blazinsaddle5
Joined: Feb 13, 2007
Posts: 19
Highlands Ranch, CO
|
Posted on May 22 2007 12:32 PM
I recently bought a 1962 reverb pan off of ebay for dirt cheap and installed it in my modded '63 RI Tank. The codes read:
1122-6232 AO-2358011
I must say, Boulder Bob is right about the vintage Gibbs sounding much better than the RI stock pan. The only thing I noticed is the control settings need to be increased more to get an equivalent amount of verb as compared to the stock pan. It seems like the range of each Pot has changed a bit. Has anyone else experienced this? Before I was setting my controls at:
7 for Dwell
5-6 for Mix
and 7 for Tone
Now with the Gibbs pan, I'm setting my controls at:
7-9 for Dwell
7 for Mix
and 7 for Tone
Any info on this would be much appreciated!
-Brett
|
JakeDobner
Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 12159
Seattle
|
Posted on May 22 2007 12:38 PM
I talked to a guy at accutronics and he said the reason for the differences in a RI reverb unit(that has the cap mod and 6K6) and a vintage tank is the reverb pan. He says the springs age in a special way that they can't replicate. Its due to being stretched for so long, having so many vibrations, and the current running through it.
|
eddiekatcher
Joined: Mar 14, 2006
Posts: 2774
Atlanta, GA
|
Posted on May 22 2007 04:12 PM
I set my controls at about 50% on the dwell, dead center of 3 on the mix and 50% on the tone. I have found the mix pot to be super sensitive on both my vintage and RI units. I also sort of favor the tighter new pan sound as opposed to the "big chunks" sound of the really older pans. I hate to say this in the company of all you serious reverb heads, but I am leaning toward a slightly cleaner/clearer sound for projection as opposed to the "lost in the reverb tone." I like a solid percussive attack followed by the splashback as opposed to the engulfed, undefinded mush of loosing the initial tone in the reverb..................I must be getting old......ed
— Traditional........speak softly and play through a big blonde amp. Did I mention that I still like big blonde amps?
|
blazinsaddle5
Joined: Feb 13, 2007
Posts: 19
Highlands Ranch, CO
|
Posted on May 22 2007 04:22 PM
but I am leaning toward a slightly cleaner/clearer sound for projection as opposed to the "lost in the reverb tone." I like a solid percussive attack followed by the splashback as opposed to the engulfed, undefinded mush of loosing the initial tone in the reverb
I agree with you Ed. I like to vary my mix control depending on the song. It gives the guitar more warmth and power.
The vintage pan I have seems to retain the guitar signal a little better. I guess a better way to describe it is that the tone doesn't sound as tinny. Definitely a more full, sound with a better drip/plink.
|
blazinsaddle5
Joined: Feb 13, 2007
Posts: 19
Highlands Ranch, CO
|
Posted on May 22 2007 04:27 PM
JakeDobner
I talked to a guy at accutronics and he said the reason for the differences in a RI reverb unit(that has the cap mod and 6K6) and a vintage tank is the reverb pan. He says the springs age in a special way that they can't replicate. Its due to being stretched for so long, having so many vibrations, and the current running through it.
That makes sense. I did notice the Gibbs springs are a little more slinky than the accutronics. So what did the surf bands in the '60's do to achieve that great verb? The springs in their reverb units were brand new at the time. Are there any other differences between the Gibbs pan and the Accutronics?
-Brett
|
Sonichris
Joined: Mar 06, 2006
Posts: 1892
Wear gloves - I'm in the Rockies
|
Posted on May 22 2007 04:38 PM
blazinsaddle5
The only thing I noticed is the control settings need to be increased more to get an equivalent amount of verb as compared to the stock pan. It seems like the range of each Pot has changed a bit. Has anyone else experienced this? Before I was setting my controls at:
7 for Dwell
5-6 for Mix
and 7 for Tone
Now with the Gibbs pan, I'm setting my controls at:
7-9 for Dwell
7 for Mix
and 7 for Tone
-Brett
I had the same experience - had to turn it up to get the same splash, but it sounded much smoother. that Boulder Bob ain't no fool when it comes to sound......
I also had an epiphany about reverb while in CAlifornia last month. I heard some recordings of us live, and I wasn't using a tank, I had a EH Holy Grail pedal. it sounds kinda cool , and a nice contrast to the our rhythm players over the top splash that night.
Chris
— "You can't tell where you're going if you don't know where you've been"
|
DualShowman
Joined: Feb 28, 2006
Posts: 69
Chicago
|
Posted on May 22 2007 05:17 PM
blazinsaddle5
That makes sense. I did notice the Gibbs springs are a little more slinky than the accutronics. So what did the surf bands in the '60's do to achieve that great verb? The springs in their reverb units were brand new at the time. Are there any other differences between the Gibbs pan and the Accutronics?
-Brett
Therein lies the issue. They did nothing extraordinary. All of these reverb pans, regardless of nameplate, are of the same design. Gibbs/Hammond/Accutronics are all the same. A new pan should be better at replicating the sound you hear on the records.
|
SurfBandBill
Joined: Mar 15, 2006
Posts: 1487
San Francisco
|
Posted on May 22 2007 05:20 PM
Eddie K - mix at 3? Wow. I had no idea.
I keep my dwell and tone right at high noon (or midnight, depending on if you're an optimist or pessimist), but I have my mix at seven - and I still feel like I could be coaxing a little more drip out of my '66 Fender tank.
I will set myself up for ridicule and critique here and say that I don't hear an incredibly specific difference between my reissue (w/cap and tube mod) and my vintage. But there is some definite vintage mojo I can't put my finger on.
~B~
|
eddiekatcher
Joined: Mar 14, 2006
Posts: 2774
Atlanta, GA
|
Posted on May 22 2007 06:39 PM
Here's how ya do it...... Next time ya play out, take along a tape recorder, a cheezy one will work fine.....set it up in the middle of the room and play your set. Fiddle with the mix control and then listen to the playback later...... I think you'll find that your guitar will get lost in the mix when it's over-verbed (sorry jake). It will have sound pressure but much less defination......I certainly don't have the chops to play with a Paul Johnson sound but I hate to feel lost in the fray between Rich and Sticks.....Those guys are tough to keep up with.......ed
— Traditional........speak softly and play through a big blonde amp. Did I mention that I still like big blonde amps?
|
WR
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 3832
netherlands
|
Posted on May 23 2007 12:46 PM
to original poster, are you sure the vintage pan has the same impedances as a standard 'fender' pan? different impedances might explain less 'verb.
WR
— Rules to live by #314:
"When in Italy, if the menu says something's grilled, don't assume it is."
https://www.facebook.com/The-Malbehavers-286429584796173/
|
blazinsaddle5
Joined: Feb 13, 2007
Posts: 19
Highlands Ranch, CO
|
Posted on May 23 2007 01:27 PM
WR
to original poster, are you sure the vintage pan has the same impedances as a standard 'fender' pan? different impedances might explain less 'verb.
WR
I believe so. I don't know what the codes stand for except for the date.
1122-6232 This pan is dated on the 32nd week of 1962
AO-23580-11 I assume this is the model number...it's the same as Diceophonic's 1963 pan he sold here a while back. I have seen Gibbs pans with model numbers such as AO-23580-10...Maybe the last number is for the impedance....Any thoughts?
|
eddiekatcher
Joined: Mar 14, 2006
Posts: 2774
Atlanta, GA
|
Posted on May 23 2007 01:50 PM
WoodyJ and I are both with you on the RI vs the Originals. We both believe the earliest RI's sound better than any of the originals that either one of us have had. The main difference for me is that the original never picks up any RFI and sometimes nothing I can do will keep some FM radio station's signal out of my RI tank! (And Rich wonders why I let him use the good sounding tank!) I think most of us agree that the RI tank is the best sounding reissue Fender has done to date........ed
— Traditional........speak softly and play through a big blonde amp. Did I mention that I still like big blonde amps?
|
WR
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 3832
netherlands
|
Posted on May 23 2007 05:03 PM
blazinsaddle5
WR
to original poster, are you sure the vintage pan has the same impedances as a standard 'fender' pan? different impedances might explain less 'verb.
WR
I believe so. I don't know what the codes stand for except for the date.
1122-6232 This pan is dated on the 32nd week of 1962
AO-23580-11 I assume this is the model number...it's the same as Diceophonic's 1963 pan he sold here a while back. I have seen Gibbs pans with model numbers such as AO-23580-10...Maybe the last number is for the impedance....Any thoughts?
as I understand the stamped letter on the inside denotes impedances, and a "C" corresponds to the fender type (8ohm input if Im not mistaken - Im doing this form the tomh) I have a "d"type and it measures different than my "fender" pans and gives less reverb, but more drastic than you describe. it's super hard to get this info on the web.  it kinda sucks they didnt have internet in '62. 
— Rules to live by #314:
"When in Italy, if the menu says something's grilled, don't assume it is."
https://www.facebook.com/The-Malbehavers-286429584796173/
|
Kawentzmann
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 1058
Berlin, Germany
|
Posted on Mar 04 2009 03:38 PM
I just got a Hammond 1122-6234 AO-23580-11. Inside the housing is a rubber stamped L or a 7, cant tell. The reverb sounds nice, but is very quiet, and a little bit noisy. It must must be a case of impedance mismatch with my Kendrick, which is a replica of a vintage Fender unit.
Since the numbers are so close to the example discussed here I thought it was safe to get it, but was wrong.
What other indicator could be there for a Gibbs/Hammon pan to match a Fender style reverb unit? Theres a little number 31 on the side of the case. I couldnt find any reference to that on the net yet.
Im contemplating trying to use the springs in the Accutronics. Curious what it would sound like.
— The Exotic Guitar of Kahuna Kawentzmann
You can get the boy out of the Keynes era, but you can’t get the Keynes era out of the boy.
|
Kawentzmann
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 1058
Berlin, Germany
|
Posted on Mar 04 2009 04:27 PM
OK, I did it. I couldnt resist. I only played with headphones at this point but it's great - I love the sound of the old springs. One couple of the Accutronics was significantly shorter that in the Gibbs.
— The Exotic Guitar of Kahuna Kawentzmann
You can get the boy out of the Keynes era, but you can’t get the Keynes era out of the boy.
|
DannySnyder
Joined: Mar 02, 2006
Posts: 11048
Berkeley, CA
|
Posted on Mar 04 2009 05:23 PM
I've recently bought 4 gibbs pans off eBay. I had the seller check the impedence for me but 2 of them I didn't get an answer and took a chance anyway. I contacted Accutronics and they said they'd sell me the transducer of proper impedence so I can switch them out. Turned out the pans I got were the right impedence anyway. I haven't tested all of them but the 2 I tried sounded fantastic - lots of drip and smooth sound. However YMMV. What's great about the hammond pans is they stay in a stationary organ and probably have far less use than the equivalent vintage Fender pan.
— Danny Snyder
"With great reverb comes great responsibility" - Uncle Leo
Playing keys and guitar with Combo Tezeta
Formerly a guitarist in The TomorrowMen and Meshugga Beach Party
Latest surf project - Now That's What I Call SURF
|
scotstandard
Joined: Nov 09, 2008
Posts: 1140
Davenport Iowa
|
Posted on Mar 04 2009 06:34 PM
Ive gone nuts over replacement pans.
Old gibbs ones are stamped F for fender
Hammond is stamped L
there is all kinds of diff imped.
The closest i can come to understanding it is the tape one the transformers. one side is red and the other is cream or white.
most hammonds are cream on both. thats the wrong guy.
My #1 65 unit has a replaced tranny and sounds great! I bought a RI as backup and it was ok but the 65 killed it. I did the cap mod and put good tubes in it and still kinda sucked. I sold it and bought another blackface 65. This one is kinda weak and sucks in compairison to my #1 Unit.
I think i might try to change the tranny to what ever is in my good one. and try that. (oh and it sounds not as good with the same tank and tubes in the new 65) so its not that.
I think they all sound diffrent from one to the next. I wish we could all hang out in a big room with our reverb units and compair.
Oh well.
— Give me reverb or give me death!
facebook.com/onenightstandards
https://www.youtube.com/scotstandard
scotstandard@yahoo.com
|
LaFleur
Joined: May 20, 2009
Posts: 525
Leipzig
|
Posted on Dec 22 2014 07:15 AM
Just found this information:
"Gibbs model L, is an Accutronics model number 4FB2B2C"
So we need to find out what is C and what is F.
I also have Gibbs pan in my G-Spring.
The numbers are 1122-6611 -> 11th week of 1966
AO-23580-15 -> I think the last two digits also indicate something, as the others stay the same on all reverb pans here.
— http://www.reverbnation.com/bangmustang
http://www.facebook.com/bangmustang
https://soundcloud.com/bang-mustang
Last edited: Dec 22, 2014 07:16:37
|
LaFleur
Joined: May 20, 2009
Posts: 525
Leipzig
|
Posted on Dec 22 2014 07:42 AM
"The AO-.... number is the part number for the organ and would lead you to the Hammond preamp/recovery circuit diagrams."
— http://www.reverbnation.com/bangmustang
http://www.facebook.com/bangmustang
https://soundcloud.com/bang-mustang
|
LittleKahunaCraig
Joined: Jan 09, 2008
Posts: 385
Orange County, CA
|
Posted on Dec 22 2014 12:07 PM
I have a '63 tank with the Gibbs pan and like Brett, I have the increase the settings to achieve the same amount of reverb as my other vintage tanks. I didn't realize it was due to the pan. I just thought it was that particular tank. I notice every vintage tank is a little different in its characteristics and the settings vs sound achieved. Thanks for the post on this.
— Craig Skelly
Little Kahuna
www.littlekahunamusic.com
The Breakaways
The Curl Riders
|
November Birthdays 
