The 6550 Experience

[Xplorer]

love the tests, there's definitely something bog and Hendrix in it now. very interesting. that's it, i'll mod my metroamp 69 this way someday
what are the speakers you're using ?
love the endless note the way it plays.
i'm sure you can get even closer with testing among some speakers, fuzz, strat pickups, amp tweaking ...
but it's much more the way i like an amp compared to the way it is , stock with el34.
thank you !

[bill bokey]

The M160 is in front of a 1969 T1534 (same as T1281, G12H bass cone), in a '69 1982B. It sounds very old I must say... the same speaker brand new would be a lot brighter and punchier (and I would prefer it that way !). When I'm standing in front of (or next to) the stack I mostly hear the top cabinet, loaded with a pair of T1221 and a pair of Fane (can't remember which one exactly) and it's definitely bright and punchier but also has less bass. When I'm happy with the sound (or at least feel there's no more hope ) I'll make a video, and there'll be a touch of camera recording, with more top than bottom. It should sound a bit more "real".

But, although I never believed Hendrix used them until Dave showed up here, those 6550s do have that late Hendrix tone we love.

[daveweyer]

You know, for the life of me I could never understand why folks had such a hard time believing there were 6550s in Jimi Hendrix' Marshall amps, at least those that were tuned up by West Coast Organ and Amp Service.
It always seemed so logical to me, especially when Marshall started shipping their amps with the same tubes.
The 6550 was more rugged, it lasted longer, and was a much safer bet for a traveling band which relied so heavily on the proper operation of their amps.
What do you suppose created all the resistance to this rather obvious fact?

[bill bokey]

Still the same amp settings, and guitar et all but this time with shared cathode (I forgot about that !)

Gainier and fuller sounding (although badly played, sorry)

https://soundcloud.com/castle-made-of-s ... ed-cathode

I think I'll have to try different settings now...

[daveweyer]

I thought the clip was scary close to Hendrix in some places!

[fakeox]

Great tone Bill!

[Xplorer]

clearly the right way ... like never before ! great clips.

i would love to hear it with a fuzz volume 10, fuzz zero, a univibe after it with intensity on zero ... and Rolling down the strat volume a little bit for some cleans ...
in some g12h30 75hz if possible.

the endless notes .... without fuzz already , wow !!!!
the Hendrix section has never been as interesting since Dave is here. so cool, i want tome 6550 and experiment with it too ...

[Tazin]

You know, for the life of me I could never understand why folks had such a hard time believing there were 6550s in Jimi Hendrix' Marshall amps, at least those that were tuned up by West Coast Organ and Amp Service.
It always seemed so logical to me, especially when Marshall started shipping their amps with the same tubes.
The 6550 was more rugged, it lasted longer, and was a much safer bet for a traveling band which relied so heavily on the proper operation of their amps.
What do you suppose created all the resistance to this rather obvious fact?

That's a good question. It could just be from the fact that people just don't the idea that Jimi's Marshall heads were modified in some way. Or, perhaps it has something to do with the long standing dislike of Marshall amps when they were originally shipped with 6550 valves.....They lost that nice harmonical crunch that everyone adored. All I know is that the 6550 rumor in Jimi's Marshall's has been around for a long time.

[bill bokey]

I always thought it was just another rumor and like Tazin said I assumed (and even read) his amps were dead stock.

By the way, @ C J H : do my clips sound like what you get out of your rig ? It'd be nice to hear more clips from others...

[daveweyer]

As rumors go, you always have to take them with a grain of salt. But does't it make you wonder why a rumor like that would get started unless there were some substantial proof of it at some time or another, seeds that got the rumor going to begin with.
Surely the roadies saw those tubes in there. Others that paid any attention must have noticed them. And then there is that sound change that happened after we started using 6550s in 1969.
If it were just a rumor, I would think folks would have to ponder who or what would gain from getting it started. Would it or could it benefit anybody's agenda? Or, alternatively, would it or could it benefit anybody's agenda to try to foster the belief that Jimi's amps were all stock? I especially ask myself that question in light of the fact that everything else he was using had been modded in some way or another.
It would be nice to set the record straight, to borrow a phrase, and I'm hopeful that another of Jimi's amps modified by West Coast Organ and Amp Service will surface which is still intact from those days, allowing everyone to see unequivocally what the reality of the situation actually was.
Sometimes I wonder if the debate is just sort of an excuse to have a mini war, each side taking on members, holding on to a rigid point of view, unwilling to compromise or see the viewpoint of the other side, taking shots at each other, and becoming entrenched forever, damn the evidence.

And yes, please, let's hear some more clips of the results you are getting. Thanks again for all the effort.

[Xplorer]

i thought i'd post this old thread based on Dan ( bily batz ) attempts with 6550's , getting some great bog results. he had started this based on your old interview i think. i'll try to ask him if he can join, and maybe repost the clips had had, not available anymore.

http://forum.metroamp.com/viewtopic.php ... +batz+6550

[Billy Batz]

You know, for the life of me I could never understand why folks had such a hard time believing there were 6550s in Jimi Hendrix' Marshall amps,

[daveweyer]

Xplorer, utterly fascinating discussion. And it had nothing to do with my being on the forum. That made it all the more interesting to me.
I've always thought to myself as I've listened to the discussions rage throughout the years, "...if those guys get an amp set up with 6550s, just like Jimi had them set up, and start playing those grooves from 1969 and 1970, then they will find out for themselves as they hear the tone approach what Jimi had going with the West Coast Organ and Amp mods, and no one will have to convince them what those amps were. That is if they do it with a reasonably open mind."

For so many years I just didn't have time to get into arguing about it, but I thought one day I might actually join a discussion to see what happens.........................
And no one is taking my word for it now either, I'm just a guy saying stuff.

Oh and Billy, thanks for jumping in again.

[Billy Batz]

You know, for the life of me I could never understand why folks had such a hard time believing there were 6550s in Jimi Hendrix' Marshall amps,

Ive probably said that verbatem many times. I read your interview and it made sense to me. I would always have to qualify my posts for the internet at large ("I know this is just one guy saying one thing....") so I wouldnt have to hear the obvious retorts about basing my thoughts on one interview snippet (which it wasnt anyway it was based on lots of experimenting) but it made sense to me right away and it never made sense to me why this was so hard to believe or the fact that his amps would be modified in general. I dont expect Jimi to have known a cathode from a diode (maybe he did for all I know) but is it that hard to think he told techs he wanted a certain sound or a certain performance change of some kind and they made it happen? I find it hard to believe his amps wouldnt be modified in some way.

The debate, for me, was a great way to have fun at my hobby and learn about amp tone. I like the search and debate. I never at any point felt like there was a definitive answer. At least to my biggest question which was the one specific Filmore NYE recording which I always assumed the recording and room had more to do with it than anyone ever gave it credit for. I have to admit 95% of Jimi's live tones arent all that attractive to me but that last 5%, the really special one's, Ive been after frever.

[bill bokey]

As I can't stop playing this "new" amp of mine I made another clip !
And as there now are knobs on the pots I at last now exactly what the settings were for all the first clips I made and I changed for this new one :
Volume 6 (+1)
Treble 6 (+2)
Mids 4
Bass 2.5 (-1.5)
Presence 9 (+1)

http://soundcloud.com/castle-made-of-so ... p-settings