Different celestion 65s?

[neikeel]

Who knows the difference between Celestion G12-65s?

I have two T3120 (1777 cones) with Marshall gold script on black logos and two T3054 also 1777 cones and same Marshall black/gold logos. Also have two T3054 (no visible but look original cone codes) but with generic silver Celestion labels.

Why both 15ohm and M magnets with 1777 cones from same era with different T codes??

[BaronGreenback]

the "marshall version" of the speaker will sometimes have its own T number, even though it might be exactly the same as another model.

Any minor variation in the construction = different T number.

apparently there are loads of G12-65's, maybe 80 or more with different T numbers. I forget the exact number, but its a lot.

the best person to ask is dr.decibel at celestion

[jape88]

Neil, as far as I can gather the T3054 is the celestion branded speaker so the same speaker when sold to marshall with their logo was given the code T3120. I'd imagine the T3054, with the marshall sticker is probably marshall running out of stock? maybe over stickered?
The 1777 code is a general celestion part number for a lead cone so it bears no info as to who made the cone apparently, hence the early appearance of the code in the early 60's The only easy code to tally to a supplier is the 003 (3) and 014 (4) to Pulsonic. The RIC is another code which as far as I can gather isn't a direct sign of a manufacturer, may be 'R'ola 'C'elestion made? no doubt the Baron can shed some light on this?

[BaronGreenback]

Well most "knowledge" about celestion cones is actually based on rumours and guesswork passed down the grapevine over the years by guitar players. Celestion will not divulge any information about their old suppliers. They say they didnt keep any records, but it could be that they just want to keep their cards close to their chest.

The RIC cones are the ones said to have been made 'in house'. This does make sense to me because they were using RIC stamped cones through the 1950's on their B024/B025 'G12' alnico speakers before they started using pulsonics in the early 60's. The Thames Ditton factory was the old British Rola factory, and British Rola were apparently very self sufficient, making their own cones, transformers, coils etc. So they would have had the equipment to make those cones at Thames Ditton. Also the 'G12' alnico is actually an old British Rola model that dates right back to the mid 1930's. So British Rola were making G12's long before they bought celestion in 1947.

Im not sure about the RIC standing for "Rola Celestion", because there are also 'NIB' stamped cones and 'POB' stamped cones around that appear to be made by the same supplier.

Celestion were still using the Thames Ditton factory until 1975. So those RIC cones that show up from 1973 to 1975 could well have been made there.

back to the G12-65's, I have yet to see an old G12-65 that did not have a kurt mueller cone (or what we have all come to call kurt muellers anyway) but the earlier speakers blackbacks, creambacks etc are a different story.

[jape88]

Great info as ever Baron. I think I jumped ahead with the RC thing from something Jeff West said but as you say 'rumours and guesswork' I do agree with you with celestion not giving things away, I still can't get my head round the fact they haven't change their site with the order of the '68 date codes being wrong ...plus I'd love to know more of the history behind the Pulsonic factory, one day things will come to light

It would be nice to get a sticky in the speaker section with some of your findings too Baron, V.George is this possible?

[BaronGreenback]

thanks, yeah there are a few things wrong with that old date chart first published by Michael Doyle. I was disappointed he made no effort to update it in his latest book. The format for 1968 is clearly incorrect, and I dont agree with the "non-skipped 'I' before 1963" theory for the month codes. Probably just a typo or factory mistake on that one speaker he found. I saw a 1964 speaker recently that clearly had an I printed for the year instead of a J, just a printing error in my opinion. Plus Ive seen 1950's speakers with M month codes. They have also used the letter A for 1991 occasionaly too which is not included on that chart.

[Scumback Speakers]

The original Dr. Decibel was Duncan Boniface, he left in 2004 after working at Celestion about 12 years. He was a lead speaker engineer there. That's who I got a lot of my information from. The new Dr D apparently is using most of Duncan's notes to reply to people now. I know this because I sent Duncan one of the new Dr. D's replies and Duncan said he wrote it. So whether or not the new Dr. D is all that knowledgeable is up for scrutiny.

Duncan worked there during the last couple years of G12-65 production. According to Duncan, they changed the specs on the G12-65 every four to six weeks over four years. So figure on at least 40 variations in that time frame alone.

Interesting experiments were:

444 55hz bass cones with a large dust cap (sounded like mud to Duncan). A few made it out to the public, most were scrapped.

Various 75 hz cones with round ribs and sharply defined ribs (1777 cone) were tested.

Why so many variations? Apparently Celestion, and maybe their clients, weren't always happy with the results. Go figure.

I had some from 81 in my 4x12 until I stopped touring at the end of 83, they sounded great. Maybe I just got lucky, who knows.

Just my two cents to add to the discussion...carry on!

[jape88]

Jim, did Duncan shead any light on the Pulsonic factory/production? It's always intrigued me as to where it was in the UK and what happened to it.

I did ask the present doc about the several suppliers used in the mid 70's at the end of the pulsonic cone and did the Mueller cone become the preferred choice for marshall from then on but just got a 'most likely'? can you shed any light on that, '77 onwards blackbacks?

[awangotango]

I rehearse at a studio that has about 6 or so jcm800/65w speakers/cabs. They all sound different, some vastly different. There are a couple dogs in there but from this experience and my own over the years, I can vouch for the 65 and say alot of them are very cool fat creamy speakers for rock, punk, rock roll, old metal, hard blues etc. Like any cab though it's a good idea to give a listen before plunking down your hard earned monies.

[Joshabr1]

I have a couple basketweaves w pre Rola 03 cones and a 81 cab w 65s. I think they are fabulous. They stand well w the ( holy grails) Mine are t3054 I think.

[awangotango]

Barron Greenback. This year I bought a full stack of RIC cones. My hearing of them is that they are darker and fatter sounding than the 03 lead cone that came before it. Also more creamy. It is my absolute favorite greenback because it gets the warmer rich bass 04 cone sound but it is not bass heavy so it acts and cuts through like the 03 lead cone. It's like the best of both world for a hard rock n roll or early metal style especially. When I plug my amps into the cabs it like instant classic record sound. I would wager that cone and cab is on more classic records than we think.

[BaronGreenback]

Hi, yeah the RIC cones sometimes get a bad rap, but a few people have told me they have a preference for them over anything else. There are also people who prefer the late 70's Muellers (blackbacks). There are a lot of factors involved. Personal taste, your other gear, and your playing style. Always worth experimenting with different cones and speaker models before settling. They dont always have to be celestion either ;o)

[awangotango]

I am a celestion slave. I know this thread is about the 65's but here's a set of links showing a differenc ein 03 and RIC cone (the RIC being my fav speaker of all time )


http://freemp3host.com/play:17892


http://freemp3host.com/play:17893

The 65's in comparison to both of these generally has a more scooped mids and bigger bottom end although the treble end of a good 65 reminds be a bit of the RIC top end except the 65 tends to be a bit piercing even though it's smooth