Hey everyone -
This is a review thread. A fantastic build discussion thread continues in at 25+ pages and counting.
So, this is not a build thread.
Many of us are either considering, or are in various stages of their build projects with Surfy Bear's great FET reverb and there seems to be waves of comments like "oh, yeah, the MOD tank is great..." followed later by "...the tail on the MOD is too long and cavernous, gonna try something else...".
Some players have made some very striking comments about this or that tank being better, worse, for sound, quality, etc. but those posts tend to contain very little specs about the actual tanks they paired-up with their FET reverb builds.

For those interested in contributing, I suggest this format:

• Tank manufacturer/country of origin (i.e. Accutronics MIK or US?)
• Model/Part number of tank
• Why you decided to go with that particular tank model/manufacturer
• Any modifications/adjustments made to the tank or to the SB FET Reverb
• Describe the sonics of the tank, such as the tail/decay, the amount of drip (if it is subtle, pronounced, how you would compare it to The Astronauts' 'Baja' )
• If you are considering - or have tried - using a different tank and what the results were.

Thanks! and Happy New Year 2015

Lorne
The Surf Shakers: https://www.facebook.com/TheSurfShakers
Vancouver BC Canada

Last edited: Dec 31, 2014 11:41:14

Don't want to disregard your format, but in brief, "Yeah, what he (Balszs) said" – the new MOD pan sounds too much like an actual acoustic space, a very huge one. To get drip, you have to suffer a reverberation tail with such a long decay that it's intolerable except in maybe very noisy ensembles where bass, drums and other instruments cover it up.
By contrast, my old Gibbs "C" is better suited for surf with a lot of crashy drip and much shorter decay tail.

Strangely, the Accu pan from my '69 Twin doesn't sound so good either with the Surfy Bear. I'm still hunting for an optimal solution.

Squink Out!

I have mixed feelings about the USA built accutronics pans. Mine is a bit washy but feel unless I find a good gibbs pan I should not bother changing it out.

Then, there is the chance if I did pull the trigger on a Gibbs, they too can greatly range from pan to pan just like any other manufacturer.

I understand about the awesome drip some recordings have with the short decay. It is ear candy.

So here are my results:

MOD 4ab3c1b: Really good tail, but not good for drip

TAD 4ab3c1b: Better for drip, not too long tail but also a not that good sounding tail

Gibbs pan 1122-6611 AO 23580-15: Really good drip, shorter but nice tail, really wet and general brighter sounding compared to the others

Accutronic Belton 4Ab3c1b: Had one on Stage in Mexico and really liked it. The low notes where really drippy sounding. Thought i had not time to check it more

http://www.reverbnation.com/bangmustang
http://www.facebook.com/bangmustang
https://soundcloud.com/bang-mustang

Last edited: Jan 02, 2015 03:43:13

Good call, but since the circuit is so close to the 6G15, why even have Surfy Bear in the title? This thread benefits all analog reverb users.

There seems to be a confusion with the orientation thing. If it ends with B - horizontal, C - vertical. I suggest that if it's already oriented accordingly, don't say anything, as it is as it should be.

Anyway, The Mod C sounds huge. Fun to play alone, totally losing it in a mix- like others said, either too much space, or not enough drip. Gonna order a few other pans.

DreadInBabylon wrote:

Good call, but since the circuit is so close to the 6G15, why even have Surfy Bear in the title? This thread benefits all analog reverb users.

There seems to be a confusion with the orientation thing. If it ends with B - horizontal, C - vertical. I suggest that if it's already oriented accordingly, don't say anything, as it is as it should be.

Anyway, The Mod C sounds huge. Fun to play alone, totally losing it in a mix- like others said, either too much space, or not enough drip. Gonna order a few other pans.

There were some comments made in that large "build" thread and others that I picked up on where players suggested that the SB FET project reacted to tanks differently than the 6G15. Also, I didn't want the focus to be on tanks that were difficult to source due to them being original stock from the 60s, etc. "Yeah, I have an original and it sounds GREAT!"...
Well, this is of some - but not great - value to someone sourcing parts for their builds today.

Lorne
The Surf Shakers: https://www.facebook.com/TheSurfShakers
Vancouver BC Canada

in mine i have try 2 tanks
first the one off my drri
2 the tad

drri pan ,really clear sound ,drips well but not as tad ,real pure sound

tad pan much warmer ,more drip ,maybe a little hiss sometimes cause it seems to be more gainy ;i let it cause i have buy for it and i am too lazy to retry again with the drri pan

to my taste it react beetween the set up of the verb and also with the amp ,then it is hard to choose in fact (maybe put 2 pan in the box and switching beetween them )
the tad is much better with palm mute ,but sometimes a little invasing without then you need to descrease the mix (and for the drri pan it is the invert need to push more the mix for better drip )

whackystrings and dboomer : You answered. Makes sense, got it! thanks.

Badger wrote:

...the orientation was there for a purpose and did have an impact in the sound. Hence my question. In a reverb build that mimics a traditional tank, the 'C' pan would be the one called for in theory, no?

Well since that's what was used then yes, in theory, if that's what you wanna recreate. That's why I built my Surfy-Bear vertical with a C pan. BUT, I believe the differences in sound would be negligible relating to the more obvious difference in modern pans. The orientation seems to be more a mechanical tolerance thing than a sound thing. See here:

Regarding the orientation of the reverb pan, see our Reverb Wiki:

...orientation of the pan (hanging vertically vs. horizontally in the floor of a combo amp) can influence tonality beyond the convenience aspect of connecting it with the RCA-plugged cables and should be the prime decision-maker in the PN ordered (slightly longer RCA cables can easily be obtained).

It's been pointed out that the difference between the vertical and horizontal reverb tanks has to do with the the "ideal mounting plane" for the tank inside the cabinet. The ideal plane is one that allows the transducer magnet to be centered in the "air gap" between the magnet and the transducer. Tanks made for vertical mount are "the best positioned mechanically to maintain that air gap". Tanks made for horizontal mount have some mechanical compensation added to the magnets position. That is, the magnets in horizontal tanks have been "factory adjusted" to be centered in the air gap for the horizontal mounting plane. This "factory adjustment" is considered less desirable from an electro- mechanical perspective. Some would argue that horizontal tanks are not as "musical" as well, although one would be hard put to fault an older Hammond tank in a Twin Reverb operating up to par.

To make it even clearer:

image
vs.
image

Last edited: Jan 03, 2015 14:14:57

Does anyone have experience using a TAD reverb? It seems that the German website does not offer the vertical tank for the 4AB3C1C spec, they just have the model with "B" at the end signifying its horizontal position.

I keep reading that TADs are the European "equivalent" to the MOD.

Lorne
The Surf Shakers: https://www.facebook.com/TheSurfShakers
Vancouver BC Canada

whackystrings wrote:

Does anyone have experience using a TAD reverb? It seems that the German website does not offer the vertical tank for the 4AB3C1C spec, they just have the model with "B" at the end signifying its horizontal position.

I keep reading that TADs are the European "equivalent" to the MOD.

bjoish wrote:

SaschaReynders wrote:

Yeah, TAD only has a horizontal mount pan for reverb units, but I got one a couple of weeks ago, mounted it vertically anyway and it works and sounds great. And when you order a pan from them, they have all the other stuff you still need as well: grill cloth, handle, knobs, pilot light, ...

Yes, I mailed TAD about this, they claim that their B-version also can be mounted vertically. Seems to be no difference.

Source

Last edited: Jan 06, 2015 09:52:02