Wonderful Land with my Apple Macintiosh echo & Pinnacle Amp

[dave robinson]

There will be other amps too Dick, it isn't exclusive. It's possible that any EF86 valved amp is a likely candidate.

[Didier]

It's been done, but not on your side of the Channel !

Didier

natuarally, we all all heard about the great success - not . . . . .

It's not because you didn't heard it that it's not good !
It hasn't been done by a professional, and it's not for sale (it's free and there is a tutorial in French), and has not been heard on your side of the channel...
No doubt that excellent results can be obtained with a Mac, but the same can be done with a PC for less money.

Didier

[Didier]

Dick, 'Is the Pinnacle THE amp' ? No, it is one of - there are several other candidates that deliver the same sound. Vox Heritage, JMI EF86 based amps, Matchless EF86 based amps, Rod Jenks's JC30 of which I currently own two and of course Roger Alcock's Vintage Unit attached to any suitable valve amp.

A few years ago I listened to a comparative test. An add-on EF86 preamp was added to an AC30, and we listened both preamps, the standard ECC83, and the add-on EF86, switching from one to the other and back several times, so that we could make instant comparisons. No significant differences could be heard. We didn't got more of "that sound" with the EF86 preamp...
Needless to say, the EF86 preamp had been installed by a highly experienced engineer in electronics, having a long experience in AC15 and AC30 amps, and the EF86 preamp worked perfectly.
This shows how subjective hearing is, and that you can hear differences if you want to hear differences.

Didier

[petercreasey]

Dick, 'Is the Pinnacle THE amp' ? No, it is one of - there are several other candidates that deliver the same sound. Vox Heritage, JMI EF86 based amps, Matchless EF86 based amps, Rod Jenks's JC30 of which I currently own two and of course Roger Alcock's Vintage Unit attached to any suitable valve amp.

A few years ago I listened to a comparative test. An add-on EF86 preamp was added to an AC30, and we listened both preamps, the standard ECC83, and the add-on EF86, switching from one to the other and back several times, so that we could make instant comparisons. No significant differences could be heard. We didn't got more of "that sound" with the EF86 preamp...
Needless to say, the EF86 preamp had been installed by a highly experienced engineer in electronics, having a long experience in AC15 and AC30 amps, and the EF86 preamp worked perfectly.
This shows how subjective hearing is, and that you can hear differences if you want to hear differences.

Didier

Was it the same settings on each?

[Didier]

Dick, 'Is the Pinnacle THE amp' ? No, it is one of - there are several other candidates that deliver the same sound. Vox Heritage, JMI EF86 based amps, Matchless EF86 based amps, Rod Jenks's JC30 of which I currently own two and of course Roger Alcock's Vintage Unit attached to any suitable valve amp.

A few years ago I listened to a comparative test. An add-on EF86 preamp was added to an AC30, and we listened both preamps, the standard ECC83, and the add-on EF86, switching from one to the other and back several times, so that we could make instant comparisons. No significant differences could be heard. We didn't got more of "that sound" with the EF86 preamp...
Needless to say, the EF86 preamp had been installed by a highly experienced engineer in electronics, having a long experience in AC15 and AC30 amps, and the EF86 preamp worked perfectly.
This shows how subjective hearing is, and that you can hear differences if you want to hear differences.
Didier

Was it the same settings on each?

There are no settings on the AC30 ECC83 preamp, There was some on the EF86 preamp which was tested, but none gave a closer "that sound" result. Of couse the amp tone settings (which are after the preamp) were not changed.

Didier

[petercreasey]

Oh Just wondered, perhaps if the tone setting had been changed there might have been a difference , might the cut control react differently to an EF86?

[fenderplucker]

This EF86 vs 12AX7/ECC83 thing seems to crop up every year. Below is a post I made a while ago on the subject:

Here are two sound files done through a special preamp that had both 12Ax7 and EF86 channels, each matched for gain and frequency response and with the tubes biased exactly as in a Vox (and please don't pay too much attention to the playing, it was done by a friend of mine on the spur of the moment to help me out).

I can hear some obvious differences in the playing and levels from place to place, but I'm not sure I could pick which was 12AX7 or EF86??

I think that the differences that are clearly apparent when playing through the different channels of a normal amplifier are due to one (or both) of two main causes:

1. The EF86 has a different gain to the 12AX7. The "Normal" channel of an AC30/6 (12AX7) has a lower gain than the EF86 channel of an AC30/4, but the top boost channel has a higher gain (with the extra 12AX7 stage).

2.The EF86 channel of an AC30/4 (or AC15) is followed by simple top cut and sometimes bass cut ( labelled as "brilliance" in the AC30/4 and AC15/3) tone sections. This is similarly the case with the "Normal" and "Bright" channels of an AC30/6 (the bright channel having more bass cut). However, the top boost channel features a tone control section that results in a sharp dip in frequency response at around 900Hz unless both the bass and treble controls are turned to zero, in which case the frequency response is again fairly flat.

Both of these certainly affect the perceived sound, but it has little to do with whether the tube is EF86 or 12AX7. Either tube can be configured to sound the same as I think this demo shows (and the sound of a top boost channel with the bass and treble fully down is very close to that of an EF86 channel if the gains and top cut are adjusted to be the same). However I accept that many commentators are probably using the descriptors "EF86" and 12AX7" as shorthand for the sound of the different channels. Maybe this is where the disagreement in the above discussion arises?

Finally, both types of frequency response are needed to cover the whole range of Shadows sound: "flat" for the early tunes up to about Find Me a Golden Street, and top boost with a dip at about 900Hz for the later tunes.

Paul.

IAMW-A.mp3

First file

(536.73 KiB) Downloaded 143 times

IAMW-B.mp3

Second file

(551.43 KiB) Downloaded 133 times

[dave robinson]

Thanks Didier , once again a good thread ruined . If you need to brag about all the technical tripe that you reckon you know, please feel free to start your own thread elsewhere ! Also, I personally don't care about what components can and can't do. I just use my ears and get on with it, I find it works fine for me. This was supposed to be about the fabulous echo sound achievable with the Mac and Logic Pro - I just happened to plug it into a Pinnacle and it sounded good, that's what we were discussing and it would have been polite to keep it at that, but as usual we have the nonsense to contend with.

It's clear to me that if some folks spent more time practicing and learning the tunes correctly, this would be a better place. Every time there's a discussion on sound, there's the same boring (we've done it better) inuendo. I have heard it all before, not interested.
Have a nice day .

[OLDEREK]

As a moderator here I don't go along with this continued abuse of members................Dave Robinson this is not your site only you know !!


NOTE ADDED 20th JULY

Anyone reading this message for the first time may wonder about my comments here, the reason is, it was in answer to the now heavily edited message above ( post38), if anyone would like to read what was first written PM me...........

[dave robinson]

Live with it Derek, the truth often offends !
By the way, why are you shouting?