Production and supply surely decreased starting in the late '70s. With the advent of the boutique guitar amp business in the '90s though, more production has resulted. And some of the recent production's quality rivals the 1960's when the art was at its peak.
The article's picture of a nice set of JJ/Telsa's a'glowing is a thing to behold!
Some days you get to rad something that just makes you feel good about innovation and people thinking. This is one of those days!
Thanks for sharing, Heater!
You know I love vacuum tubes. Most of my vintage Heathkit ham gear and Predicta TVs use tubes.
BTW, one of my favorite books is "MIG Pilot", about the soviet pilot who defected with his MIG 25 in 1976. Highly recommended reading. The plane we feared so was rusting carbon steel and surprisingly low-tech overall. Its radar system used hi-power vacuum tubes. It was not the dogfighter we assumed, a one-shot, piloted missile-like interceptor. The book gives incredible insight into the Russian way of life back then. Still hard to believe.
Except that the "tubes" in the linked article don't have heaters. They are just small enough that they can get useful emission without heaters. It's also possible to do this with old school vacuum tubes, but it requires ridiculous voltages and is extremely nonlinear. Apparently the small spacing takes care of the ridiculous voltage problem, and the nonlinearity isn't a big deal if you want to use the element as a switch instead of an analog amplifier.
It's interesting to note that one complaint about the new "tubes" is that they require about 10 volts to work, which is not compatible with the ~1 volt or so used by silicon switches of similar performance, making them "incompatible." Of course 10 volts was perfectly compatible with the earliest CMOS logic chips.
Production and supply surely decreased starting in the late '70s. With the advent of the boutique guitar amp business in the '90s though, more production has resulted. And some of the recent production's quality rivals the 1960's when the art was at its peak.
The article's picture of a nice set of JJ/Telsa's a'glowing is a thing to behold!
Yea, the other thing tubes are still around for is high power. Last stage power amplifier on a radio station? Probably a big honking vacuum tube. High voltage regulator for a large gas discharge laser? Probably a tube.
That whole operating while glowing hot bit? Makes life a LOT easier for BIG linear amplifiers and supplies.
I seriously hope not, they were awfull, and had no tubes:)
@davejames
They never left.
Thank God.
@mindrobots
Some days you get to rad something that just makes you feel good about innovation and people thinking
Yes, in a world were giant corporations are fighting over stupid patents of software widgets (Google/Oracle for example)
it's good to occasionally see the results of people doing some real thinking.
@Phil,
But no glowing filaments to warm the chilly night of deep space.
Ha! I must admit that tubes without heaters are a bit dull (get it) but in deep space you might be glad to save the power.
And yes that is the reason for "Heater."
Thing about thermionic valves is that, like steam engines, you can almost see them working and get a feel for what is going on.
Still searching for that unique project that requires a Propeller and Triodes....
Valves never went away for many radio amateurs. All high-power linear amps (1 kW or more) still use them, although they haven't been used for many years in other amateur radio equipment.
Back in the mid '60s tube based digital and analog computers were being designed for use in space applications.
These were built using similar lithographic techniques to the ICs of the time. They were made on sheets of glass. The cavities were etched into the glass. The interconnections and structures were mostly plated metal. There wasn't a filament as such, just heaters coated with electron emitting materials. These tubes were only made with one glass sheet, the tubes were open on one side since the vacuum was formed by the vacuum of space.
They were highly radiation hardened and equal to or smaller than the control computers at the time. In addition thousands of the tubes could be made on one sheet. ICs only had tens to hundreds of transistors in each package and one needed many of these.
These new devices are much smaller in size, using the current photo lithographic techniques.
I have a few 12AX7 for that tube sound ..
and I have a 4CX4000 in my parents house ..
a few NIXIE and some 6L6 for more Sound ..
I love firebottles ! and most people have a tube in there house not the TV but the microwave .
is not easy to get 1kW RF cheap at 2.4 Gigz with Solid State..
heheh he said Valve ... hehe mullard valves any one? tungsol or Tesla tubes .
* wait Iam only 25 I should not know this *
and Yes i have a slight lust for WLW .... I have its simple shematic on my wall in my room .. ..
ya know I should make a new amp this summer for my radio show . a inlne amp f for my Fet Mic .. some warm tube sound .. and the 12AX7s need like 100-300 V to run , easy to get From a cam strobe charger. .
It's a one-tube super-regenerative shortwave receiver. I was never able to get it to work until I purchased a pair of antique high-impedance headphones for it. Now, with a long-wire antenna in the attic, it's able to pick up world-wide shortwave broadcasts if the conditions are right. (At least this one has a knob for the regeneration feedback. The one-tube receiver I cut my teeth on as a kid used a tickler coil that had to be positioned just so inside the antenna coil to hit that sweet spot between no reception and squealing. If anything in life taught me patience and perseverance, it had to be that regeneration adjustment.)
I guess I'm spoiled. My first crystal radio used a 1N34. (Well, there was that failed experiment with the Gillette blue blade, bent safety pin with the pencil lead wire-wrapped to the point, and toilet-paper-tube coil.)
A few years ago I asked a local shop that sold crystals and minerals if they had any galena. With a lot of searching they found some. I made a detector with a piece of it and a piece of copper wire, connected a coil and capacitor, an antenna and ground, and an amplifier and speaker, and briefly heard a radio station a couple of times whilst poking the galena with the wire for an hour or so.
I can be happy with pretty much any amp but the modellers go WAY beyond. Reading the guitar forums, I find it amusing that so many guitarists are striving for (example) the "Hendrix sound".
I'm pretty certain that if Hendrix were around today, he'd be all over the new technology, just as he was exploring add-on effects back then. No more Strat/Marshall stack, I bet.
There have been blind-tests conducted to compare software modellers with "real" guitar amplifiers which, to me, totally misses the point. The flexibility and 'total-recall' ability of a software-based solution far exceeds the practicality of using dedicated hardware if you are looking for an array of different set-ups that can be instantly selected. One of my personal favourites is to play a "Carlos Sanatana rig" simultaneously with a "BB King rig". In a live scenario you would think that more than one guitarist is playing. The fanless, solid-state system that I have just built is for live use. I have a dedicated mini-itx system with a clean-install of XP-Pro with HORM and EWF added, courtesy of XP-embedded
That's OK. Perhaps one day you can run your software sound models on a tube based computer imagine how much better that will sound:)
You are a brave man to rely on a Windows system during a live performance!!
Seem to me the makers of the original tube guitar amps, Marshal and co, were not looking for that ultimate sound. They just built amps and boxes down to a price. By happy circumstance it was found that one could thoroughly overdrive and abuse those things with some interesting artistic results.
Musicians have a habit of getting interesting and pleasant sounds from almost anything, from drumming on plastic dustbins (The Bonzoid Mutants) to hammering on rusty water tanks (Test Department) to twanging nails banged into sticks (all over Africa). A friend of mine could entertain us for ages just tweaking the frequency knob on a signal generator.
On a technical note, a decent triode is the most linear amplifying device ever invented.
That's OK. Perhaps one day you can run your software sound models on a tube based computer imagine how much better that will sound:)
You are a brave man to rely on a Windows system during a live performance!!
Hehehehe, my musician buddies thought I was nuts until I did my little demo. Now they want to know how much I'll charge to build them...The technology has been around for years but apparently, technology is "just not rock 'n' roll"! The clean, bare-bones install with EWF and HORM takes care of the live performance worries. Heck, with the low cost of this stuff, I'm even considering a redundant unit running in parallel.
Seem to me the makers of the original tube guitar amps, Marshal and co, were not looking for that ultimate sound. They just built amps and boxes down to a price. By happy circumstance it was found that one could thoroughly overdrive and abuse those things with some interesting artistic results.
Absolutely true but if modellers had been around first, conventional amps would have gone nowhere.
Musicians have a habit of getting interesting and pleasant sounds from almost anything, from drumming on plastic dustbins (The Bonzoid Mutants) to hammering on rusty water tanks (Test Department) to twanging nails banged into sticks (all over Africa). A friend of mine could entertain us for ages just tweaking the frequency knob on a signal generator.
True again. This technology includes samplers and "loopers" meaning that any-old sound-source can be an instant instrument.
but apparently, technology is "just not rock 'n' roll"!
What? Was when I was a young'n. Think Hawkwind, Tim Blake, Jean Michel Jarre, Emerson, Lake and Palmer. They all had a good go with the technology available.
Never mind the "tube simulators" or whatever. I was simply referring to the fact that the characteristics of a single tube as an amplifying device with no feed back are more linear than any single transistor or anything else we have come up with. Which is kind of neat but of course in practical circuits that may not be so important.
Heater.
Posts: 21,230
Comments
Production and supply surely decreased starting in the late '70s. With the advent of the boutique guitar amp business in the '90s though, more production has resulted. And some of the recent production's quality rivals the 1960's when the art was at its peak.
The article's picture of a nice set of JJ/Telsa's a'glowing is a thing to behold!
Thanks for sharing, Heater!
-Phil
BTW, one of my favorite books is "MIG Pilot", about the soviet pilot who defected with his MIG 25 in 1976. Highly recommended reading. The plane we feared so was rusting carbon steel and surprisingly low-tech overall. Its radar system used hi-power vacuum tubes. It was not the dogfighter we assumed, a one-shot, piloted missile-like interceptor. The book gives incredible insight into the Russian way of life back then. Still hard to believe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Belenko
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mig-Pilot-The-Final-Escape-of-Lt-Belenko-by-John-Barron-PB-BOOK-/180866002702?pt=US_Nonfiction_Book&hash=item2a1c742f0e
In space, no one can hear you scream "I just burned out my last tube!"
-Phil
I think he did mention that connection on an earlier tube-based discussion.
"Tubes - the ONLY way to amplify guitar!"
It's interesting to note that one complaint about the new "tubes" is that they require about 10 volts to work, which is not compatible with the ~1 volt or so used by silicon switches of similar performance, making them "incompatible." Of course 10 volts was perfectly compatible with the earliest CMOS logic chips.
Yea, the other thing tubes are still around for is high power. Last stage power amplifier on a radio station? Probably a big honking vacuum tube. High voltage regulator for a large gas discharge laser? Probably a tube.
That whole operating while glowing hot bit? Makes life a LOT easier for BIG linear amplifiers and supplies.
Lawson
300kW. Oh yeah!
And don't forget the magnetron that powers your microwave oven.
-Phil
And watercooled too. I had no idea.
@davejames Thank God.
@mindrobots Yes, in a world were giant corporations are fighting over stupid patents of software widgets (Google/Oracle for example)
it's good to occasionally see the results of people doing some real thinking.
@Phil, Ha! I must admit that tubes without heaters are a bit dull (get it) but in deep space you might be glad to save the power.
And yes that is the reason for "Heater."
Thing about thermionic valves is that, like steam engines, you can almost see them working and get a feel for what is going on.
Still searching for that unique project that requires a Propeller and Triodes....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Bz2110fOyA
Tony's room there looks like by bedroom at about the same year.
I travel by this station when I visit one of my clients.
WLW Site:
http://hawkins.pair.com/wlw.shtml
The output tubes:
http://hawkins.pair.com/wlw/wlw3.jpg
The cooling pond:
http://hawkins.pair.com/wlw/wlw9.jpg
C.W.
These were built using similar lithographic techniques to the ICs of the time. They were made on sheets of glass. The cavities were etched into the glass. The interconnections and structures were mostly plated metal. There wasn't a filament as such, just heaters coated with electron emitting materials. These tubes were only made with one glass sheet, the tubes were open on one side since the vacuum was formed by the vacuum of space.
They were highly radiation hardened and equal to or smaller than the control computers at the time. In addition thousands of the tubes could be made on one sheet. ICs only had tens to hundreds of transistors in each package and one needed many of these.
These new devices are much smaller in size, using the current photo lithographic techniques.
Cool stuff.
Duane J
and I have a 4CX4000 in my parents house ..
a few NIXIE and some 6L6 for more Sound ..
I love firebottles ! and most people have a tube in there house not the TV but the microwave .
is not easy to get 1kW RF cheap at 2.4 Gigz with Solid State..
heheh he said Valve ... hehe mullard valves any one? tungsol or Tesla tubes .
* wait Iam only 25 I should not know this *
and Yes i have a slight lust for WLW .... I have its simple shematic on my wall in my room .. ..
ya know I should make a new amp this summer for my radio show . a inlne amp f for my Fet Mic .. some warm tube sound .. and the 12AX7s need like 100-300 V to run , easy to get From a cam strobe charger. .
too bad Rad shack is not gonna have any ..
It's a one-tube super-regenerative shortwave receiver. I was never able to get it to work until I purchased a pair of antique high-impedance headphones for it. Now, with a long-wire antenna in the attic, it's able to pick up world-wide shortwave broadcasts if the conditions are right. (At least this one has a knob for the regeneration feedback. The one-tube receiver I cut my teeth on as a kid used a tickler coil that had to be positioned just so inside the antenna coil to hit that sweet spot between no reception and squealing. If anything in life taught me patience and perseverance, it had to be that regeneration adjustment.)
-Phil
A catwhisker & galena crystal can also teach patience, my young Padawan!
I guess I'm spoiled. My first crystal radio used a 1N34. (Well, there was that failed experiment with the Gillette blue blade, bent safety pin with the pencil lead wire-wrapped to the point, and toilet-paper-tube coil.)
-Phil
What an absolute thing of beauty!!!
Lucky guy!
Software modelling for me, actually
I can be happy with pretty much any amp but the modellers go WAY beyond. Reading the guitar forums, I find it amusing that so many guitarists are striving for (example) the "Hendrix sound".
I'm pretty certain that if Hendrix were around today, he'd be all over the new technology, just as he was exploring add-on effects back then. No more Strat/Marshall stack, I bet.
There have been blind-tests conducted to compare software modellers with "real" guitar amplifiers which, to me, totally misses the point. The flexibility and 'total-recall' ability of a software-based solution far exceeds the practicality of using dedicated hardware if you are looking for an array of different set-ups that can be instantly selected. One of my personal favourites is to play a "Carlos Sanatana rig" simultaneously with a "BB King rig". In a live scenario you would think that more than one guitarist is playing. The fanless, solid-state system that I have just built is for live use. I have a dedicated mini-itx system with a clean-install of XP-Pro with HORM and EWF added, courtesy of XP-embedded
Cheers!
Mickster
http://www.emusician.com/techniques/0768/showdown-at-the-clubhouse--amp-software-vs-amps/141292
That's OK. Perhaps one day you can run your software sound models on a tube based computer imagine how much better that will sound:)
You are a brave man to rely on a Windows system during a live performance!!
Seem to me the makers of the original tube guitar amps, Marshal and co, were not looking for that ultimate sound. They just built amps and boxes down to a price. By happy circumstance it was found that one could thoroughly overdrive and abuse those things with some interesting artistic results.
Musicians have a habit of getting interesting and pleasant sounds from almost anything, from drumming on plastic dustbins (The Bonzoid Mutants) to hammering on rusty water tanks (Test Department) to twanging nails banged into sticks (all over Africa). A friend of mine could entertain us for ages just tweaking the frequency knob on a signal generator.
On a technical note, a decent triode is the most linear amplifying device ever invented.
Hehehehe, my musician buddies thought I was nuts until I did my little demo. Now they want to know how much I'll charge to build them...The technology has been around for years but apparently, technology is "just not rock 'n' roll"! The clean, bare-bones install with EWF and HORM takes care of the live performance worries. Heck, with the low cost of this stuff, I'm even considering a redundant unit running in parallel.
Absolutely true but if modellers had been around first, conventional amps would have gone nowhere.
True again. This technology includes samplers and "loopers" meaning that any-old sound-source can be an instant instrument.
Look under "Tweak"
http://www.peavey.com/products/software/revalver/
Cheers!
Mickster
What? Was when I was a young'n. Think Hawkwind, Tim Blake, Jean Michel Jarre, Emerson, Lake and Palmer. They all had a good go with the technology available.
Never mind the "tube simulators" or whatever. I was simply referring to the fact that the characteristics of a single tube as an amplifying device with no feed back are more linear than any single transistor or anything else we have come up with. Which is kind of neat but of course in practical circuits that may not be so important.
http://blog.reprap.org/2012/04/some-more-printed-circuitry.html
I wonder if we could use this to print custom parts at home?
How small to they have to so vacuum is not required, or can anything be done using a partial vacuum, etc?
In my head I'm combining vacuum tube and reprap circuit printing with this:
http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=24553.php