W for gigging ! You want that dynamic headroom and thermal compression.

Some people say knowing the physics behind the rainbow kills the magic? To me, knowing all I can about everything enhances it (and btw, makes me a living and helps me help people!)

Dave.
 
You aren't wrong. The JCM 900's had exactly that in them, which is what made them sound thinner and crappier than the 800's. It was an attempt to build in a Tube Screamer, which is what a lot of people were sticking in front of the JCM 800's to get a little more gain. Not sure how, but they screwed the pooch with that. But I think there were other changes made to the amps around the same time which didn't help. The same kinds of things that made the early 800's sound different than the later 800's.
Yup, the first two editions of the JCM 900s had diode clipping. The later JCM 900 SL-X version is all-tube, but still isn't all that great. I personally think the first edition JCM 900 MkIII is a great amp. The Dual Reverb and SL-X, not so much.

The 800s had a few things go on. For one, there were two different models/circuits. The single channel 2203/2204 holy-grail types, and the split-channel 2205/2210. The single channel models were all tube, caveman basic, and some of the best amps Marshall ever made. The split-channel versions have, to the best of my recollection, an additional diode clipping circuit in the lead channel that was the precursor to the JCM 900.

The 100w single channel 800s also went through a filter reduction and board layout change in 85. This is like the mason-dixon line between the most desirable 800s and the still desirable, but not as much 800s. But all of the single channel no-diode 800s are generally regarded as "better" than the split-channel diode-clipped 800s.

Things get confusing because of Marshall tends to change the amp about a year before they change the name. Which is why you have JMP's with master volumes and 800's with the diode clipper from the transition years.
The JMP master volume amps came out in 76. They were their own thing. Marshall made JMP Super Leads with no master volumes, and JMP master volume amps. That was the birth of the 2203/2204, and those amps are what became the JCM 800. The only difference between a 1977 JMP 2203 100w master volume and a 1983 JCM 800 2203 100w master volume is cosmetics. The circuits are identical. The older JMP master volumes had lower output power transformers though. The JMP/JCM master volume amps are essentially the exact same thing though.
 
There are actually two different ideas here Greg.
My comment was that you do not have to drive a speaker all that hard to get a good tone and that is the opinion of not just THE major guitar speaker mnfctr but many in the industry and I say that to kill the myth and prevent people from putting speakers, possibly amps and hearing in danger.
The "classic" is a 4x12 by V30s and a 100wattter and so each speaker will get less than half its full rated power and Cellies are conservative anyway so all is safe.

Of course we need more than 1W for gigging ! You want that dynamic headroom and thermal compression.

Some people say knowing the physics behind the rainbow kills the magic? To me, knowing all I can about everything enhances it (and btw, makes me a living and helps me help people!)

Dave.

Ha, I'm not talking about pushing a speaker into coil meltdown. You don't have to break a speaker, but you need to do more than tickle it. It makes a difference. There's no myth about it.
 
Yup, the first two editions of the JCM 900s had diode clipping. The later JCM 900 SL-X version is all-tube, but still isn't all that great. I personally think the first edition JCM 900 MkIII is a great amp. The Dual Reverb and SL-X, not so much.

The 800s had a few things go on. For one, there were two different models/circuits. The single channel 2203/2204 holy-grail types, and the split-channel 2205/2210. The single channel models were all tube, caveman basic, and some of the best amps Marshall ever made. The split-channel versions have, to the best of my recollection, an additional diode clipping circuit in the lead channel that was the precursor to the JCM 900.

The 100w single channel 800s also went through a filter reduction and board layout change in 85. This is like the mason-dixon line between the most desirable 800s and the still desirable, but not as much 800s. But all of the single channel no-diode 800s are generally regarded as "better" than the split-channel diode-clipped 800s.


The JMP master volume amps came out in 76. They were their own thing. Marshall made JMP Super Leads with no master volumes, and JMP master volume amps. That was the birth of the 2203/2204, and those amps are what became the JCM 800. The only difference between a 1977 JMP 2203 100w master volume and a 1983 JCM 800 2203 100w master volume is cosmetics. The circuits are identical. The older JMP master volumes had lower output power transformers though. The JMP/JCM master volume amps are essentially the exact same thing though.
My god, I used to know all that. It's all but faded away now. I guess the mind is the first thing to go.
I had a few non master volume JMPs, a goofy single channel JCM 800 that ran 6550 power tubes and an Ampeg V4. Then I got my Laney endorsement and I got rid of my remaining Marshalls... Oh how I wish I still had them.

The only amp I have left is my heavily modified Anniversary edition AOR Pro-tube 100 in white tolex. It's awesome, as long as you want to sound like me in 1991, otherwise...
 
Ha, I'm not talking about pushing a speaker into coil meltdown. You don't have to break a speaker, but you need to do more than tickle it. It makes a difference. There's no myth about it.

I do have to agree with Greg on pushing the speaker & moving air...Myself, I've been down the road of trying to get a cranked amp tone, with little to no noise, & while it can be somewhat done, it's pretty damn hard, or for me anyway...

I started with a Blackstar HT-5 a couple years ago, & while it was a decent amp, it wasn't what I was after....

Bought an Egnater Tweaker 15w...same thing, decent little amp (which I still have btw), but it just didn't have "that" sound I was trying to get...

Bought a Marshall DSL-1 H, the 1 watt, 50th anniversary tube head...While I will say my sound improved (to me anyway, tone is really subjective), it still wasn't "there"...

Went the 1x12 route, still have 'em, & even built an ISO cab which did kill the noise in the room quite a bit, but my tones still weren't what I was trying to achieve....The home-made ISO cab actually sounded pretty good though...

This summer, I bought a Marshall DSL100 & 1960A 4x12, & to me, my tones improved drastically....Good amp, just loud as fuck...but it still wasn't what I was after....

A couple months ago, I bought a Ceriatone Chupacabra 50w hot-rodded plexi clone, & BLAM!!!!! That amp has "that" sound, but like the DSL100, it's loud as fuck...

But, I will say, you don't have to peel the paint off the walls to get a good sounding recording, but you do have to move a little air into the mic....I could've just bought the 50/100w amps, & a 4x12 to begin with, but I was trying to go the "low-noise" route, & for me, it's just not as good....YMMV


One thing I have bought this year, & would not recommend at all is a Randall ISO cab....Sure, it kills the noise in the room, but it also kills the recorded tone, so much so, I've got a $400 end table now....
 
a goofy single channel JCM 800 that ran 6550 power tubes ..

Those aren't goofy, that's how they came. Almost every Marshall of the 70s into the mid 80s slated for US distribution had 6550s. Marshall got tired of filling broken EL34 warranty claims so they specified the amps be shipped with more robust 6550s and/or be shipped tubeless and the distributor would fit them with 6550s.

What's really odd is that Canadian Marshalls got EL34s...like shipping from england to canada is less damaging or something. Another oddity is that Canadian Marshalls kept using metal toggles while all others switched to plastic rocker switches, and the Canadian Marshalls didn't have a 16 ohm speaker tap. 4 and 8 only. Weird stuff.

My 1979 JMP 2204 (50w Master Volume) was originally a 6550 amp, but it's been converted to run EL34s. It's a JMP era amp, but the circuit is exactly the same as a JCM 800.
 
All of my JMP's were EL34. I had a buddy that had an EL34 800, I figured mine was the goofy one.
 
All of my JMP's were EL34. I had a buddy that had an EL34 800, I figured mine was the goofy one.

Do you remember what year they were and where they came from? Might they have been converted? That was one of the first things everyone did to these amps. I suppose it's likely that the early/mid 70s non-master amps still came with EL34s. But a huge chunk of late 70s JMP master volumes and early 800s had 6550s.
 
I know the earliest one of them was a '74, the rest could have been late 70's. I bought them all used, except for the 800. Two of them were heavily modified. One had a master volume added, another had an extra gain stage and bass boost. I got rid of them 30 years ago, so the details are pretty fuzzy now.
 
I was wrong! The Tube Screamer does NOT use a diode clipper but the non-linear feedback arrangement.

The attached shots show the two circuits, hardly ever see a true clipper in a guitar amp.

No, I did not mean melting the voice coils (well the old paper formers used to catch fire!) either. Again, I simply mean that speakers should be rated well above the amplifier's specified power output and many valve amplifiers are capable of well above the showroom floor figure. I never measured an HT-60 that gave less than an easy 80watts. I understand there is a "100W" Marshall model that can get to around twice that if pressed?

I do not dispute what people hear, that's the business after all! But I think much of it is more about the Fletcher Munson curves and adrenalin than speaker cone displacement.
LOUD is ALWAYS better!

Dave.
 

Attachments

  • clipper proper.png
    clipper proper.png
    312 KB · Views: 137
  • TS. NOT a clipper!.png
    TS. NOT a clipper!.png
    262.4 KB · Views: 138
I was wrong! The Tube Screamer does NOT use a diode clipper but the non-linear feedback arrangement.

The attached shots show the two circuits, hardly ever see a true clipper in a guitar amp.

No, I did not mean melting the voice coils (well the old paper formers used to catch fire!) either. Again, I simply mean that speakers should be rated well above the amplifier's specified power output and many valve amplifiers are capable of well above the showroom floor figure. I never measured an HT-60 that gave less than an easy 80watts. I understand there is a "100W" Marshall model that can get to around twice that if pressed?

I do not dispute what people hear, that's the business after all! But I think much of it is more about the Fletcher Munson curves and adrenalin than speaker cone displacement.
LOUD is ALWAYS better!

Dave.

Haha, I have a 100w Marshall 1959 Super Lead feeding a Greenback loaded cab rated for 100 watts. Some Super Leads have been measured at approx 170 actual watts when driven to the max. I know one day it's all gonna blow spectacularly. At that point I will rebuild and do it all over again. Rock and fucking roll. :D

If you can please, if you have the time, check out the schematics for these amps:

Marshall JCM 900 2100 MkIII
Marshall JCM 900 4100 Dual Reverb
Marshall JCM 800 2210

I believe all three of these amps have "diode clippers" for their secondary gain channels. Or maybe even LEDs.

Here...look at this one. This is the Marshall JCM 800 2210. I'm not very good at reading schematics, but I think I see the diode circuit at V1b.

marshall_jcm800_splitch_100w_2210.pdf_1.png
 
Back
Top