can different types of ECC83s make a significant difference

steven70

Hello, after some more advice again please (I'll try and offer some one day)

After much messing with pedals/speakers, still not happy with the sound coming out of the 'Bassman' - so I thought I'd check the valves.

I ran a hot bath, took the back off the amp and turned it up to ten.

Tappity tap tap with a biro- tap, tap- TING. OK, replaced the offending JJ ECC83S with another I had knocking around.
tap, tap- ting. Still a bit of 'ting' so I pulled one from the Nolan. This was a Mullard, which I guess may have been in there for a while.
No 'ting', so I plugged in and - such a difference, even at bedroom level, things are starting to sound back in the zone. 

Question is- is it likely that I had one or maybe a couple of microphonic valves or is that tapping thing urban legend? And even if this is the case, could the Mullard make such a significant difference over the JJ? And, following on from that, is it worth replacing the other ECC33s and if so, what with?

Thanks again for the advice.

PS I made the bath thing up. Showing off and nothing to be proud of.

Edit: PPS the valve was 2nd position away from the power tubes. Just in case...

ICBM

Yes. Although this is a demo for the Jet City 'Retrovalve' solid state replacements, there are real valves compared as well. It's pretty clear that there are substantial differences in the sound.



In that amp the second preamp valve from the power valves is the gain stages for the Normal channel, by the way - probably the most important valve in the amp for tone. Most valves are microphonic to some degree, it's a question of how much.

Personally, I really dislike JJ preamp valves so what you found doesn't surprise me at all - it's very clear which one is the JJ in that demo video too.

steven70

Ah, thank you @ICBM- really glad to have found something that makes such a difference  (was getting frustrated)
And that makes perfect sense that it is the gain stage.

I'll watch the vid now.

Any recommendations aside from leaving the Mullard in (I feel guilty for depriving the Nolan!) 

Cheers

ICBM

steven70 said:

Any recommendations aside from leaving the Mullard in (I feel guilty for depriving the Nolan!)

Any NOS - or just plain old, if tested and good - US-made 12AX7 - GE, RCA, Sylvania etc. Or if you don't want to spend that much or take a chance on an old valve, a modern Tung-Sol.

steven70

ICBM said:

steven70 said:

Any recommendations aside from leaving the Mullard in (I feel guilty for depriving the Nolan!)

Any NOS - or just plain old, if tested and good - US-made 12AX7 - GE, RCA, Sylvania etc. Or if you don't want to spend that much or take a chance on an old valve, a modern Tung-Sol.

Legend- really appreciated, I'm going to take a punt on some NOS, get that straight before I start messing around with drives. Thank you

gringopig

.

ICBM

I don’t think it’s the playing. I recognised the muddy top-end of the JJ straight away .

JohnPerry

Putting in old Mullards or similar has always made a substantial difference to my amps, including my Lazy J. They just sound richer and smoother (though I agree with John that Tung Sols are about the best new ones). 

The trick to buying them is an ebay seller with a returns policy. I've bought two dozen over the years and had one dud.
 

RiftAmps

NOS valves are a real crap shoot, as nearly all of the good ones have been hoovered up by now. The chance of finding a truly exceptional sounding ECC83 is probably next to nothing.

I’ve got a pair of the most desirable 83s (yellow print Mullards) that despite testing ‘as new’ sound hilariously bad. If I was an arsehole, I’d list them on eBay for a few hundred £ and take advantage of people getting caught up in NOS-fever.

Buy new production, with warranty, from a reputable dealer.

gringopig

.

ICBM

RiftAmps said:

NOS valves are a real crap shoot, as nearly all of the good ones have been hoovered up by now. The chance of finding a truly exceptional sounding ECC83 is probably next to nothing.

I would say precisely zero. There are no ‘exceptional sounding’ valves, to me - the good ones are a level playing field and there are others that don’t sound as good. I’ve never heard one single valve that sounds *better* than a properly-working old-production Mullard/Brimar/GE/RCA/whatever, even if you can hear any difference between them at all.

I do find old RFTs have a distinctive sound, which works especially well in Marshall-type amps, but they’re the only real exception.

The reason I don’t like things like JJs is because they don’t seem to have the full frequency response - it’s that they’re bad, rather than the good ones are good... if that makes sense!

gringopig said:

So I guess valve 1?

Yes.

The other two sound very similar.

JohnPerry

Totally understand why amp makers prefer reliable new valves. Jesse Hoff was the same, adamant the EHX ones he uses were unbeatable and that NOS valves were a fool's errand.

I already owned a few though and am glad I ignored him because the improvement was obvious to me. Maybe I have just got lucky with those I have bought.

Maynehead

My NOS hit rate has been around 40%. I’ve bagged a good Mullard and RFT, and a couple of EIs, but others were microphonic out of the box. I still have a couple which are untested...

I’d say unless you are a dedicated tone chaser, it’s safe to go with good modern production. My hit rate with modern valves are much higher, in the 80+%, and they don’t sound too bad if you know which ones to avoid.

PolarityMan

ICBM said:

I don’t think it’s the playing. I recognised the muddy top-end of the JJ straight away .

So I actually measured this once back in the MR days on my JVM, I used a looped to eliminate playing as a factor and there was a tiny difference you could pick up on an EQ visualizer I couldnt actually hear it and I suspect it was below the threshold of most peoples ears to distinguish...wish I had the screenshots still but that was about 4 computers ago.

steven70

Yikes, I've just seen how much NOS can go for- ordered a couple of Tung-Sols first. I suspect I just had a dodgy one in there or knackered it with my crap playing.

That Mullard did sound mighty good though, honestly...just rehearsed 5 hours with the thing. I'll take it out again and see what it is exactly, might be Pat Nolan's family heirloom.  

crunchman

Different valves do make a difference.  It does depend on the amp as well.  What sounds good in some amps doesn't sound good in others.

Unlike @ICBM I actually quite like JJs in some amps.  The amps in question might well have been fizzy sounding amps where taming the top end was a good thing, but they definitely sounded better than the EHX in a couple of the amps I tried them in.  I haven't really had an option since I bought my Lazy J.  Until very recently EHX were the only manufacturer of a new production 12AY7.

mani

I'm well placed to try a NOS experiment vs new valves (EHX, JJ, Sovtek) in my Univalve, a retired local engineer offered me a box full of old ECCXX type valves and a good number of power valves EL34, EL84 etc. They're all Mullard, Brimar, Telefunken, Mazda etc. It'll be interesting/amusing to hear the differences in a recording setup.

This might be worth a read:

http://www.guitaramplifierblueprinting.com/12ax7.html

ICBM

PolarityMan said:

So I actually measured this once back in the MR days on my JVM, I used a looped to eliminate playing as a factor and there was a tiny difference you could pick up on an EQ visualizer I couldnt actually hear it and I suspect it was below the threshold of most peoples ears to distinguish...wish I had the screenshots still but that was about 4 computers ago.

Probably because the JVM has caps at a couple of places in the circuit to suppress HF oscillation, which will mask the top-end response of the valves... so they'll all end up sounding a bit like JJs.

The difference is quite noticeable normally, and I'm far from the only one who can hear it.

steven70

mani said:

I'm well placed to try a NOS experiment vs new valves (EHX, JJ, Sovtek) in my Univalve, a retired local engineer offered me a box full of old ECCXX type valves and a good number of power valves EL34, EL84 etc. They're all Mullard, Brimar, Telefunken, Mazda etc. It'll be interesting/amusing to hear the differences in a recording setup.

This might be worth a read:

http://www.guitaramplifierblueprinting.com/12ax7.html

Thanks for the article @mani - great stuff.

I'd be interested to hear results of any NOS experiment you carry out.

PolarityMan

ICBM said:

PolarityMan said:

So I actually measured this once back in the MR days on my JVM, I used a looped to eliminate playing as a factor and there was a tiny difference you could pick up on an EQ visualizer I couldnt actually hear it and I suspect it was below the threshold of most peoples ears to distinguish...wish I had the screenshots still but that was about 4 computers ago.

Probably because the JVM has caps at a couple of places in the circuit to suppress HF oscillation, which will mask the top-end response of the valves... so they'll all end up sounding a bit like JJs.

The difference is quite noticeable normally, and I'm far from the only one who can hear it.

Well learn something new every day, i guess the design goal is more consistency?

ICBM

PolarityMan said:

i guess the design goal is more consistency?

The design goal is very high gain without instability. Caps like this are normal in high-gain amps, which is why they tend to be less valve-sensitive.