superbass spec ( ****** )

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:20 pm

rgalpin wrote:not really better or worse to me - they both sound killer!!

my first reaction is that it was more "generic" in comparison to the previous.

i think i can hear your playing and technique more in the bass circuit - just seemed more unique and engaging.

i hear ya. the bass circuit has more width. all in that shared cathode i think.

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:23 pm

4ohm is hairier but as well i think its tighter too.

a sound that is hairier AND tighter is pretty elusive. usually i find that when i add hair from the presence / NFB circuit things start falling apart - start to lose the tight backbone in a compromise to get more grind.

i have read some debate about whether there is a percieveable difference between switching from the 8 ohm to the 4 ohm tap vs doubling the size of the NFB resistor. never played around with it though.

do you think using the 4 ohm tap keeps things tighter even as you turn the presence up?

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:26 pm

rgalpin wrote:
4ohm is hairier but as well i think its tighter too.
a sound that is hairier AND tighter is pretty elusive. usually i find that when i add hair from the presence / NFB circuit things start falling apart - start to lose the tight backbone in a compromise to get more grind.

i have read some debate about whether there is a percieveable difference between switching from the 8 ohm to the 4 ohm tap vs doubling the size of the NFB resistor. never played around with it though.

do you think using the 4 ohm tap keeps things tighter even as you turn the presence up?

i remember Larry talking about it. something like 141k on the 8 ohm tap would be the same as 47k on the 4 ohm tap. i forget the math. he should chime in.
perhaps i should try it on the 8 ohm tap and see what i get.

bmf5150 · Post by **bmf5150** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:32 pm

rockstah wrote:
Eargasm wrote:Playing great as usual Mark, but I am noting a 'looser' feeling to your playing, that I think is inspired by the trannys? Whatever, your playing sounds unforced and natural, very cool.
But this is a tough one...
The trannys sound too mushy to my ear...too much sag. You would think that with that much sag, there would be more time for tone, which is normally what happens, but the tone is just not there...it sags with nothing to back it up. It's reminiscent of the effect you get from an added gain stage...more sustain, compression - and mush, but at the cost of tone.

You did this because you are trying to get away from the "tight, having to force it" feel of the plexi circuit didn't you?
i never liked the ****** tranies,there not wright.the closest i have heard are the ones john from sozo capcitors have cloned.no closer sound trannys out there!!!!

thanks man. the playing wasn't anything really. just goofing off. but yeah these trannys are looser, mushier. I'm comparing it to my 78 with the same spec.
the amp always lends itself to my playing regardless.

this amp is another build to primarily to hear the trannys. since i liked the spec in my 78 i thought i would try it here. it doesn't sound as good for sure.

i may swap in a merc OT to hear the difference in this amp. but how much does the PT effect things I'm wondering as well.

this amp has very sweet highs. not aggreesive like i like in my metro and 78.

never liked the ****** tranies,there not wright.the closest i have heard are the ones john from sozo capcitors have cloned.no closer sound trannys out there!!!!

bmf5150 · Post by **bmf5150** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:35 pm

they both sound good,whic do you prefer tone wise.

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:35 pm

it seems there are better trannys for vh. now for a bluesy type tone. they sound ok. very sweet and smooth. they have a sweetness to them.but again not what i want for vh tone.

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:36 pm

ok i changed some stuff,again.

everything is the same except:

shared cathode 820/250u mod: split cathode 2.7k/.68u - 820/250u
bright channel .0022u
4700pf on the bright volume
560p on the bright channel mixer.
250p/56k tone stack mod: 500p/33k
nothing bypassing v2a mod: 330u on v2a
.022u output caps. mod: .1u output caps
NFB on the 4 ohm tap mod: 8ohm tap
dual 32u preamp
16u screens
50u mains
32u PI
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/songInf ... ID=5812701

man its funny to think during the year when im touring most my chops come down compared to when i have time off and i can play all day long!

Eargasm · Post by **Eargasm** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:54 pm

"Chewy" as hell! If I were playing that amp, it would force me to make "chewing faces"...

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:23 pm

agreed on max chew factor!

at exactly :50 - that note - that's when i slap the table and just say - dag... that is cool.

this seemed to get it out of the generic thing - sounds wild. makes me wonder what it would sound like without 330 on v2a. because it seems just a tad too distorted - hairy - whatever you might call it.

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:02 pm

Rob, u mean the single high note at 50 or the chord right before it?

everything the same except:moved to the high tap on the PT and used a variac on 110dcv.

this random playing is getting kind of fun. thanks for listening.

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/songInf ... ID=5813352

Eargasm · Post by **Eargasm** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:55 pm

I can't figure out whether I like this one, or the last one better...

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:59 pm

its this one, trust me.

Eargasm · Post by **Eargasm** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:12 pm

rockstah wrote:its this one, trust me.

LMAO!!!! That was hilarious!
Okay, I'll take your word for it!

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:56 pm

Eargasm wrote:
rockstah wrote:its this one, trust me.
LMAO!!!! That was hilarious!
Okay, I'll take your word for it!

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:27 am

it was the high note at 50 - caught it perfectly to give it that vocal quality.