hmm, is this amp tech no good?

[sjhusting]

The way I remember it in the '70s and (early) '80s was, whup, amp sounding a bit ragged, head down to the local drug store, test the 6l6s in the tester there, buy a new pair for - what was it? 6-8 bucks a pop? stick 'em in the amp and go. I think I made an effort so that the tubes I bought were both from the same manufacturer.

I never heard anything about 'biasing' or 'matching' until Groove Tubes showed up.

I remember playing with the 'hum balance' on one of my fenders once without actually knowing what I was doing or what it did. Turned it for minimum hum, which wasn't much different than maximum hum, and forgot about it. Musta been a SF bassman, I had a boatload of those.

That doesn't make it any better or worse, but I think [old guy voice on] that's the way we all did it back in the old days. [old guy voice off]

steven

[Teletale]

tt

[Billm]

Aiken is not wrong. He's just saying that tubes have different amounts of internal resistance and differ from tube to tube in how they respond to the applied plate and bias voltages. That's why the bias--a function of one of the circuit elements you mentioned--needs to be adjustable.

[Guitarslinger1]

Originally Posted by Teletale

This is simply wrong. The language is casual/slack and it compromises the logic of basic physics (along with their integrity). A tube is a passive element/item and only becomes active/live when placed in a given circuit, whereupon it conducts current provided by and governed by that circuit's tension. In real life the ground reference is what draws the current. Those electrons want to get to ground/earth (just like lightening). The tube?... doesn't actually care one way or another.

-TT

It's typical simplified bench tech jargon, as there are simplified jargons that tend to develop in any trade that might not be "textbook correct", but facilitate quick communication. It's easier for the lay person (think: guitar player) to understand, and there's nothing wrong with it, except in the classroom (and perhaps contrarian laden message boards).

But please tell us what you have to say about this...


Originally Posted by Teletale View Post
The GT (or Mesa) numbering system refers to the point on a scale from 1-9 (?) that the tube runs into saturation. later numbers having more clean headroom... lower numbers having an earlier onset of saturation/distortion. It has nothing to do with the negative bias voltage.

From the Groove Tube website...

IMPORTANT BIAS NOTE: If you're replacing a tube with the SAME TYPE of Groove Tube (tube model and rating), you should have no problems with your amp's bias. In any other case, you should always have a qualified amp tech reset your amp’s bias whenever changing your tube type or rating number. Contact Groove Tubes if you have questions about which
tube will work for your amplifier, or whether re-biasing is required.

[Teletale]

tt

[Guitarslinger1]

But, you didn't address the obvious question:

Originally Posted by Teletale

The GT (or Mesa) numbering system refers to the point on a scale from 1-9 (?) that the tube runs into saturation. later numbers having more clean headroom... lower numbers having an earlier onset of saturation/distortion. It has nothing to do with the negative bias voltage.

Originally Posted by specialty guitars

From the Groove Tube website...

IMPORTANT BIAS NOTE: If you're replacing a tube with the SAME TYPE of Groove Tube (tube model and rating), you should have no problems with your amp's bias. In any other case, you should always have a qualified amp tech reset your amp’s bias whenever changing your tube type or rating number. Contact Groove Tubes if you have questions about which
tube will work for your amplifier, or whether re-biasing is required.

Please rectify the discrepancies between your statement, that Groove Tube's rating system has nothing to do with biasing, vs. the information from the Groove Tubes website that denotes that their rating system does have to do with biasing.

[Teletale]

tt

[Guitarslinger1]

Originally Posted by Teletale

They use the word Bias as a general word meaning idle current.
Read my statement again, I did not say it had nothing to do with Biasing (by which I'm assuming you mean the process of adjusting negative bias voltage to affect idle current)... What I said was the number system does not refer to, and has nothing to do with the negative bias voltage.

How much longer do you want to carry on? Are you trying to prove something, like you do in practically every thread up here? That's fine by me... I have all day.

-TT

So the idle current of the tubes has nothing to do with the negative bias voltage? Interesting.

No Teletale, I have nothing to prove.

I was simply trying to help the person who originally started the thread. Those who are trying to prove something showed up later.

[Teletale]

tt

[Guitarslinger1]

Originally Posted by Teletale

You're being very difficult aren't you. I said the NUMBERING SYSTEM had nothing to do with the negative bias voltage.

Why are you changing my words? I suggest you go read a couple of books on the subject, that way, when you answer every thread on the board as you normally do, you might be able to talk some sense. I understand you are running a business and you need to reply to as many posts as possible for your exposure, but at least be ready with some technical facts.

-TT

Teletale, lets recap...

I answered a question from another poster, in regards to the Fender/Groove Tubes color code/number rating system and biasing in post number 34. You challenged my answer. I posted proof from the Groove Tubes website to back up my post.

Teletale, according to you, is the information I provided in post #34 incorrect? Yes or No?


I have read many books on the subject, and have a clearer knowledge than many, but do not blow techno-babble smoke at every chance I get as some do. Looking back over this thread, if anyone is talking nonsense, it's you. Among other interesting bits, you managed to work AWG 600v wire into your post challenging my post on the Grove Tube number rating system.

I do not answer every post on this board. That is a falsehood. I post on the threads I'm interested in, and where I think I can help. I like helping people, and enjoy tube amplifiers. There's simply no more to it. If you have a problem with that, you're going to have to get over it.

Teletale, if you find something incorrect in any of my posts, please point the inaccuracies out, and enlighten us with the correct information. So far you cried foul over some oft used semantics that I have used. You've blown a lot of techo-babble smoke, and kicked up a lot of opinionated dust, but have not pointed out where any of my posts have been factually incorrect.

There's no need to make it your work to follow around, trying to dog me or anyone else at every turn. If you see something that is factually incorrect, point it out. If you have a differing opinion, then share it. If you want to join in the discussion, by all means join in. But it can all be done without the dogging. Nobody learns anything or has any fun from that. All that serves to do is make you look bad.

This is a great message board. Let's try to keep it fun and on the up and up.

[Teletale]

tt

[Guitarslinger1]

Originally Posted by Teletale

Your answer was subjective because the language you are quoting is generalized.

My answer, which was not quoting anything, was accurate, but in general layman's terms. The note on Groove Tubes website served to back that up.

My answer was not intended for you, rather for the member asking the question about the Fender/Groove Tubes number rating system.

Yet again though, you still did not answer the question.

Originally Posted by Teletale

Everything I have mentioned has relevance to the subject. Take it out of context or change the words and it's easy to make it look like nonsense.T

I was referring to the complete posts, in full context.

Originally Posted by Teletale

I'm interested in technical accuracy and facts.

As am I.

Originally Posted by Teletale

Over and out... no really, I have music to play.

Yes, we're done. I have playing do do as well.

Later.