Adressing the PT/stock amp threads + clip

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:50 am

awangotango wrote:original greens compared to the 90's cones are quite different and I can hear those particular speakers throughout the clips. so all I can agree on, is that for you, with your setup, then yes, you may get to a point where you feel 460B+, x feedback specs, x v2 specs etc is what is needed to make your amp sound like 'the one'. But that does not give any credence to those specs being in his amp. because all the other gear around it is era incorrect.

I think it's a big assumption to make that 'the characteristics' of his no 1 amp will shine through unchanged if played through the 90's greenbacks and a JB. This seems to be the assumption you are making. That 'the specs' shine through whatever other gear being used and to an extent yes, but when you get down to definite details like exact plate voltage, variac settings, feedback levels etc, it's not true imo.. Yes we could hear the basic amp but you'd definitely hear what the 90's greenbacks add even if ed played his number 1 through those speakers. Because of what they add, it makes it hard (impossible imo) to settle conclusively on exact specs because they are significantly different speakers

I totally agree... and maybe it' is a big assumption for me to make, but even if I had those speakers you say, I think I would be in the same possition as I am with mine... I would still have to keep searching for the details within the sound to get, what I define as the charecteristics ( I like to use that word just to show what I mean by what I hear )... So in a way, yes, I think it would shine through...

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:56 am

awangotango wrote:I agree it's not all there. it's a les paul and who knows what the settings are. but most of it is there and arguably the most important parts (the heart)....yes I can hear it needs a bit more low mid crunch but I doubt the guy was cranking the bass and all other knobs and if he did, i'd bet it'd be darn close to ed tones

He he... this is fun... we could go at it all day

... I hear you... maybe I should be more carefull with what I say... it's just that it gets sooo exciting when something like this comes up...
After all this time searching and listening, you get real inside of the sound ( and maybe too inside... hard to be objective about it )... but I feel I hear the details... the real details... the ones that comes from the amp it self... so... here we go again... I do belive it would shine through...

awangotango · Post by **awangotango** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:01 am

Well the specs may shine through, but not totally or clearly through imo. And these discussions are at a fine level of detail where little aspects start to be meaningful. and those 90's GB's are definitely meaningful in their difference.

yes you'd be in 'the same position' of having to dial it in and 'hear' the characteristics of different feedback specs, different plate voltages etc BUT the end results you'd settle on WOULD BE DIFFERENT. that is the point i'm making, the final specs you settle on for your rig are different not only because of the speakers but because of all the other era incorrect parts. The speakers alone would be enough to guarentee different end game specs

but this is the question, do 'the specs' shine through. I'm just giving my opinion. and over the years i've come to believe 'specs' are not as important as original parts or particular voltages

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:21 am

awangotango wrote:Well the specs may shine through, but not totally or clearly through imo. And these discussions are at a fine level of detail where little aspects start to be meaningful. and those 90's GB's are definitely meaningful in their difference.

If you had the original greens, I think you'd be able to agree more with the point i'm making. yes you'd be in 'the same position' of having to dial it in and 'hear' the characteristics of different feedback specs, different plate voltages etc BUT the end results you'd settle on WOULD BE DIFFERENT. that is the point i'm making, the final specs you settle on for your rig are different not only because of the speakers but because of all the other era incorrect parts. The speakers alone would be enough to guarentee different end game specs, but add it all up and imo there's no way to know that ed had XYZ specs if testing all this stuff out in a rig so different than eds'. IMO etc.

but I can see where you are coming from, working with what we have. I just don't think plate voltage or particlar specs are as important as others seem to when it comes to nailing ed's tone. I'm sure he had many different variac settings and OT's over the course of the 5 year golden era as well. I would say he probably didn't mess with 'the specs' though. i.e. get in there and swap amp parts is probably something that wasn't done

That's true... Ed's sound is his, and mine is mine... he he, it's not like I'm having a hard time being happy with my sound... I love it... as I'm sure I would've with Ed's sound... in fact there is just that " small " thing that I REALLY would like to get, and that's that "thing" in his sound... a speciall shape or form wich I think comes from the preamp... wich I think would shine through anywhere... I'm good with the rest...

awangotango · Post by **awangotango** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:24 am

are you sure it comes from specs though? that is the question that this discussion has highlighted. It's an interesting question. But this last little spherical thing, are you sure it couldn't it come from original parts? that is my guess.....btw have you gone back and tried shared cathode in the last few years? that '67 bluesbreaker is shared I believe but sounds like split. Are we sure ed had split with every recording? I'm not saying going back to shared will give you the spherical thing, but that is what it does. split cathode tends to take that round sound and focus it more so maybe shared in your current rig, would be a useful spec to retry?

also, I don't know what your ultimate refence is, but whatever it is, is it vinyl? CD or compressed mp3. I use vinyl as reference and it's alot different than
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODKt0d44jZk so we need to also keep in mind what 'eddie' tones we are referencing. I'd say you're there at the zero demos. That is the tone you've got, except a bit 'better' and more meaty (due to 90's gb's)

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 6:55 am

Just to be sure of one thing; when I say specs, i mean the stock specs+original parts... that's a huge thing, don't you think? I mean there's a LOT of stock/original parts out ther from that eara...
I run the amp with a 1202-80 giving me 445-455v loaded... so I'm going with those who claim it's a lower voltage from the start.
The reason I chimed in is cause Plexified think the PT has a huge impact, and I do too... But NOT as conclusive as I've seen many think... That's why I keep talking about the "specs"... I think the specs are more important cause I can achive more, or come closer, closer, not all the way... it gives me "charcteristics" ( there we go again ) regardless of what iron I have... it shines through...IF I allso had the right irons ( and speakers ) it could possible get the whole way... the final distance...
So out of all variations, I keep coming back to that it is the specs, the right specs that I CAN NOT do without... cuase there wouldn't be any "Charcteristics" to shine through... That's the point I'm trying to make here...

There is something about the shared cathod, isn't it... like you get some good things, and some not so good... deffenitly some thing there...

"also, I don't know what your ultimate refence is, but whatever it is, is it vinyl? CD or compressed mp3. I use vinyl as reference and it's alot different than
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODKt0d44jZk so we need to also keep in mind what 'eddie' tones we are referencing. I'd say you're there at the zero demos. That is the tone you've got, except a bit 'better' and more meaty (due to 90's gb's)"

He he... yes, it's the Zero demos ( mp3's )... maybe should've said that from the start... I like the way you say more meaty... I can realte to that, and maybe that's where the differences from speakers, guitar and other stuff comes in... actually it feels right

awangotango · Post by **awangotango** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 7:03 am

shared has a special thing. a great thing. Just make sure the bass is cut in the amp, pretty much as you have it now, may need to tweek a thing or two, as like you say , you need to transform that little aspect of the shared that can be loose or flubby. easily doable though with filters and component tweeks. the zero demos could easily be shared cathode judging just from those youtubes. does anyone have proof it was splt? but either way again I fall back on other things. you can get the zero demo tone (or almost any of his tones ) with EITHER shared or split, if other things are in order. I guess that is my simple point again leaning to variables other than specs. but I agree, most of the specs have to be there. Its just a question of that last little bit....who cares, close enough if you get the heart of the tone thats what matters.

and yes, that meat is from the 90's gb's. That is what they do. They also dry up the tone a bit which is what I didn't like about 'em but you've delt with that well so it's not a real issue. So back to my original idea. if you now subbed them out for original 03 cones you'd probably find the tone not quite as full and meaty as you like (or as ed liked) and so then you'd have to go into the amp and tweek to get that extra 'weight' or low mid crunch, back into the tone. which results in slightly different specs since you now need to get that low mid crunch from the amp....that is back when I suggested its the syulvanias being pushed. They can stand to be hammered with low mids and not fart out, so the amp was doing that, this results in that killa midrange crunch. All anyone is doing who isn't using sylvania 6ca7s and original iron and speakers, is tweeking other aspects of their rig or circuit to add in similar qualities. There's one way to get the real thing, and many ways to get real close

awangotango · Post by **awangotango** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 7:35 am

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Sylvani ... 20ff9248c0

here's an ed tube pack all ready! Hopefully they are not perfectly matched !

JimiJames · Post by **JimiJames** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 7:37 am

Re: Adressing the PT/stock amp threads + clip

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 7:57 am

Tazin · Post by **Tazin** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 8:39 am

Didn't Friedman say Ed's Dagnall T2562 put out about 470Vdc at normal wall voltage?... So obviously Ed's PT just happens to be one that's lower in voltage compared to the 'typical' 495Vdc seen in the T2562 PT's.

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 10:00 am

I've seen 460v... but it's around there somewhere...

Tazin · Post by **Tazin** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 10:18 am

Speaking of specs....I wonder if Ed's amp happened to be one which originally came with the two 20uF/450Vdc filter caps for the preamp instead of the normal dual 32uF cap? There seems to be a decent number of 100w Marshall's produced around the same time as Ed's amp which have these caps. The lower filtering would/should keep the amp "brighter" sounding at higher volumes.
Ralle, aren't you running two 16uF caps for the preamp?

Ralle · Post by **Ralle** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:23 pm

No, I have 2x32u... I have tried everything from 15u up to 50u... 16u sounded good but not Ed's tone IMO... I've seen 20u caps in that possition as well...

jnew · Post by **jnew** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:40 pm

HEY SPANKATANGO,
why are you scrutinizing the opinions of a highly regarded member, who's contributions have been instrumental in bringing this forum to a place where early EVH tone is, THE BEST ON THE FU&!NG PLANET. He's just simply saying that, based on his years of experiecing round and round with plexi circuits, that his experience tells him, the basic stock plexi pre-amp circuit characteristics, play a bigger role than authentic trannies and voltages. Can he not just share this without nearly 2 pages of your FUC&^G BANTERING? HE'S DONE ALL THIS SH*&T. And we've listened and learned. And we've built amps and posted clips and shared everything from information and actual parts and pieces amongst.

I'll do ya one better. Have you listened to the Greenback iso's, and the JBL iso's of Runnin With the Devil? You'd be hard pressed to find two polar opposite behaviors of speakers than those two (in that given era) BUT, there is no question about the amp, and its CHARACTERISTICS", to get the picture. It does not sound like two different amps, does it. And it is known that Ed used old, Pulsonic coned Celestions, 70's Blackback 25 watt types and G12H30's as well. Can you tell me which albums/songs had which speakers? I highly doubt it.

So let the guy share his stuff, SHUT THE FU&^K UP, and allow those of us who appreciate knowledge and experience, to take something from this and not waste our time with all your HORSESH*&T.

Metropoulos Forum