#1
Could anyone please help figuring out which version of ecc83 telefunken this one is?
#2
Need a closer pic of the plates and a pic of the bottom.
E-peen:
Rhodes Gemini
Fryette Ultra Lead
Peavey 6505
THD Flexi 50

Gibson R0 Prototype
EBMM JP13 Rosewood
Fender CS Mary Kaye

WTLT

(512) Audio Engineering - Custom Pedal Builds, Mods and Repairs
#3
Yes, please. Bigger pictures and more angles. Especially the bottom. I can say that the plates on that don't look like any Telefunkens I'm familiar with.
#4
Quote by Roc8995
Yes, please. Bigger pictures and more angles. Especially the bottom. I can say that the plates on that don't look like any Telefunkens I'm familiar with.


+1

From that angle, it doesn't look like any of the Telefunkens I own.
E-peen:
Rhodes Gemini
Fryette Ultra Lead
Peavey 6505
THD Flexi 50

Gibson R0 Prototype
EBMM JP13 Rosewood
Fender CS Mary Kaye

WTLT

(512) Audio Engineering - Custom Pedal Builds, Mods and Repairs
#5


The bottom has the shape of a diamond with the number 16 inside

#7
That looks more familiar from that angle. The print looks familiar, too. Any chance you can read any of those white numbers on the side?

Still can't quite make out the plates from there, besides it being a short plate. Does look like a real Telefunken.
#8
Quote by Roc8995
That looks more familiar from that angle. The print looks familiar, too. Any chance you can read any of those white numbers on the side?

Still can't quite make out the plates from there, besides it being a short plate. Does look like a real Telefunken.

It is definetly Telefunken, everuthing is quite faded though.
It has the Telefunken printing.Underneath it, it is pretty faded but it starts with EC, end with a 3.The space between these it's enough to largely say ECC83.Ont he side it has a printing Bne07, on top has two printings, one says 292, the other one is blurry but appears to be also 292.On the bottom it has a craved, not painted, diamond shape with the number 16 on it.The old guy who gave it to me sayd it was a ECC83 telefunken, and before he said it was, I already thought it was.He had loads of old valves including telefunkens, so I'm sure it is Telefunken.

Last edited by garfo at Jun 17, 2013,
#9
Ok, now we're cooking. The capital B indicates a postwar Berlin tube, the ne means it's from March of 1956.

It's a short plate, but you might have to figure out if they're ribbed/smooth or grey/black on your own, I can't tell from the pictures.
#10
The truth is, I don't know how to tell the diffewrence.It appears to be grey, so grey...hihi.I just don't know the rest.If this valve is working, let's say, I have a Philips miniwatt ecc83, a Buggle boy Amperex ecc83 and this one.At the moment my amp goes like: V1:Philips Miniwatt; V2:Amperex; V3(PI):JAN Philips 5751.
Would the Telefunken be a greater candidate for the PI slot?
I'm talking about a Bugera V55, and yes, I know it's a waste of valves on this amp, but only one of them costed me 10€, the rest was free
#11
I wouldn't waste any of those tubes in the PI slot. It's usually not worth it to put NOS tubes there, most amps don't sound much different with a better tube in the PI. I suspect this is the case with the 55.

Personally, I'd use those tubes in V1 only, and use current production stuff in the rest of the preamp. That way you're getting 90% of the tonal benefits but you'll be able to use good tubes for four times as long.
#12
Quote by Roc8995
I wouldn't waste any of those tubes in the PI slot. It's usually not worth it to put NOS tubes there, most amps don't sound much different with a better tube in the PI. I suspect this is the case with the 55.

Personally, I'd use those tubes in V1 only, and use current production stuff in the rest of the preamp. That way you're getting 90% of the tonal benefits but you'll be able to use good tubes for four times as long.

I see, does the PI slot taked the life out of them much faster???
In the V55 case it uses both v1 and 2 as clean channel, so, I'll give them turns and see how it sounds better.I was surprised how the miniwatt sounded, it sounds very good!!!
#13
A tube should actually last a bit longer in the PI, but the idea is that the tone difference is so minimal that using a rare tube there is a waste.
The reason I'm suggesting only using these tubes in V1 is that after the first gain stage the type of tube starts to make less and less of an impact. So maybe a good tube in V2 sounds way better, but try some modern tubes to make sure. Don't waste your NOS stuff in V2 if the difference is minimal. I'd rather have 95% perfect tone for 20 years than 100% for five. Maybe your outlook is different, but that's my suggestion.
#14
Quote by Roc8995
A tube should actually last a bit longer in the PI, but the idea is that the tone difference is so minimal that using a rare tube there is a waste.
The reason I'm suggesting only using these tubes in V1 is that after the first gain stage the type of tube starts to make less and less of an impact. So maybe a good tube in V2 sounds way better, but try some modern tubes to make sure. Don't waste your NOS stuff in V2 if the difference is minimal. I'd rather have 95% perfect tone for 20 years than 100% for five. Maybe your outlook is different, but that's my suggestion.

Yeah, I do agree with you, the only thing is that the bugera V55 actually uses half of the first preamp and half of the second, always, no matter if in in clean mode or overdrive.The overdrive is not made by the valves, it has a its own circuit!!!So, I assume that the second valve in this case also has a big impact on the sound.
From what I understand it uses 1a with 2b for clean channel and uses 1b with 2a for overdrive.So, in this case V1 = V2, no?just a guess
#15
Sounds like you got a good once-over by a salesman. The short version of the rest of this post is that none of those things make the V55 special, and everything I said about V1 vs. the other positions stands unchanged.


Yes, V2A is split between the channels, but that means next to nothing. First off, that's a standard design, so there's nothing special or useful about that particular statement. Second, let's look at what V2 actually does in a V55. On the OD channel, it's the third gain stage. That's well into "doesn't matter much" territory. The other half basically just drives the EQ, although if you had the volume way up on the clean channel it might start doing something. So, while it's technically true that V2 is in the circuit on both channels, there's no good reason to make the leap from that statement to saying that it actually does anything unusually important. Remember that every gain stage gets amplified by the stage after it, so the first stage is by far the most important since its contribution gets amplified by every stage after it.

Let's look at V1: The first half is the first gain stage for both channels. Easily the most important stage in the amp. The second half is the second gain stage for the OD channel. I'd call that a distant second. So, you can see again why I said V1 was far and away the most important. It's doing almost all of the actual preamp gain duty and tone shaping.

The OD channel having its own circuit is also very standard. Actually that's sort of the definition of an OD channel. So that isn't a useful statement. And saying that the tubes don't make the overdrive is wrong. There's no SS clipping in this amp that I can see.

So, no, V1 is not = V2 as you guessed. I can see how you might think that given the information you were told, but from an actual topology standpoint that doesn't hold up at all. The V55 doesn't use a particularly unusual layout, so there's no reason to say that V2 is any more important in it than it is in any other amp. If anything, V2 is less important in this amp. For example, in a Twin Reverb, V2 is like V1 but for the Tremolo channel. In a Plexi, V2 is the second and third gain stage for both channels.

Anyway, test it out for yourself but none of the things you mentioned make the V55 unique in the way it handles V2. I'd still wager that V2 makes far less difference than V1, to the point of not being worth using a NOS tube.
#16
Looks like Colin has you pretty well sorted. I have nothing to add really.

However - save me digging up the schematic, Colin. What sort of tone stack does it have? May be worth putting something nice in there.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#18
Plate driven. Hmm, maybe not then.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#19
Always learning.i have the amperex in v2.i might just remove it and place a jj instead and turno places beetween philips and amperex.does anyone know If the philips miniwatt are somehow related with the same factory where the mullards were made?this tube sounds really good.