Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Actually, I think a lot of the transistor stigma was generated by a lack of real understanding on how to design a really good transistor amp as well as a desire to cash in on the cheap side of things. A lot of early solid state amps were designed for the economy market since they were cheaper than tubes/valves, requiring fewer parts, less labor, etc. and consequently, the designs were also done as cheaply as possible.

There's really no reason a solid state amp can't perform just as well as a tube amp, at least when things remain linear. When you overdrive tubes, they have some unique properties such as soft clipping and a natural compression that transistors just don't do, but for undistorted amplification, they do just fine, and could have "back in the day" as well...

cjj wrote:Actually, I think a lot of the transistor stigma was generated by a lack of real understanding on how to design a really good transistor amp as well as a desire to cash in on the cheap side of things. A lot of early solid state amps were designed for the economy market since they were cheaper than tubes/valves, requiring fewer parts, less labor, etc. and consequently, the designs were also done as cheaply as possible.

There's really no reason a solid state amp can't perform just as well as a tube amp, at least when things remain linear. When you overdrive tubes, they have some unique properties such as soft clipping and a natural compression that transistors just don't do, but for undistorted amplification, they do just fine, and could have "back in the day" as well...

I have an Ampeg B2RE head and Ampeg SVT HLF 4-10 bottom. Sounds great. However, there's something that seems to be lacking, a certain presence, when compared to a class A tube amp. There's a whole other dynamic in tone that I haven't heard replicated by a non-tube amp.

Hey, what happened to that divine one-off mapleglo Ric avatar?

It's Christmas season, so I got out my Happy Christmas cat avatar!

Yes, the specifics of amplifier design can have a huge effect in the overall sound of the amp. Class A is simple (and nice since you don't have to deal with crossover switching effects), but much less efficient since the active elements are always in conduction. Class A amps always keep the active elements in the linear range of operation. Non class A amps have to deal with the active element going into the nonlinear region (which will cause signal distortion) and make sure none of this comes through to the output. This is difficult to do, especially over wide temperature ranges. Modern IC designs, where all transistors are extremely identical make this easier, as well as being able to add all sorts of nice compensating circuits, etc. Tube amps are often run class A because it's so hard to get the crossover effects tuned out (it can be, and is done though), and efficiency isn't a huge concern since you aren't going to get really high anyway running all of the cathode heaters.

Beyond the operating class, there are many factors that contribute to the sound. How many stages, interstage coupling design, frequency response characteristics of the stages and coupling, etc., etc. All of these can be designed essentially the same way whether or not the active element is a tube or a transistor. This does not mean that they are however...

cjj wrote:It's Christmas season, so I got out my Happy Christmas cat avatar!

Yes, the specifics of amplifier design can have a huge effect in the overall sound of the amp. Class A is simple (and nice since you don't have to deal with crossover switching effects), but much less efficient since the active elements are always in conduction. Class A amps always keep the active elements in the linear range of operation. Non class A amps have to deal with the active element going into the nonlinear region (which will cause signal distortion) and make sure none of this comes through to the output. This is difficult to do, especially over wide temperature ranges. Modern IC designs, where all transistors are extremely identical make this easier, as well as being able to add all sorts of nice compensating circuits, etc. Tube amps are often run class A because it's so hard to get the crossover effects tuned out (it can be, and is done though), and efficiency isn't a huge concern since you aren't going to get really high anyway running all of the cathode heaters.

Beyond the operating class, there are many factors that contribute to the sound. How many stages, interstage coupling design, frequency response characteristics of the stages and coupling, etc., etc. All of these can be designed essentially the same way whether or not the active element is a tube or a transistor. This does not mean that they are however...

Okay, you know your stuff!

I simply know how to power them up and which hole to plug the jack in.

And I do believe you.

It has something to do with spending the last 30+ years working in electronics R&D...

cjj wrote:
It has something to do with spending the last 30+ years working in electronics R&D...

Well, that makes sense.

Those of us who were around and buying amps in the '60's can remember when solid-state amps were being touted as the next big thing, and often turned out to be anything but. Those ill-fated Fender solid-state amps of the mid-'60's certainly contributed to the bad reputation of transistor technology, but the solid-state Vox amps made by Thomas Organ weren't any better--they had more built-in features (fuzz, tremolo, reverb, midboost), but they weren't any more reliable. In '69 I worked with a bass player whose Super Beatle would blow up at least once a week, usually on or just before a gig, and he'd have to scrounge around to borrow a replacement for his state-of-the-art $1200 (about $5000 in today's money) amp. To be fair, some of the tube stuff around was starting to go downhill too--my first good amp was a '66 Fender Bandmaster I bought new; a great-sounding amp, but I wanted reverb and more power, so in 1970 I traded it in on a new silverface Twin Reverb. Now, Twins are some of my favorite amps, but that one was a dog, so I replaced it with a big Kustom, which didn't sound all that great, but it was loud and you couldn't kill it! It seemed like there was a period in the late-'60's and early-'70's when you couldn't buy a decent new amp from anybody. Marshalls sounded great, but they had reliability issues here in the US too, and most of us couldn't afford them anyway. It took me until '75, when Music Man amps came out, for me to find a good-sounding amp that would hold up, and then I couldn't lift it! (I had an HD-130 410 that weighed 75 pounds--ouch!) Mesa/Boogies were around, and they sounded good, but the little 100-watt 1-12" combo weighed more than the Music Man did. I can't vouch for Rickenbacker Transonics, as I've never played through one, but they appear to be one of the better amps from that period.

jfine wrote:...It seemed like there was a period in the late-'60's and early-'70's when you couldn't buy a decent new amp from anybody.

I knew there was a reason why I was being increasingly drawn toward the acoustic side at the time!
JimK

My Transonic was a 17-year-old new old stock amp when I bought it. I functions just as well today as it did in 1985 when I bought it. As I've stated before, I had to replace one speaker jack and have cleaned the pots a few times, but it really has held up nicely. I'm sure I'd have had a few more problems, had this amp been gigged with professionally, but that's true for ANY equipment. I know RIC doesn't want the liability associated with building amps, but I sure wish they'd licence someone to build Transonic cabinets again!

fabandgear wrote:My Transonic was a 17-year-old new old stock amp when I bought it. I functions just as well today as it did in 1985 when I bought it. As I've stated before, I had to replace one speaker jack and have cleaned the pots a few times, but it really has held up nicely. I'm sure I'd have had a few more problems, had this amp been gigged with professionally, but that's true for ANY equipment.

I know RIC doesn't want the liability associated with building amps, but I sure wish they'd licence someone to build Transonic cabinets again!

That's an interesting observation. Could you elaborate?

BTW - I'd also love to see a reissue of this iconic cabinet.

Should RIC get back into making amps, product liability insurance would be prohibitively expensive, according to John Hall.

coolhandjjl wrote:Should RIC get back into making amps, product liability insurance would be prohibitively expensive, according to John Hall.

This is so true. In this litigious society we live in today, Rickenbacker Int'l. Corp. could be spending it's time and resources answering personal injury lawsuits instead of building guitars. I can see it now: "If you've been injured or killed by a Rickenbacker amp, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact the offices of James Scofflaw..."

coolhandjjl wrote:Should RIC get back into making amps, product liability insurance would be prohibitively expensive, according to John Hall.

That is an interesting point. Maybe Ric could spec out a new amplifier line, and have one of the boutique amp builders handle the production. I don't know if this would help limit the liability issue, but it sure would be fantastic to to have a great line of Ric guitar & bass amps that were tailored to the unique voices of their instruments.

John and I have talked about a Transonic support system of some kind, including repro this & that and service for existing amps. Many OEM items like corners, cloth and other cosmetics might be troublesome. Without scads of customers, I can see the endeavor deteriorate into a nonprofit organization real quick. I too would also like to see some support for the 'cubes' as well (TR35/75/120 etc.).

As far as a 'boutique' Rickenbacker amp, well that's just the point. The Rickenbacker moniker won't be attached to anything that plugs into the wall. I submit that they could be called 'Transonic Amplifiers'. I'll run it by John. I already have my own line of boutique amplifiers and cabs.

Open to suggestion------

tracy wrote: As far as a 'boutique' Rickenbacker amp, well that's just the point. The Rickenbacker moniker won't be attached to anything that plugs into the wall. I submit that they could be called 'Transonic Amplifiers'.

Thats a real shame. I was thinking again today about what a modern new line of Transonics could offer, and I envisioned a 400-watt bass head with compression, shelving and graphic EQ sections, blendble tube & solid-state preamps, all mated to a warm sounding mos-fet amplifier. A matching cab could be loaded with a single 15", a pair of 10"s and a ribbon tweeter, all wrapped up in vintage Transonic cosmetics.
Man, I would love to have modern power & tone in an amp that looks as cool as the old Transonics!