LOL Seriously. People are nuts. LOL I have tube rolled. Some people hear the difference. Some people can't tell the difference between a 5150 and a Line6 POD 1.0. I change tubes because they affect the presence and it makes the amp feel a touch different for me, but that's also not something that comes across in recorded tone. I also probably haven't spent more than $150 on tubes in 26 years of playing guitar, so I clearly haven't gone crazy, and that includes straight up replacements of dead tubes. LOL My point is that there's a middle ground between just going insane and spending tons of money on tubes and spending $15 on a JJ ECC803S because it sounds good in V1 of a Marshall.
@@t_sosh " but...But... BUUTT!!! I spent $150 on a magical 70 year old tube that has made the compete and utter difference in the the tone stack phase inversion bias farty buttons on my amp! Sheesh!! Tone-deaf heathens!!! How DARE YOU NOT VALIDATE MY PURCHASE!!! " The Tube Snobs drive me nuts. Yes, I sincerely prefer tube amps. Why? They sound good and provide that BLAST in the face when I really open one of them up. Most of these assnuggets with the "Golden Ears" will never have their recordings heard outside of the laptop they recorded them to.
@@joeyvanostrand3655, the truth is, as usual, somewhere in the middle. Tubes are great BECAUSE they're imperfect. There is absolutely no operating range in which what goes into a tube is the same waveform as what comes out (minus change in amplitude, of course). There is ALWAYS distortion, as defined by that inability to perfectly replicate the wave. It may still sound "clean" to the human ear, but it's distorted. Are some tubes better than others? Yeah. Are some tubes still made on the same worn-out machinery as they were 40 years ago, and thus manufacturing tolerances have slipped? Most certainly. Are others made on new machinery? Yeah. Do current tubes follow the published spec? Depends on which tube you're talking about. Some do, some are WAAAAAAAAAY off. As I said in another comment somewhere, some manufacturers slap "6CA7" on a pentodes (usually EL34s) while an actual 6CA7 is a beam tetrode built to be electrically compatible (but internally way different) with the EL34. The only "magic" in NOS tubes is that they were made back when people cared about published specs, so a Sylvania 12AX7 was basically the same as a GE 12AX7 and 7025 actually meant a military ruggedized version of the 12AX7 (now anything labeled 7025 is just a 12AX7 with a different label and no differences in construction). But that in no way means there aren't good tubes today. NewSensor makes a whole variety of tubes under different brands (Sovtek, Mullard, Tung-Sol, Svetlana, EH) and, surprisingly, actually use different designs for each brand rather than just slapping a different label on the same tube (which is why Tung-Sols tend to die in the cathode follower due to a design flaw). That said, I'm not picky. I tend to like JJ ECC83S's for the preamps in Fender-types with JJ 6L6GCs for the power section while Marshall-types tend to get a JJ ECC803S in V1, Shugangs in the rest of the preamp, and Shuguang or JJ EL34s. Nothing NOS, nothing expensive. I just make sure everything's biased up correctly power tube wise. I mean, that's been my experience for the past 26 years. These days I tend to run a modified Jet City Amelia into JCA24S cab with one stock 70W JC Eminence and the other swapped for an Eminence Private Jack. I leave the EQ alone and run different guitars for different sounds (Strats, Super Strats, Teles, Explorer, Wolfgangs, all with different woods and pickups). I miss running my Marshall 1959 circuit amp into my Peavey 412MS, but that's just too big for most places these days. I've also recorded with Pod Farm and, with a little work, gotten some pretty decent sounds out of that... I think the REAL difference is how the player feels. I think if the amp feels good and sounds good in the room it affects my playing. That 1% better sound could make me really feel the groove and play 10% better. Ya know what I mean? And who cares if nobody else ever hears it? Sometimes all that matters if you make yourself happy.
@@riptanionAF and this is why theory is always designed to be tested and re-tested. It doesn't take any more money than the next guy, it just requires careful attention to eliminate contamination of the data and stringent controls to make sure the repeat test is as accurate as it can be. That said, these people are crying because their religion was busted, not because Glenn was wrong.
Do you know where you bass player is? he's trying to fix the electricity in his mom's house after he blew it up by trying to change the tubes on a SOLID STATE AMP
Tube amp story. Yeah I've changed tubes. Sovtech, Groove tubes, silvania on and on. Ive stated before I never noticed much of a difference except for working/not working. Anyway, after a few amps, (musicman, fender, fenderclone, Garnett) in the late 80s I got a Redknob twin. Lots of power, clean, love it still have it. But in the bar days different sound personal (I found) would have different biases toward gear (not unlike every other situation in life) and I'd get 'suggestions', (like "you should try xxx tubes). So, Id try different ones, save the old ones, bla bla (sound men would always notice a difference in 'tone') I never noticed any difference and after growing and becoming more confident I stopped bothering being concerned about it. But then some sound magazine wrote an article regarding the tone of the red knob twin and all of the things you'd have to do to get a palatable sound out of it. Of course most of these experts were just annoyed that my amp wasn't a Vox, marshal, boggie or at least a '60s or '70s twin. I went to RadioShake and bought some black knobs and all the complaints vanished.
My main amp is a red knobs Twin too. Still the best clean tone I ever had (and I played a Roland JC-120 throughout the 80s and early 90s). The dirt channel is an acquired taste so I've relied on pedals for a long time too (the JHS Andy Timmons signature Angry Charlie is my current fave). I've played in a grunge band with that Twin in the late 90s early 2000s (using its dirt channel), I started using pedals again much later) and it sounded fuller and cut through the mix better than the other guy with a Marshall and 4x12. I plug my Twin in a 4x12 too now and mic that live. Killer. I needed to have my Twin recapped and retubed recently (it's a 30+ years old piece of gear after all) and needed a replacement because the caps took forever to be delivered to the tech and I used a Katana head through my 4x12. That sounds killer as well. I've never been a gear snob and, in my experience, the two ends of the chain make the biggest difference (the guitar then the cab). I played two guitars than convinced me of that many years ago. One was a pristine condition 1959 Les Paul Gold Top. I'm not a Gibson guy but that guitar was downright magical and I didn't know at the time that this is pretty much the holy grail year and model for a lot of collectors. To the kid I was, the tone and ease of playing were just out of this world... A year later I was able to compare a 1969 Strat with a brand new 1982 Strat. There was no comparison. The 69's tone (not even a pre CBS model for the purists...) was so much richer, clearer and punchier and it played way better. Absolutely no comparison. There are some truth to the magic of some old gear... but tubes? No. The caps replacement in my Twin made a HUGE difference in tone, volume and feel. Not because they were special but because the old ones were too old and out of spec. We then changed the tubes and that had very little impact on tone other than gain because, again, I'd waited too long to change them. The amp got a little tighter still and louder but that's because the old tubes were too old. Not because I changed brand (because I bought what was available). As Glenn said, buy the best quality/longest lasting tubes you can afford and play your guitar. Spend your energy on playing, developing your ears and enjoying the gear you do have. All gear is not suitable to all styles, but learning to tweak the knobs what you have now will be usful to you with any gear for years to come. Obsessing over tubes brand names will not ;)
FWIW, I still own a redknob Twin myself. And yes, I went through some tube experiments as well - didn't notice much of a difference, if any (and if so, it was likely just due to semi-blown tubes). On a quick sidenote: I did notice very strong differences when changing V1 tubes on various amps - but I only did that to exchange, say, an ECC83 in favour of an ECC81, simply because I wanted more clean headroom. Which worked pretty well on most amps. Tonally, however, there's been little to no change. The Twin however didn't need that tweak, featuring loads of headroom to start with. Anyway, back to off topic and that redknob Twin: I thought it was a horrible amp for the most part (I don't even know why I bought it) until, well, I finally exchanged the speakers. Those "Fender Special Design" (or whatever they're called) speakers are just horrible, especially once it comes to speaker beam. I tried all sorts of things to minimize that, slapping various things (ranging from gaffa tape, cardeboard, the infamous Jay Mitchell "donut" and all the way to a Deeflex) in front of them, basically to no avail. Then I finally slapped a V30 and a Peavey Sheffield that I had more or less hanging around unused in. And *WOOOSH!!!* there we were! All of a sudden that Twin became the most glorious clean pedal platform amp I ever owned. Well, ok, it only became that glorious when I later on exchanged the V30 in favour of a G12H100. The only amp that ever got me as good clean platform results later on has been my Mark IV (which I used for around a decade with the 2 overdriven channels wasted), which also had the better tone controls (and was easier to carry around, having separate top and cab instead of that friggin' heavy Twin monsterosity). No more speaker beam issues, no more gnarly/harsh mids on overdriven sounds and the cleans were still nice and chimey (used an EQ on my pedalboard to slightly beef them up, though). Fwiw: I'm not located in the heavy realm, soundwise I'm more into funky/jazzy to, well, kinda classic rock-ish things. Bottomline: If you ever need to do a modification to your amp, the first thing to fool around with are the speakers. Night and day, really. These days, everybody with a decent computer and half-decent recording setup can easily check the significance of speakers out by trying out some IRs.
I had an Evil Twin for a while too. Very good amp. Downside was that the much coveted JBLs it came with, the orange frame ones, were designed for a closed back cab, so although they sounded amazingly good they were less than entirely reliable over time.
@@niallmacdonald2710 If you mean the red knobs, that's not the "evil" Twin. That's the model that came right after the red knobs Twin. The speakers in red knob Twins are usually Eminence speakers and I think mine sound great.
OMG that actually happened in my band. Our bass player got a DUI and had to serve jail time on weekends. We actually played a gig where the bar was one block away from the jail that he had to serve in. He was not happy as much as we were, but shit happened. We had two guitar players at the time, I was one, so we divided up the bass parts and got through the weekends that he had to serve out his time.
After a lengthy discussion with guitar players, the scientists at CERN decided to change the tubes in the Large Hadron Collider ( LHC ).. and - voilà; they discovered the Higgs Boson.
@Tuomas - lol. Good one. Did they get those from Guitar Center? After the Higgs boson discovery, the scientists travelled 100 years into the future and attempted to sell those tubes as NOS to unsuspecting customers. lol
I think this test was one of the most amazing things a musician (and I think it surely even applies to audiophiles) can experience! I saw that kind butthurt responses coming... I can only imagine all the work that putting this together has been required. So, as a music lover, a musician and an audio freak, I thank you very much Glenn! \m/
Timecode index! (Awesome shirt btw Glenn) 0:47 Facebook and gearsluts nuclear annihilation reel 1:40 Angry feedback about scooped tone for tubechange and hear a difference 3:31 What? (bass player comment) 3:50 6L6 vs EL34 tubes 5:16 Scientific method (somebody didn't watch the entire video) 6:33 High gain metal amp for testing (also didn't watch full video) 6:58 Pro Mix Acamedy sponsorship 7:58 Butthurt of the week 10:00 I heard a difference - wornout tubes? 11:03 Somebody actually enjoyed the tube test - more scientific method 11:56 Aren't all tubes the same from China? 12:59 EVH variac power supply 14:03 Remote controled mic stand 14:53 Bias of tubes and preamp tubes 15:31 Tungsol tubes 15:46 Glenn! you are wrong 16:40 Cab speaker breakin shootout suggestion 17:37 Manufacture tolerances for tubes 17:55 Tube recommendations
If you want to know how closely the test followed the scientific method (or at least in a simplified fashion, there are a million models for the scientific method, I’m going with the simplest), here’s how I remember the scientific method being organized when I was in school compared to the tube test; 1. Question: start by asking a question. In the case of the tube test; does changing out vacuum tubes in amplifiers change the tone? 2. Hypothesis: an assumption based on limited data. Your hypothesis was that vacuum tubes don’t change the tone, but you were basing it on limited knowledge initially. 3. Experiment. Make a way to test your hypothesis. Optional; isolate the single variable you need to test (this is only unnecessary if you aren’t testing things where you need to be meticulous about the test being the same many times over). In this case: putting the amp into an impulse response, thereby isolating the factor you want to control; the tubes, then switching out a few different models of vacuum tubes. 4. Record data. Record your findings. What did you discover? In this case: the data showed that there was a very minimal difference between the different vacuum tubes. The only major differences being loss in gain, and very little else. This was also backed up by the null test, showing how little difference there was in tone. 5. Draw conclusions. This is the point where you can be absolutely sure about your conclusions (unless you want to do another round of the test, but in this case, everything was so tightly controlled, I’d be amazed if there’s anything else to get under control). For this test, the conclusion is: changing your vacuum tubes in an amplifier does NOT make a dramatic shift in your guitars tone. 6. Report. Share your findings with your peers. A scientific test is no good if no one else knows about it. For this test, you shared with us, your viewers, and about 80% of us were receptive to your findings xD
#3. Not everyone uses a load box. The "unnecessary variable" happens to be very important to most tube head users. Using a load box is peahacking the experiment. The argument Glenn gives for not using a cabinet is fucking ridiculous.
Plus: Even though in sound engineering using your ears is important, it's common in science to use numbers and/or graphs. Record it with a spectrum analyzer (there are some free apps for windows, but I don't know how good they are). In this way you can watch differences in frequency responses.
So far, the consensus I've seen from several sources, including those who build and repair tube amps, (You rock, Uncle Doug!), is that you "only" replace your tubes if the ones you have are failing.
lightning blew out my amp. i think that counts as "failing". 10 years of hard labor, 1 total tube swap. so far, my amp has cost 1,137€ for the amp (1000), the footswitch(50), the tubes(67), and the swap and bias(20). pretty good return on investment i'd say. but yeah, i'm of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" school.
watch the rick beato amp builders video, or "tube tone talk" both explain about tubes from an amp builder's perspective, what you say makes sense if you have never heard a nos tube. amp builders hate the modern crap more than anyone else. it makes all their hard work sound bad...there is also a dr z video about tubes if that's not enough prs used nos in his amps
I love the name of this video so much!!! From my experience, theres 2 types of guitarists. The tube snob or purist who only wants to hear analog all tube amps, who also seeks out vintage gear, and will laugh at anyone they see playing anything else, the same people that subscribe to all these myths about gear, then the guitarist thats willing to try out anything with open ears to hear what things sound like for themselves without bias. Tubes sound amazing, but there is a ton of solid state and digital gear that sounds fantastic as well. Why limit yourself and spend more than you have to just to appeal to your ego? Use your ears, and let go, u might be surprised on how far technology has come.
The only, only, ONLY tube I recommend that anybody looks at NOS tubes for is rectifier tubes (like for Fender Deluxe Reverbs, Champs, Princetons, Marshall JTM45s, etc.). The current tubes have two problems: 1) They throw whatever label they feel like on them and different recto tubes have different specs, including voltage drops. A mislabeled recto tube can change the operating voltage of the amp, either changing your output wattage and distortion characteristics with low voltage OR killing power tubes with high voltage. 2) They're simply not as robust in build and don't last as long. There are amps from the '50s still rocking the factory rectifier tubes. The reason for this is that the market is so small for rectifier tubes compared to the larger guitar amp market (most amps use solid state diodes for rectification) so they don't invest nearly as much time and attention to them. Rectifier tubes don't change tone at all but you want something that'll last longer.
@@paullee3660 na the Ibanez super metal is a better boost overall because it has more range of gain ,eq ,and output level so you can really tune the feel of the amp.
I love how these people obviously rage quit and commented before watching the whole video on tube comparisons because it was super detailed and so many bases
Hi Glen! I love the original tube video and this follow up video. The tube swap mirrored my own experience with tubes. Coming from the HMAP forum, i am not surprised to see facebook folks flip over the video. Concerning speaker break-in, it is a real factor similar to string break-in, but a lot of speaker companies take care of that at the factory as part of the normal testing to make sure it doesn't immediately die upon use. This helps to catch bad connections, faulty coils, and faulty cones as part of the normal quality control. Breaking in a speaker basically smooths out the frequency response a bit by allowing the bass to increase a small amount due to the cone stretching/settling ever so slightly. It is audible but not night and day different. A bigger difference would be using a fresh speaker (V30 for this example) and comparing it to a 10 and 20 year old version. That should yield measurable results. I hope to see the test soon. Thank you!
The biggest influence on tone, beside EQ is the Cabinet you're going through. The whole power valve thing is way overblown and much more interdependent on other variables within the amp.
I have an old vintage from the 70's tube tester. That would be a good thing to have. I recently had my Russian buddy that can fix anything recap it and replace the meter with the actual same components that were originally in there. I got it at a garage sale for $15 with the manual and tube info sheet, you can find them from $200-300 online. I am a Luthier and dabble in fixing amps and the tube tester has helped a ton in many situations and saves me and the customer money. Love the show Glenn.
Hey Glenn....love your channel....long time guitarist and former tube snob ...currently getting my degree in Electrical Engineering so....the reason we use and prefer tubes over solid state amps is that the more fragile harmonics in your signal survive better in vacuum than they would if they were being confined in a crystal lattice. However the vacuum tube is literally just acting as a sort of an 'amplified gate/switch' for the flow of the signal. Here is where vacuum tube construction comes in, and there's only like a handful of factories still making these things, different voltage and bias currents will affect the tube and thus the sound...but from tube to tube of the same type the difference in tolerance is almost inaudible....perhaps the specific exception being the Tung-Sol KT66 in place of the 6l6, which would give you the biggest differences if there were any...cause again...it is just electrons in a vacuum.....changing your pick will change your tone more than a tube swap. While I would have preferred a real cabinet...that Captor X is looking real tempting haha........for the remaining tube snobs....if you care that much..then im sorry but then you need to upgrade the iron in your transformers cause the stock iron they came with is wack and also beef them up and bias the power section for some KT120's and just ftw... if that doesn't then satisfy your needs for superior tube-age then idk....you can't reason with crazy. Most guys wont and dont even crank their power section to the point where you can really even begin to ask if they are they different..ugh
Hi Glenn, If you ever decide to do a v2 of this test, it would be great to see if changing from a class A to class A/B amp would make a significant difference, and secondly, how about really high end (corksniffer) tubes? There are some other boutique tube manufacturers out there like Sophia Electric, but their prices are astronomical (we're talking $100 a pop). I've never tried them, but if their claims are to be believed the gain factor of their tubes is different, and they have a higher headroom without loosing volume. Also, it would be great to see if biasing the different tube sets to their ideal (correct) plate voltage would have an impact on the tone between one set and the next, as I think that with a fixed bias amp the effect might be less pronounced. Cheers!
The main problem with class A -> A/B is that it's insanely difficult to get a valid null test, to the point of being impossible. Why? Because that will almost always involve using an entirely different circuit, which in the majority of cases means a different amp. Even when it doesn't, when an amp has multiple output modes (like the Victory Kraken, for example, which can run both ways as far as I know) there will be such a difference in output power that you'd have to artificially normalise the output. However, which frequencies do you normalise to? The choice will significantly affect the test, because class A and class A/B have very different characteristics.
China and Russia are the ONLY manufacturers of tubes. These "Sophia" tubes are undoubtedly just Russian tubes that have been painstakingly tested... much in the same way Groove Tubes (for example) tests their "premium" tubes.
@@digiscream Unless the amp is single ended (only one output tube) it's not true class 'A' 99% of amps that are called class A are actually cathode biased class A/B. As well negative feedback (or lack of it) in the power section makes a huge diff in tone.
@@kellyjackson7889 - that's basically my point. It's possible to build a switching setup in the power amp which removes all but one valve from the circuit and forces class A operation(which is what the Kraken does), however, but the drop in power will affect the sound significantly.
@@digiscream I meant doing the the same test but on a class A amp, as according to urban myth, they are the ones that most purely represent a tube's characteristics.
Cork sniffing. Pure and simple. I think the way you did the test the best way possible Glenn. A direct recording re-amped really is the only way to isolate all variables. You did a great job Glenn. And as I commented on one of your other videos....I changed the power tubes in my Mesa Boogie Mark IV...the only thing that changed was that my amp stopped blowing fuses. Haha
It’s been my experience that citing your experiences, observations, and failures in an effort to help people save money is good way to get yourself raked over the coals and labeled a self appointed expert. I do not pretend to understand why that is. Just been my experience in my limited scope. Hey...you’re doing a good job
Hey Glen, great work on the tube swap video. I have to say the results didn't surprise me that much, except for the 6L6/EL34 swap - I always thought there would be a far greater difference between them. If you're doing a follow-up, I have a few suggestions: Firstly, maybe try the amp at different master volume levels so we can hear if there are differences in the headroom/gain characteristics of different tubes. Secondly, re-bias the amp after changing the tubes but record it before and after the biasing - that way we can hear how the electrical bias of the amp affects the tone versus the tubes in the amp. Keep up the amazing work!
People have been told generalizations for decades, but when tested it doesn’t meet their doctrinal expectations and they get angry . It reminds me of when you tell creationists that the Flintstones isn’t a documentary... they freak out!
Since a looper is also just a recording device, but changing out tubes multiples times takes a whole lot of time, it's sure to say that a direct recording which is reamped afterwards will give a more precise reprodctubable result than a looper (plus, most loopers just record in 16bit 44.1kHz while the standard for recording nowadays is at minimum 24bit 48kHz).
Using a looper and recording software is how I choose tubes. (The differences are slight, reinforcing Glen's test data) It's technically more scientific, because the input is consistent
@@SpectreSoundStudios the preamp comparisons were pretty detailed including the isolated recordings but why did you kind of blow through the power tubes part? It would be great if we could get isolated tracks of the power tube comparisons.
wow, i’ve not seen this video yet, but my interest is peaked. i’ll watch it this weekend. it never really surprises me anymore when people get up in arms about anything that challenges their belief system, but social media has made it far easier to speak without thinking. oddly enough, they can google anything they want and do research easier than ever, but i guess it’s far easier to spout off first. oh well. I’ve come to expect less and less, with the passing years. i wonder if there will be a tonal difference at all between a quality I. R. and a speaker moving air in a room. i tend to doubt it, other than natural acoustic preperties in a room, not much would be drastically different. i imagine you can achieve far different tonal changes with changing speaker, and cabinet types. closed back vs. open back cabs, v-30 speakers vs. cream backs, or Jenson’s vs. Peavy. I love these tests you do, and i do get some perverse entertainment from peoples butthurt responses as well. keep up the good work.
13:15 Please also note that EVH was playing through a European model Marshall that needed a doubled voltage to run. 220V not 110V, like the domestic amps were wired for. I have avoided this method just to be safe and work within the manufactured specs of my tube amps. Burnin' down the house is just a song, not a goal.
Rectifiers with a Bold / Spongy switch on the back will essentially variac down the voltage supply to the whole amp by around 10% in the spongy setting. Thanks, EVH. Also, one of the most knowledgeable tube amp builders on TH-cam is Uncle Doug. In hundreds of videos he demonstrates that only extremely rarely are “bad tubes” responsible for bad amp performance, even tubes with multiple decades of use on them. On the flip side, Mike Soldano opted to build in a DC heater supply into the new SLOs because he believes quality control from the remaining few tube factories is sliding and he’s getting tired of hand swapping tubes to find one with a noise floor quiet enough for the first position. So if your amp is noisy, you might focus on that first preamp tube. Finding a good tube for that first position may get the noise floor suppressed, but it won’t change tone much, as you’ve clearly shown in your science experiment.
also as a producer/engineer, i have to say that on some level a $20 tube that's as effective as dumbo's feather might actually be worth the money. heh.
A website called Audiosciencereview already disproved speaker break in using scientific measurements. The biggest variables that will impact the sound of a speaker are temperature, which only impacts the bass at a few db, potential speaker damage and how vulnerable humans are to the power of suggestion.
Thanks for all your time and energy in putting that experiment together Glenn. I personally never heard much of a difference in tube swaps on my amps and tube pre amps over the years. I will say, I have noticed massive tone differences in mic placement and testing each speaker in my 4x 12 cab, which I have learned from watching your vids. Thanks Man!
I watched that one. Someone in the comment section suggested that they should have done a blind listening test in the interest of objectivity. Rick replied telling the guy that he couldn't know because he wasn't there. If that's the case what was the point in publishing a video for the exercise in the first place? I love Rick but the man can't handle any amount of criticism very well.
I guess that could've been handled better! But in the interest of objectivity, and I know I can't measure how much TH-cam has compressed the audio, plus extracting audio into MP3 blah blah, I'd still like to put it into my DAW, trim out just the playing and do a blind test for myself. Just for fun :D
Oh! Oh! Oh! Sorry for writing so much but I just thought of something else that relates to this topic and what I posted below. With regard to the subjectivity and perception of sound I recall learning this about myself. (this is from 'the old days' of course). While working in a very hard working bar band we would travel from town to town doing week gigs so sunday evening was set up and soundcheck night. In this band we did sound from the stage a lot and so this meant pulling the snake out past the dance floor setting up, play for a bit and get things sounding as good as we could and then moving the board to the stage and hoping for the best. I recall one such evening. We had a hand full of songs we could do where one of the band members could fiddle at the board and walk the room while the others played or walk about with long guitar cables or wirelesses. On this particular evening, everything was working correctly, people singing ok and all guitars were in tune, no feedback issues, all speakers working no 60hz hums but something just wasn't right and I couldn't put my finger on it. We all took turns and everyone one agreed that there was something just not quite there. This went on for a few song, we finished setting up, put cables and cases away, hung black cloth on shit, played a bit more ... like ... it sounded ok ... but I, and the whole band ... were just used to a little more 'p'zzaz and it just wasn't happening. Even when we stuck in a break tape it seemed to suffer the 'something is missing' feel. With the break tape going I double checked our rack eqs and fxs to make sure nothing had been bumped or adjusted to an extreme. Four guys in the band, all four guys had the same feeling about our particular sound and even with a break tape in. It just sounded 'ok'. Couldn't quite put a finger on it but, shrugg, it's probably good enough for the fuckin loser town we were playing in anyway. By this time we were almost done set up and clean up. Switched off the ugly fluorescent house lights above the stage and turned on our fancy coloured lights ... and in that instance ... everything sounded fine, in-fact better than fine, even the break tape sounded great. The four of us were blown away at how affected we were with regard to our stage lighting and the perception of our environment. We also didn't look as pale and sickly as we did under the house lights. Thank god for salmon pink and magenta gels. We all went out for chinese dinner in a really good mood. My point is, observing myself going through that experience causes me to remind myself to cut somebody a little slack for thinking that coating there guitar cables in pepper will brighten their tone. I can see full well how buying tubes that come in a box with a picture of a fucking mig on it might make one think that their tone had just jumped up the wall.
Man If guitarists continue on this path you might need to reassess the worst band member. Bassists have embraced solid state amps (dark glass) and high end Chinese made basses (Dingwalls are assembled in China), meanwhile Guitarists cling to Gibson and vintage tubes for dear life. Hmm 🧐
This comment hurts because its true! I have seen people with gibsons that cost more that my rig, and the worst part is the can barely play a F chord lol
Solid state tends to have a much better dampening factor than tubes. (Yes, that's a real term that can be scientifically measured. It has to do with how the amp interacts with the speaker.) According to Wikipedia, it's more important in the bass frequencies than in the mid to treble range.
Your objective test was not objective enough because you eliminated the subjective elements (/s, in response to "didn't allow the guitarists to explore the different gain structures). I suggest getting a couple of the most vitriolic among them, and give them a true blind a/b test. Yes, you can hear differences -- we all did, even Glenn. But if you don't know which tube is which, do you believe you can pick out the better-sounding tube consistently? Do you believe you can identify the brand of tube solely from those differences? Personally, I doubt it. Anyway, according to legend, EVH was able to play with the variac tricks during his career because if he blew an amp up or drastically shortened its life it was no big deal. The story I heard (who knows if it's true) is that he'd have an amp running full power in an isolation box for a week and if it DIDN'T blow up, he'd consider it viable for touring.
GLEEEEEN! I used to use tube amps exclusively (Mesa Boogies) and never saw a difference in one tube brand or another. I did, however, see a small difference in tone when I went from 6L6’s to EL34’s in my Triple Rectifier. The difference was a minor decrease in low end fullness. But, the difference was only noticeable through the speaker cabinet and not the power soak output I would use sometimes when recording. I wonder if some tube models react with speakers a bit differently causing the perceived “change” in tone? Greetings from Maryland’s Eastern Shore and “Fornicate Thou”!
Deja vu... Except "wood species"... Stay in school kids. Choose S.T.E.M. So you'll be smart enough to recognize quantifiable reality. "Fall back" on music. PLEASE!
*I* find that Sovtek tubes give my tone a great fruity bouquet, with strong hints of tannin and a oaky aftertaste. They go *perfectly* with white, gold, and natural finish guitars. For red, black, or blue guitars, you *must* have Genalex tubes, which provide a wonderful biscuity aroma, a chewy body, and just a supple hint of soy sauce. Green guitars? Peasant....
@@witnessthewrath8061 As much difference with solid bodies as there is between having a rosewood fretboard or a maple fretboard, so not a lot. But try to get one of them aluminum Stratocaster's Fender made back in the 90's and tell me that you can't hear a clear difference trough an amp with that body. :D
Glenn, love the video. What I think you should have done is primed your viewers by telling them the common expectation of what each tube brings but then played the same audio. In one of my recording classes, my teacher played the pure mix critical listening series where Fab displayed an eq and bypassed it but it was actually on an empty channel and I was the only one in the class that didn’t hear a difference. He did this to explain priming and I would’ve loved to see the reactions of people who “could hear a difference” in the same audio file. In my experience, priming is everything.
Ffs, mic the cab, leave the head on a desk a few feet away. The problem is you are eliminating the speakers. If the power is changed from the output IT WILL AFFECT THE SPEAKER. Changing the pre AND power tubes will demonstrate it. Don't do a lazy experiment. Mic the cab, use a long lead to the head.
Hey there! I was really surprised with you results. As anybody else I was (and still am) into the tube “magic” beliefs. And I’ve bought all sorts of tubes, including “vintage magic” tubes. Now, I believe I heard the difference, and eventually I got back to JJ. The point I’m making, is that as a result of all the search I got back to “standard “ JJ tubes. And those “warm magic ones” are in my closet. So I guess, there is a difference. Now, can it be, that the test should have been done by micking the room, not the specific spot on the speaker? I mean, when you micking specific spot, you kinda get super narrow specific frequency range, which is not that sensitive to tube variance? And I must say You did really good job! I’m really puzzled by the result.
So you used IRs to check power amp tubes, I think there is something wrong here, may be i'm getting old and crazy, but when you use IRs, you simply removed the power tube sound even if you used speaker out from the amp, still the Capctor X will attenuate the signal to pre amp out level to add the IRs algorithm, so basically you tested something was not in the sound, and then you are saying there is no sound changes, YES no changes as you deleted the sound of the power tubes by using IRs. if you used sound of wall plugin, you will find the power tube section, so you can add the sound of the specific power tube, because by using IRs you deleted the power tube sound, to make that comparison you need to use a real cab and mic. I'm sorry man, i love your show and i learned a lot from it, but you miss the point in that comparison, power tubes need mic and cab to be tested, not IRs love you man, hope no hard feelings :)
wow, i was like WTF in the last video as no sound diff. but your analysis for the problem is convencing, GLEEEEEENNNNNN do another experpment, and do it right this time, Use a cab and mic not a fuckin ir, and please don't talk about science :D
You're wrong. A load box goes between an amplifier and the speakers, so the power tubes still do their thing. Also the impulse response just filters out frequencies, just like a speaker would.
@@nikolabegonja5490 take the output from the preamp ex: FX send port, and record it, and in the same time use capctor x at the amp out and do a second record, as Gleen did, use the same IR for both records, and you will get almost the same result, which means the power tubes was almost cancelled, that's why 6L6 and EL34 almost sound the same, to really compare power tubes you need to use cab and mic, Gleen knows and he mentioned before that IRs are not replacing cab and mic, it's just a snap of the sound, digital tech is good, but not getting out the same result as analogue, anyway, the only way to test it is to do the test again but through cab and mic and see the results. i did the compare between the pre amp out and amp out, and using same IR, as i mentioned above, almost same result, which means power tubes are not that effective in IR case
“Deleted the sound of the power tubes”lmao. The reason the power section emulation exists in two notes wall of sound is because it can be used in different contexts...like following an amp sim or something without a power section so you can simulate a power section.
I think the testing was quite concise and enlightening. The nulling on some of the sets was wild, didnt think it would null that well. What i think a few people are getting at is that a player is a huge part of the signal chain/feedback loop. So a player's response to the subtle difference in what they hear can actually change the overall sound more dramatically than the subtle difference in itself. Kind of Woo-Woo i know, but im sure you know what i mean.
havent seen a tasty glenn video for almost a year now(been doing andrew yang stuffs im so exhausted send help) and i gotta say glenn, i LOVE the multiple angles. im really happy to see that your content has continued growing its presentation. wonderful work glenn, wishing you the best:]
Glenn, you go to great lengths to demonstrate better standards of practice and technology. Anyone who can't provide a constructive critique or ask questions without making baseless accusations is just being histrionic. Personally, I think 95% of these deserved The Butthurt of the Week title. Great show, my man! I don't really do this stuff but I've learned a lot just by watching.
I’m super excited about the break-in speaker test. I work at a music store and I’ll never forget this guy who brings in all kinds of gear to get fixed and it’s all old beat up gear. I recommended he buy something new (he was getting frustrated with all the repairs) and he got uppity with me saying he’ll never buy new, only “broken in.” My eyes rolled all way back in my head as he played his 5 millionth pentatonic blues lick, and I’m curious to see if he was full of shit or not. I’ve always been 99% sure he was, so it’ll be nice to get that last percent lmao
When I got my amp used, it had 6l6's, i swapped them out for EL34's because I had heard that theres more swept mids and it has a different sound than the 6l6's (One being more british and one being more american which supposedly is a thing) and since I am actually brand new to tube amps I spent a lot of thing thinking I did something wrong as I didn't notice any difference. I'm not upset about putting in new tubes, I don't know how the old ones were handled and it's not a shiny new head, but the video did set my mind at ease quite a bit. I will say one thing though, I noticed I get a lot more feedback at high gain with the el34's. I don't know if that's a byproduct of them being new and the other ones starting to go out, or if something else is goofy but that is the extent of what changed for me changing tubes. Anyway, it's nice to know that i have more options and the change won't be noticeable by my ears.
I had a Peavey Classic 50 combo amp years ago. I switched 2 of the EHX 12ZX7 preamp tubes that were in it to tubes out of my dad's old jukebox. The amp definitely had a bit more harmonic distortion with the old-ass tubes in it and it did sound better. Likewise, putting the EHX tubes into the jukebox made it instantly sound much cleaner! It was a good swap (and free). I think I also bought a set of Tube Doctor EL84's for the power stage. Can't say I noticed ANY difference at all with them. The biggest difference though was swapping out the 2 12" Peavey speakers with some cheap ($25 each) but well-made Weber speakers. Weber has all sorts of configuration options that you can choose from even on their cheap speakers, and swapping them out I was surprised by how stiff the Peavey speakers were. The Webers I had chosen specifically to try to make the speakers break up earlier, and boy did they. It honestly sounded great. If you REALLY want to change the sound of your amp, I think speakers are probably the best way to do it, and you don't have to spend a lot to do it. I highly recommend Weber as ordering from them was great, and they have so many options along with very reasonable prices. Even if you want to go with a pricey original vintage speaker, Weber can recreate that exact speaker for you at a cheaper price. I don't know why people spend the money on name-brand speakers that no one will ever see when you can get the same thing for less.
Only really noticeable difference I've heard in swapping around preamp tubes in the past was in a laney VC50 combo I used to own. The clean channel wasn't all that clean and if anything that amp had more gain available than I'd ever need, so I changed out the position 1 ax7 for a lower gain at7 and it tamed the beast. Good amp btw, mine had Steve Vai's signature across the grille cloth from when he'd used it for some in store demos years previously. Effing heavy 2x12 combo though. I changed it for a Laney silver anniversary combo with 2x10, same preamp section, different power tubes, silver tolex and a lot less weight. I did the same tube swap in position 1 on that amp too. Great amps both. Unrelated trivia now. Laney bought out HH, I forget when, when they were in financial difficulties, and used them as the basis for their own speakers. HH were a popular brand of mostly solid state amps in the UK in the 70s and 80s, one of the sounds of punk. Their cabs were 1/2" ply vs most others' 1/4" ply and weighed a ton, hence the nickname Happy Hernias. I still have an HH 4x12 cab suitable for guitar or bass use, and it still sounds amazing.
When I had an Egnater Renegade I was able to compare pairs of power tubes in the same amp since that amp allows you to "pan" between pairs of power tubes, typically it was used so you could have EL34s and 6L6s in the same amp and blend the two for different tones..... the difference between the EL34s and 6L6s was noticeable for sure.... I did compare 6L6s from JJ and GT at one point and found there was a difference there too.... nothing adjusting the EQ in the amp couldn't probably fix but a difference none the less..... Maybe you could grab one of those amps for the next test and reduce the variables in the test even further
Is it possible to normalize the volume of the each sample? this would remove the difference in perception because of volume change and also improve results when looking for differences when adding an out of phase signal. I wouldn't know how to do this with a DAW but if you could get the raw data you could normalize by dividing the entire signal by it's variance, either the standard deviation or inter quartile range (lets subtract the mean/median for completeness too)
Hey GleeeeeeEEEEeeEeEEEeeEEeEEeeeenn! Love your show! It is very difficult to find a place to learn new tricks while dying of laughter with your humor and sarcasm! Well done, sr! Thanks for your tremendous effort in educating us (bunch of idiots, haha ...). I am not a guitarist nor do I use tube amps, but what do you think about changing the tubes of an ART VLA PRO II? I guess it's the same, but i'm curious. Greetings from Chile!
@ SpectreSoundStudios: One test that might be worth trying is to compare a short plate 12ax7/ecc83 with one or another of the long plate tubes in the phase splitter position in an amp set for a mostly clean pre-amp driving the output section to distortion. Possible long plate options would be Sovtek 12ax7-lps, JJ ecc803S, Mullard 12ax7, or Sovtek 5751. Many people don't realize that a lot of what is thought to be power tube distortion is actually happening in the phase splitter. I haven't had the time to try this myself and would love to see what, if any difference there is. Cheers!
This is some funny shit, haven't laughed this hard in a while. Guitar Center once told me changing the tubes would change the sound. I then took my JCM900 to an actual amp tech, and he explained that the EL34 tubes in my amp were the ones I needed. Changing them wouldn't make sense in his opinion. Exactly what you said.
I’m fucking sick of people complaining about everything that doesn’t align with their own views and doesn’t justify their purchase. Glenn, by the end of the night I’ll be a Patreon again because videos like these are SORELY needed in the filth that is the audio industry.
Question for you - have any advice on blending / placing multiple mics on guitar cabinets? Or is this not done much in metal? (Other than the Fredman technique)
Oooo. Speaker break in test would be amazing. That could be super helpful. Not just for there being a difference but what is that difference. Does it really tame the highs and get warmer? You MUST make that video.
Glen, I used to work in a Music Shop in the 80's. Selling guitars was an easy grind. Tell them you hear something in their tone was the easiest way to put them in debt. I played probably a thousand guitars. From 'Trades' to 'Brand New'. 'Feel' was more important than tone.
You sort of touched on another question I have about tubes: how much does the make of the tube affect the longevity and reliability of the tube? Will a premium tube last much longer or have much less of a chance of going microphonic than a no-name tube? Or is that also a negligible difference? Enquiring minds want to know.
I did a video comparison a few years ago of 2 Mesa Boogie Roadsters (very close serial #) one had stock Mesa tubes, the other had a whizz bang array of tubes. I did a similar test (Although not as thorough as you did in the previous video). Lets just say that that video was not well received- haha. Purchase confirmation bias is a real thing. Regardless of high tech EQ matching and comparison - people will swear up and down that they hear a difference. Much like you- when I was more active in making videos- I simply wanted to help folks direct their funds more wisely, and not make empty promise purchases. Want to change your guitar sound? CHANGE YOUR DAMN STRINGS, or better yet, get a different cab. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk. Keep crushing souls Glenn!
BTW, those that say that differences are in the mid range... it would be quite difficult to have that, if there are differences they are at the either end of the spectrum. It is of course possible that we then have a tube that sucks at low and highs, which means the mids will be louder relative but.. having just the mids change, would require some filtering somewhere. In room acoustics, cabinets etc. you can have all kinds of midrange peaks and valleys but to have the same in amps.. it is quite unlikely.
I bought a Marshall 9200 used a few years ago. I changed all the valves, in particular the 5881 to 6L6C. When I went to test, the changes were practically minimal. Honestly, if you have money and want to change the valves, ok change, if not, don't worry. Therefore, I fully agree with Glenn. Of course the bass player in my band said it made a huge difference.
To improve the test if you do one next time, be sure to re-bias the power section when you change the tubes. This will allow the same amount of current to flow through the tubes so that the variation in tone will literally be just down to the tubes. Loved the first test though, keep up the good work Glenn!
One caution about rebadging. Just because something is made in the same plant, doesn't mean it's made to the same standards. There's a possibility that one tube has received a better ($) coating that helps it function better/longer than one produced under a different contracted run. From what I understand, that happens all the time with batteries and oil filters. It's all about what the customer (the brand) ordered.
You could step it up, by running a test signal like EQ sweeps or White noise through the Amps. You could do this at different Volumes and have a look if that makes a Difference. Idk just an idea
Madman suggestion: change all possible potentiometers for resistors. You can measure the resistance of the potentiometer in the preferred position and find a resistor with that value, this way you can remove the possibility of accidentally changing the controls in the amp. One suggestion that I have for a video is to try to make two different setups sound as close as possible (different guitars, amps, etc) by just changing the EQ controls in the amp or daw. Great video, cheers from Brazil!
Output tubes matter but not as much as other things in the signal chain. I have tested different tubes on a McIntosh amp and you can tell that there is a difference. But in a fender amp I couldn't tell any difference. The difference is that the McIntosh each (2 for stereo) weigh as much as the fender amp and it doesn't have a driver or cabinet. The amps in guitar amp aren't designed to be flat and silent. They are intended to color the sound and they do it so much to erase the difference in tubes.
Hey Glenn! how are you doing? the tube video have been enlightening! I would love to watch other experiments like this one... maybe the next one could be "how much the wood affects the tone". Cheers
Glen I think your video with the test and this follow up is very interesting, to show how much snake oil is still going around. What i would like to see on a later test (I am willing to help if we can overcome the distance and covid) is the so called matched power tubes. Matching tubes happened from half the eighties. During the sixties and seventies end tubes were not really matched. It is an artifact from the high end audio community that grew at the end of the eighties. Buying matched tubes has always so much snake oil involved because no vendor release the parameters the tubes are matched on. And it is a very complex matter.
I liked your previous video about tubes. Watched the whole thing. They definitely had a difference, but minimal, like you said. I have never changed tubes, typically changing speaker, mic or mic placement yields bigger changes. I think the only thing someone mentioned that I wonder about too is the gain structure/ sweep. How clean and how distorted can a set of pre-amp tubes go. Like gain on 1 vs gain on 5 vs gain on 10. Same with power tubes... At volume 1, volume 5, volume 9-10. Where do they break-up and does it impact tone in the process.
by the way, thanks to your fearless gear reviews, I have a Harley Benton 2x12 vintage 30 loaded cab on its way from Thomann to compliment my Revv G-20. it should be here monday, and i can’t wait to hear how it sounds together.
I'll admit I was surprised their wasn't a bigger difference between tube types, but otherwise the results were pretty much what I expected. One of my main amps back in the mid 2000s was a Mesa Nomad 2x12 that I changed the tubes in after about 5 years of gigging, and my recollection was that it sounded better, but I'm pretty sure there was a bit of confirmation bias going on - and also, the old tubes were well used, so what I was probably hearing was the difference between old and new tubes. If you can be bothered repeating this experiment, and want to placate those who are complaining, it might be worth removing the load box and IR and use a speaker and mic in an iso cabinet. Great video, thanks and fuck you, Glenn.
Thank you for making that video. I am new to tube amps and I fell into the trap of the thinking of replacing tube amp will change the tone of the amp well your video was good enough to make me realize that the cost does not justify the change. Now off to shop/research for a 10” speaker to change.
Glenn. I am by no means an expert video editor, but recently I've been spending a fair amount of time working with different dissolves, camera changes etc. I would offer some advice (keeping in mind, I'm no pro) on your camera changes. In my opinion when changing from one camera angle to another, leave in about a second or less of you looking at the other camera before the change so that it shows you turning to face the other camera... just a bit. Also (in my non-expert opinion) when you go from a zoomed out camera shot to a close up (or whenever camera distance is changed,) use a dissolve. Fade out from the first shot and fade into the second shot, using no more than one second of time total (1/2 second fade out, 1/2 second fade in.) These are not game breakers by any means. I find the cut from one view to the next to feel a bit unnatural. Again, just my two cents.
"The only thing this test shows is your personal agenda."
😆 Yeah, Glenn's *totally* in the pocket of Big, uh, Not... Replace.. Tubes?
HE'S Socialism! No...Marxism! No... CULTURAL MARXISM!! Don't let him indoctrinate your children! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
The struggle is real.
LOL Seriously. People are nuts. LOL
I have tube rolled. Some people hear the difference. Some people can't tell the difference between a 5150 and a Line6 POD 1.0. I change tubes because they affect the presence and it makes the amp feel a touch different for me, but that's also not something that comes across in recorded tone.
I also probably haven't spent more than $150 on tubes in 26 years of playing guitar, so I clearly haven't gone crazy, and that includes straight up replacements of dead tubes. LOL My point is that there's a middle ground between just going insane and spending tons of money on tubes and spending $15 on a JJ ECC803S because it sounds good in V1 of a Marshall.
@@t_sosh " but...But... BUUTT!!! I spent $150 on a magical 70 year old tube that has made the compete and utter difference in the the tone stack phase inversion bias farty buttons on my amp! Sheesh!! Tone-deaf heathens!!! How DARE YOU NOT VALIDATE MY PURCHASE!!! "
The Tube Snobs drive me nuts.
Yes, I sincerely prefer tube amps.
Why? They sound good and provide that BLAST in the face when I really open one of them up.
Most of these assnuggets with the "Golden Ears" will never have their recordings heard outside of the laptop they recorded them to.
@@joeyvanostrand3655, the truth is, as usual, somewhere in the middle. Tubes are great BECAUSE they're imperfect. There is absolutely no operating range in which what goes into a tube is the same waveform as what comes out (minus change in amplitude, of course). There is ALWAYS distortion, as defined by that inability to perfectly replicate the wave. It may still sound "clean" to the human ear, but it's distorted.
Are some tubes better than others? Yeah. Are some tubes still made on the same worn-out machinery as they were 40 years ago, and thus manufacturing tolerances have slipped? Most certainly. Are others made on new machinery? Yeah. Do current tubes follow the published spec? Depends on which tube you're talking about. Some do, some are WAAAAAAAAAY off. As I said in another comment somewhere, some manufacturers slap "6CA7" on a pentodes (usually EL34s) while an actual 6CA7 is a beam tetrode built to be electrically compatible (but internally way different) with the EL34.
The only "magic" in NOS tubes is that they were made back when people cared about published specs, so a Sylvania 12AX7 was basically the same as a GE 12AX7 and 7025 actually meant a military ruggedized version of the 12AX7 (now anything labeled 7025 is just a 12AX7 with a different label and no differences in construction).
But that in no way means there aren't good tubes today. NewSensor makes a whole variety of tubes under different brands (Sovtek, Mullard, Tung-Sol, Svetlana, EH) and, surprisingly, actually use different designs for each brand rather than just slapping a different label on the same tube (which is why Tung-Sols tend to die in the cathode follower due to a design flaw).
That said, I'm not picky. I tend to like JJ ECC83S's for the preamps in Fender-types with JJ 6L6GCs for the power section while Marshall-types tend to get a JJ ECC803S in V1, Shugangs in the rest of the preamp, and Shuguang or JJ EL34s. Nothing NOS, nothing expensive. I just make sure everything's biased up correctly power tube wise.
I mean, that's been my experience for the past 26 years. These days I tend to run a modified Jet City Amelia into JCA24S cab with one stock 70W JC Eminence and the other swapped for an Eminence Private Jack. I leave the EQ alone and run different guitars for different sounds (Strats, Super Strats, Teles, Explorer, Wolfgangs, all with different woods and pickups). I miss running my Marshall 1959 circuit amp into my Peavey 412MS, but that's just too big for most places these days.
I've also recorded with Pod Farm and, with a little work, gotten some pretty decent sounds out of that...
I think the REAL difference is how the player feels. I think if the amp feels good and sounds good in the room it affects my playing. That 1% better sound could make me really feel the groove and play 10% better. Ya know what I mean?
And who cares if nobody else ever hears it? Sometimes all that matters if you make yourself happy.
"The only thing that beats science is better science"
This needs to be on a t-shirt.
THIS!!
SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!
If there's one problem with science, it's scientists. They are human and thus fallible and corruptible. Trust but verify.
@@riptanionAF Good science takes money. Money tends to have strings attached.
@@riptanionAF and this is why theory is always designed to be tested and re-tested. It doesn't take any more money than the next guy, it just requires careful attention to eliminate contamination of the data and stringent controls to make sure the repeat test is as accurate as it can be. That said, these people are crying because their religion was busted, not because Glenn was wrong.
And next you'll tell me that a Klon Centaur isn't really worth five grand....
lol. Everybody knows, the Klon Centaur is worth at least $500,000us. 😨😧🥴
Do you know where you bass player is?
he's trying to fix the electricity in his mom's house after he blew it up by trying to change the tubes on a SOLID STATE AMP
We don’t need no steenking tubes!
he's got electricity? wow!
@@kingjbone1 not him, his mom lol
How?
@@ioanhales455 he's a bass player, he has his ways lol
Tube amp story. Yeah I've changed tubes. Sovtech, Groove tubes, silvania on and on. Ive stated before I never noticed much of a difference except for working/not working. Anyway, after a few amps, (musicman, fender, fenderclone, Garnett) in the late 80s I got a Redknob twin. Lots of power, clean, love it still have it. But in the bar days different sound personal (I found) would have different biases toward gear (not unlike every other situation in life) and I'd get 'suggestions', (like "you should try xxx tubes). So, Id try different ones, save the old ones, bla bla (sound men would always notice a difference in 'tone') I never noticed any difference and after growing and becoming more confident I stopped bothering being concerned about it. But then some sound magazine wrote an article regarding the tone of the red knob twin and all of the things you'd have to do to get a palatable sound out of it. Of course most of these experts were just annoyed that my amp wasn't a Vox, marshal, boggie or at least a '60s or '70s twin. I went to RadioShake and bought some black knobs and all the complaints vanished.
My main amp is a red knobs Twin too. Still the best clean tone I ever had (and I played a Roland JC-120 throughout the 80s and early 90s). The dirt channel is an acquired taste so I've relied on pedals for a long time too (the JHS Andy Timmons signature Angry Charlie is my current fave).
I've played in a grunge band with that Twin in the late 90s early 2000s (using its dirt channel), I started using pedals again much later) and it sounded fuller and cut through the mix better than the other guy with a Marshall and 4x12. I plug my Twin in a 4x12 too now and mic that live. Killer.
I needed to have my Twin recapped and retubed recently (it's a 30+ years old piece of gear after all) and needed a replacement because the caps took forever to be delivered to the tech and I used a Katana head through my 4x12. That sounds killer as well. I've never been a gear snob and, in my experience, the two ends of the chain make the biggest difference (the guitar then the cab). I played two guitars than convinced me of that many years ago. One was a pristine condition 1959 Les Paul Gold Top. I'm not a Gibson guy but that guitar was downright magical and I didn't know at the time that this is pretty much the holy grail year and model for a lot of collectors. To the kid I was, the tone and ease of playing were just out of this world...
A year later I was able to compare a 1969 Strat with a brand new 1982 Strat. There was no comparison. The 69's tone (not even a pre CBS model for the purists...) was so much richer, clearer and punchier and it played way better. Absolutely no comparison. There are some truth to the magic of some old gear... but tubes? No.
The caps replacement in my Twin made a HUGE difference in tone, volume and feel. Not because they were special but because the old ones were too old and out of spec. We then changed the tubes and that had very little impact on tone other than gain because, again, I'd waited too long to change them. The amp got a little tighter still and louder but that's because the old tubes were too old. Not because I changed brand (because I bought what was available).
As Glenn said, buy the best quality/longest lasting tubes you can afford and play your guitar. Spend your energy on playing, developing your ears and enjoying the gear you do have. All gear is not suitable to all styles, but learning to tweak the knobs what you have now will be usful to you with any gear for years to come. Obsessing over tubes brand names will not ;)
FWIW, I still own a redknob Twin myself. And yes, I went through some tube experiments as well - didn't notice much of a difference, if any (and if so, it was likely just due to semi-blown tubes).
On a quick sidenote: I did notice very strong differences when changing V1 tubes on various amps - but I only did that to exchange, say, an ECC83 in favour of an ECC81, simply because I wanted more clean headroom. Which worked pretty well on most amps. Tonally, however, there's been little to no change. The Twin however didn't need that tweak, featuring loads of headroom to start with.
Anyway, back to off topic and that redknob Twin: I thought it was a horrible amp for the most part (I don't even know why I bought it) until, well, I finally exchanged the speakers. Those "Fender Special Design" (or whatever they're called) speakers are just horrible, especially once it comes to speaker beam. I tried all sorts of things to minimize that, slapping various things (ranging from gaffa tape, cardeboard, the infamous Jay Mitchell "donut" and all the way to a Deeflex) in front of them, basically to no avail. Then I finally slapped a V30 and a Peavey Sheffield that I had more or less hanging around unused in. And *WOOOSH!!!* there we were! All of a sudden that Twin became the most glorious clean pedal platform amp I ever owned. Well, ok, it only became that glorious when I later on exchanged the V30 in favour of a G12H100.
The only amp that ever got me as good clean platform results later on has been my Mark IV (which I used for around a decade with the 2 overdriven channels wasted), which also had the better tone controls (and was easier to carry around, having separate top and cab instead of that friggin' heavy Twin monsterosity).
No more speaker beam issues, no more gnarly/harsh mids on overdriven sounds and the cleans were still nice and chimey (used an EQ on my pedalboard to slightly beef them up, though).
Fwiw: I'm not located in the heavy realm, soundwise I'm more into funky/jazzy to, well, kinda classic rock-ish things.
Bottomline: If you ever need to do a modification to your amp, the first thing to fool around with are the speakers. Night and day, really. These days, everybody with a decent computer and half-decent recording setup can easily check the significance of speakers out by trying out some IRs.
Everybody knows that changing your knobs makes the biggest difference in tone. That was the secret to the true vintage Fenders!
I had an Evil Twin for a while too. Very good amp. Downside was that the much coveted JBLs it came with, the orange frame ones, were designed for a closed back cab, so although they sounded amazingly good they were less than entirely reliable over time.
@@niallmacdonald2710 If you mean the red knobs, that's not the "evil" Twin. That's the model that came right after the red knobs Twin. The speakers in red knob Twins are usually Eminence speakers and I think mine sound great.
Is it just me, or are people forgetting they've got a huge tone changer on their amp, it's called the eq.
B-but the internet said that these amp settings are perfect and should never be changed!!!
And for people who that EQ isn’t enough. SPEND $100 ON AN EQ PEDAL INSTEAD OF A $200 SET OF TUBES!!! 😂😂
@@gamesandguitars3901 There are a lot of people who don't realize just how valuable an EQ pedal really is.
tbf, my low and high knob do jack shit xD
Some people can't even use the tone control in the guitar, and God forbids having the volume control not at 10
Do you know where your bass player is?
Yeah, he just called. He needs bail money... Again
It wasn’t my fault !!! When I woke up all the drugs , hookers and cops were just there !!!!!
OMG that actually happened in my band. Our bass player got a DUI and had to serve jail time on weekends. We actually played a gig where the bar was one block away from the jail that he had to serve in. He was not happy as much as we were, but shit happened. We had two guitar players at the time, I was one, so we divided up the bass parts and got through the weekends that he had to serve out his time.
Yeah, he needs to get bailed out because tomorrow is STD day at the free clinic and his smack dealer is usually there too.
After a lengthy discussion with guitar players, the scientists at CERN decided to change the tubes in the Large Hadron Collider ( LHC ).. and - voilà; they discovered the Higgs Boson.
here take my upvote xD
@Tuomas - lol. Good one. Did they get those from Guitar Center?
After the Higgs boson discovery, the scientists travelled 100 years into the future and attempted to sell those tubes as NOS to unsuspecting customers. lol
Butt hurt of the week? I think that should have been at the start of the episode with the amount of butt hurt this week 🤣
It's butthurt platoon this time
Butthurt of the WEAK.. damn.. should have named it that.... :(
I think this test was one of the most amazing things a musician (and I think it surely even applies to audiophiles) can experience! I saw that kind butthurt responses coming... I can only imagine all the work that putting this together has been required. So, as a music lover, a musician and an audio freak, I thank you very much Glenn! \m/
Timecode index! (Awesome shirt btw Glenn)
0:47 Facebook and gearsluts nuclear annihilation reel
1:40 Angry feedback about scooped tone for tubechange and hear a difference
3:31 What? (bass player comment)
3:50 6L6 vs EL34 tubes
5:16 Scientific method (somebody didn't watch the entire video)
6:33 High gain metal amp for testing (also didn't watch full video)
6:58 Pro Mix Acamedy sponsorship
7:58 Butthurt of the week
10:00 I heard a difference - wornout tubes?
11:03 Somebody actually enjoyed the tube test - more scientific method
11:56 Aren't all tubes the same from China?
12:59 EVH variac power supply
14:03 Remote controled mic stand
14:53 Bias of tubes and preamp tubes
15:31 Tungsol tubes
15:46 Glenn! you are wrong
16:40 Cab speaker breakin shootout suggestion
17:37 Manufacture tolerances for tubes
17:55 Tube recommendations
Thank you so much!
@@SpectreSoundStudios Thank you for the show man. Also we really need that speaker breakin video!
That whole intro section (first 1 minute 20 seconds) was mental. I almost wet myself laughing - major props man!
If you want to know how closely the test followed the scientific method (or at least in a simplified fashion, there are a million models for the scientific method, I’m going with the simplest), here’s how I remember the scientific method being organized when I was in school compared to the tube test;
1. Question: start by asking a question. In the case of the tube test; does changing out vacuum tubes in amplifiers change the tone?
2. Hypothesis: an assumption based on limited data. Your hypothesis was that vacuum tubes don’t change the tone, but you were basing it on limited knowledge initially.
3. Experiment. Make a way to test your hypothesis. Optional; isolate the single variable you need to test (this is only unnecessary if you aren’t testing things where you need to be meticulous about the test being the same many times over). In this case: putting the amp into an impulse response, thereby isolating the factor you want to control; the tubes, then switching out a few different models of vacuum tubes.
4. Record data. Record your findings. What did you discover? In this case: the data showed that there was a very minimal difference between the different vacuum tubes. The only major differences being loss in gain, and very little else. This was also backed up by the null test, showing how little difference there was in tone.
5. Draw conclusions. This is the point where you can be absolutely sure about your conclusions (unless you want to do another round of the test, but in this case, everything was so tightly controlled, I’d be amazed if there’s anything else to get under control). For this test, the conclusion is: changing your vacuum tubes in an amplifier does NOT make a dramatic shift in your guitars tone.
6. Report. Share your findings with your peers. A scientific test is no good if no one else knows about it. For this test, you shared with us, your viewers, and about 80% of us were receptive to your findings xD
Thanks Alpha! Apparently I did the test wrong because.... oh who are we kidding? Nobody has come back with a legit argument yet.
#3. Not everyone uses a load box. The "unnecessary variable" happens to be very important to most tube head users. Using a load box is peahacking the experiment. The argument Glenn gives for not using a cabinet is fucking ridiculous.
Plus: Even though in sound engineering using your ears is important, it's common in science to use numbers and/or graphs. Record it with a spectrum analyzer (there are some free apps for windows, but I don't know how good they are). In this way you can watch differences in frequency responses.
And some guy on the internet after hearing the results of all that work-"Bullshit!"
@@iamjakt "Using a load box is peahacking the experiment". please validate that statment with evidence.
All the tests you’ve done over the years have saved me tons of cash that I could better invest in lessons (daycare) for my bass player
As a bassist, I commend you 🤣
So far, the consensus I've seen from several sources, including those who build and repair tube amps, (You rock, Uncle Doug!), is that you "only" replace your tubes if the ones you have are failing.
lightning blew out my amp. i think that counts as "failing". 10 years of hard labor, 1 total tube swap. so far, my amp has cost 1,137€ for the amp (1000), the footswitch(50), the tubes(67), and the swap and bias(20). pretty good return on investment i'd say. but yeah, i'm of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" school.
Uncle doug is truly a legend
watch the rick beato amp builders video, or "tube tone talk" both explain about tubes from an amp builder's perspective, what you say makes sense if you have never heard a nos tube. amp builders hate the modern crap more than anyone else. it makes all their hard work sound bad...there is also a dr z video about tubes if that's not enough prs used nos in his amps
I love the name of this video so much!!! From my experience, theres 2 types of guitarists. The tube snob or purist who only wants to hear analog all tube amps, who also seeks out vintage gear, and will laugh at anyone they see playing anything else, the same people that subscribe to all these myths about gear, then the guitarist thats willing to try out anything with open ears to hear what things sound like for themselves without bias. Tubes sound amazing, but there is a ton of solid state and digital gear that sounds fantastic as well. Why limit yourself and spend more than you have to just to appeal to your ego? Use your ears, and let go, u might be surprised on how far technology has come.
Sounds like there's been a fair bit of the old "comment before watching the full video" going on? Fun times.
Welcome to TH-cam, where anyone, despite how low or high their IQ is, can post a comment. Hehehe
Yeah, thats really lame.
Just a smidge!
The only, only, ONLY tube I recommend that anybody looks at NOS tubes for is rectifier tubes (like for Fender Deluxe Reverbs, Champs, Princetons, Marshall JTM45s, etc.). The current tubes have two problems:
1) They throw whatever label they feel like on them and different recto tubes have different specs, including voltage drops. A mislabeled recto tube can change the operating voltage of the amp, either changing your output wattage and distortion characteristics with low voltage OR killing power tubes with high voltage.
2) They're simply not as robust in build and don't last as long. There are amps from the '50s still rocking the factory rectifier tubes.
The reason for this is that the market is so small for rectifier tubes compared to the larger guitar amp market (most amps use solid state diodes for rectification) so they don't invest nearly as much time and attention to them.
Rectifier tubes don't change tone at all but you want something that'll last longer.
The only "Tube" I use in my gear is the "Screamer".
Glenn’s hair on fleek
yeah, that's what i thought...What? A triggered TS-9?? how do you do that?
@@Timbo6669 Tell it it’s not as good as a TS808.
You are right to tell people to stay off the glue. Heroin is much better.
@@paullee3660 na the Ibanez super metal is a better boost overall because it has more range of gain ,eq ,and output level so you can really tune the feel of the amp.
The multiple camera angles and cuts really emphasize and enhance your ranting... I'm enjoying it.
I love how these people obviously rage quit and commented before watching the whole video on tube comparisons because it was super detailed and so many bases
Hi Glen! I love the original tube video and this follow up video. The tube swap mirrored my own experience with tubes. Coming from the HMAP forum, i am not surprised to see facebook folks flip over the video. Concerning speaker break-in, it is a real factor similar to string break-in, but a lot of speaker companies take care of that at the factory as part of the normal testing to make sure it doesn't immediately die upon use. This helps to catch bad connections, faulty coils, and faulty cones as part of the normal quality control. Breaking in a speaker basically smooths out the frequency response a bit by allowing the bass to increase a small amount due to the cone stretching/settling ever so slightly. It is audible but not night and day different. A bigger difference would be using a fresh speaker (V30 for this example) and comparing it to a 10 and 20 year old version. That should yield measurable results. I hope to see the test soon. Thank you!
The biggest influence on tone, beside EQ is the Cabinet you're going through. The whole power valve thing is way overblown and much more interdependent on other variables within the amp.
I have an old vintage from the 70's tube tester. That would be a good thing to have. I recently had my Russian buddy that can fix anything recap it and replace the meter with the actual same components that were originally in there. I got it at a garage sale for $15 with the manual and tube info sheet, you can find them from $200-300 online. I am a Luthier and dabble in fixing amps and the tube tester has helped a ton in many situations and saves me and the customer money. Love the show Glenn.
Tube Screamers? Man, it should have been the Crybaby Wahs
Ayoooooooo!
That was awesome
it wouldn't have all that high screams XD
agreed!
Nicely done, here's a like!
Hey Glenn....love your channel....long time guitarist and former tube snob ...currently getting my degree in Electrical Engineering so....the reason we use and prefer tubes over solid state amps is that the more fragile harmonics in your signal survive better in vacuum than they would if they were being confined in a crystal lattice. However the vacuum tube is literally just acting as a sort of an 'amplified gate/switch' for the flow of the signal. Here is where vacuum tube construction comes in, and there's only like a handful of factories still making these things, different voltage and bias currents will affect the tube and thus the sound...but from tube to tube of the same type the difference in tolerance is almost inaudible....perhaps the specific exception being the Tung-Sol KT66 in place of the 6l6, which would give you the biggest differences if there were any...cause again...it is just electrons in a vacuum.....changing your pick will change your tone more than a tube swap. While I would have preferred a real cabinet...that Captor X is looking real tempting haha........for the remaining tube snobs....if you care that much..then im sorry but then you need to upgrade the iron in your transformers cause the stock iron they came with is wack and also beef them up and bias the power section for some KT120's and just ftw... if that doesn't then satisfy your needs for superior tube-age then idk....you can't reason with crazy. Most guys wont and dont even crank their power section to the point where you can really even begin to ask if they are they different..ugh
Hi Glenn,
If you ever decide to do a v2 of this test, it would be great to see if changing from a class A to class A/B amp would make a significant difference, and secondly, how about really high end (corksniffer) tubes? There are some other boutique tube manufacturers out there like Sophia Electric, but their prices are astronomical (we're talking $100 a pop). I've never tried them, but if their claims are to be believed the gain factor of their tubes is different, and they have a higher headroom without loosing volume.
Also, it would be great to see if biasing the different tube sets to their ideal (correct) plate voltage would have an impact on the tone between one set and the next, as I think that with a fixed bias amp the effect might be less pronounced.
Cheers!
The main problem with class A -> A/B is that it's insanely difficult to get a valid null test, to the point of being impossible. Why? Because that will almost always involve using an entirely different circuit, which in the majority of cases means a different amp. Even when it doesn't, when an amp has multiple output modes (like the Victory Kraken, for example, which can run both ways as far as I know) there will be such a difference in output power that you'd have to artificially normalise the output. However, which frequencies do you normalise to? The choice will significantly affect the test, because class A and class A/B have very different characteristics.
China and Russia are the ONLY manufacturers of tubes. These "Sophia" tubes are undoubtedly just Russian tubes that have been painstakingly tested... much in the same way Groove Tubes (for example) tests their "premium" tubes.
@@digiscream Unless the amp is single ended (only one output tube) it's not true class 'A' 99% of amps that are called class A are actually cathode biased class A/B. As well negative feedback (or lack of it) in the power section makes a huge diff in tone.
@@kellyjackson7889 - that's basically my point. It's possible to build a switching setup in the power amp which removes all but one valve from the circuit and forces class A operation(which is what the Kraken does), however, but the drop in power will affect the sound significantly.
@@digiscream I meant doing the the same test but on a class A amp, as according to urban myth, they are the ones that most purely represent a tube's characteristics.
Cork sniffing. Pure and simple. I think the way you did the test the best way possible Glenn. A direct recording re-amped really is the only way to isolate all variables. You did a great job Glenn. And as I commented on one of your other videos....I changed the power tubes in my Mesa Boogie Mark IV...the only thing that changed was that my amp stopped blowing fuses. Haha
It’s been my experience that citing your experiences, observations, and failures in an effort to help people save money is good way to get yourself raked over the coals and labeled a self appointed expert. I do not pretend to understand why that is. Just been my experience in my limited scope. Hey...you’re doing a good job
Hey Glen, great work on the tube swap video. I have to say the results didn't surprise me that much, except for the 6L6/EL34 swap - I always thought there would be a far greater difference between them. If you're doing a follow-up, I have a few suggestions: Firstly, maybe try the amp at different master volume levels so we can hear if there are differences in the headroom/gain characteristics of different tubes. Secondly, re-bias the amp after changing the tubes but record it before and after the biasing - that way we can hear how the electrical bias of the amp affects the tone versus the tubes in the amp.
Keep up the amazing work!
People have been told generalizations for decades, but when tested it doesn’t meet their doctrinal expectations and they get angry . It reminds me of when you tell creationists that the Flintstones isn’t a documentary... they freak out!
Your vids help me so much! Struggling for years to find my a guitar tone I like, and your insight into all this helps guide me. Thank Glenn!
Out of curiosity, to eliminate even more variables. Could one just not use a looper? Or is that fundamentally flawed to?
Since a looper is also just a recording device, but changing out tubes multiples times takes a whole lot of time, it's sure to say that a direct recording which is reamped afterwards will give a more precise reprodctubable result than a looper (plus, most loopers just record in 16bit 44.1kHz while the standard for recording nowadays is at minimum 24bit 48kHz).
A looper and a reamping box are going to do exactly the same thing. They'll play a direct recording of the guitar into the amp.
Using a looper and recording software is how I choose tubes. (The differences are slight, reinforcing Glen's test data) It's technically more scientific, because the input is consistent
@@Ninjametal Can't do a null test with a looper. YOu can with a reamp as the start times are exactly the same.
Glenn!! Kudos on your patience with some of these commenters, and great work on the tube test.
8:25
“OH SO YOU’RE A SCIENTIST NOW EH GLENNNN?!”
Yes, how dare I conduct an experiment!
@@SpectreSoundStudios the preamp comparisons were pretty detailed including the isolated recordings but why did you kind of blow through the power tubes part? It would be great if we could get isolated tracks of the power tube comparisons.
wow, i’ve not seen this video yet, but my interest is peaked. i’ll watch it this weekend. it never really surprises me anymore when people get up in arms about anything that challenges their belief system, but social media has made it far easier to speak without thinking. oddly enough, they can google anything they want and do research easier than ever, but i guess it’s far easier to spout off first. oh well. I’ve come to expect less and less, with the passing years. i wonder if there will be a tonal difference at all between a quality I. R. and a speaker moving air in a room. i tend to doubt it, other than natural acoustic preperties in a room, not much would be drastically different. i imagine you can achieve far different tonal changes with changing speaker, and cabinet types. closed back vs. open back cabs, v-30 speakers vs. cream backs, or Jenson’s vs. Peavy. I love these tests you do, and i do get some perverse entertainment from peoples butthurt responses as well. keep up the good work.
13:15 Please also note that EVH was playing through a European model Marshall that needed a doubled voltage to run. 220V not 110V, like the domestic amps were wired for. I have avoided this method just to be safe and work within the manufactured specs of my tube amps. Burnin' down the house is just a song, not a goal.
Arson is a thing that exists, just saying ;)
Rectifiers with a Bold / Spongy switch on the back will essentially variac down the voltage supply to the whole amp by around 10% in the spongy setting. Thanks, EVH. Also, one of the most knowledgeable tube amp builders on TH-cam is Uncle Doug. In hundreds of videos he demonstrates that only extremely rarely are “bad tubes” responsible for bad amp performance, even tubes with multiple decades of use on them. On the flip side, Mike Soldano opted to build in a DC heater supply into the new SLOs because he believes quality control from the remaining few tube factories is sliding and he’s getting tired of hand swapping tubes to find one with a noise floor quiet enough for the first position. So if your amp is noisy, you might focus on that first preamp tube. Finding a good tube for that first position may get the noise floor suppressed, but it won’t change tone much, as you’ve clearly shown in your science experiment.
Exactly!
also as a producer/engineer, i have to say that on some level a $20 tube that's as effective as dumbo's feather might actually be worth the money. heh.
Holy Sh*t the editing in this video is pure platinum! Not just the Karen/nuke footage; the camera angles make you look extra MAD.
A website called Audiosciencereview already disproved speaker break in using scientific measurements. The biggest variables that will impact the sound of a speaker are temperature, which only impacts the bass at a few db, potential speaker damage and how vulnerable humans are to the power of suggestion.
Could you link it? I tried searching, but couldn't find anything other than forum posts claiming one way or the other.
Wonder if it's the cab that actually breaks in?
@@AD1978leo no
Thanks for all your time and energy in putting that experiment together Glenn. I personally never heard much of a difference in tube swaps on my amps and tube pre amps over the years.
I will say, I have noticed massive tone differences in mic placement and testing each speaker in my 4x 12 cab, which I have learned from watching your vids. Thanks Man!
Hey Glen! Check out Rick Beato's video on the EVH sound! I think you'll love it!
The Variac was such a cool part of that.
I watched that one. Someone in the comment section suggested that they should have done a blind listening test in the interest of objectivity. Rick replied telling the guy that he couldn't know because he wasn't there. If that's the case what was the point in publishing a video for the exercise in the first place? I love Rick but the man can't handle any amount of criticism very well.
I guess that could've been handled better! But in the interest of objectivity, and I know I can't measure how much TH-cam has compressed the audio, plus extracting audio into MP3 blah blah, I'd still like to put it into my DAW, trim out just the playing and do a blind test for myself. Just for fun :D
Oh! Oh! Oh! Sorry for writing so much but I just thought of something else that relates to this topic and what I posted below.
With regard to the subjectivity and perception of sound I recall learning this about myself. (this is from 'the old days' of course).
While working in a very hard working bar band we would travel from town to town doing week gigs so sunday evening was set up and soundcheck night. In this band we did sound from the stage a lot and so this meant pulling the snake out past the dance floor setting up, play for a bit and get things sounding as good as we could and then moving the board to the stage and hoping for the best.
I recall one such evening. We had a hand full of songs we could do where one of the band members could fiddle at the board and walk the room while the others played or walk about with long guitar cables or wirelesses. On this particular evening, everything was working correctly, people singing ok and all guitars were in tune, no feedback issues, all speakers working no 60hz hums but something just wasn't right and I couldn't put my finger on it. We all took turns and everyone one agreed that there was something just not quite there.
This went on for a few song, we finished setting up, put cables and cases away, hung black cloth on shit, played a bit more ... like ... it sounded ok ... but I, and the whole band ... were just used to a little more 'p'zzaz and it just wasn't happening. Even when we stuck in a break tape it seemed to suffer the 'something is missing' feel. With the break tape going I double checked our rack eqs and fxs to make sure nothing had been bumped or adjusted to an extreme.
Four guys in the band, all four guys had the same feeling about our particular sound and even with a break tape in. It just sounded 'ok'. Couldn't quite put a finger on it but, shrugg, it's probably good enough for the fuckin loser town we were playing in anyway.
By this time we were almost done set up and clean up. Switched off the ugly fluorescent house lights above the stage and turned on our fancy coloured lights ... and in that instance ... everything sounded fine, in-fact better than fine, even the break tape sounded great. The four of us were blown away at how affected we were with regard to our stage lighting and the perception of our environment. We also didn't look as pale and sickly as we did under the house lights. Thank god for salmon pink and magenta gels. We all went out for chinese dinner in a really good mood.
My point is, observing myself going through that experience causes me to remind myself to cut somebody a little slack for thinking that coating there guitar cables in pepper will brighten their tone. I can see full well how buying tubes that come in a box with a picture of a fucking mig on it might make one think that their tone had just jumped up the wall.
Man If guitarists continue on this path you might need to reassess the worst band member. Bassists have embraced solid state amps (dark glass) and high end Chinese made basses (Dingwalls are assembled in China), meanwhile Guitarists cling to Gibson and vintage tubes for dear life. Hmm 🧐
Guitarists cling to Gibson’s? How old are the guitarists you hang out with?? And everyone uses modelers these days lmao nice try bass player!
This comment hurts because its true! I have seen people with gibsons that cost more that my rig, and the worst part is the can barely play a F chord lol
Solid state tends to have a much better dampening factor than tubes. (Yes, that's a real term that can be scientifically measured. It has to do with how the amp interacts with the speaker.) According to Wikipedia, it's more important in the bass frequencies than in the mid to treble range.
i play a 200e bass through a 1000e guitar tube amp. i think i made keyboard warriors cry.
@@snapascrew fair point, there’s a lotta boomer blues boiz near me but my main guitarist I work with is a schecter man
I think your Tube test was spot on. Thank you for doing this Glen 😄
Looks like some peeps actively fight for the butthurt of the week spot.
This episode did not disappoint! Thanks, Glenn!
Your objective test was not objective enough because you eliminated the subjective elements (/s, in response to "didn't allow the guitarists to explore the different gain structures).
I suggest getting a couple of the most vitriolic among them, and give them a true blind a/b test. Yes, you can hear differences -- we all did, even Glenn. But if you don't know which tube is which, do you believe you can pick out the better-sounding tube consistently? Do you believe you can identify the brand of tube solely from those differences?
Personally, I doubt it.
Anyway, according to legend, EVH was able to play with the variac tricks during his career because if he blew an amp up or drastically shortened its life it was no big deal. The story I heard (who knows if it's true) is that he'd have an amp running full power in an isolation box for a week and if it DIDN'T blow up, he'd consider it viable for touring.
GLEEEEEN! I used to use tube amps exclusively (Mesa Boogies) and never saw a difference in one tube brand or another. I did, however, see a small difference in tone when I went from 6L6’s to EL34’s in my Triple Rectifier. The difference was a minor decrease in low end fullness. But, the difference was only noticeable through the speaker cabinet and not the power soak output I would use sometimes when recording. I wonder if some tube models react with speakers a bit differently causing the perceived “change” in tone? Greetings from Maryland’s Eastern Shore and “Fornicate Thou”!
Deja vu... Except "wood species"...
Stay in school kids. Choose S.T.E.M. So you'll be smart enough to recognize quantifiable reality. "Fall back" on music. PLEASE!
*I* find that Sovtek tubes give my tone a great fruity bouquet, with strong hints of tannin and a oaky aftertaste. They go *perfectly* with white, gold, and natural finish guitars. For red, black, or blue guitars, you *must* have Genalex tubes, which provide a wonderful biscuity aroma, a chewy body, and just a supple hint of soy sauce. Green guitars? Peasant....
claiming tubes drastically changing your sound is like saying that tonewood to solid-body electric guitars is a thing...
Yeah you literally can't hear a difference between tonewoods through an amp
@@JanXD well on acoustic guitars you can.. But if we are talking solid body electric guitars then no
@@JanXD only tone woods of neck and fretboard
@@witnessthewrath8061 As much difference with solid bodies as there is between having a rosewood fretboard or a maple fretboard, so not a lot.
But try to get one of them aluminum Stratocaster's Fender made back in the 90's and tell me that you can't hear a clear difference trough an amp with that body. :D
Thank you for all your hard work Glenn. I, for one, really appreciate it
Glenn, love the video. What I think you should have done is primed your viewers by telling them the common expectation of what each tube brings but then played the same audio. In one of my recording classes, my teacher played the pure mix critical listening series where Fab displayed an eq and bypassed it but it was actually on an empty channel and I was the only one in the class that didn’t hear a difference. He did this to explain priming and I would’ve loved to see the reactions of people who “could hear a difference” in the same audio file. In my experience, priming is everything.
hmm... good point. I'll remember that next time! The follow up video just became much more fun :)
Ffs, mic the cab, leave the head on a desk a few feet away. The problem is you are eliminating the speakers. If the power is changed from the output IT WILL AFFECT THE SPEAKER. Changing the pre AND power tubes will demonstrate it. Don't do a lazy experiment. Mic the cab, use a long lead to the head.
Lol
Hey there! I was really surprised with you results. As anybody else I was (and still am) into the tube “magic” beliefs. And I’ve bought all sorts of tubes, including “vintage magic” tubes. Now, I believe I heard the difference, and eventually I got back to JJ. The point I’m making, is that as a result of all the search I got back to “standard “ JJ tubes. And those “warm magic ones” are in my closet. So I guess, there is a difference.
Now, can it be, that the test should have been done by micking the room, not the specific spot on the speaker? I mean, when you micking specific spot, you kinda get super narrow specific frequency range, which is not that sensitive to tube variance?
And I must say You did really good job! I’m really puzzled by the result.
So you used IRs to check power amp tubes, I think there is something wrong here, may be i'm getting old and crazy, but when you use IRs, you simply removed the power tube sound even if you used speaker out from the amp, still the Capctor X will attenuate the signal to pre amp out level to add the IRs algorithm, so basically you tested something was not in the sound, and then you are saying there is no sound changes, YES no changes as you deleted the sound of the power tubes by using IRs.
if you used sound of wall plugin, you will find the power tube section, so you can add the sound of the specific power tube, because by using IRs you deleted the power tube sound, to make that comparison you need to use a real cab and mic. I'm sorry man, i love your show and i learned a lot from it, but you miss the point in that comparison, power tubes need mic and cab to be tested, not IRs
love you man, hope no hard feelings :)
wow, i was like WTF in the last video as no sound diff. but your analysis for the problem is convencing, GLEEEEEENNNNNN do another experpment, and do it right this time, Use a cab and mic not a fuckin ir, and please don't talk about science :D
you got a point
You're wrong. A load box goes between an amplifier and the speakers, so the power tubes still do their thing. Also the impulse response just filters out frequencies, just like a speaker would.
@@nikolabegonja5490 take the output from the preamp ex: FX send port, and record it, and in the same time use capctor x at the amp out and do a second record, as Gleen did, use the same IR for both records, and you will get almost the same result, which means the power tubes was almost cancelled, that's why 6L6 and EL34 almost sound the same, to really compare power tubes you need to use cab and mic, Gleen knows and he mentioned before that IRs are not replacing cab and mic, it's just a snap of the sound, digital tech is good, but not getting out the same result as analogue, anyway, the only way to test it is to do the test again but through cab and mic and see the results.
i did the compare between the pre amp out and amp out, and using same IR, as i mentioned above, almost same result, which means power tubes are not that effective in IR case
“Deleted the sound of the power tubes”lmao. The reason the power section emulation exists in two notes wall of sound is because it can be used in different contexts...like following an amp sim or something without a power section so you can simulate a power section.
I think the testing was quite concise and enlightening. The nulling on some of the sets was wild, didnt think it would null that well. What i think a few people are getting at is that a player is a huge part of the signal chain/feedback loop. So a player's response to the subtle difference in what they hear can actually change the overall sound more dramatically than the subtle difference in itself. Kind of Woo-Woo i know, but im sure you know what i mean.
havent seen a tasty glenn video for almost a year now(been doing andrew yang stuffs im so exhausted send help) and i gotta say glenn, i LOVE the multiple angles. im really happy to see that your content has continued growing its presentation. wonderful work glenn, wishing you the best:]
Glenn, you go to great lengths to demonstrate better standards of practice and technology. Anyone who can't provide a constructive critique or ask questions without making baseless accusations is just being histrionic. Personally, I think 95% of these deserved The Butthurt of the Week title. Great show, my man! I don't really do this stuff but I've learned a lot just by watching.
I’m super excited about the break-in speaker test. I work at a music store and I’ll never forget this guy who brings in all kinds of gear to get fixed and it’s all old beat up gear. I recommended he buy something new (he was getting frustrated with all the repairs) and he got uppity with me saying he’ll never buy new, only “broken in.” My eyes rolled all way back in my head as he played his 5 millionth pentatonic blues lick, and I’m curious to see if he was full of shit or not. I’ve always been 99% sure he was, so it’ll be nice to get that last percent lmao
When I got my amp used, it had 6l6's, i swapped them out for EL34's because I had heard that theres more swept mids and it has a different sound than the 6l6's (One being more british and one being more american which supposedly is a thing) and since I am actually brand new to tube amps I spent a lot of thing thinking I did something wrong as I didn't notice any difference. I'm not upset about putting in new tubes, I don't know how the old ones were handled and it's not a shiny new head, but the video did set my mind at ease quite a bit. I will say one thing though, I noticed I get a lot more feedback at high gain with the el34's. I don't know if that's a byproduct of them being new and the other ones starting to go out, or if something else is goofy but that is the extent of what changed for me changing tubes. Anyway, it's nice to know that i have more options and the change won't be noticeable by my ears.
Thank you for all your hard work on these very informative vids brother.
I had a Peavey Classic 50 combo amp years ago. I switched 2 of the EHX 12ZX7 preamp tubes that were in it to tubes out of my dad's old jukebox. The amp definitely had a bit more harmonic distortion with the old-ass tubes in it and it did sound better. Likewise, putting the EHX tubes into the jukebox made it instantly sound much cleaner! It was a good swap (and free). I think I also bought a set of Tube Doctor EL84's for the power stage. Can't say I noticed ANY difference at all with them.
The biggest difference though was swapping out the 2 12" Peavey speakers with some cheap ($25 each) but well-made Weber speakers. Weber has all sorts of configuration options that you can choose from even on their cheap speakers, and swapping them out I was surprised by how stiff the Peavey speakers were. The Webers I had chosen specifically to try to make the speakers break up earlier, and boy did they. It honestly sounded great.
If you REALLY want to change the sound of your amp, I think speakers are probably the best way to do it, and you don't have to spend a lot to do it. I highly recommend Weber as ordering from them was great, and they have so many options along with very reasonable prices. Even if you want to go with a pricey original vintage speaker, Weber can recreate that exact speaker for you at a cheaper price. I don't know why people spend the money on name-brand speakers that no one will ever see when you can get the same thing for less.
Good stuff, Glenn!! Keep fighting the good fight against utter BS! 🤘🏻
Only really noticeable difference I've heard in swapping around preamp tubes in the past was in a laney VC50 combo I used to own. The clean channel wasn't all that clean and if anything that amp had more gain available than I'd ever need, so I changed out the position 1 ax7 for a lower gain at7 and it tamed the beast. Good amp btw, mine had Steve Vai's signature across the grille cloth from when he'd used it for some in store demos years previously. Effing heavy 2x12 combo though. I changed it for a Laney silver anniversary combo with 2x10, same preamp section, different power tubes, silver tolex and a lot less weight. I did the same tube swap in position 1 on that amp too. Great amps both.
Unrelated trivia now. Laney bought out HH, I forget when, when they were in financial difficulties, and used them as the basis for their own speakers. HH were a popular brand of mostly solid state amps in the UK in the 70s and 80s, one of the sounds of punk. Their cabs were 1/2" ply vs most others' 1/4" ply and weighed a ton, hence the nickname Happy Hernias. I still have an HH 4x12 cab suitable for guitar or bass use, and it still sounds amazing.
All things considered, the Captor-X is the best piece of gear I have purchased in years.
Captor user here. Can confirm.
When I had an Egnater Renegade I was able to compare pairs of power tubes in the same amp since that amp allows you to "pan" between pairs of power tubes, typically it was used so you could have EL34s and 6L6s in the same amp and blend the two for different tones..... the difference between the EL34s and 6L6s was noticeable for sure.... I did compare 6L6s from JJ and GT at one point and found there was a difference there too.... nothing adjusting the EQ in the amp couldn't probably fix but a difference none the less.....
Maybe you could grab one of those amps for the next test and reduce the variables in the test even further
Is it possible to normalize the volume of the each sample? this would remove the difference in perception because of volume change and also improve results when looking for differences when adding an out of phase signal. I wouldn't know how to do this with a DAW but if you could get the raw data you could normalize by dividing the entire signal by it's variance, either the standard deviation or inter quartile range (lets subtract the mean/median for completeness too)
Hey GleeeeeeEEEEeeEeEEEeeEEeEEeeeenn!
Love your show! It is very difficult to find a place to learn new tricks while dying of laughter with your humor and sarcasm! Well done, sr!
Thanks for your tremendous effort in educating us (bunch of idiots, haha ...).
I am not a guitarist nor do I use tube amps,
but what do you think about changing the tubes of an ART VLA PRO II? I guess it's the same, but i'm curious.
Greetings from Chile!
@ SpectreSoundStudios:
One test that might be worth trying is to compare a short plate 12ax7/ecc83 with one or another of the long plate tubes in the phase splitter position in an amp set for a mostly clean pre-amp driving the output section to distortion. Possible long plate options would be Sovtek 12ax7-lps, JJ ecc803S, Mullard 12ax7, or Sovtek 5751. Many people don't realize that a lot of what is thought to be power tube distortion is actually happening in the phase splitter. I haven't had the time to try this myself and would love to see what, if any difference there is. Cheers!
This is some funny shit, haven't laughed this hard in a while. Guitar Center once told me changing the tubes would change the sound. I then took my JCM900 to an actual amp tech, and he explained that the EL34 tubes in my amp were the ones I needed. Changing them wouldn't make sense in his opinion. Exactly what you said.
I’m fucking sick of people complaining about everything that doesn’t align with their own views and doesn’t justify their purchase. Glenn, by the end of the night I’ll be a Patreon again because videos like these are SORELY needed in the filth that is the audio industry.
Update: Lvl 2 member on youtube. 💪
Question for you - have any advice on blending / placing multiple mics on guitar cabinets? Or is this not done much in metal? (Other than the Fredman technique)
Might help! th-cam.com/video/ohgzKrFKusU/w-d-xo.html
Oooo. Speaker break in test would be amazing. That could be super helpful. Not just for there being a difference but what is that difference. Does it really tame the highs and get warmer? You MUST make that video.
Glen, I used to work in a Music Shop in the 80's.
Selling guitars was an easy grind.
Tell them you hear something in their tone was the easiest way to put them in debt.
I played probably a thousand guitars. From 'Trades' to 'Brand New'.
'Feel' was more important than tone.
sounds about right!
Thank you for that video last week Glenn. I was sipping the tube Kool Aid for years.
You sort of touched on another question I have about tubes: how much does the make of the tube affect the longevity and reliability of the tube? Will a premium tube last much longer or have much less of a chance of going microphonic than a no-name tube? Or is that also a negligible difference? Enquiring minds want to know.
I did a video comparison a few years ago of 2 Mesa Boogie Roadsters (very close serial #) one had stock Mesa tubes, the other had a whizz bang array of tubes. I did a similar test (Although not as thorough as you did in the previous video). Lets just say that that video was not well received- haha.
Purchase confirmation bias is a real thing. Regardless of high tech EQ matching and comparison - people will swear up and down that they hear a difference.
Much like you- when I was more active in making videos- I simply wanted to help folks direct their funds more wisely, and not make empty promise purchases. Want to change your guitar sound? CHANGE YOUR DAMN STRINGS, or better yet, get a different cab. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
Keep crushing souls Glenn!
The point of Glenn's videos is to show the endless galaxy of variables in the guitar players scientific methods
BTW, those that say that differences are in the mid range... it would be quite difficult to have that, if there are differences they are at the either end of the spectrum. It is of course possible that we then have a tube that sucks at low and highs, which means the mids will be louder relative but.. having just the mids change, would require some filtering somewhere. In room acoustics, cabinets etc. you can have all kinds of midrange peaks and valleys but to have the same in amps.. it is quite unlikely.
I bought a Marshall 9200 used a few years ago. I changed all the valves, in particular the 5881 to 6L6C. When I went to test, the changes were practically minimal.
Honestly, if you have money and want to change the valves, ok change, if not, don't worry. Therefore, I fully agree with Glenn.
Of course the bass player in my band said it made a huge difference.
To improve the test if you do one next time, be sure to re-bias the power section when you change the tubes. This will allow the same amount of current to flow through the tubes so that the variation in tone will literally be just down to the tubes. Loved the first test though, keep up the good work Glenn!
One caution about rebadging. Just because something is made in the same plant, doesn't mean it's made to the same standards. There's a possibility that one tube has received a better ($) coating that helps it function better/longer than one produced under a different contracted run. From what I understand, that happens all the time with batteries and oil filters. It's all about what the customer (the brand) ordered.
You could step it up, by running a test signal like EQ sweeps or White noise through the Amps. You could do this at different Volumes and have a look if that makes a Difference. Idk just an idea
Madman suggestion: change all possible potentiometers for resistors. You can measure the resistance of the potentiometer in the preferred position and find a resistor with that value, this way you can remove the possibility of accidentally changing the controls in the amp.
One suggestion that I have for a video is to try to make two different setups sound as close as possible (different guitars, amps, etc) by just changing the EQ controls in the amp or daw.
Great video, cheers from Brazil!
Output tubes matter but not as much as other things in the signal chain. I have tested different tubes on a McIntosh amp and you can tell that there is a difference. But in a fender amp I couldn't tell any difference. The difference is that the McIntosh each (2 for stereo) weigh as much as the fender amp and it doesn't have a driver or cabinet. The amps in guitar amp aren't designed to be flat and silent. They are intended to color the sound and they do it so much to erase the difference in tubes.
Hey Glenn! how are you doing? the tube video have been enlightening! I would love to watch other experiments like this one... maybe the next one could be "how much the wood affects the tone". Cheers
Glen I think your video with the test and this follow up is very interesting, to show how much snake oil is still going around. What i would like to see on a later test (I am willing to help if we can overcome the distance and covid) is the so called matched power tubes. Matching tubes happened from half the eighties. During the sixties and seventies end tubes were not really matched. It is an artifact from the high end audio community that grew at the end of the eighties. Buying matched tubes has always so much snake oil involved because no vendor release the parameters the tubes are matched on. And it is a very complex matter.
I liked your previous video about tubes. Watched the whole thing. They definitely had a difference, but minimal, like you said. I have never changed tubes, typically changing speaker, mic or mic placement yields bigger changes.
I think the only thing someone mentioned that I wonder about too is the gain structure/ sweep. How clean and how distorted can a set of pre-amp tubes go. Like gain on 1 vs gain on 5 vs gain on 10. Same with power tubes... At volume 1, volume 5, volume 9-10. Where do they break-up and does it impact tone in the process.
by the way, thanks to your fearless gear reviews, I have a Harley Benton 2x12 vintage 30 loaded cab on its way from Thomann to compliment my Revv G-20. it should be here monday, and i can’t wait to hear how it sounds together.
Amazing show. Always enjoy your video's. Have a great weekend.
Holy shit speaker break in Has been something Im currently researching for car audio as well so perfect.
I'll admit I was surprised their wasn't a bigger difference between tube types, but otherwise the results were pretty much what I expected.
One of my main amps back in the mid 2000s was a Mesa Nomad 2x12 that I changed the tubes in after about 5 years of gigging, and my recollection was that it sounded better, but I'm pretty sure there was a bit of confirmation bias going on - and also, the old tubes were well used, so what I was probably hearing was the difference between old and new tubes.
If you can be bothered repeating this experiment, and want to placate those who are complaining, it might be worth removing the load box and IR and use a speaker and mic in an iso cabinet.
Great video, thanks and fuck you, Glenn.
Thank you for making that video. I am new to tube amps and I fell into the trap of the thinking of replacing tube amp will change the tone of the amp well your video was good enough to make me realize that the cost does not justify the change. Now off to shop/research for a 10” speaker to change.
Loving the new camera angles.
Great opening thanks glen sending love your way man keep it up.
Did the noise level change between tubes?
The differences in tone were there but we are talking 6.0 vs 6.1 on the treble knob minimal.
Glenn. I am by no means an expert video editor, but recently I've been spending a fair amount of time working with different dissolves, camera changes etc. I would offer some advice (keeping in mind, I'm no pro) on your camera changes. In my opinion when changing from one camera angle to another, leave in about a second or less of you looking at the other camera before the change so that it shows you turning to face the other camera... just a bit. Also (in my non-expert opinion) when you go from a zoomed out camera shot to a close up (or whenever camera distance is changed,) use a dissolve. Fade out from the first shot and fade into the second shot, using no more than one second of time total (1/2 second fade out, 1/2 second fade in.) These are not game breakers by any means. I find the cut from one view to the next to feel a bit unnatural. Again, just my two cents.