RN65 vs CF

[greiswig]

Anybody have a ReAmp that could be used to control the licks as a variable? Hate to have you need to repeat the experiment, but that seems to be a variable that has to be accounted for.

[Bob-I]

I guess all this careful tweaking is wasted on me. I dissected this clip with a wave editor and while I hear differences (there seems to be a few more 'chirps' in sample y) I can't hear any tonal differences that couldn't be easily accounted for by small variations in Mat's touch between takes.

That's one of the problems with clips, the other more important one is that recording often loses the nuances of tone. In other words, you really had to be there.

[Buschman]

Sorry, I've got rock & roll ears & can't tell the difference. I mignt could feel a difference if I played them both @ the same sitting. I remember when I switched to Vishays the amp seemed smoother. It didn't make sense to me, I expected a harder feel with them.

[llemtt]

..what You mean by resistor 'shape' ?

Film resistor are built like an inductance coil, it's a "spiral" of resistive film, hence their "shape" (length, diameter,...) has an impact on parameters like inductance, capacitance; their "shape" can change also the way they interact with neighbouring components.

CC resistor are built differently, it's a rod of resistive material.

cheers
Teo

[jaysg]

I vote that mat tells us which is which now

[briane]

Embarassed Ok, after brushing up on some tube theory, it appears a larger plate R = more gain, although I don't understand why except in terms of less current draw across the resistor keeps the voltage higher, translating to more gain.

Maybe I can clear this up simply....Its not what I thought when I first started doing this, but this is what the scientists tell me...

Amplification is a function of swing across the plate resistors, and really this is the effect the tube is feeding. So if we have more swing (ie lower and higher extremes) we have more amplification, and thus a larger value creates more swing, and a result a greater amplification factor, which is gain.

If I guess x/y, likely I'll be wrong. please just tell me

[mat]

..what You mean by resistor 'shape' ?

Film resistor are built like an inductance coil, it's a "spiral" of resistive film, hence their "shape" (length, diameter,...) has an impact on parameters like inductance, capacitance; their "shape" can change also the way they interact with neighbouring components.

CC resistor are built differently, it's a rod of resistive material.

cheers
Teo

Thanks llemtt for the great answer. I think that explains alot of the different sound between cc's and mf's.
But in this case we have cf's and mf's. Is there any difference in shape between them both being '-films' type of resistors ?

Answer to the resistors on the clips coming tomorrow

[llemtt]

CFs and MFs are built the same way, only the resistive material changes but I don't think you'll find two "identical" even if they came from the same brand and wattage.

Try to "dismount" two of them and also one CC to discover their structure!

Teo

[mat]

Ok, most of You got it right. X=CF and Y=RN65.

The test was far from being scientific in any way but I tried the playin/recording situation to be as similar as possible to both recordings.

On the clip it is easy to compare the two and the difference is quite obvious to me. In person while only soldering the two components between the takes it is more difficult to tell the difference, but I'm absolutely sure that some of the 'hiss' or 'hair' went away + some kind of 'glassiness' (maybe because some of the hair was lost) got in after putting the RN65's in. That has been my goal on this amp. I like some hair on the sound but just a little. Without it I think the sound of the amp kind of losts in the mix.

ops.. gotta go - i'll post the recording setup later if need be..

[dogears]

Cool... I think the important point is which way did you prefer it live? The feel and tone? From your comments, I guess the RN65 was in improvement for you, expecially with what your ears heard in the room.

Ok, most of You got it right. X=CF and Y=RN65.

The test was far from being scientific in any way but I tried the playin/recording situation to be as similar as possible to both recordings.

On the clip it is easy to compare the two and the difference is quite obvious to me. In person while only soldering the two components between the takes it is more difficult to tell the difference, but I'm absolutely sure that some of the 'hiss' or 'hair' went away + some kind of 'glassiness' (maybe because some of the hair was lost) got in after putting the RN65's in. That has been my goal on this amp. I like some hair on the sound but just a little. Without it I think the sound of the amp kind of losts in the mix.

ops.. gotta go - i'll post the recording setup later if need be..

[mat]

Cool... I think the important point is which way did you prefer it live? The feel and tone? From your comments, I guess the RN65 was in improvement for you, expecially with what your ears heard in the room.

That is exactly how it felt in the room. The thing that the od was clearer affected to the feel and playing.

I was in impression that with the CF's the amp got more easily to the feedback, but this might be the slight difference of the position of the guitar, I don't know. But definitely prefer the RN65's.

[HiGain]

I was in impression that with the CF's the amp got more easily to the feedback, but this might be the slight difference of the position of the guitar, I don't know. But definitely prefer the RN65's.

You can hear the octave harmonic more clearly with the CF. The sustain also appears longer. But this might be an allusion due to the lack of the sharp attack in the upper frequencies.... ?

Jake

[dogears]

You can't base opinions on low fi recorded samples IMO. Especially not tweaking the amp settings to optimize the tone between takes. My expierence is easier feedback w/ RN65 fwiw. More articulation....

I was in impression that with the CF's the amp got more easily to the feedback, but this might be the slight difference of the position of the guitar, I don't know. But definitely prefer the RN65's.

You can hear the octave harmonic more clearly with the CF. The sustain also appears longer. But this might be an allusion due to the lack of the sharp attack in the upper frequencies.... ?

Jake