Ampeg GV-22

[Denton]

Nearby shop has one of these in fair condition. I own a VT-22.. Is the GV-22 similar tonally? I haven't tried to lift it yet, but I'd like a lighter and lower wattage Ampeg for my Les Paul.

Anyone with experience with this combo?

[Liquids]

Nearby shop has one of these in fair condition. I own a VT-22.. Is the GV-22 similar tonally? I haven't tried to lift it yet, but I'd like a lighter and lower wattage Ampeg for my Les Paul.

Anyone with experience with this combo?

In the sense that its Ampeg vs Ampeg, there will be similarities I would have to guess from my experience. In terms of circuity--no, there are noteworthy differences from the schematic I have seen.

There may be multiple different schematics as it is, so I'm not sure if there are a few GV-22 variations.

See how light it is. Consider that it may have a 7199, both as something unique and a potentially difficult tube to find (though some have ways around this I believe). If it's light and sounds good to you for the money, hey, why not.

I like my Reverberocket II a lot, fairly light, good sound IMO. Some like the earlier Gemini's which are sometimes based on a single 15" speaker, etc.

Whatever Ampeg combo you land on, you should have almost no trouble locating something significantly lighter than your VT-22.

[Hangman]

The GV-22 is almost like a cross between the G12 and the VT-22. its definitely lighter (but not light).

the reverb circuit is pretty much the same, but the Tremolo/vibrato is wicked cool!. real pitch shifting vibrato... not quite as cool as a magnatone but it also does tremolo... so thats a plus.
it also has the same phase inverter as the G12, which is a great sounding circuit. the amp doesn't break up as much as the vt-22 but its also easier to handle when it does break up (not quite thunderously loud)
the gv-22 is about 35 watts, so kinda like a deluxe reverb.

I really love the G series amps. I have nearly gotten rid of all of the amplifiers I own that are more than 40 watts... mainly because I never need anything louder than that.

[Denton]

Yeah, less wattage is what I need. Same shop has a near mint Rocket 2. I believe it's a '65. Has the amp cover still, which is why it's near mint I suppose.

[bax]

The GV-22 is an interesting amp. Many of the Ampeg guitar amps have less capacitance in the power supply relative to that seen in their bass amps, not so with this design. The electronics can handle both bass and guitar. Consistent with the other amps in this line like the V4, VT-22. etc.

Speaking of the G12, the tremolo on the Tommy James' vocal on Crimson and Clover was fed through an Ampeg Gemini 2. A very nice sounding tremolo.

[Hangman]

The GV-22 is an interesting amp. Many of the Ampeg guitar amps have less capacitance in the power supply relative to that seen in their bass amps, not so with this design. The electronics can handle both bass and guitar. Consistent with the other amps in this line like the V4, VT-22. etc.

Speaking of the G12, the tremolo on the Tommy James' vocal on Crimson and Clover was fed through an Ampeg Gemini 2. A very nice sounding tremolo.

yes the Gemini 2 tremolo circuit is identical to the G12. I think the only difference between the two models is that the gemini 2 is fixed bias, closer to 35 watts rather than cathode bias and 22 watts. might be a few other minor differences but I can't recall off hand.

Doesnt the GV-22 just have a 30uf for the reservoir cap?

I know the G12 has a 70 or 80uf as does the gemini 2

[bax]

Yes, the GV-22 and the GV-15 both have a 30uF first node reservoir cap, which I think it would be better if it were a bit larger.

As far as using the amp for bass (with speakers that can handle the low end), the power amp and power supply design have many similarities to the fixed bias B-15 which works pretty well for bass. Ampeg bounced around on the size of the power supply caps in the B-15 with the different revisions. A lot of the early revisions had 40uF. That they went down to 30uF and they increased the voltage rating of the cap to 600V. When they introduced the Heritage B-15 a few years ago, they stiffened up the power supply. The first node had a 47uF cap followed by a choke and then another 47uF cap. Jess Oliver has said that he felt that the amp sounds better with a stiffer power supply and held out for it in the Heritage design.

As you know, in a bass amp, a larger first node capacitance will provide more headroom and the amp can better cope with the lower notes which draw more from the power supply. With a guitar amp, if you are looking for an early onset of distortion, having less capacitance helps. Designing an amp for both bass and guitar often involves some compromises.

[Liquids]

As you know, in a bass amp, a larger first node capacitance will provide more headroom and the amp can better cope with the lower notes which draw more from the power supply. With a guitar amp, if you are looking for an early onset of distortion, having less capacitance helps. Designing an amp for both bass and guitar often involves some compromises.

All useful info. But here, I think it depends...

As for the amount of filtering in the power supply (the combination of rectifier, C, L, and R all work together)--less filtering doesn't really make distortion's onset happen sooner. In fact, one can argue that more filtering lowers the effective DC voltage, lower voltage means sooner to distort, but with the voltages most amps are using, say 500v, +/- 5% rule is +/- 25v, which puts that in the generally negligible range. If anything, with all else being the same, more power supply filtering (yielding lower DC voltage) would mean earlier onset of clipping, rather than less filtering.

Volume (amp power) is also at play in conjunction with frequency here. The power filter caps are smoothing over the DC ripple and acting as a small current/voltage/power reservoir. With a given power supply and power amp arrangement that might not have any problem accurately delivering a tight, fast, accurate note at a specific volume (power) with a certain guitar at a fundamental *frequency* of 440hz, using a bass to play a note at the same fundamental frequency but a more dense harmonic content, it might start to struggle more than the other scenario. With either instrument playing a note at 220hz it may struggle more, at 110hz even more, and so on-- particularly in conjunction with a specific speaker configuration's response characteristics, as it likely drops off and needs increasingly more power to produce increasing lower frequencies at the same measurable (let alone apparent) volume/power.

Likewise, at 440hz but 10db louder than one started at, they may struggle more as well--same frequency. All depends on usual suspects for amp components, including the filtering, transformers, etc.

So filtering can't be totally isolated, even with the power supply--at what frequency, and at what volume/power output? Unless you design for the full audio spectrum and full possible output that can be delivered, volume and frequency affect response even more than they already do naturally, and sometimes to a very noticeable degree in a specific amp.

One thing is for sure--if you want more accurate reproduction of notes with a given design, with a "tight" transient and low frequency response, all else being equal, you want more filtering rather than less--"amp sounds better with a stiffer power supply," at least up to that design point where more filtering makes no appreciable difference.

Heavy metal guitarists are often looking for a "tighter" amp as much as a bassist is from their amp, so it's not always bass vs. guitar or clean vs. distorted in broad terms. As a guitarist running my Ampegs clean, the tight but massively powerful bass is one of the major reasons I play these amps instead of others. I don't play metal, but primarily play blues based music in some way...though many "blues" guitarists are first to seek an old tweed era Fender Bassman with less than the cleanest power filtering just as well.

Guitarists are known for *utilizing* amps with a sound partly affected by an amps sagging, swampy filtering when cranked (etc.) as a kind of 'effect' and growing fond of the quirks, the tone, etc. While people might try and duplicate such an amp including what happens with such an amp cranked up with the power supply/filtering struggling to keep up intentionally, NOW, for it's audio characteristics, that was rarely (if ever?) an original/early instrument amp design goal--the audio "effect" of things like how it clipped, power filtering, etc.

While designing a "quirky" amp (including just having a particular preamp overdrive tone) that is ideal for multiple things/sounds/instruments can be hard to impossible depending on how wide a scope the design targets, designing a amp for high quality audio instrument amplification first and foremost with some degree of flexibility (EQ, etc.)--which is what I think some Ampeg amps approached in some of their designs--probably works well. To my knowledge, the Ampeg V series guitar amps came out, and when they made the "bass version" in the V4b, and we see it's basically the same core amp with some slight tweaks in gain/EQ switches and reverb between the two, which suggest the original CORE design was for audio instruments, not so much "designed for guitar."

So while an instrument amp primarily designed for audio can't do exactly what all the one-trick pony (quirky) amps can do necessarily, I think it spans more flexibility and a broader audience when you design for accurate audio reproduction and can tweak from there, rather than one specific tone. If it is not even possible for an amp to produce audio cleanly and accurately, it's an amplifier AND an effect. It may sound cool, but you can't turn off that effect...which limits it significantly.

Personally, if the world ran out of tubes, and I had to play a solid state amp from what is available today, I'd probably play any basic, solidly designed bass amp with good EQ range, over almost every comparable solid state guitar amp "designed for guitar," and add reverb/echo and overdrive pedals like I always do...

[bax]

Thanks for your comments. As you pointed out, it is very complicated. Nothing is isolated, everything in the amp, from the input through to the speaker, interacts and affects how the amp performs. Frequency is important. How hard the amp is being driven is important. When designing an amp, there are some general guidelines that hold true.

My point was simply, low end demand on the power supply in a bass amp lowers the reservoir and, if it can't recover, causes the supply to sag to the point where it is a factor in the onset of distortion. The smaller the reservoir, the less able the amp can cope. Increasing the capacitance of the first reservoir cap is one way to reduce the sag.

[Hangman]

I'm not sure I understand your original statement. the gv-22 uses a 30uf reservoir cap which is pretty low for ampeg. especially for a 40-50 watt amp.

weren't you saying that they didn't use a lower value?