Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

That90'sGuy

DyzaBoyzologist
It's a snowy day in New England and keeping warm indoors I decided to do some jamming on my Tungsten Crema Wheat. I liked the tone of the amp with some GE/JAN NOS preamp tube stuff I've had lying around (2 12AX7WAs and a 12AY7), but while they had a sweet warmth and clarity, I found they also had lots of headroom. Not a big deal with my ES-335, but it had to almost be cranked wide open to get any decent gain out of my Tele.

Having a drawer of random tubes, I decided to do some experimenting. I found that Tung Sol RI 12AX7s were a bit harsh with the Crema (they sound good with my Vibrolux Reverb though), but had some nice gain. The GE/JAN stuff sounded richer and warmer, but there wasn't the same level of bite to really rock with it at decent volumes. I said "what the heck, I'll throw in some JJ tubes". I had 3 JJs around: 2 ECC83S tubes and 1 faded gold print tube (I think it was an ECC83). One of the ECC83S tubes was microphonic, so that got thrown away, but I found that ECC83 worked well in the V2 position darkening the amp a hair and lowering the headroom/adding saturation and the V1 ECC83S had a fair amount of bite and warmth to it. It wasn't as harsh as the Tung Sol, but there was still about as much gain and the fatter sound actually worked with the 5e3 layout.

Don't get me wrong, I think at loud gigging volumes the NOS stuff is perfect, but realistically these days I want an amp that gives up the goods at lower volumes for recording at home and I can do that now that the darker, fatter, lower headroom JJs are in there. For those that may be wondering, I tried mixing the NOS stuff with the JJs, but neither seemed to compliment one another well (they both lacked overall clarity when mixed, no matter what the combination). I've had JJs in other amps in the past and almost universally hated them. I do think the ECC83S is light years beyond the original ECC83 that I used to base my hatred off of. I feel like the ECC83S is a bit more balanced and gainy than the ECC83 used to be. FWIW, I tried finding the original ECC83 on Eurotubes website and couldn't find it anymore so maybe it's been discontinued. The JJs aren't perfect; they can get a bit fizzy/fuzzy when cranked, but at lower volumes I find them to be quite useful. Given the polarizing opinions of this manufacturer (and the fact I've bashed them in the past), I figured it was only fair I'd showcase some of the merits of the design to contrast my previous criticisms.
 
Last edited:
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

yup, they certainly have their place
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

They definitely have their place in my amps. I like em a lot.
 
Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I run them in the pre of my Marshall and love them. After trying a few other sets, they turned out to be the best.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I like JJ tubes - pre-amp and power amp in my Marshalls.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I have had issues with the old ECC83 as well and did not like them at all...really dark...compressed highs....tons of squishy gain, very one dimensional. But I've been running a pair of ECC83S as well as a JJ EL84 in my Class5 for nearly a year. I am sure there are some better NOS options, but the JJs have worked spectacularly in that amp, and are easy to find and inexpensive.The amp does get some fizz past 3 o' clock on the (NM) volume though I never have the gain past 2 oclock anyway. Before the tube swap it was fizzy at 10 o' clock, and a much harsher ratty distortion overall, irregardless of where the volume was set. I actually lost some pre-amp gain going with the JJ ECC83S vs. the chinese Marshall (re?) branded tubes, but the amp now sounds like a classic Marshall amp is supposed to.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I have never liked the JJ ECC83S. Other than that, I think they're good tubes. The long-plate ECC803S has always been an acceptable option. Their ECC82 is on par with NOS tubes I've tried. I just have never had an amp that got along with the short-plate 12AX7. Glad it worked for you, though, and I'll keep mine around in case they work for something.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

A JJ in V1 of my Peavey Valveking sure tamed the fizzies and made the amp sound 100% better.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I did play around some more today (this time adding in a EH 12AX7 into the mix). The EH was a bit more aggressive, but a felt a little more compressed in the mids than the ECC83S. After throwing back in the original NOS JAN/GEs, I think the JJs are an acceptable compromise for a modern production tube, but there is a bit richer of a character with the NOS stuff, so I think the little bit of sacrifice in gain still makes it worth it. I'll have to pick up some more modern production stuff just to what kinds of differences there are (it's been a long time since I've really experimented).
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I've always found JJ's to be great at adding some definition to dark, loud amps. My Carvin Legacy loved those things.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

The funny thing is I remember just the opposite about the ECC83s. They sucked out the gain and put a blanket over the amp. Imagine my surprise when I found that the ECC83S sounds like a completely different tube. I certainly hear much more detail and treble with them than I ever did with the ECC83 and they feel pretty good too; I'm really quite impressed with them in this particular amp.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I have the impression the people that doesn't like JJ tubes are who doesn't play in a band.
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

I've just replaced the three no name pre-amp tubes in my Cornford Roadhouse with JJ83s gold pins. Now I don't give a damn about the gold pin stuff but I decided on these after a lengthy chat with my supplier (Hotrox).

After two gigs I'm undecided. They lack the high end bite of the original tubes so they don't seem to cut so well but they also lack the occasional eardrum puncturing spike the originals could sometimes produce. They have more gain than the originals so at the moment I'm playing around with the gains and EQ on my amp. A guitarist friend came to my last gig and said I had a great sound. Gigging tonight so I'll have another good listen - if I'm capable, we're on free booze from arrival until 3am. Luckily the gig is at my local pub which is 200 yards from my house. Happy New Year !!!!!
 
Re: Stark revelation: JJ preamp tubes aren't bad in the right application

Well, third gig with the JJs after re-thinking my amp settings and they sounded great. Very pleased with them. They seem to play nice with my Tung Sol EL34B output tubes.
 
Back
Top