single ended Blackstars!

Telejester · July 2017

Anyone see Johann segborn yt clip using a ht5r head ? The guy made it sound kickass !

monquixote · July 2017

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

@ICBM You must be pleased that they have acknowledged in their blurb that they have solid state components?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that?

"The lead sounds are enhanced by a built-in overdrive circuit inspired by our HT-Drive pedal"

ecc83 · July 2017

monquixote said:

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

@ICBM You must be pleased that they have acknowledged in their blurb that they have solid state components?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that?

"The lead sounds are enhanced by a built-in overdrive circuit inspired by our HT-Drive pedal"

Ah! No, see. The overdrive sound of the HT pedals (and the 'hybrid amps) is virtually all overdriven triodes. ICBM has established this. Honest chap! Hates Blackstar but tells the truth!

Mind you! Marketing COULD have shot hoof slightly? Many, as above might get the impression that the OD IS sstate derived!

Dave.

jpfamps · July 2017

ecc83 said:

Telejester said:

Bit of a pisser that the original artisans are all handwired, for 499.00 unlikely the 10w artisan will be also.

Quite but I have always thought that a PCB version of the Artisans (15 &30 at least) would be a good seller?
Get rid of the *&^%"!! valve rectifiers (and fit a switchable 'sag' R if you like. A standby switch if you must!) Makes the mains traff MUCH simpler and therefore cheaper . DC heat the pre amp valves. An effects loop is tricky given the peculiar circuit topology but I have a few ideas.
Those that know a bit about me know I came late to guitar amps as a job. My audio background is hi fi and PA. I am therefore ideologically opposed to SE valve amps! Ok for the arse end of a radio with a 12W pentode and 3-4W output but have serious technical drawbacks to me for any more power.
I cannot find a circuit atmo' for a single ended KT88 amp but kludging from the GEC 50W cathode biased circuit (virtually class A) the valve would need 425 on its anode and pull an Ia of 87mA. The bias resistor would be 525 Ohms and at least of 5W rating. Now, that all puts the cathode at 50V + so not only are you loosing 50V* of HT you are dissipating about half the deliver power, ALL the fekking time, in that bloody resistor! I would think that 1/2 a PPull kludge would put out no more than 12 watts or so?
Plus, all else being equal the output transformer would need to be about the size and cost of at least a 50W push pull design.
*ICBM. This is why I suspect part fixed bias. Ah! Just remembered. There was a Pye company hi fi amp that used an EL34 SE circuit. Was it called the 'Mozart'? Anyway it had some pretty fancy NFB circuits to tame all that distortion! 10W with a firm wind avast it. Speaker then were bigger and more sensitive.
Dave.

Most "hi-fi" designs using pentodes have them triode strapped, and there are a few SET KT88 designs out there.

Negative feedback is regarded as the work of the devil himself (or indeed herself) by the SET zealots.

More info here:

http://www.single-ended.com/

jpfamps · July 2017

ecc83 said:

monquixote said:

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

@ICBM You must be pleased that they have acknowledged in their blurb that they have solid state components?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that?

"The lead sounds are enhanced by a built-in overdrive circuit inspired by our HT-Drive pedal"

Ah! No, see. The overdrive sound of the HT pedals (and the 'hybrid amps) is virtually all overdriven triodes. ICBM has established this. Honest chap! Hates Blackstar but tells the truth!
Mind you! Marketing COULD have shot hoof slightly? Many, as above might get the impression that the OD IS sstate derived!
Dave.

You can make some horrific distortion with triodes. I know!

TL072s also produce significant distortion when not used optimally, ie in most applications.

And you definitely don't want then to clip as they phase invert.

ecc83 · July 2017

"You can make some horrific distortion with triodes. I know!"

Indeed, which is why B's use a diode feedback compressor to keep drive levels in the sweet spot.

"TL072s also produce significant distortion when not used optimally, ie in most applications."

Yes, don't like loads much under 2k.

"And you definitely don't want then to clip as they phase invert. "

There is a single NE5534 in the Series One PSU for precisely that reason!

Dave.

ecc83 · July 2017

https://wgsusa.com/vet30#specs

Bit OT but in my search for speaker opinions that^ popped up. Anyone had any experience? I note they do it in 3 impedances.

BTW why here at TFB can you not 'type then paste'? I have to paste in a link FIRST otherwise my text is deleted.

Dave.

JayGee · July 2017

Given that there are quite a number of "universal octal" Single Ended cathode biased amplifiers around (Youngest Son's Peavey Windsor Studio for a start) which claim to accept all of these valves as a straight swap would it be overly cynical of me to speculate that these could actually all be exactly the same amplifier with the appropriate tube/valve swapped in and a few cosmetic and panel labelling changes?

ecc83 · July 2017

JayGee said:

Given that there are quite a number of "universal octal" Single Ended cathode biased amplifiers around (Youngest Son's Peavey Windsor Studio for a start) which claim to accept all of these valves as a straight swap would it be overly cynical of me to speculate that these could actually all be exactly the same amplifier with the appropriate tube/valve swapped in and a few cosmetic and panel labelling changes?

Well! You can bet your life Behringer are working on it! I dare say you are a bit right Jay because there are only SO many ways to make a valve amplifier. Virtually every gitamp is a straight copy or modification of the original Fender, often down to the 'mistakes'! The Blackstar A100 is about as conventional a '4xEL34 plus triodes' amp as you are likely to see. The differences are in the voicing (Cs&Rs) and perhaps the B.S.H. construction, both mechanically and electronically.

Then, as the company knows to its irritation, it is very easy to ASSUME a circuit is in the public domain but then find some bstd has a sneaky patent! Such claims would probably not get through a court but the cost of fighting such claims and the negative publicity makes it counter-productive as a rule. (or, if you are as big as Bellrimgers you can just say 'fk EVERYBODY!' )

Dave.

Dave_Mc · July 2017

monquixote said:

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

@ICBM You must be pleased that they have acknowledged in their blurb that they have solid state components?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that?

"The lead sounds are enhanced by a built-in overdrive circuit inspired by our HT-Drive pedal"

I thought that might have been what you meant, but if you go to the HT-Drive product page, there's no mention of any solid state components. https://www.blackstaramps.com/uk/products/ht-drive

What you have is a pedal which says "Pure Valve Overdrive" on it,

"The HT-DRIVE guitar pedal has dual cascaded, high voltage, triode stages which deliver gain from warm boost to screaming valve saturation. "

(Ooops, that says gain, not just distortion, which makes me wonder a little about @ecc83 's point about the valves delivering most* of the distortion so that the marketing is ok.

* Also "virtually all" is not the same as "pure", either, IMO.)

"Genuine valve design"

"Cascaded valve gain stages"

"Responds like a valve amp"

Nowhere that I can see is there any mention of solid state technology- and an awful lot of mentions of valve technology.

ecc83 · July 2017

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

Dave_Mc said:

monquixote said:

@ICBM You must be pleased that they have acknowledged in their blurb that they have solid state components?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that?

"The lead sounds are enhanced by a built-in overdrive circuit inspired by our HT-Drive pedal"

I thought that might have been what you meant, but if you go to the HT-Drive product page, there's no mention of any solid state components. https://www.blackstaramps.com/uk/products/ht-drive

What you have is a pedal which says "Pure Valve Overdrive" on it,

"The HT-DRIVE guitar pedal has dual cascaded, high voltage, triode stages which deliver gain from warm boost to screaming valve saturation. "

(Ooops, that says gain, not just distortion, which makes me wonder a little about @ecc83 's point about the valves delivering most* of the distortion so that the marketing is ok.

* Also "virtually all" is not the same as "pure", either, IMO.)

"Genuine valve design"

"Cascaded valve gain stages"

"Responds like a valve amp"

Nowhere that I can see is there any mention of solid state technology- and an awful lot of mentions of valve technology.

The semantics and marketing BS have been debated ad.n. here and in other places. I don't like it, many here and elsewhere don't like it. If Blackstar had wanted a way to generate MASSIVE debate about their products (from the launch of the HT-5. Nobody seemed bothered by the HT pedals at first) they could hardly have done a better job! Personally I don't think anyone was that smart.

Ten years on and most of the common amp's schematics have been 'webbed' so those that care about these things can see for themselves how the levels work.

As far as I am aware no one has reported the company to the advertising standard people? Perhaps it is now time to 'put up or... I shall NOT be so rude!

Dave.

Dave_Mc · July 2017

^ Yeah. I'm glad you don't agree with it either.

I mean, I'm just going by what I see on other forums- on Ultimate Guitar, for example, we get a thread about once a week or so where it's clear that the threadstarter* is considering a Blackstar HT (and often other companies with similar products like H&K etc.) because they think it's all-valve. So I just don't really buy the argument that "everyone knows now", because in my opinion and experience, they don't, and it seems like the marketing works. And as people have often pointed out here, guitar forum regulars are probably (generally) much more clued-in than the average guitar buyer, and if a lot of them even don't know.

I don't really understand your last sentence.

* And that threadstarter is usually a young, impressionable teenager, and I don't like that they're, IMO, being taken advantage of.

jpfamps · July 2017

ecc83 said:

"You can make some horrific distortion with triodes. I know!"
Indeed, which is why B's use a diode feedback compressor to keep drive levels in the sweet spot.

"TL072s also produce significant distortion when not used optimally, ie in most applications."
Yes, don't like loads much under 2k.

"And you definitely don't want then to clip as they phase invert. "
There is a single NE5534 in the Series One PSU for precisely that reason!
Dave.

Actually to loading distortion is NOT the major distortion problem with TL072s.

Common mode distortion and non-equal input impedances cause major non-linearity issues with the TL072, which far exceed loading distortion (unless you are trying to drive a very low load).

These mechanisms are rarely measured as many people are unaware of them.

For more info see here:

http://www.nanovolt.ch/resources/ic_opamps/pdf/opamp_distortion.pdf

ecc83 · July 2017

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pye+mozart+el34+amplifier+schematics&tbm=isch&imgil=sChd5IDTVjM6LM%3A%3B6K2aYMlufj7EnM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.diyaudio.com%252Fforums%252Ftubes-valves%252F255476-el34-se-ultralinear-schematic-5.html&source=iu&pf=m&fir=sChd5IDTVjM6LM%3A%2C6K2aYMlufj7EnM%2C_&usg=__tbASD42hku3QSvCjxyH_chZAF70=&biw=1366&bih=675&ved=0ahUKEwj56bbC9Y_VAhUrJ8AKHa_FCmQQyjcIMQ&ei=4ndsWfnwJavOgAavi6ugBg#imgrc=sChd5IDTVjM6LM:&spf=1500280807602

WAS called the Mozart! The feedback is in the cathode circuit a la Quad as is the speaker connection! Doubt that would pass today?

Negative feedback work of the devil J? Heh! I lived through the whole 'TID,SID.TIM' era, we seemed to have survived and so has NFB. (P.J.Baxandall sorted then out I recall in a Wireless World article!). Audio (well, 'Hi-Fi') seems to be the only branch of engineering where designers seem to think systems need to have bandwidths several orders greater the requited signal?

Thank for the .pdf..Phew! Be a while until I get through that! A quick look however shows TL071 (cannot see a 072?) IS prone to common mode distortion but even so it rarely exceeds 0.05% at +10dBu and as ICBM is often at pains to point out, that's hi fi to gitamp peeps! I have seen the odd, single BJT in guitar amps and such will generate a lot more than 0.05% and at lower than +10dBu.

The distortion figures seem to largely agree with D.Self.

Don't like Adpuff and marketing BS WHEREVER it comes from. There are 'lies, damned lies and specifications' Very few are written in a standard, comparable form but then this is not new. Manufacturers were being slated in the pages of Studio Sound, Hi Fi News and Wireless World way back in the 60's and probably before that. There is nothing special about 'discrete op amps' and why would anyone use anything OTHER than a 'Class A' circuit for a mic pre amp?

Dave.

jpfamps · July 2017

TL072 is simple the dual version of the TL071.

If anything performance of the TL071 could be better as you could decouple the power supply better.

Both common mode and input impedance distortion of the TL072 are poor.

Does this make a difference?

Well, in all applications we've compared TL072s with other op amps, the TL072s sound brighter. This can't be due to bandwidth (as I've checked this), so can only be due to distortion.

Several people have done these tests in various gear (buffers, boosters, compressors) and come to the same conclusion. We've also done blind listening tests too.

The only conclusion we can come to is that the TL072 is adding harmonic distortion that is perceived as brightness.

Dave_Mc · July 2017

ecc83 said:
Don't like Adpuff and marketing BS WHEREVER it comes from. There are 'lies, damned lies and specifications' Very few are written in a standard, comparable form but then this is not new. Manufacturers were being slated in the pages of Studio Sound, Hi Fi News and Wireless World way back in the 60's and probably before that. There is nothing special about 'discrete op amps' and why would anyone use anything OTHER than a 'Class A' circuit for a mic pre amp?
Dave.

Yeah definitely. I'm still gonna call it out when I see it, though, or it's only going to get worse.

ecc83 · July 2017

Dave_Mc said:

ecc83 said:
Don't like Adpuff and marketing BS WHEREVER it comes from. There are 'lies, damned lies and specifications' Very few are written in a standard, comparable form but then this is not new. Manufacturers were being slated in the pages of Studio Sound, Hi Fi News and Wireless World way back in the 60's and probably before that. There is nothing special about 'discrete op amps' and why would anyone use anything OTHER than a 'Class A' circuit for a mic pre amp?
Dave.

Yeah definitely. I'm still gonna call it out when I see it, though, or it's only going to get worse.

Well, it IS going to get worse because the technical magazines that used to battle the issues are no longer with us (and the few that are left are, for whatever reasons, unwilling to get really heavy) .

We also have IMHO an ever increasingly technically ignorant population. When I was in a 'group' as they were then called, you had to know a bit and do it all yourself! (and a few died on the way. Natural Selection at work) . These days the forums are full of people that do not even know Ohm's Law, though they MUST have done SOME technology at school?

I have always believed that if a person can read and write ( yeah! I know, the forum 'texters'!) hold down a job, cook a basic meal, drive a car FCS! They are capable of learning the basics of amps, ohms and volts and decibels.

It is easier it seems to believe in the Russ Andrew's fairy tales of what good sound equipment is than stick to scientific principles.

Technology has gotten this planet in the shit but most of that was driven by rampant greed. The ONLY way to solve the planet's woes is to stick with science and technology. But that 'Orange Person' makes this rather unlikely?

Dave.

Dave_Mc · July 2017

ecc83 said:

Dave_Mc said:

ecc83 said:
Don't like Adpuff and marketing BS WHEREVER it comes from. There are 'lies, damned lies and specifications' Very few are written in a standard, comparable form but then this is not new. Manufacturers were being slated in the pages of Studio Sound, Hi Fi News and Wireless World way back in the 60's and probably before that. There is nothing special about 'discrete op amps' and why would anyone use anything OTHER than a 'Class A' circuit for a mic pre amp?
Dave.

Yeah definitely. I'm still gonna call it out when I see it, though, or it's only going to get worse.

Well, it IS going to get worse because the technical magazines that used to battle the issues are no longer with us (and the few that are left are, for whatever reasons, unwilling to get really heavy) .
We also have IMHO an ever increasingly technically ignorant population. When I was in a 'group' as they were then called, you had to know a bit and do it all yourself! (and a few died on the way. Natural Selection at work) . These days the forums are full of people that do not even know Ohm's Law, though they MUST have done SOME technology at school?
I have always believed that if a person can read and write ( yeah! I know, the forum 'texters'!) hold down a job, cook a basic meal, drive a car FCS! They are capable of learning the basics of amps, ohms and volts and decibels.
It is easier it seems to believe in the Russ Andrew's fairy tales of what good sound equipment is than stick to scientific principles.
Technology has gotten this planet in the shit but most of that was driven by rampant greed. The ONLY way to solve the planet's woes is to stick with science and technology. But that 'Orange Person' makes this rather unlikely?
Dave.

Yeah. I mean, from what I can remember at school (and i did triple science at gcse, i.e. physics as its own subject... a lot of people were doing it in less depth) there was precious little electronics, only very basic ohm's law with lightbulbs and the like. i think we did pneumatics in technology, not electronics, which was boring.

I mean, I guess the problem is that (a) education is not generalised enough, at least in parts, and not much joined-up learning and (b) conversely you also need to be careful that you don't think that the thing you're into is the only important thing and how come everyone can't learn it? I mean, I like science, and I don't think I'm as bad as most at it, but a lot of the more advanced electronics stuff (advanced for me, not you

) reads like gibberish once you start getting into impedances and complex numbers and the like.

Plus you also need to be careful that you're not implying that if you don't understand something that you deserve to be ripped off and it's your own fault. I know that's not what you're implying, but other less scrupulous people don't always need much encouragement to take that out of it.

ecc83 · July 2017

Dave_Mc said:

ecc83 said:

Dave_Mc said:

ecc83 said:
Don't like Adpuff and marketing BS WHEREVER it comes from. There are 'lies, damned lies and specifications' Very few are written in a standard, comparable form but then this is not new. Manufacturers were being slated in the pages of Studio Sound, Hi Fi News and Wireless World way back in the 60's and probably before that. There is nothing special about 'discrete op amps' and why would anyone use anything OTHER than a 'Class A' circuit for a mic pre amp?
Dave.

Yeah definitely. I'm still gonna call it out when I see it, though, or it's only going to get worse.

Well, it IS going to get worse because the technical magazines that used to battle the issues are no longer with us (and the few that are left are, for whatever reasons, unwilling to get really heavy) .
We also have IMHO an ever increasingly technically ignorant population. When I was in a 'group' as they were then called, you had to know a bit and do it all yourself! (and a few died on the way. Natural Selection at work) . These days the forums are full of people that do not even know Ohm's Law, though they MUST have done SOME technology at school?
I have always believed that if a person can read and write ( yeah! I know, the forum 'texters'!) hold down a job, cook a basic meal, drive a car FCS! They are capable of learning the basics of amps, ohms and volts and decibels.
It is easier it seems to believe in the Russ Andrew's fairy tales of what good sound equipment is than stick to scientific principles.
Technology has gotten this planet in the shit but most of that was driven by rampant greed. The ONLY way to solve the planet's woes is to stick with science and technology. But that 'Orange Person' makes this rather unlikely?
Dave.

Yeah. I mean, from what I can remember at school (and i did triple science at gcse, i.e. physics as its own subject... a lot of people were doing it in less depth) there was precious little electronics, only very basic ohm's law with lightbulbs and the like. i think we did pneumatics in technology, not electronics, which was boring.

I mean, I guess the problem is that (a) education is not generalised enough, at least in parts, and not much joined-up learning and (b) conversely you also need to be careful that you don't think that the thing you're into is the only important thing and how come everyone can't learn it? I mean, I like science, and I don't think I'm as bad as most at it, but a lot of the more advanced electronics stuff (advanced for me, not you ) reads like gibberish once you start getting into impedances and complex numbers and the like.

Plus you also need to be careful that you're not implying that if you don't understand something that you deserve to be ripped off and it's your own fault. I know that's not what you're implying, but other less scrupulous people don't always need much encouragement to take that out of it.

I have not perhaps explained myself too well Dave. I don't expect the GENERAL public to know much if anything electrical (though everyone should, IMHO know about fuses). No, I mean if you are 'into' music and electric instruments and especially home recording you should make the effort to learn the basics.

I am, for instance pretty noobish when it comes to computers (not the guts and the 'lectricals, that's easy) and ten or so years ago I was practically dysfunctional with software. People might think an electronics background would help? It don't and that is because PC software IS NOT LOGICAL! I suspect a lot of things are done in DAWs for instance because in the very early days there was no other way to do it with the puny machines they had. The protocols have stuck. Electrical circuits on the other hand HAVE to follow the laws of the universe, NOT some programmer!

So, I struggled but learned just about enough to get by.

Dave.

Dave_Mc · July 2017

^ Yeah I knew what you meant, and I still think it can be difficult if you're not really into that kind of stuff. I mean, I think I've learnt enough about the electrical aspects of guitar to get by, but I'm pretty terrible at the DIY aspect of guitars- I mean, I learnt guitar to play guitar, not so I could spend a bunch of time soldering etc. lol. And I would guess a lot of other people are similar. I would suspect that a lot of guitarists are more arty, and that makes it harder too if you're not that interested in science.

I know what you mean about the computers thing versus electronics, a lot of people seem to think that if you know any science you must know all science (not helped by Hollywood!), so I could well understand how knowing electronics would be no help with computers (I'm not that well up on computers myself

). I did chemistry, and there's basically zero overlap between it and any of the science we talk about here for guitars/amps, yet I would think a lot of laypeople would think it helps a lot. Well, I suppose it helps from the point of view that I'm more tuned in to science jargon etc. and from a rough general overview it helps, but when it comes to specifics, nope.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

single ended Blackstars!

Comments