Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘NOS tubes’

NOS Tubes: They are totally worth it!

Posted in 12AX7, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 15, 2009| Leave a Comment »

I ordered a couple of NOS 1959 GE long plate 12AX7’s a few days ago – they were a great deal – and looks like I’m going to buy several more. NOS tubes is where it’s at for me. What’s the big deal? Well, for one thing, they were made during a time when almost all electronics were run by vacuum tubes, so they’re incredibly reliable. But more importantly, they just plain sound better than any new tube. Not that new tubes are bad – far from it – I’m a big fan of JJ’s and Tung-Sol’s, but they can at times be a bit harsh, and in the case of the Tung-Sols, don’t last very long. For instance, I had a set of JJ’s in my custom Aracom VRX18, an incredible amp powered by two EL84’s. They sounded great in that amp, but the highs could get really fizzy.

When I got the GE’s today, I immediately installed them into the VRX18, and lo and behold, that top-end fizz was tamed! You get that fizz from EL84’s anyway, which happen to power this amp, but those NOS tubes really mellowed out the fizz, and provided a richness in the tone of that amp that I had not ever heard come from it! I was so amazed, that I used that amp on a new song I’ve been working on called, “Strutter.” I may actually call it “Stratter,” as I recorded it with my Strat, but I’m still undecided… Give it a listen:

I probably should’ve had a before and after clip, but what those tubes did was to take the naturally bright tone of the amp, and add a bit of bottom end to it. The amp is still on the bright side, but with that little bit of extra bottom end, it sounds so much richer. Here’s  the amp totally clean, played with Goldie, then into a Hardwire reverb, then into the amp. The tones are simply lush!

Who knows? I might be hearing things, but I’m not alone in feeling this way about NOS tubes. Lots of people will attest to the same thing: NOS tubes just sound better. Whether or not it’s due to their construction or the manufacturing technology of the time. Good NOS tubes sound and feel so much fuller than their modern counterparts. As I eluded to above, it could all be imagination coming into play, but if hundreds of people are saying the same thing, there’s got to be something to it…

Read Full Post »

Amazing the Difference a Tube Can Make…

Posted in 12AX7, amplifiers, amps, Amps/Amplification, aracom amps, attenuator, GAS, gear, gear reviews, goldie, guitar, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Mullard, Music, musicians, new gear, NOS, overdrive, saint guitars messenger, Tone, tubes, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 1, 2009| 2 Comments »

Mullard Zaerix 12AX7Conventional tube-amp wisdom states that you get the most bang for your buck by replacing your pre-amp tubes. I’ve been a believer of this for quite awhile, and have tried out all sorts of pre-amp tubes in my amps over the years. A couple of days ago, I wrote that I had installed a new Mullard ECC83 (12AX7) into my Aracom VRX22. This particular Mullard is a Zaerix-labled ECC83 that probably came from the GDR (I didn’t look at the numbers – I really don’t care, for that matter). All I know is that it made a HUGE difference in the way my amp sounds. The overdrive instantly became smoother and more focused without top-end artifacts, and the notes are still very defined even at high overdrive settings on my amp.

The clip below says it all. I recorded this clip playing in the bridge pick up of Goldie, plugged straight into the VRX22, which then fed into the ever-so-awesome Aracom PRX15-Pro attenuator. The amp’s master, tone, and volume knobs were all set at 6 (about 2pm on the amp), and the clip was recorded at bedroom level!

To my ears, the VRX22 sounds like a much bigger amp than its 22 Watts! I’m really in tonal heaven right now!

Read Full Post »

NOS Tubes: It Ain’t All Hype…

Posted in 12AX7, accessories, amplifiers, amps, Amps/Amplification, buying gear, ECC83, GAS, gear, gear reviews, guitar, guitar gear, guitar gear reviews, guitarists, Guitars, Mullard, Music, musicians, NOS, tubes, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 29, 2009| 4 Comments »

Just put in a re-labeled 1960’s-era Mullard ECC83 into my Aracom VRX22 this afternoon. I had a JJ 12AX7 in there, and make no bones about it; that’s a great pre-amp tube. But the difference in tone between the two is immense. Where my JJ had a great tone, one thing that I noticed was that the highs tended to be rather harsh when the tube was overdrive, and I found myself turning my Tone knob left of center – a lot – to bleed off some of the highs.

But after I installed the Mullard, I was absolutely blown away! The overdrive seemed so much more focused, with zero high-end harshness. It was some of the smoothest overdrive I’ve heard, and definitely the smoothest the VRX22 has sounded since I got it. That’s saying quite a bit because I love the tone of this amp immensely, even without the NOS Mullard. Which brings me to the crux of this entry…

As a tube amp aficionado, I’ve gone through lots of pre-amp tubes, and almost invariably, I’ve gravitated towards NOS tubes to get the tone I like. Some people I’ve spoken to say it’s all hype but, at least to me, it’s not. I suppose for some types of tubes, there’s not much of a difference. For instance, I almost invariably use JJ’s for power tubes because they just sound great to me. They’re well-made, and run pretty hot, and they break up nicely.

But with respect to pre-amp tubes, I’ve found a marked difference between NOS and new tubes. I love Mullard and JAN Phillips tubes for pre-amp tubes. They’re just so smooth sounding, smoother than all the new make tubes I’ve played. Plus, they were made during a time when most electronic devices were run with tubes, so the build expertise, equipment and materials for making tubes was abundant. According to my friend Jeff Aragaki of Aracom Amps, the alloys used in NOS tubes are not as readily available nowadays, and that could account for the difference in tone. Not sure if this is true, but it certainly makes sense. The only drawback is the price. That Mullard sells for $129 retail, and that is by no means inexpensive.

But I look at buying NOS tubes very much like buying a great pair of shoes. For instance, I spend almost $200 a pair for my everyday shoes. These are absolutely comfortable, and not only that they last a long time because they’re constructed so well. In fact, it takes me about 4-5 years to really wear them out. This in contrast to lower priced shoes that I’ve worn out within a few months. After a long period of time, I’ll spend more on the cheap shoes. A better case is my father. His shoes cost at least $500. But they last almost 20 years! He just gets them resoled every few years until the shoe repair guy says that it’s not worth it.

NOS tubes are similar. I’ve had the same NOS tubes in my Hot Rod Deluxe for almost five years, and they still sound great! I play that amp a lot. On the other hand, the new Tung-Sol tubes I put in another amp lasted all of two months before they started to lose their character, with one becoming microphonic. Granted, they’re fairly inexpensive tubes and they sound great, but if I have to shell out $25 every couple of months, that starts to add up. NOS tubes, especially the mil-spec tubes that I prefer were made for military usage, which means they had to be well-built and durable. That’s a huge advantage NOS tubes have over newer tubes.

Jeff also shared a story with me today about a friend of his who used to be stationed on an aircraft carrier. He was telling Jeff that when the ship replaced electronic components, they’d dump boxes of tubes – good ones, mind you – over the side of the ship. So the ocean has NOS tubes littering its bottom.

In any case, please do not just take me at my word! 🙂 This is simply my perception based upon my experience. In the end, as I am often apt to mention, you’re judge of what sounds pleasing to you. So only buy what makes sense to you!

Read Full Post »