View Full Version : H.H. Scott 222c modified by Mapleshade


Sonance'84
03-14-2010, 08:10 PM
A friend let me borrow the Mapleshade mail order catalog, and I read through it and liked their approach getting the listener as close to the music as possible. I wasn't in the market for an amp, but the description for the "restored and ultra-modified" H.H. Scott integrated got me thinking. Maybe I can replace my amp/pre combo (listed in my signature) with this one unit, AND have it blow that combo away.

So, I did a lot of research on the amp and have only read good things. Then I called the manufacturer, Pierre Sprey at Mapleshade. After talking to him for about 30 minutes, I was sold. I have to hear it for myself, and with the 30-day money back guarantee, I can't go wrong. So, I placed an order for a my first tube amp! (http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/products.asp?dept=178) I chose a Scott 222C chassis. Here's what he says about he tube compliment: "We replace the original 7189 output tubes with a carefully matched, substantially cleaner-sounding set of new EL-84s--and then match carefully selected driver tubes to the output tubes in such a way as to minimize distortion, using in-circuit oscilloscope waveform analysis (note that tube tester matching is completely inadequate to achieve optimum sonics from tubes)." So, no tube rolling for me...just a plug and play vintage tube amp. He said it will take about 3-4 weeks before I'll get it on the doorstep. I can't wait! It should work great with my speakers too. I kinda need some extra cash at the moment, so, I'm selling the McIntosh stuff and that will afford me the Scott amp and put a good chunk back in my pocket. I hope that doesn't come back to bite me in the ass.:scratch2:

Does anyone have a Mapleshade modded Scott amp or any thoughts on it? I'd like to hear what some tube experts have to say.

Cory

schwarcw
03-14-2010, 10:28 PM
I have several Scott units, one is a 222B. None of these are Mapleshade units. I have seen their advertising but never knew anybody who owned one. You should be very pleased with your unit.

PS What he is saying is that he has biased your new tubes. These are probably Chinese, maybe Russian. I think Mapleshade replaces the old caps, Selenium rectifier, maybe some resistors. The good restoration uses replacement caps and resistors with similiar sonics. That can be a little bit of an art form. They may be pretty good doing the renovation since they have been selling these units for years.

Good luck with your new Scott, I think you'll like it!:music: Now you need to get a matching stereo tuner, like the 350.:D

Carl

ke4mcl
03-14-2010, 11:00 PM
dont know who mapleshade is but $1300 can buy you a mcintosh tube amp on a good day or give you plenty of options for a restored fisher tube receiver or pilot tube receiver around here.

unless money is not an object, i'd read more, learn more, and then make a purchase.

Scuzzer
03-14-2010, 11:26 PM
I'd like to know how they're getting 26 watts per channel out of EL84's.

Sonance'84
03-14-2010, 11:59 PM
dont know who mapleshade is but $1300 can buy you a mcintosh tube amp on a good day or give you plenty of options for a restored fisher tube receiver or pilot tube receiver around here.

unless money is not an object, i'd read more, learn more, and then make a purchase.

So, you're saying that on a good day I can find a McIntosh tube amp/pre OR integrated, fully restored, needing NO WORK at all, for $1300? I'd like to see that. What model #'s are you referring to? I wouldn't own solid state Mac gear if that was the case. I waited a long time for "that" deal to come around and that's why I have the current combo. The Scott 222/299 is modified to be a giant killer(did you even click on the link and read?)...even if I did find a Mac tube amp/pre OR integrated for $1300, I don't think it would come close to how the modded Scott sounds, even if i sent it to Terry DeWick before using it.

Also, I am looking at the regular Scott amp($1175), NOT the high-power Scott($1375). The prices I've seen NOSvalves sell their Scott amps for are not that different from what I paid. I don't want a receiver either, I don't use the tuner. A Scott 222 or 299 integrated has to be equal, if not better than a Fisher or Pilot receiver. Especially when fully restored and modified. Mapleshade does the most extensive servicing on Scott amps than anyone else as far as I've read.

Sorry to come off defensive, but I've been doing research for over a year on tube gear, mainly vintage. Money is an object and I don't like to waste it. How long did you research before making your first tube purchase ke4mcl? Were you completely satisfied? You couldn't even give me a suggestion on which model Fisher or Pilot I might look at instead of the Scott 222C.

Anyways, back to the topic...

ke4mcl
03-15-2010, 01:04 AM
i own an mc225, an mc240, a c22, an sa1000, (2) fisher 400 preamps, and countless other pieces. i make less than 25k a year.

yes, you can find nice mac pieces for less than what they want for that scott. you need to search better and have cash in hand. the economy sucks. theres deals to be had.

its your cash. im merely suggesting more research may be in order.

Danimal
03-15-2010, 01:24 AM
i own an mc225, an mc240, a c22, an sa1000, (2) fisher 400 preamps, and countless other pieces. i make less than 25k a year.

yes, you can find nice mac pieces for less than what they want for that scott. you need to search better and have cash in hand. the economy sucks. theres deals to be had.

its your cash. im merely suggesting more research may be in order.

Do you do all the repair work yourself? I ask because some of us do not have the skills to restore a unit at the price range you refer to. Sometimes paying a premium for work that is already done is a great piece of mind to some of us that are "electronically challenged".

ke4mcl
03-15-2010, 01:53 AM
i fix 99% of my broken stuff myself. self taught by reading books and breaking things. i assure you i am no rocket scientist. not all was broken when i got it. most was via lots of wheeling and dealing. only one piece, the mc225 i actually paid asking price for.

there are deals to be had out there. yard sales, estate sales, craigslist, etc. put it to you this way. the mc240 i have i technically paid $10 for. i purchased an antique radio from somebody for $10. it turned out to be one of 7 known to exist. i traded the radio for a mcintosh serviced mc240 shipped to my door.

this why i say to the OP, do more research. its not the first time i hear of somebody showing up to an estate sale of a ticked off ex wife and buying a whole highend system for a few hundred bucks. yeah, its work and luck but when it pays out you'll be real happy.

Danimal
03-15-2010, 02:00 AM
Don't get me wrong... I understand deals are out there. I got a similar deal on my Rega P2. Free... my favorite price. I was just stating that some of us like the piece of mind of having something that is 100% operational.

Sonance'84
03-15-2010, 02:23 AM
I understand that deals are around too, that's how I came across my turntable, speakers and my McIntosh gear. I don't find tube amps though.

GordonW
03-15-2010, 08:16 AM
I'd like to know how they're getting 26 watts per channel out of EL84's.

:scratch2: Me too. 18-20 watts out of 7189s is plausible. Beyond that, you're taking the life of the tube into your own hands...

Regards,
Gordon.

dcgillespie
03-15-2010, 09:09 AM
Scott provided excellent and honest performance documentation for all of their gear. This group provides precious little, with the power output spec given being highly questionable. It reminds me of the way overstated specs given for the cheap stuff in the backs of catalogs back in the 50s and 60s. This comes down to what you want, and trusting this group to provide it by way of their performance description. I would surely research what others think who have laid down that kind of cash for equipment from this group.

jaymanaa
03-15-2010, 09:42 AM
I'd like to know how they're getting 26 watts per channel out of EL84's.

I'd also like to see/hear the MC circuit.:scratch2:

ducati_EL34
03-15-2010, 10:11 AM
dont know who mapleshade is but $1300 can buy you a mcintosh tube amp on a good day or give you plenty of options for a restored fisher tube receiver or pilot tube receiver around here.

unless money is not an object, i'd read more, learn more, and then make a purchase.

Not every town is like yours. Where I live, you only find junk at garage sales/estate sales. The days of finding tube gear, are long gone.

As for receivers, I would rather own a clean amp. I don't need all the added junk, of a receiver. Should FM improve around here, I would just buy a seperate tube tuner.

ke4mcl
03-15-2010, 10:15 AM
actually i was referring to AK barter town. theres some nice gear thats already been serviced that pops up here from trusted individuals.

bricktop
03-15-2010, 10:33 AM
I'd also like to see/hear the MC circuit.:scratch2:

With some Edcor transformers, you can make a unity-coupled amplifier for a fraction of the MCamp cost. I did it for probably $800 in parts (ball park) for a stereo amp. Of course, I got to spread it out over many paychecks too, which helps.

reggaenaut
03-15-2010, 10:38 AM
The days of find someone who does not know the value of a tube mac are OVER! Many years ago I bought a cheap ss integrated from a variety shop, but was not satisfied with the sound and returned it. The seller instead of giving me back my cash reached down under his counter and handed me this heavy Mac 240, which I unhesitantly received.:D

spartanmanor
03-15-2010, 10:39 AM
I will be interested in hearing your opinion. I have a 299D being worked on at NOS valves. I have also read a lot of good reviews on the Scott tube lineup.

kpaxfaq
03-15-2010, 11:53 AM
I will be interested in hearing your opinion. I have a 299D being worked on at NOS valves. I have also read a lot of good reviews on the Scott tube lineup.

X2, Will be looking forward to review/detailed pictures of their work. Scott made some nice looking units

Ballylongford
03-15-2010, 12:55 PM
Pm sent

Sonance'84
03-15-2010, 01:51 PM
I'd like to know how they're getting 26 watts per channel out of EL84's.

:scratch2: Me too. 18-20 watts out of 7189s is plausible. Beyond that, you're taking the life of the tube into your own hands...

Regards,
Gordon.

Here's a short comment I found that was stated by Pierre:

"By our rather stringent measurements, a stock 222C puts out 20-21 watts per channel. Our hot-rodded 222Cs put out 26 watts per channel. No audiophile should pay attention to any of these wattage numbers. Remember that the wattage rating of an amp is hopelessly irrelevant to music and does NOT correlate with how loud an amp can play. Why? Because the wattage rating measures only steady state power and there is no such thing as steady state music. Music consists of very low average power signals with millisecond-long transient peaks that jump up to at least 100 times the average music power. It’s exactly those peaks that contain the excitement of the music; it’s those peaks that define what the ear hears as loudness. The ability of an amp to reproduce those transient peaks is not correlated with its wattage rating and, in fact, requires an entirely different measurement which is never performed by labs or audio reviewers."

So, he's squeezing about 5-6 more watts per channel than a stock 222C. I have no idea about which tubes output what, so it doesn't confuse me yet. I know he says the EL84's awesome little tubes though. What is the MC circuit? He takes the bottom plate off and puts 2 wood planks across the bottom, so this inside will be easy to take pics of. Here's a link to some pics of Mapleshade modded 222's: http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl_sold.pl?intatube&1268606616 , http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?intatube&1273539021&/Scott-222-D-Stereo-Tube-Integr

And, yes, I will take a lot of pics and review the unit as soon as I get it and burn it in for a few days.

Cory

MLD277
03-15-2010, 02:19 PM
Hi,
I've never heard the Mapleshade mods but I recently purchased a Scott 299D with the stock 7591's and I am very impressed. It was rebuilt and sold to me by Mark Voigt of Providence, RI. He does Ebay business as "soundbug1".
After noticing that people are paying $300-500 for "as-is" units on Ebay, I went ahead and bought mine for $750 and couldn't be happier.
The 299D puts out 34/side. This is my first foray into tubes and I find myself constantly astonished by the black backgroud and level of detail.
See pic

Scuzzer
03-15-2010, 02:19 PM
I guess they use different watts than I'm used to reading about, probably some peak transient test judging by the rest of the blurb.

The 222C should be a great sounding unit and if the mods they do meet your needs then I would say it's money well spent. Looking forward to hearing your review and seeing some detailed pics!

jaymanaa
03-15-2010, 02:49 PM
Here's a short comment I found that was stated by Pierre:

"By our rather stringent measurements, a stock 222C puts out 20-21 watts per channel. Our hot-rodded 222Cs put out 26 watts per channel. No audiophile should pay attention to any of these wattage numbers. Remember that the wattage rating of an amp is hopelessly irrelevant to music and does NOT correlate with how loud an amp can play. Why? Because the wattage rating measures only steady state power and there is no such thing as steady state music. Music consists of very low average power signals with millisecond-long transient peaks that jump up to at least 100 times the average music power. Itís exactly those peaks that contain the excitement of the music; itís those peaks that define what the ear hears as loudness. The ability of an amp to reproduce those transient peaks is not correlated with its wattage rating and, in fact, requires an entirely different measurement which is never performed by labs or audio reviewers."

So, he's squeezing about 5-6 more watts per channel than a stock 222C. I have no idea about which tubes output what, so it doesn't confuse me yet. I know he says the EL84's awesome little tubes though. What is the MC circuit? He takes the bottom plate off and puts 2 wood planks across the bottom, do this inside will be easy to take pics of. Here's a link to some pics of Mapleshade modded 222's: http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl_sold.pl?intatube&1268606616 , http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?intatube&1273539021&/Scott-222-D-Stereo-Tube-Integr

And, yes, I will take a lot of pics and review the unit as soon as I get it and burn it in for a few days.

Cory

Moving coil phono. (sorry)
Is there any chance you have the "stuff" to measure the output power with?

Bluelobster
03-15-2010, 03:11 PM
Here's a short comment I found that was stated by Pierre:

"By our rather stringent measurements, a stock 222C puts out 20-21 watts per channel. Our hot-rodded 222Cs put out 26 watts per channel. No audiophile should pay attention to any of these wattage numbers. Remember that the wattage rating of an amp is hopelessly irrelevant to music and does NOT correlate with how loud an amp can play. Why? Because the wattage rating measures only steady state power and there is no such thing as steady state music. Music consists of very low average power signals with millisecond-long transient peaks that jump up to at least 100 times the average music power. Itís exactly those peaks that contain the excitement of the music; itís those peaks that define what the ear hears as loudness. The ability of an amp to reproduce those transient peaks is not correlated with its wattage rating and, in fact, requires an entirely different measurement which is never performed by labs or audio reviewers."

So, he's squeezing about 5-6 more watts per channel than a stock 222C. I have no idea about which tubes output what, so it doesn't confuse me yet. I know he says the EL84's awesome little tubes though. What is the MC circuit? He takes the bottom plate off and puts 2 wood planks across the bottom, do this inside will be easy to take pics of. Here's a link to some pics of Mapleshade modded 222's: http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl_sold.pl?intatube&1268606616 , http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?intatube&1273539021&/Scott-222-D-Stereo-Tube-Integr

And, yes, I will take a lot of pics and review the unit as soon as I get it and burn it in for a few days.

Cory

If you are looking for a Scott unit ready to go, and it certainly seems like you put in the time researching, you got just what you wanted and won't be disappointed. Mapleshade (Pierre) knows what he's doing and will stand by his work.
The few more watts output are coming from running Russian 7189 replacement a little hotter. These are a good tube with very nice sonics. Also I believe he massages the power supply a bit to allow it to keep up with the current demand during transient peaks.
Good luck, I think you made a wise and "frugal" choice.

jaymanaa
03-15-2010, 03:39 PM
If you are looking for a Scott unit ready to go, and it certainly seems like you put in the time researching, you got just what you wanted and won't be disappointed. Mapleshade (Pierre) knows what he's doing and will stand by his work.
The few more watts output are coming from running Russian 7189 replacement a little hotter. These are a good tube with very nice sonics. Also I believe he massages the power supply a bit to allow it to keep up with the current demand during transient peaks.
Good luck, I think you made a wise and "frugal" choice.

Anyone have the Russian number for these tubes? I guess you would want to rebias to do any tube rolling.

jaymanaa
03-15-2010, 03:41 PM
This must be it. (no afill)

http://www.tubeman.com/item576.htm

Bluelobster
03-15-2010, 03:52 PM
This must be it. (no afill)

http://www.tubeman.com/item576.htm

You got it Jay! I think Jim McShane is carrying these now.

jaymanaa
03-15-2010, 03:54 PM
I investigated a bit further and it seems like there are a couple variations (letters behind the numbers). I'm going to try some out.:yes:

ampsandsound
03-15-2010, 04:18 PM
How about this.... Congrats... you will love it. There is always better and different... but your choice sounds great.

Glassweights
03-15-2010, 04:21 PM
I have seen numbers like $4-500 for refurbishing tube amps.

That would be plus shipping both ways, plus the cost of a nice condition amp.

I would have to throw in a premium for these guys mods.

Add all that together with the fact that they are right, Scotts are great sounding amps to start, and they they do a Magnavox on it. (strip it down is all I mean)

I think it is very likely to be amazing!

I have this Scott 222c and everyone who listens to it comments on how good it sounds. I got it on the cheap, lettering not great, no box, did all the work myself even though it did in fact play to begin with. Spent a ton of time researching, learning , ordering parts, installing them.

Mine has all the original circuit layout, no no way it is as pure as this one will be.

Makes me wonder about their circuit, what sort of voltages they are running.

And it makes me wonder how much better my amp might sound if I figured out how to bias the non-matched Russian tubes!

Looking forward to the review on your new amp!

Oh, it is worth mentioning that every one of my tube amps is different. That is why I can't bring myself to sell any of them.

Dan.

Patrice B
03-15-2010, 04:37 PM
Just curious: the pics showed the underneath of the Mapleshade amps without cover... I know in my case that if I remove the bottom plate on my LK-72, I hear a lot of unwanted noise.

I could even "play" the amp by putting my hand near the components to modify the hum (like a cheap theremin!).

Patrice

Mike Stehr
03-16-2010, 08:19 PM
This is just my honest opinion and nobody should take offense...but the parts used in the rebuild does not seem to justify the cost.

Maybe that's some real rare old growth Maple or sumthin'...


http://pic6.audiogon.com/i/c/f/1268354568.jpg

Andyman
03-16-2010, 08:37 PM
Mapleshade has always seemed a bit pricey to me and also given to a certain amount of audiophile salesmanship, for lack of a better term; that bit about oscilloscope matching the new EL-84s was about par for the course.

I guess I'm spoiled here in SE MI where there seems to be a stunning tube tech on every other corner, but $1300 seems high to me. I'm pretty sure a 222 could be sourced and shipped up to Craig at NOSValves and gone through for quite a bit less than the $1300 Mapleshade is asking.

I'd also beware of the "New" tube pitch; there's many of us listening to decades old tubes that sound great.,. like I am right now.

Destructor
03-17-2010, 07:57 AM
They look like Xicon coupling caps.

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 12:27 PM
Moving coil phono. (sorry)
Is there any chance you have the "stuff" to measure the output power with?

No, I don't have any testing equipment. Haven't got that far yet.

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 12:30 PM
Just curious: the pics showed the underneath of the Mapleshade amps without cover... I know in my case that if I remove the bottom plate on my LK-72, I hear a lot of unwanted noise.

I could even "play" the amp by putting my hand near the components to modify the hum (like a cheap theremin!).

Patrice
This is a comment about from Pierre...

"7. The chassis' aluminum bottom plate is removed and replaced with two much stiffer maple rails, thereby greatly improving bass "punch"
and upper frequency clarity (due to both the elimination of bottom plate vibrations and the very substantial bottom plate eddy current losses)."

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 12:40 PM
Mapleshade has always seemed a bit pricey to me and also given to a certain amount of audiophile salesmanship, for lack of a better term; that bit about oscilloscope matching the new EL-84s was about par for the course.

I guess I'm spoiled here in SE MI where there seems to be a stunning tube tech on every other corner, but $1300 seems high to me. I'm pretty sure a 222 could be sourced and shipped up to Craig at NOSValves and gone through for quite a bit less than the $1300 Mapleshade is asking.

I'd also beware of the "New" tube pitch; there's many of us listening to decades old tubes that sound great.,. like I am right now.

Well, I know he does a more extensive job and different than NOSValves. Not saying the latter doesn't sound amazing, just that the Mapleshade will be different from that one. I don't think NOSValves uses a passive preamp either.

On the tubes...I can't find much about which type he uses except these 2 statements...

Pierre wrote:
"1. Tube complement: ECC83s are just European 12AX7s, so there’s
really 4 12AX7s on board the Scott.."

and these are actual tubes in a Mapleshade Scott 222:

"The tube lineup consists of 1 NOS HH Scott 5AR4, 4 New Electro Harmonix EL84, 2 New Sovtek 12AX7, 1 Raytheon 12AX7, 1 GE 12AX7 and 2 NOS 6U8A... all tested as new by Mapleshade."

I don't know how old or new any of these tubes are, but with the very careful matching they do, I probably won't be rolling any time soon. I will have to listen and enjoy first, as I have never listened to a tube amp...except at concerts.

Cory

Les Lammers
03-17-2010, 12:41 PM
Hi,
I've never heard the Mapleshade mods but I recently purchased a Scott 299D with the stock 7591's and I am very impressed. It was rebuilt and sold to me by Mark Voigt of Providence, RI. He does Ebay business as "soundbug1".
After noticing that people are paying $300-500 for "as-is" units on Ebay, I went ahead and bought mine for $750 and couldn't be happier.
The 299D puts out 34/side. This is my first foray into tubes and I find myself constantly astonished by the black backgroud and level of detail.
See pic

I have seen Mark's amps on e*ay too and unless I were skilled at repairs I would get a restored unit. All old gear needs to be restored B4 it is put into daily use. Getting something 'working' is not the same thing. :yes:

Regarding the Mapleshade...you can send it back if it is not your cup 'o tea.
Sounds like a no lose, except for shipping, deal to me. Let us know how you like it. :thmbsp:

Les Lammers
03-17-2010, 12:48 PM
The days of find someone who does not know the value of a tube mac are OVER! Many years ago I bought a cheap ss integrated from a variety shop, but was not satisfied with the sound and returned it. The seller instead of giving me back my cash reached down under his counter and handed me this heavy Mac 240, which I unhesitantly received.:D

Yes, those days are as common as a winning lotto ticket. The internet has pretty much leveled the playing field. :thmbsp: when it does happen. :yes:

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 12:58 PM
I have seen Mark's amps on e*ay too and unless I were skilled at repairs I would get a restored unit. All old gear needs to be restored B4 it is put into daily use. Getting something 'working' is not the same thing. :yes:

Regarding the Mapleshade...you can send it back if it is not your cup 'o tea.
Sounds like a no lose, except for shipping, deal to me. Let us know how you like it. :thmbsp:

I'm just hoping that the 222c will play at the volume levels I want. I want to FEEL the heartbeat on "Dark Side of the Moon" like I do with the MC2105. My speakers are 98db (8ohms) with new crossovers.

Cory

Les Lammers
03-17-2010, 01:09 PM
Is this your first tube amp? It will be different than the Big Mac.

zenith2134
03-17-2010, 01:10 PM
If your speakers are 98dB sensitive with 1w at 1m, I doubt you'll need more power than the Scott can deliver. What size is the room?

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 01:57 PM
Is this your first tube amp? It will be different than the Big Mac.

If your speakers are 98dB sensitive with 1w at 1m, I doubt you'll need more power than the Scott can deliver. What size is the room?

Hahaha...Bic Mac! Yep, it's my first tube amp. My room right now is 12x13 with vaulted ceiling, but I'm moving soon and would like to find a house with a little bit bigger room...but it might not have a vaulted ceiling. Here are a few specs for my speakers:

FREQUENCY RESPONSE - 32Hz-20kHz(+-)3dB
POWER HANDLING - 100 watts maximum continuous (500 watts peak)
SENSITIVITY - 98dB @ 1watt/1meter
NOMINAL IMPEDANCE - 8 ohms

Pierre(@ Mapleshade) was saying that I wont ever tap into the class B power with these speakers, but I'll have no way of knowing. It runs in class AB1 from what I've read. I'll just have to actually hear it with my speakers I guess.

Cory

Les Lammers
03-17-2010, 02:21 PM
Yeah Big Mac...hot dog...just let us know what you think. :thmbsp:

"The tube lineup consists of 1 NOS HH Scott 5AR4, 4 New Electro Harmonix EL84, 2 New Sovtek 12AX7, 1 Raytheon 12AX7, 1 GE 12AX7 and 2 NOS 6U8A... all tested as new by Mapleshade."

I don't know how old or new any of these tubes are, but with the very careful matching they do, I probably won't be rolling any time soon. I will have to listen and enjoy first, as I have never listened to a tube amp...except at concerts.

2 of the 12ax7's are for the phono stage...probably Sovtek 12ax7 LPS's and they are pretty good. Don't change anything until you decide to keep the amp...and rolling tubes will not change your decision.

gogofast
03-17-2010, 03:08 PM
sounds like you've done a good amount of research, and we should be thankful for you sharing your purchase and letting us know that there's another option out there.

my only concern, if i was to purchase this amp, would be - with such premium upgrades (specially not coming from parts involved but purely labor) counted toward the final price, my resale value might not be great. i don't know about you, but i can't stay with same setup for more than six months :D (luckily i don't have this kind of lack of commitment issue in my marriage).:D

audiodon
03-17-2010, 03:53 PM
I believe the original poster to be describing a practical purchase to a bunch of do-it-yourselfers - not an easy audience. Many of us wish we could get that for stuff we've struggled with, learned from, and had fun with.
I wish the original poster the best and I hope you're happy with your purchase.

perchdog
03-17-2010, 04:00 PM
:scratch2: Me too. 18-20 watts out of 7189s is plausible. Beyond that, you're taking the life of the tube into your own hands...

Regards,
Gordon.

Isn't the first generation Fisher X-202 rated at 25 watts per channel. That amp uses EL84's

gigbyt
03-17-2010, 05:32 PM
As far as the scott's 22 watts being enough, iv'e heard a pair of forte's
being powered by a 10 watt magnavox console amp (el84) and the bass was
astonishing,/ powerful and tight! this was in a small room about 12 feet by 9 feet. I think you'll be happy with the scott's power output and those klipsch speakers.:music:

Andyman
03-17-2010, 05:41 PM
On the tubes...I can't find much about which type he uses except these 2 statements...

Pierre wrote:
"1. Tube complement: ECC83s are just European 12AX7s, so thereís
really 4 12AX7s on board the Scott.."

and these are actual tubes in a Mapleshade Scott 222:

"The tube lineup consists of 1 NOS HH Scott 5AR4, 4 New Electro Harmonix EL84, 2 New Sovtek 12AX7, 1 Raytheon 12AX7, 1 GE 12AX7 and 2 NOS 6U8A... all tested as new by Mapleshade."

I don't know how old or new any of these tubes are, but with the very careful matching they do, I probably won't be rolling any time soon. I will have to listen and enjoy first, as I have never listened to a tube amp...except at concerts.

Cory

OK a couple quick points.

1) Anybody who's been into tubes for more that 20 seconds knows that ECC83 is the European designation for the 12AX7. And they also know that many folks prefer the European tubes, Mullards, Telefunkens, Siemens, Amperex Bugle Boys, to domestic makes in quite a few cases.

2) The "matching" of 3 different branded tubes is interesting to me at the very least. I don't quite understand how you can match tubes that aren't of the same manufacture, unless they actually ARE the same manufacture, ie Mullard badging tubes for Eico, Heath or Webcor. While they may all "test" close, for $1300,I'd expect them to find me 4 12AX7s from the same manufacturer that match up.

3) What's the deal with the ECC83s? Did he pull them and stick those Sovteks in??? If so, most tube guys I know wouldn't view that as an upgrade at all.

I've seen the Mapleshade catalogs and while they have some interesting stuff, I find the prices to almost as inflated as the advertising copy they use, but they aren't the only ones to "wax poetic" about their wares. That quote about the use of the maple slats on the bottom fits right in.

Your quote "I want to FEEL the heartbeat on "Dark Side of the Moon" like I do with the MC2105" may be a challenge for the Scott, as the EL84s are known for their sweet midrange rather than for their bottom end.

I'd dig around a bit more and let this thread run a while to see who else chimes in before you jump into anything. :yes:

bricktop
03-17-2010, 05:46 PM
Like Andy said, I'd definitely expect a bit more from a $1300 222C.

Sam Cogley
03-17-2010, 05:51 PM
Isn't the first generation Fisher X-202 rated at 25 watts per channel. That amp uses EL84's

Fisher wasn't exactly known for being nice to tubes.

JonL
03-17-2010, 06:00 PM
My take on the 12AX7 types they've chosen is that the brands and types are selected for sonics in the particular stages of the amp they are used. They're probably matched either by section or by whole tube where it's important for channel balance or PP driver, etc. I wouldn't doubt that they get a great sounding amp by carefully selecting tubes that way in addition to the usual upgrades.

Andyman
03-17-2010, 07:48 PM
My take on the 12AX7 types they've chosen is that the brands and types are selected for sonics in the particular stages of the amp they are used. They're probably matched either by section or by whole tube where it's important for channel balance or PP driver, etc. I wouldn't doubt that they get a great sounding amp by carefully selecting tubes that way in addition to the usual upgrades.

Interesting, as most folks I know probably wouldn't use Sovteks, Raytheons or GEs in a top shelf amp, if for no other reason than they simply lack the sex appeal of Telefunkens or Mullards.

Given Mapleshade's flair, I'd almost expect them to have some high falutin' Euro tubes in there. :scratch2:

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 08:44 PM
OK a couple quick points.

1) Anybody who's been into tubes for more that 20 seconds knows that ECC83 is the European designation for the 12AX7. And they also know that many folks prefer the European tubes, Mullards, Telefunkens, Siemens, Amperex Bugle Boys, to domestic makes in quite a few cases.

2) The "matching" of 3 different branded tubes is interesting to me at the very least. I don't quite understand how you can match tubes that aren't of the same manufacture, unless they actually ARE the same manufacture, ie Mullard badging tubes for Eico, Heath or Webcor. While they may all "test" close, for $1300,I'd expect them to find me 4 12AX7s from the same manufacturer that match up.

3) What's the deal with the ECC83s? Did he pull them and stick those Sovteks in??? If so, most tube guys I know wouldn't view that as an upgrade at all.

I've seen the Mapleshade catalogs and while they have some interesting stuff, I find the prices to almost as inflated as the advertising copy they use, but they aren't the only ones to "wax poetic" about their wares. That quote about the use of the maple slats on the bottom fits right in.

Interesting, as most folks I know probably wouldn't use Sovteks, Raytheons or GEs in a top shelf amp, if for no other reason than they simply lack the sex appeal of Telefunkens or Mullards.

Given Mapleshade's flair, I'd almost expect them to have some high falutin' Euro tubes in there. :scratch2:


1) I was just stating what Pierre said about using ECC83's. I wasn't trying to educate anyone on the tubes.

2) This I already posted, but here it is again...from Pierre: "We replace the original 7189 output tubes with a carefully matched, substantially cleaner-sounding set of new EL-84s--and then match carefully selected driver tubes to the output tubes in such a way as to minimize distortion, using in-circuit oscilloscope waveform analysis (note that tube tester matching is completely inadequate to achieve optimum sonics from tubes)."

and

"Output tube life should be 3 years or more for an amp that’s played every evening. The rest of the tubes should be good for well over 5 years. None of the tubes are exotic, rare or expensive. We always have complete complements of tubes on hand (as well as replacement parts for every component of the amp). If you use our tubes-- which we match using in-circuit oscilloscope measurements (not the much-less-stringent tube tester)--you will not need to send in the amp for re-biasing. None of the tubes on the Scott cost more than $15 when sourced from us."

3) That tube compliment with no ECC83's was from a unit I found on audiogon and those were the particular tubes that came in HIS own Mapleshade resto-modded amp. That shows that they(Mapleshade) don't try and come up with the same match for every amp...each amp gets a uniquely matched set of tubes, specific to itself.

I don't know what you mean about flair, but I think they take a look at things in a different way than others. They say they are purists...maybe not in the form of keeping the originality of a rebuilt/modified product, but in the form of getting their product to reproduce music in your home and have it sound just as it did in the studio. At least that's their intent. I don't find their prices as inflated as other name brands. And I already ordered it...it's being made as we speak...if I don't like it, I can send it back no questions asked.

Cory

Andyman
03-17-2010, 09:12 PM
3) That tube compliment with no ECC83's was from a unit I found on audiogon and those were the particular tubes that came in HIS own Mapleshade resto-modded amp. That shows that they(Mapleshade) don't try and come up with the same match for every amp...each amp gets a uniquely matched set to tubes, specific that itself. Here it is again...

""7. The chassis' aluminum bottom plate is removed and replaced with two much stiffer maple rails, thereby greatly improving bass "punch"
and upper frequency clarity (due to both the elimination of bottom plate vibrations and the very substantial bottom plate eddy current losses)."

I don't know what you mean about flair, but I think they take a look at things in a different way than others. They say they are purists...maybe not in the form of keeping the originality of a rebuilt/modified product, but in the form of getting their product to reproduce music in your home and have it sound just as it did in the studio. At least that's their intent. I don't find their prices as inflated as other name brands. And I already ordered it...it's being made as we speak...if I don't like it, I can send it back no questions asked.

Cory

I guess we just have different takes on this.

To me Mapleshade seems to be given to excess and hyperbole with a bit of techno-babble tossed in to legitimize their claims. Your quote below about the wooden slats on the amps bottom is a perfect example. That's what I'm politely alluding to as "flair"

""7. The chassis' aluminum bottom plate is removed and replaced with two much stiffer maple rails, thereby greatly improving bass "punch"
and upper frequency clarity (due to both the elimination of bottom plate vibrations and the very substantial bottom plate eddy current losses)."

I wouldn't single them out as purists either, as one thing I've learned in this hobby is that there are a great many folks tirelessly searching for better sound. I could rattle off dozens of names of folks who have tweaked, rolled, flipped, and designed amps, speakers, turntable, etc, etc, all in order to attain what they feel is the sound they desire. And I would expect the same from any vendor.

Let us know how your amp sounds; I hope you like it. It would be interesting to see how it stacks up to a redone stock 222C too as there are a couple that look well done right now online.

Keep us posted once it arrives!!

bricktop
03-17-2010, 09:55 PM
Don't forget that, because all the 12AX7/ECC83s are in a series filament string, they should all be of the same brand and type to make sure that the filament voltage is balanced across the tubes and there are no start-up surges that might kill one of them. If it doesn't arrive this way, you may want to switch a new set in there.

larryderouin
03-17-2010, 10:47 PM
DAMN! And I live 20 minutes from these guys for 28 years and didn't even know about them. WAY out of my league $$$$ wise. but nice to know I can take a 20 minute ride and probably get what I need if they do will calls.

Larry

Sonance'84
03-17-2010, 10:59 PM
I guess we just have different takes on this.

To me Mapleshade seems to be given to excess and hyperbole with a bit of techno-babble tossed in to legitimize their claims. Your quote below about the wooden slats on the amps bottom is a perfect example. That's what I'm politely alluding to as "flair"

""7. The chassis' aluminum bottom plate is removed and replaced with two much stiffer maple rails, thereby greatly improving bass "punch"
and upper frequency clarity (due to both the elimination of bottom plate vibrations and the very substantial bottom plate eddy current losses)."

I wouldn't single them out as purists either, as one thing I've learned in this hobby is that there are a great many folks tirelessly searching for better sound. I could rattle off dozens of names of folks who have tweaked, rolled, flipped, and designed amps, speakers, turntable, etc, etc, all in order to attain what they feel is the sound they desire. And I would expect the same from any vendor.

Let us know how your amp sounds; I hope you like it. It would be interesting to see how it stacks up to a redone stock 222C too as there are a couple that look well done right now online.

Keep us posted once it arrives!!

Just for the books, that wasn't my quote, but one said by Pierre of Mapleshade. And how can you prove that what he is saying isn't true? How is that flair when they claim better sound from the aluminum plate being removed??...NOT from wooden slats being added? Either way, I would also like to hear a stock 222C against theirs, for reference purposes at least...side by side, on the same system. :yes: I would expect most vendors to produce specs on paper and CLAIM it is the purest audio component possible. It all comes down to ones own ears in the end.

Les Lammers
03-18-2010, 04:23 AM
Don't forget that, because all the 12AX7/ECC83s are in a series filament string, they should all be of the same brand and type to make sure that the filament voltage is balanced across the tubes and there are no start-up surges that might kill one of them. If it doesn't arrive this way, you may want to switch a new set in there.

Huh? :scratch2:

Sonance,

You may want to keep your Mac, even if it costs a little credit card interest, until you get the new amp and make a decision. Just because....

Les Lammers
03-18-2010, 04:29 AM
Just for the books, that wasn't my quote, but one said by Pierre of Mapleshade. And how can you prove that what he is saying isn't true? How is that flair when they claim better sound from the aluminum plate being removed??...NOT from wooden slats being added? Either way, I would also like to hear a stock 222C against theirs, for reference purposes at least...side by side, on the same system. :yes: I would expect most vendors to produce specs on paper and CLAIM it is the purest audio component possible. It all comes down to ones own ears in the end.

Exactly. However, *I* would still like to have the bottom cover for the amp.

The asking price for a tube integrated with a good phono stage is not at all unreasonable.

Ty_Bower
03-18-2010, 08:46 AM
Does Mapleshade ship their custom power cords with the amp, or does that cost extra?

http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MK2PC-PL

Scuzzer
03-18-2010, 08:57 AM
No, the power chords are supplied by the amp. You just have to select the right music. http://fc02.deviantart.net/images3/i/2004/11/3/e/Rim_Shot_emoticon.gif

jaymanaa
03-18-2010, 09:58 AM
Does Mapleshade ship their custom power cords with the amp, or does that cost extra?

http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MK2PC-PL

Well, I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but.................

I swear my local hardware store has those ends.

Sonance'84
03-18-2010, 11:11 AM
Does Mapleshade ship their custom power cords with the amp, or does that cost extra?

http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MK2PC-PL

Nope, it doesn't come with a Clearview power cord, but it should...they have that listed as upgrades, along with a few other things like: an N.O.S. Chatham Mil Spec Rectifier tube, ultra low noise stepped attenuater, a tube anchor kit just to name a few. All of these extras can be done after the fact. I can't afford any extra upgrades yet though. Pierre said the adding some of their brass footers is the first upgrade he would do.

Sonance'84
03-18-2010, 11:17 AM
Sonance,

You may want to keep your Mac, even if it costs a little credit card interest, until you get the new amp and make a decision. Just because....

Yeah, I'm gonna hang on to my Mac amp/pre until I hear this Scott first. I have not had any phone calls on them anyways...I have the price kinda high, and I'm lowering it every few days. I like the combo, just looking for something better/different to listen to. I would like to keep them both, but I can't really afford it at this point. It's getting harder to find Mac components in this condition, making it a hard decision.

NOSValves
03-18-2010, 11:42 AM
Mapleshade......Well I have RE-rebuilt about 10 of them so far.

The Mapleshade modification is a breeze and the parts count installed is about 10.... my rebuilds consist of about 40 components replaced or added. I could do a mapleshade mod for about $150 less then my deluxe rebuild. But I'd really prefer to not perform the butcher job. It definitely sounds different much more like a modern HiFi tube amp like a Jolida, Cayin or similar. The modification basically removes all the Scott from the Scott. IMHO if you want a modern sounding tube amp why not just buy a modern tube amp??

Scuzzer
03-18-2010, 12:38 PM
Hey NOSValves, any thoughts on the 26 watt output?

NOSValves
03-18-2010, 01:09 PM
Under true acceptable testing standards I'd say its hogwash...

Andyman
03-18-2010, 03:12 PM
Well, I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but.................

I swear my local hardware store has those ends.

Actually, I think they were standard on coffee pots circa 1942....

But then again, they weren't connected to Double Helix "power conductors", ie wires, either.

Yep, that's "flair" :lmao:

BTW, in the bold, the quote of the day so far:


It definitely sounds different much more like a modern HiFi tube amp like a Jolida, Cayin or similar. The modification basically removes all the Scott from the Scott. IMHO if you want a modern sounding tube amp why not just buy a modern tube amp??

audiodon
03-18-2010, 03:35 PM
The first Fisher receiver I got (a 400) had been given the AudioClassics treatment by Richard Modafferi. It also had a "less is more" restoration that left all can caps and most ero-foil couplers in place. Got a banana peel sticker near the replaced 1000V 35uf dual doubling caps though:thmbsp:

Mark W.
03-18-2010, 03:39 PM
After reading this I think I am unbelievably happy with my H.H. Scott 233 which hasn't been touched since I bought it almost 3 years ago. granted I don't run it every night. And as Craig told me when I got it there are a number of things I should do it before I start running it every night. But for the $250.00 + shp I got for off Audiogon I'm pretty sure I could do any work it needs or could use twice for the cost of the one being discussed here.

But for now a better 5ar4 is about all I'm planning.


Since mine is in the factory wood case I think the wood thing is covered.

Sonance'84
03-18-2010, 03:57 PM
IMHO if you want a modern sounding tube amp why not just buy a modern tube amp??


BTW, in the bold, the quote of the day so far:

I'm just looking for the best sounding tube amp in this price range, be it old or new...but I do prefer vintage to new. Sorry my choice isn't what yours would be. I like the idea of the passive preamp as well. I wish there were someone with a stock 222C and an NOSValves unit in my city. I have no base to judge the Mapleshade unit once I get it. I'm sure the NOSValves version sounds amazing too, and maybe I'll send this one back and get one done by you if this Mapleshade unit doesn't work out. But how am I supposed to find which sound I am looking for until I actually have a tube amp to listen to? I don't just have a bunch of friends with tubes...or even solid-state for that matter. I can't listen to different types before I buy. Which is where the 30-day get my money back part comes in.

FalconEddy
03-18-2010, 04:22 PM
Getting what you've paid for isn't necessarily what may please you.

The word 'pure-ist' can get plugged into statements as needed to suit a particular listeners requirements.

Provided the preamp and output tubes aren't ready for the trashcan, I can completely change the overall sound presentation of a Scott tube amp by changing four capacitors and state it's like a veil has been lifted off the sound. It would cost about $25-$50 and take about 30 minutes, tops.

Craig Ostby has most likely rebuilt more Scott tube amps than anyone that visits this forum. Although he and I don't always agree on everything, he knows how to rebuild vintage amps, and he knows it very well.

. . Falcon

Patrice B
03-18-2010, 05:02 PM
My Scott LK-72 did cost me 450 canadian dollars and it was unmolested.

Then, I shipped it to a tech thinking it should do a good job (wasn't the case). Two times: total about 350 CAD. It was now 800 CAD...

Not satisfied, another tech that did a basic job to make it work without distortion: 150 CAD. We're at 950 CAD.

After that, I took the plunge and bought the components to restore it myself (with the invaluable help of this forum...), maybe around 200 CAD. Add to this a backup set of EH7591A's and it sums around 1300 CAD...

So, for the price of Mapleshade and with a lot of bad decisions I made (remember, three techs, around 500 CAD...!), I'm now at an equivalent price. And with a darn good sounding amp I must add!

Remove bad decisions: 1300 minus 500 = 800 CAD. Remove the backup set of power tubes: 700 CAD. Also take in consideration that the amp came with only NOS tubes (the Daystrom's power set is a little tired but is ok for now).

I know that you want a troublefree amp out of the box but I'm sure that a lot of guys on this forum could have done a really good sounding amp (at your liking) for a lot less than 1300 USD total...

Just my opinion...

jaymanaa
03-18-2010, 05:10 PM
Actually, I think they were standard on coffee pots circa 1942....

:

Yes! That's where I've seen that plug before!:yes: Here's my take; If a vendor trys to get into my pocket on one thing, how do I know that all their stuff isn't ridiculously priced. Can that cord have 10 dollars worth of parts in it?:scratch2:

gigbyt
03-18-2010, 05:35 PM
i've been around several different audio forums for a few years now and have read many peoples reviews of Nosvalved tube amps and have never read a bad one. i have never read of any user reviews of a Mapleshade modded tube amp EVER, not saying there arent any out there but i just havent come across anyone ever recomending them as a source for good tube repair work.
I have read tons of recomendations for Nosvalves being the place to go for
tube amp repair work.
Anyone else have this same experience?.

NOSValves
03-18-2010, 06:15 PM
I'm just looking for the best sounding tube amp in this price range, be it old or new...but I do prefer vintage to new. Sorry my choice isn't what yours would be. I like the idea of the passive preamp as well. I wish there were someone with a stock 222C and an NOSValves unit in my city. I have no base to judge the Mapleshade unit once I get it. I'm sure the NOSValves version sounds amazing too, and maybe I'll send this one back and get one done by you if this Mapleshade unit doesn't work out. But how am I supposed to find which sound I am looking for until I actually have a tube amp to listen to? I don't just have a bunch of friends with tubes...or even solid-state for that matter. I can't listen to different types before I buy. Which is where the 30-day get my money back part comes in.

That is why I started that statement with IMHO... its my opinion and I do not expect it to be your opinion. Relax and enjoy I hope it works out for you. They don't sound bad by any means. They just do not sound anything like a Scott.

Andyman
03-18-2010, 06:27 PM
I'm just looking for the best sounding tube amp in this price range, be it old or new...but I do prefer vintage to new. Sorry my choice isn't what yours would be.

Absolutely, no need to be sorry at all. It's not important at all what sounds good to me, it's what sounds good to you that counts.

But how am I supposed to find which sound I am looking for until I actually have a tube amp to listen to? I don't just have a bunch of friends with tubes...or even solid-state for that matter.

I guess this is the point I'm trying to make; I just think you may have jumped into this at the wrong point and that the $1300 Mapleshade doesn't represent the best 1st step. It might be appropriate after you've come to some consensus on what you want in an amp, but I'd recommend a smaller comittment for a 1st step.


I can't listen to different types before I buy. Which is where the 30-day get my money back part comes in.

I'd take advantage of that 30 day guarantee for sure if I were you. If this amp doesn't totally blow you away; I'd ship it back and try another. There's a couple nice looking 222C online right now in the $400-600 range that I would personally select as a starting point, or you could try an un-restored one and ship it off to Craig if it has issues.

We're just trying to help, not criticize, and I'm just a little leery of the value of the Mapleshade product as I find most of their stuff priced well into the top end of the spectrum. It's too bad you're way out in Vegas; if you came to AKFest this year, we'd show you some tube amps, for sure ......:yes:

So, after all this, when are you expecting delivery????

jaymanaa
03-18-2010, 06:30 PM
We're just trying to help, not criticize, and I'm just a little leery of the value of the Mapleshade product as I find most of their stuff priced well into the top end of the spectrum.

????

Well said.

kpaxfaq
03-18-2010, 07:54 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/HH-SCOTT-222-REFURBISHED-w-Mullard-Tubes_W0QQitemZ110501738318QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVint age_Electronics_R2?hash=item19ba6ab74e

Not affiliated with this at all just thought this is a much better price....

kymers
03-18-2010, 08:55 PM
Yes! That's where I've seen that plug before!:yes: Here's my take; If a vendor trys to get into my pocket on one thing, how do I know that all their stuff isn't ridiculously priced. Can that cord have 10 dollars worth of parts in it?:scratch2:

That to me looks like an obsolete,"live front" male cord end, screw terminals on the front, covered by a thin piece of cardboard.:nono:

As an electritian I have used many cord ends and that would never pass inspection. There are many superior ends, including hospital grade, to be had for short money in comparison. Hubbell comes to mind.

That $285 power cord seems to be a highly overpriced p.o.s. more audio voodoo! Just my opinion.

drknstrmyknight
03-18-2010, 10:45 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/HH-SCOTT-222-REFURBISHED-w-Mullard-Tubes_W0QQitemZ110501738318QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVint age_Electronics_R2?hash=item19ba6ab74e

Not affiliated with this at all just thought this is a much better price....

check completed listings for a Mapleshade that didn't sell

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 12:23 AM
check completed listings for a Mapleshade that didn't sell

I don't get what you're saying here?


On another note, this seems like a pretty damning thread for Mapleshade.

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 12:32 AM
So, after all this, when are you expecting delivery????

Hopefully within 3 weeks. I ordered it last Friday and he said 3-4 weeks.

becketma
03-19-2010, 12:49 AM
Hope you love your new unit.

This unit has a 12AX7 for bass and treble, plus two for the phono stage. The two in the phono section will probably sound better if they are the same. Different ones in the tine control make perfect sense! It sounds as if they've chosen 12AX7s based upon their performance.

I figure the price of research has to be passed along--retail price carries some of the cost to trick a unit out so that there is their standard way to rebuild one.

I've played around with a few different Mullard GZ34 in my Scott units. I prefer different ones with different tubes sets.

I made my own power cord with DIY cable and tried a few different AC plugs. the ones from Home Depot seem to work the same as ones from Parts Connection and one I took off a high priced AC cord.

I haven't spun any LPs thru my units yet. One of them runs for about 6 hours a day with my rebuilt Dynaco FM-3.

Since I ordered some new Hendix albums, I'll be tryin out the phono section soon.

I've got a variety of 12AX7s to play with including some Siemans E283CC.

I run my Scott into 89db Paradigm Titans, 6-8 ohms in my open kitchen. Try to get the volume close to 12 just doesn't work--way too loud!

Best from Tucson
Bob

drknstrmyknight
03-19-2010, 01:05 AM
check completed listings for a Mapleshade that didn't sell

Check Ebay's completed listings for a Mapeshade Scott ("factory fresh") that didn't sell for $1050. It's an indication of retained value.

andy
03-19-2010, 01:46 AM
It doesn't make sense that the metal bottom would have such a detrimental effect on the sound, but the metal chassis wouldn't. I also don't like the idea of running it without a bottom cover. It would be easy to forget and get a nasty surprise if you ever try to pick it up while it's on. At the very least, I would want to have a full bottom cover that would prevent a potentially lethal accident.

Patrice B
03-19-2010, 05:28 AM
There's also a 222C with cabinet now on that auction site... with a spare of 6BQ5's.

Looks wonderful!

Glassweights
03-19-2010, 07:21 AM
http://cgi.ebay.com/HH-SCOTT-222-REFURBISHED-w-Mullard-Tubes_W0QQitemZ110501738318QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVint age_Electronics_R2?hash=item19ba6ab74e

Not affiliated with this at all just thought this is a much better price....

Is that true what he says about it being self biasing?

Dan

Patrice B
03-19-2010, 07:43 AM
Is that true what he says about it being self biasing?

Dan

There looks to be two DC balance pots. Correct me someone if I'm wrong but I think it is fixed bias without a way (pots?) to adjust bias, similar to my LK-72A...

Patrice

sheltie dave
03-19-2010, 08:18 AM
There is a very good safety reason for retaining a complete bottom cover, and these units sound great with the original cover installed.

These Scotts are very enjoyable and musical units when rebuilt correctly, Sonance. Hope you enjoy yours as much as I have my units!

ducati_EL34
03-19-2010, 09:01 AM
It doesn't make sense that the metal bottom would have such a detrimental effect on the sound, but the metal chassis wouldn't. I also don't like the idea of running it without a bottom cover. It would be easy to forget and get a nasty surprise if you ever try to pick it up while it's on. At the very least, I would want to have a full bottom cover that would prevent a potentially lethal accident.

Yes, I think the bed slats on the bottom are "redneck". As for safety, it is called "situational awareness". Know what you are dealing with, and you will not make a mistake. My 2A3 amp does not have a cover on the bottom. I know this and I do not pick it up, while it is plugged in.

ducati_EL34
03-19-2010, 09:34 AM
That is why I started that statement with IMHO... its my opinion and I do not expect it to be your opinion. Relax and enjoy I hope it works out for you. They don't sound bad by any means. They just do not sound anything like a Scott.

Let me start by saying I would never pay their price, for that amp, so I am not a Mapleshade homer. My question is, why would this not sound like a Scott amp? How would bypassing the tone controls and filters make this sound anything less like a stock Scott 222, with the tone controls set at the "flat" position, and the filters in the normally bypassed? What am I missing here?

andy
03-19-2010, 10:45 AM
Yes, I think the bed slats on the bottom are "redneck". As for safety, it is called "situational awareness". Know what you are dealing with, and you will not make a mistake. My 2A3 amp does not have a cover on the bottom. I know this and I do not pick it up, while it is plugged in.

I guess the thing that bothers me is that you don't expect a Scott to be missing the cover, so it's easier to forget (or someone else). It also looks like those slats are thick enough to leave a good size gap at the sides which would make it easy for an accident to happen (like a stray patch cable getting under it). I generally don't like to have booby traps in otherwise safe looking equipment.

andy
03-19-2010, 10:47 AM
Let me start by saying I would never pay their price, for that amp, so I am not a Mapleshade homer. My question is, why would this not sound like a Scott amp? How would bypassing the tone controls and filters make this sound anything less like a stock Scott 222, with the tone controls set at the "flat" position, and the filters in the normally bypassed? What am I missing here?

I've found the tone controls on most vintage amps to be fairly hard to predict. Flat (if there is even a flat position) is often not at the 12 O'clock position. Those old pots were often 20% when they were new, and they don't always age well.

ducati_EL34
03-19-2010, 11:15 AM
I've found the tone controls on most vintage amps to be fairly hard to predict. Flat (if there is even a flat position) is often not at the 12 O'clock position. Those old pots were often 20% when they were new, and they don't always age well.

So... That is even more reason to either bypass them, or replace
them, with quality components that are not vague in their position. Either way, I do not see how this can take away from the "Scott" sound.

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 12:35 PM
Is that true what he says about it being self biasing?

Dan

I'm pretty sure the Scott 222's and 299's, as well as the similar kits, are self biasing.

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 12:49 PM
It doesn't make sense that the metal bottom would have such a detrimental effect on the sound, but the metal chassis wouldn't. I also don't like the idea of running it without a bottom cover. It would be easy to forget and get a nasty surprise if you ever try to pick it up while it's on. At the very least, I would want to have a full bottom cover that would prevent a potentially lethal accident.

From what Pierre says that removing the plastic covers and tube cages leads to a large, sometimes huge, improvements in 98% of components and says it's a must hear for big solid-state amps.

I have not removed the cage on my MC2105, so I'm not sure if this is true or not. It's kind of a pain to take the cage off anyways.

jaymanaa
03-19-2010, 12:49 PM
, this seems like a pretty damning thread for Mapleshade.

Eh, don't sweat it, you may absolutely love this rig (seems like a lot of folks do). I would say that IF you get into a quality tube rig that YOU like for that kind of dough, you did unbelievably well.:yes: Try not to let this thread bias you before you even here it. That may be hard, but it deserves a fair chance (and comes guaranteed to please).:thmbsp:

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 01:05 PM
Eh, don't sweat it, you may absolutely love this rig (seems like a lot of folks do). I would say that IF you get into a quality tube rig that YOU like for that kind of dough, you did unbelievably well.:yes: Try not to let this thread bias you before you even here it. That may be hard, but it deserves a fair chance (and comes guaranteed to please).:thmbsp:

At this point, I'm wondering how I will be able to tell if the amp sounds better of worse than a stock 222. Making it harder to know if I got my money's worth.

soundguy
03-19-2010, 02:05 PM
a scott 222 is a fixed bias amp, as is the 299.

I understand that most people in "audiophile" world are not engineers, but some of you guys have to find a way to cut through some of the utter nonsense out there. Having worked on all variety of gear for years I can think of nothing that sounds different with its bottom plate on or off, nor anything that you could put a scope to and measure. Working on amps, you are listening to the thing with the cover off the whole time you are working on it, so its not like some casual audition...

so, anyone who claims the bottom cover makes some kind of difference is immediately suspect a snake oil salesman in my world. If I were to make such an absurd statement, I would immediately back it up with proof from a scope to silence the few people like myself who know better and take the time to say something, but thats likely not to happen here.

Next, for the thousand and few hundred you pay, you get the joy of having the cheapest components available for purchase soldered into your amp. Thats real nice. Yes, some caps can be very very expensive. But when you look at sonicaps, which are really excellent caps and only about $4 each for what you need in a scott, it makes the idea of putting thirty cent caps in there a bit cheap and the thirty cent caps hes using arent good in any universe. Signal caps carry all your audio. doesnt matter wtf the circuit is, its only gonna sound as good as the coupling material you use. This is a real wise place for an "audiophile" to skimp.

So here is a guy claiming that screwing a piece of wood into the bottom of the amp makes it sounds better, but then turns around and puts the cheapest caps in there he could profit off of. The incongruity of these two things alone, is enough to not touch it with a ten foot pole for fear of what other practices are being applied to the unit.

I dont mean to bash the guys business or anything, but those two ideas just dont add up at all.

If I was ever going to buy a vintage amp for whatever reason and not work on it myself, for hifi, I would by an amp from craig at NOS. Dude uses excellent components, his work is clean and he knows what hes talking about. Most importantly, he doesnt try to cram a bunch of BS down your throat. Perhaps unfortunately for Craig, he is outpriced by other techs and in the hifi world often more expensive equates to better by people who just by no fault, dont know better.

These amps are not very complicated. It takes effort to restore them properly, but its very straight forward. So long as craig is taking on work, its hard to imagine paying tons more from anyone else if they did an equivalent job and impossible to imagine paying tons more to get inferior component selection and who knows what else, which is exactly what you'd be getting here...

word to the wise.

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 03:24 PM
So long as craig is taking on work, its hard to imagine paying tons more from anyone else if they did an equivalent job and impossible to imagine paying tons more to get inferior component selection and who knows what else, which is exactly what you'd be getting here...


Its not that much more, at all, than what I've seen NOSValves Scott's go for. Either way, I'm not trying to source my own amp, then pay to ship it both ways AND the repair cost. I'd like to just buy one that is already done and ready to be used on a daily basis. I already said if this one doesn't work out, I'll try one of Craig's amps, which probably sound great.

FalconEddy
03-19-2010, 03:27 PM
Is that true what he says about it being self biasing?

Dan

Since this photo shows this to most likely be a model 222, yes. . . sort of. The two pots are A/C Balance controls.

Although his description states this is equipped with 7189's, the photo clearly shows EL84's.

It also appears he has rebuilt the splitter to output section with Illinois Capacitor MWR series polyester caps to help preserve the original sound design. They are very cost-effective and work well in this area on vintage tube amps.

. . Falcon

FalconEddy
03-19-2010, 03:31 PM
Its not that much more, at all, than what I've seen NOSValves Scott's go for. Either way, I'm not trying to source my own amp, then pay to ship it both ways AND the repair cost. I'd like to just buy one that is already done and ready to be used on a daily basis. Why does it bother people so much that I made this decision...If I were to just say f**k it and buy one from Craig, would that make all of you happy? I already said if this one doesn't work out, I'll try one from Graig.

Hey, it doesn't bother me in the least. It's your choice, right?

Stay out this thread you started and I'll bet you'll start feeling better about your purchase in a couple of days. Seriously. :)

. . Falcon

Sam Cogley
03-19-2010, 03:52 PM
Why does it bother people so much that I made this decision...If I were to just say f**k it and buy one from Craig, I'll bet everyone would be much happier with MY decision. I already said if this one doesn't work out, I'll try one of his amps, which probably sound great.

It's your decision, no one has said that it isn't. All I've seen is a fairly technical discussion of the work done by this company.

soundguy
03-19-2010, 05:02 PM
corey-

nobody cares in the least bit what you do or how you spend your money. You started this thread asking for some opinions and thats all youve gotten more or less. The basic point being made by some of us is just because two vendors offer a similar product for perhaps a similar price does not necessarily mean that you are getting the same quality per dollar in return.

becketma
03-19-2010, 06:27 PM
The only way to know what a stock Scott sounds like is to play one in your system.

But, if you found a stock working Scott, you'd have to start making pre-emptive repairs on it. My view is if I'm in there working on it, I might as well check everything and make prudent modifications.

My guess is that for you, a large part of the value in this unit is that you won't have to worry about component failure because of age.

If the NOS rectifier isn't a dual getter Mullard GZ34, you can probably improve the sound with one of those. If I remember correctly they are model number f31, and early f32.

I'm using a Phillips late 50's era GZ34.

With my Scott222, using Russian K40-Y coupling caps, I never grew to love the sound of the Russian 7189 tubes.

Best from Tucson
Bob

Sonance'84
03-19-2010, 09:10 PM
They don't sound bad by any means. They just do not sound anything like a Scott.

What exactly does he do to make it not sound like a Scott? Just curious. And what is your take on using a passive preamp?

ldatlof
03-19-2010, 09:50 PM
I live in Vegas and if you like you can listen to a few of the tube amps I have in my small collection. You're invited!

I have a Fisher 400 (repaired by NOSValves BTW), a pair of Quad II monoblocks (repaired by Terry DeWick), and a TAD-60 (Chinese amp made by Bez (I think)).

I would love to hear the Mapleshade when you get it.

PM if you are interested.

gigbyt
04-02-2010, 06:47 PM
:lurk:

NOSValves
04-02-2010, 07:54 PM
What exactly does he do to make it not sound like a Scott? Just curious. And what is your take on using a passive preamp?

Okay you ask so I will reply.

What Maple Shade (actually foster Blair does the work) is they take the raw signal from the source off the tape switch and feeds it into the volume control (about a 10 minute job) which bypasses the entire scott front end.. Then the signal heads off to the phase inverter/Driver tube but with less drive then is required to bring the output section to full power. So they over come this by lowering the feedback.

Now if you were to get out the Scott schematic and knew how to trace the circuit you would find they have built in LF and HF filters that are always "in the circuit" The Scott engineers went to great pains to make sure that there was no energy being wasted amplifying frequencies outside of the human audible range and also outside the frequencies speakers could reproduce. Also these filters are present to tune the amps response to match the response of the output transformer. This is all part of the true Scott Sound...

The frequency response of a Maple Shade modified amplifier isn't even remotely similar to a Scott amp... Look at square wave response and you would swear you were looking at some other brand amp..... Very modern entry level tube amp like ... maybe Hi Fi sounding would be a good way to describe it.. IAgain it does not sound bad!!

My major issue with what Maple Shade does to the amps has nothing to do with the above... Its about all the things they don't do... Original power supply still in place and so on. I've Re-rebuilt many of them simply because they act up not to long down the road when you don't completely rebuild them.

Sonance'84
04-06-2010, 06:49 PM
Well, I got a call from Mapleshade today saying that the amp is ready and being shipped out. I should have it in about 5 business days. Can't wait to hear it after a good burn in period. Ill post thoughts on it once it arrives. Now I just need to set something up with ldatlof so I can hear some tube amps before listening to the modified Scott 222C.

Cory

spartanmanor
04-06-2010, 08:27 PM
Looking forward to your review.

ldatlof
04-07-2010, 07:34 PM
Well, I got a call from Mapleshade today saying that the amp is ready and being shipped out. I should have it in about 5 business days. Can't wait to hear it after a good burn in period. Ill post thoughts on it once it arrives. Now I just need to set something up with ldatlof so I can hear some tube amps before listening to the modified Scott 222C.

Cory

You have a PM.

Blast
04-07-2010, 08:20 PM
Looking forward to your review.

Me, too. I'm on the edge of my seat!

analogman
04-07-2010, 08:37 PM
That to me looks like an obsolete,"live front" male cord end, screw terminals on the front, covered by a thin piece of cardboard.:nono:

As an electritian I have used many cord ends and that would never pass inspection. There are many superior ends, including hospital grade, to be had for short money in comparison. Hubbell comes to mind.

That $285 power cord seems to be a highly overpriced p.o.s. more audio voodoo! Just my opinion.

Thank you for saying it so succinctly: The Emperor Has No Clothes!

Mapleshade: Basic parts swaps with very basic parts, change a few things, nothing esoteric about them or even special........
EXCEPT their ability to market to those suffering from Audio Nervosa and NOT in possession of a basic understanding of all things Audio (or even just a little, not all)

I am not picking on ANYONE. I learned a $3000 lesson with a $900 dollar "demo" getting tangled up with the tube "gurus" and Scott Frankland

DIDN'T DO MY HOME WORK FIRST as MANY have suggested; just poured money and time down a hole and still wound up with an amp that sounded like shit (Sonic Frontiers with Magic Mods 'n' Up Grades)

I have been on Mapleshade's mailing list for years: they are full of shit

I AM NOT saying your amplifier will not sound nice

I AM SAYING you can get a Hell of a lot more for the same money if you weren't going about it the lazy "turnkey" Man's way, and I would be willing to bet, you'd be happier

Outfits like Mapleshade thrive on people's insercurities

Their marketing (to a niche market and much smaller scale) would make Bose blush

They take advantage of what you DON'T know,and to my mind that's border line unethical

At least it felt that way when it happened to me

I hope it all works out :yes:

Marshall

analogman
04-07-2010, 08:41 PM
Well, I got a call from Mapleshade today saying that the amp is ready and being shipped out. I should have it in about 5 business days. Can't wait to hear it after a good burn in period. Ill post thoughts on it once it arrives. Now I just need to set something up with ldatlof so I can hear some tube amps before listening to the modified Scott 222C.

Cory


For $1,300 bucks they don't burn it in for you?

All that precision matching and tuning will need to be re-evaluated, won't it?

Bias checked?

I'll shut up now; I wish you the best

Marshall

analogman
04-07-2010, 08:46 PM
Okay you ask so I will reply.

What Maple Shade (actually foster Blair does the work) is they take the raw signal from the source off the tape switch and feeds it into the volume control (about a 10 minute job) which bypasses the entire scott front end.. Then the signal heads off to the phase inverter/Driver tube but with less drive then is required to bring the output section to full power. So they over come this by lowering the feedback.

Now if you were to get out the Scott schematic and knew how to trace the circuit you would find they have built in LF and HF filters that are always "in the circuit" The Scott engineers went to great pains to make sure that there was no energy being wasted amplifying frequencies outside of the human audible range and also outside the frequencies speakers could reproduce. Also these filters are present to tune the amps response to match the response of the output transformer. This is all part of the true Scott Sound...

The frequency response of a Maple Shade modified amplifier isn't even remotely similar to a Scott amp... Look at square wave response and you would swear you were looking at some other brand amp..... Very modern entry level tube amp like ... maybe Hi Fi sounding would be a good way to describe it.. IAgain it does not sound bad!!

My major issue with what Maple Shade does to the amps has nothing to do with the above... Its about all the things they don't do... Original power supply still in place and so on. I've Re-rebuilt many of them simply because they act up not to long down the road when you don't completely rebuild them.

Thank you for lifting the veil, or should I say "shade"?:D

Marshall

analogman
04-07-2010, 08:59 PM
It doesn't make sense that the metal bottom would have such a detrimental effect on the sound, but the metal chassis wouldn't. I also don't like the idea of running it without a bottom cover. It would be easy to forget and get a nasty surprise if you ever try to pick it up while it's on. At the very least, I would want to have a full bottom cover that would prevent a potentially lethal accident.

Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Marshall

analogman
04-07-2010, 09:07 PM
At this point, I'm wondering how I will be able to tell if the amp sounds better of worse than a stock 222. Making it harder to know if I got my money's worth.

I think that's what folks have been trying to say, in many different ways.

A dead stock one in working order would have told you enough to know if you wanted more. You can always recover your investment on a well shopped Scott.

That "best" amp for the money way of deciding things, sight unseen, is pure gambling.

You may not even care for Vintage Scott sound at all.

Again, good luck!

Marshall

andersonpaul
04-08-2010, 09:05 AM
Having gotten my first stereo tube setup in 1958 has given me plenty of time to play around with -no offense guys-more varieties of fi than most enthusiasts have heard of. My young-ish nephew showed me the Mapleshade flyer some years ago, and I phoned the company to ask if they would modify one of my scotts but provide for a switchable in/out tone control network. They replied that was impossible. I personally, with all my experience, would never.. Never deprive myself of the option of tone controls or some sort of eq. Non-negotiable. One of THE most important tools to dial-in musical balance available to the music lover. Peter Walker of Quad believed this and all of the design and manufacturing giants who were also musicians- Mr.Fisher, Mr Grado,Mr. Saul Marantz, Mr.Sid Smith,etc., did as well.If one were curious to compare the sound of a banjo record with-as compared-to without tone controls, one would probably not notice much if any difference.If, on the other hand, one were to listen to a full symphony orchestra performance under the same comparative conditions, and then to twiddle the tone controls to see if there is something more musically right about a tone-adjusted condition, I am personally convinced that most would prefer the latter. This prediction unfortunately excludes on the face of it, those who do not-can not trust their own ears. I would recommend as a modestly inexpensive experiment toward one's hifi education tuition,that one pick-up an old eico hf-12 {my nephew prefers it to his Cary 300 b sei chromey potted luxo unit-he sold it to someone in Germany after he realized he preferred the eicos Dennis Had of Cary told me that the little eico comes as close as any vintage amp to sounding like his se amps.. NO MODS AT ALL ANYWHERE within..preamp and all.. plug n play.] The Heath EA 2or 3. They have tone controls. Use them. Try them.See for how simply and for how few bux you can delight in music. And then go from there. Do not start at a Mapleshade flyer. Regards and good luck.Incidentally, I do not miss my WE Marantz Mac gear at all. My KLH Nines, QUADs, open baffle Bozaks, Tympanis and Daytonn Wrights all work fine with stock old tube amps of humbler provenance.

becketma
04-08-2010, 11:44 PM
How much less than Full output?

I ask, cause I'm been thinking that my 222B might sound better with the tone control by passed. Course, the mythology is that the tone control, which I leave at 12 O'clock, is a net minus for sound.

With the proper change in the feed back circuit, will it be operating with less or more distortion?

many thanks
Bob

FalconEddy
04-09-2010, 08:44 AM
The only way to know what a stock Scott sounds like is to play one in your system.


I'll take that a step further and add a comment about also needing a time machine to return you to the early 1960's. Buy a brand new Scott and a new pair of whatever speakers you plan to use (may require another stop in the seventies/eighties), bring them back to the future, hook up the system, and play it. (Of course, unless you bought an unassembled amp kit) :)

That's what a brand new stock Scott amp sounds like through the speakers you'll be listening to in the future. . .er, I mean present. :scratch2:

Sonance'84, as I stated earlier, if you want to start feeling better about your purchase. . . stay out of this thread you started. Once those worms start crawling out of the can, many of the underlying traits we had prior to evolving involuntarily rise to the surface and reveal the roots of our human nature.

. . Falcon

ccerovina
04-09-2010, 11:11 AM
I bought a Scott 222 for 150 bucks just to rape the legendary output iron from it for my own build :P I had no idea you could get so much money for one of those babies.

Sonance'84
04-09-2010, 01:31 PM
I'll take that a step further and add a comment about also needing a time machine to return you to the early 1960's.

Sonance'84, as I stated earlier, if you want to start feeling better about your purchase. . . stay out of this thread you started.

I don't feel "bad" about my purchase. I do understand what you are saying and at this point I'm just sitting back and listening as I have no basis to judge sound of a tube amp.

My opinion about the stock 222C sound or any vintage tube amp is that they are like an old car. There are people that restore them and people who modify them. I think a restored to original 222C would sound pretty damn close to a new 222C sitting in a living room in the 60's. I don't know why it would sound so much different now than back then if restored properly. When you restore an old car to original, it's pretty much like driving the thing off the lot, and I would imagine it drives like it did in the 60's.

I probably won't end up keeping the 222C from Mapleshade....I just want to hear it and see what it's all about. It better show up with a specifications sheet. I think I'll end up getting a non modified vintage tube amp after I send this one back.

Rocjr
04-09-2010, 04:32 PM
The difference here is that when new, the margin between a '60s car and a present day car is large. The sound of a new or restored '60's vintage amp is far closer to a comparable modern tube amp than you might think where the power output is the same. Some were tubey and euphonic, but most were not. I think that the "vintage sound" thing is a bit of a myth, especially when talking about the good stuff. Sure, there were cheaply built amps that would flatline when pushed past their limits, but the well built gear played within its limits sounds quite modern. I'd go so far to say that some modern gear built right has some of the better qualities of good vintage gear, meaning not etched or spotlit sounding.

Anyway, be smart and let the unit burn in for a few hunderd hours before making rash decisions either way. Let it become what it'll be first.

sheltie dave
04-10-2010, 07:41 AM
Eddy, "these worms crawling out of a can" also happen to be good people. There always are difference of opinion, differences in the amount of money charged, and differences in subjective/objective performance and reliability.

I have stayed out of this thread because I don't liked being characterized as one of the "worms," and don't much enjoy slagging people who help others into/along the tube hobby road, but misconceptions and smoke are an issue that do need to be discussed.

I have had the opportunity to sit down and listen to a Mapleshade restored, NOSValves restored, and bone stock 299C at the same time. Four hours later, I was a happy owner(still) with the NOSValves and original 299Cs, and the Mapleshade 299C owner took his amp to the spa to get things straightened out to his liking. He now has premium Teles for the splitter and pre section, Mullards for the phono section, and matched NOS RCA 7591s as outputs - and a healthy respect for the techs and hobbyists who do things the RIGHT way.

Don't try to lay no boogie woogie on the King of rock-n-roll. :smoke::thmbsp:

Blast
04-10-2010, 10:17 AM
--snip-- the Mapleshade 299C owner took his amp to the spa to get things straightened out to his liking. He now has premium Teles for the splitter and pre section, Mullards for the phono section, and matched NOS RCA 7591s as outputs - and a healthy respect for the techs and hobbyists who do things the RIGHT way.--snip--

:scratch2: I have a question. According to this:

--snip-- What Maple Shade (actually foster Blair does the work) is they take the raw signal from the source off the tape switch and feeds it into the volume control (about a 10 minute job) which bypasses the entire scott front end.. Then the signal heads off to the phase inverter/Driver tube but with less drive then is required to bring the output section to full power. So they over come this by lowering the feedback.--snip--

the front end of the amp (I assume this does NOT mean the phono section) has been bypassed. Other than current drawn by the filaments (as it is a series string) would this not make the choice of tubes for the pre section a moot point?

Brian

sheltie dave
04-10-2010, 08:14 PM
Blast, it is hard to answer your specific question, because my now friend's 299C may not have had the identical mod. He was running higher mu driver tubes, and was agog at his second tube amp being the cat's meow. At the time, I had just received my NOSValves rebuilt 299C from a forum bud, and had scored the second stock unit locally.

Everything was foreign to me in tube land, but it didn't take long for me to realize the MS 299C owner was not happy once we started playing his amp. I can see why Craig would hold that Mapleshade modded amps will not present the signature Scott sound.

I don't like to shill, but there are some techs who frequent this board, and their work is the bomb. There are also folks who charge $250 for dropping $20 worth of cheap parts in a unit. These folks, if they are smart, rapidly find their way to one of the good techs.

jaymanaa
04-11-2010, 09:35 AM
I bought a Scott 222 for 150 bucks just to rape the legendary output iron from it for my own build .

Best idea I've heard yet.:thmbsp:

Sonance'84
04-13-2010, 11:54 PM
Ok, so I got the Scott 222C from Mapleshade today and set it up. I will post the pics(soon) of it upon arrival before I plugged it in. I also took pics of the tubes they sent with it. Look for those in a day or two.

I actually want to ask a question about the tubes real quick. Out of the 4 12AX7's sent with it, 2 seem to be brand new Electro-Harmonix, 1 not new GE and 1 not new Zenith. The two EHX tubes don't light up orange like the other two 12AX7's or the rest of the tubes in the amp for that matter, but they do get warm/hot. Is that usual? Does it mean something if they don't glow? :scratch2:

Also, I am a complete newb to tube amp's, and I would like to know if there are any warnings on things not to do when operating a tube amp? Is there a length of time that I should limit my listening to, or turn it off and let it cool down after a 8 hours or so? Thanks, and sorry to sidetrack.

Cory :smoke:

JonL
04-14-2010, 12:02 AM
The tubes that don't seem to glow simply have the whole filament hidden inside other structures in the tube. The filament is the only part that actually glows unless there is something else wrong. (Blue glow is different and ok, but will only be in the larger power tubes.) As long as they work, there is nothing wrong with the filaments even if you cannot see them glow.

You can run the amp 24/7/365 if you want, though I wouldn't advise leaving the amp on if you aren't going to be home. I'll leave mine on if I'm just going out for 15 minutes or so, otherwise I turn it off.

Once you turn it off, it is best to let it cool down for 15 minutes or so before turning it on again. Short cycling is tough on them. 15 minutes may be more than necessary, but better safe than sorry.

Congratulations on the purchase, looking forward to pics and listening impressions.

Sonance'84
04-14-2010, 12:26 AM
Thanks, that pretty much summed up what I wanted to know. Also...

The tubes that don't seem to glow simply have the whole filament hidden inside other structures in the tube.

Does anyone know if this is the case with 12AX7's made by EHX?

As long as they work, there is nothing wrong with the filaments even if you cannot see them glow.

Is there any way I would know if a tube or multiple tubes were not working? Thanks again.

JonL
04-14-2010, 12:38 AM
If the phono stage and line stages are both working on both channels and it doesn't sound really bad, then all the tubes are working. It is conceivable for one or two of the power tubes (EL84/6BQ5 in that amp I believe) to be dead and the amp could still sound good at low volume. Crank it up some and it'd be weak and distorted if one power tube in one or both channels was dead. You are concerned about the 12AX7s though, and if any of those are not working you'd know it from the sonics right away. One or two of the 12AX7s probably only function in the phono stage though, so unless you are using a phono input you might not know if those are bad. I can't be more specific because I don't know that particular amp.

JonL
04-14-2010, 12:40 AM
The tubes that don't seem to glow simply have the whole filament hidden inside other structures in the tube.

Sometimes it's also the position of the tube in the amp that makes it hard to see any part of the filament because you don't have a good line of sight.

ampsandsound
04-14-2010, 12:44 AM
EH 12X7 tubes can look very dark... turn off the lights... each tube will have a dim light.

But again... if it sounds good then its working great.

becketma
04-14-2010, 01:55 AM
The heaters heat the tubes up.
Best test is to turn it on, spin some of your favorite tunes, sit back and relax.

Zenith bought tubes from other companies and put their brand name on them. Even the companies that made tubes bought tubes and put their names on them.

You might consider concentrating on getting your new unit sounding as best you can instead of worrying about what a non-modified unit sounds like?

Best from tucson
Bob

spartanmanor
04-14-2010, 09:20 AM
Yes, you really need to give it a few days to see what you think. BTW: I just got my 299D back from NOSvalves yesterday and will be doing the same thing you are doing.

Sonance'84
04-14-2010, 01:05 PM
You might consider concentrating on getting your new unit sounding as best you can instead of worrying about what a non-modified unit sounds like?


Yes, you really need to give it a few days to see what you think.

I agree, I just want to hear a "stock/restored to original" 222 or 299 for reference. I will be giving my 222C a few days before using it in my main setup. It's in my bedroom hooked up to the Heresy's and I'm using a CD from IsoTek to burn-in the unit quicker. I've heard that 24 hours of playback are equal to over 100 hours of listening. I only listened to two songs right when I hooked it up, the first two songs on Dark Side of the Moon, and they sounded great! I plan to bring it out here to the main system tomorrow. :thmbsp:

becketma
04-15-2010, 02:51 AM
IsoTek burn-in CD?

We don't need no stinking burn-in CDs!

Treat that unit RIGHT and start spinin a Dark Side album thru it. then haul out all of your LED Zep albums; get some food and CAFFEENN into your system and then spin every Hendrix album you own.

Light up some incense, thank the tube gods for blessing you with such JOY and then start spinin every foot stompin blues album you own.

Best from Tucson
Bob

kpaxfaq
04-15-2010, 08:54 AM
Do you have any pics of your rig? I just picked up a 222c restored by fellow AK'er bricktop and love it!

audiodon
04-15-2010, 09:59 AM
Sonance'84,

There's gotta be an AKer somewhere near you in Nevada with a Scott you can listen to.

I wouldn't worry about all this stuff in these ten pages right now.

Listen to your rig. Search on the internet, read and learn. Then find a non-Mapleshaded one and listen to that. Decide for yourself what you like.

There's really only one person that needs to be satisfied here and that's Sonance'84.

Scuzzer
04-15-2010, 10:26 AM
There's really only one person that needs to be satisfied here and that's Sonance'84.

Well yeah, unless there's a Mrs. Sonance'84.

Sonance'84
04-15-2010, 01:42 PM
Do you have any pics of your rig? I just picked up a 222c restored by fellow AK'er bricktop and love it!

Yes I do, and I will try and post them today. I took a lot, so I need to figure out how to post them properly.

There's gotta be an AKer somewhere near you in Nevada with a Scott you can listen to.

Well, I found someone with a Fisher 400 that was restored by Craig @ NOSValves...I listened to that. That's the closest I'm going to come for now.

Well yeah, unless there's a Mrs. Sonance'84.

Haha, nope...not just yet. I'm 25 and enjoy being single at the moment. :thmbsp:

ckreymann
04-15-2010, 03:16 PM
I'm 25 and enjoy being single at the moment. :thmbsp:

I'm jealous. I always have to listen to her 'tude at the end of the month when my wife sees the credit card bill for all the "stupid tube parts" that I buy....

I listen to an (almost) original Scott 299B in my workshop. If you're ever in Orange County, lemme know by PM and you can hear it if you'd like. Very sweet sound to my ears.

Wow, quite the interesting thread here...very educational, very balanced and, despite some passion, very respectful.

My 2 cents: Pay attention to the empirics and the science being spoken; There's a HUGE reserve of skill and experience here; the subjective stuff is opinion and everyone is equally entitled to their own.

Finally, it's appropriate here and now to share an epiphany: One time, long ago, I was zapped by 2000 volts for a brief moment or two. The electrons spoke to me and assured me that they don't give a crap about how much an AC connector or speaker cables cost, although they did express a general preference for copper.

Take care,

Chris

targeteye
04-15-2010, 04:27 PM
Something NOSValves said in one of his posts is bothering me about this amp. It mentioned that the power Supply sections in these amps are not rebuilt. I'm sure Craig knows what he is talking about but if that is true you need to immediately box this thing up and send it back for your money back. One of the very FIRST things that should be done to one of these is to replace all the electrolytics if you want it to last for years to come. If you paid 1300 for a 40+ year old 222C and it is not completely recapped you've been ripped off.

Hopefully I read that part of Craigs post wrong and this amp is actually completely recapped. (for however many caps are still being used in the modified circuit).

Steve

gogofast
04-15-2010, 04:46 PM
from my personal experience, i know that need to replace power filter caps is not just some hype. i've seen more than a few amps blow up, fume out white smoke, and scream diabolical noise because of old caps gone bad. without a doubt, if the amp still has those old power caps, you MUST return them or change them out yourself. i'd be so mad if they really left those caps. :no:

gogofast
04-15-2010, 04:48 PM
Yes I do, and I will try and post them today. I took a lot, so I need to figure out how to post them properly.

use imageshack or imagehosting to upload and then use "your pic direct link here" to post. make sure the size of your pic will fit in the screen and not too big.

Sonance'84
04-16-2010, 12:00 AM
Ok, before I get into details on this amp, I must hear the phono section. But, when I switch it to phono, I get a ground loop noise. I grounded the turntable. When I mess with the rca's on the back it makes it better/worse. The same thing was happening with the aux input but I got around that by messing with the interconnects at the input. The rca's do touch at the phono input, but they are the stock SL1200 rca's with rubber at the ends. There is no metal touching. What is going on here? I wanna play a record so bad!

First thoughts on the CD capabilities...amazing. Can't stop trying different albums to see how they sound. SACD playback is very nice as well. This amp is dead quiet, way more so than my McIntosh stuff. The bass and mid's on Dark Side of the Moon were better than the Mac stuff too and more sense of depth. I think the frequency response is very much improved. That's all for now...only been listening for about 2 hours now.

spartanmanor
04-16-2010, 08:54 AM
Did you ground the table to the frame of the Scott? I have only been listening to vinyl on my 299D and am also amazed out how dead quiet it is as well.

targeteye
04-16-2010, 09:06 AM
Sounds like the RCA jacks on the Amp may be Dirty. Do they look bright or dull and grey?

Steve

Sonance'84
04-16-2010, 12:56 PM
Did you ground the table to the frame of the Scott? I have only been listening to vinyl on my 299D and am also amazed out how dead quiet it is as well.

Yes, I grounded it to the brass screw above the phono input as the owner's manual says to do. Should I be using mag high or mag low with my Shure M97xE? I had it plugged into mag high.

Sounds like the RCA jacks on the Amp may be Dirty. Do they look bright or dull and grey?

They are dull and have surface rust on them. Especially the phono and aux inputs. That was one of the first things I noticed when unpacking this...the inputs looked very oxidized. How do I clean them?

My interconnects from the CD player are touching at the amp input and I just had to wiggle them around to get them to sound right. Thanks for the help!

targeteye
04-16-2010, 01:44 PM
Truthfully if you have rust on them they need to be replaced. You can try copious amounts of Deoxit and working a jack in and out while they are wet but these are plated and rust indicates the plating is shot. Even if you get them clean the corrosion will return.

If it were me I'd return the amp and make them put in new jacks or get my money back. It is absolutely appalling that anyone would sell you a 222C for 1300 and not put in new jacks or at least make sure the originals are cleaned. It would also begin to make me wonder what else they haven't done that they need to.

Not trying to make you feel bad its not your fault these guys did shoddy work. Just some friendly advice.

Steve

ckreymann
04-16-2010, 01:47 PM
They are dull and have surface rust on them. Especially the phono and aux inputs. That was one of the first things I noticed when unpacking this...the inputs looked very oxidized. How do I clean them?

:yikes: Help me out here, please. Are we still talking about the Mapleshaded unit that cost $1300?

And what about the very important power supply questions that gogofast and targeteye asked about? Surely the electrolytics were replaced, although it's not apparent from the chassis pic...

Sonance'84
04-16-2010, 01:49 PM
Truthfully if you have rust on them they need to be replaced. You can try copious amounts of Deoxit and working a jack in and out while they are wet but these are plated and rust indicates the plating is shot. Even if you get them clean the corrosion will return.

If it were me I'd return the amp and make them put in new jacks or get my money back. It is absolutely appalling that anyone would sell you a 222C for 1300 and not put in new jacks or at least make sure the originals are cleaned. It would also begin to make me wonder what else they haven't done that they need to.

Not trying to make you feel bad its not your fault these guys did shoddy work. Just some friendly advice.

Steve

Thanks, that's what I was thinking too. My brother said, "They didn't put new rca's on there for that mucj money!" when he saw the amp. I hate making complaint phone calls. Waste of time to me, but looks like it needs to be done.

ckreymann
04-16-2010, 01:53 PM
Truthfully if you have rust on them they need to be replaced. You can try copious amounts of Deoxit and working a jack in and out while they are wet but these are plated and rust indicates the plating is shot. Even if you get them clean the corrosion will return.

If it were me I'd return the amp and make them put in new jacks or get my money back. It is absolutely appalling that anyone would sell you a 222C for 1300 and not put in new jacks or at least make sure the originals are cleaned. It would also begin to make me wonder what else they haven't done that they need to.

Not trying to make you feel bad its not your fault these guys did shoddy work. Just some friendly advice.

Steve

Just saw this. I totally agree with targeteye except that I think it's pointless to send it back for jacks. Just send it back. I don't sense any pride in their work whatsoever.

I'm sorry this happened, but you can do way, way better for that kind of $$$.

Sonance'84
04-16-2010, 02:15 PM
Just saw this. I totally agree with targeteye except that I think it's pointless to send it back for jacks. Just send it back. I don't sense any pride in their work whatsoever.

I'm sorry this happened, but you can do way, way better for that kind of $$$.

Yeah, I have the feeling this would NOT have happened if I got one through NOSValves. I am very disappointed.

spartanmanor
04-16-2010, 02:20 PM
FWIW my RCA jacks were not replaced as part of bringing my 299D back to life. But mine do not have rust on them and I paid no where near what you did. Craig does do an incredible job though. this has to be one of the most extensive rebuilds I have had done and the results are stunning.

ckreymann
04-16-2010, 02:51 PM
Yeah, I have the feeling this would NOT have happened if I got one through NOSValves. I am very disappointed.

I can sympathize...been there, some things we learn the hard way. Look at the bright side: You made a very good decision by interacting and maintaining a good attitude with this group who, all along, had your best interests at heart.

I hope you won't have any problems with a return shipment. If you paid by credit card, be sure to call the card company and dispute the charge immediately (goods received not as advertised, faulty, whatever). Otherwise, some vendors have been known to string you along past the 30-day cutoff date you have for filing a dispute and then you loose. This is a preemptive move to protect your ability to get money back just in case.

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice, just based on experience...

Take care,

Chris

Sam Cogley
04-16-2010, 03:36 PM
Truthfully if you have rust on them they need to be replaced. You can try copious amounts of Deoxit and working a jack in and out while they are wet but these are plated and rust indicates the plating is shot. Even if you get them clean the corrosion will return.

If it were me I'd return the amp and make them put in new jacks or get my money back. It is absolutely appalling that anyone would sell you a 222C for 1300 and not put in new jacks or at least make sure the originals are cleaned. It would also begin to make me wonder what else they haven't done that they need to.

Not trying to make you feel bad its not your fault these guys did shoddy work. Just some friendly advice.

Steve

Oxidized, original steel jacks on a $1300 amp rebuild? Good grief. My reaction would look something like this: :pistols:

I can sympathize...been there, some things we learn the hard way. Look at the bright side: You made a very good decision by interacting and maintaining a good attitude with this group who, all along, had your best interests at heart.

I hope you won't have any problems with a return shipment. If you paid by credit card, be sure to call the card company and dispute the charge immediately (goods received not as advertised, faulty, whatever). Otherwise, some vendors have been known to string you along past the 30-day cutoff date you have for filing a dispute and then you loose. This is a preemptive move to protect your ability to get money back just in case.

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice, just based on experience...

Take care,

Chris

Sounds like good practical advice. :thmbsp:

A chat with the BBB might also be in order.

spartanmanor
04-16-2010, 03:46 PM
unless stated that they were gong to be replaced I really don't see this as a matter of bad business practice. I would agree that for the price more should have been done but in this case it really is BBW. And it sounds like this was always a trial from the start with the option to return if not satisfied.

becketma
04-16-2010, 04:55 PM
Mine are oxidized. Try fine steel wool around the outside, followed by thorough cleaning with Q-tips and rubbing alcohol until the tip stays white.

Also try unscrewing the outer metal shield on your on your RCA plug. slide it away from the plug and then install the RCA plugs.

Its easy to say just replace the RCA jacks, but the new ones aren't the same size as the old ones which are mounted in plastic panels. The result is having to do fabrication with new panels, or drilling holes into the back panel.

Many times, one can trim a Q-tip so that it can be inserted into an RCA plug for cleaning.

While you are at it, clean the plugs on your cables and the AC plug. Consider removing each tube and cleaning it's pins. You can clean the tube sockets with a device designed to clean between teeth, the metal shaft ones work best.

If your unit came with a two pronged AC plug, try flipping the plug over.

Best from Tucson
Bob

ckreymann
04-16-2010, 06:40 PM
unless stated that they were gong to be replaced I really don't see this as a matter of bad business practice. I would agree that for the price more should have been done but in this case it really is BBW. And it sounds like this was always a trial from the start with the option to return if not satisfied.

I have to respectfully disagree. Amongst professionals there's this concept called "Best Practices", which is essentially an unofficial guide to commonly accepted standards of the way things should be done. This avoids the need for lengthy contracts that specifically state that "the leaking, 40 year old capacitor (that you haven't even seen yet) shall be replaced" as part of a $1300 deal. Besides, Sonance'84 had never seen the amp and trusted the vendor to perform proper workmanship for that kind of money. That's a reasonable expectation.

I just hope that "trial from the start with the option to return if not satisfied" is in writing somewhere. But you're right, of course, it's BBW.

I just hate to see this happen especially to a young tube enthusiast.

Chris

JonL
04-16-2010, 06:57 PM
What mean BBW?

KT88Lover
04-16-2010, 07:01 PM
What mean BBW?

Very strange... it won't let me write "BBW" in all caps in the first line....

BBW = Big Beautiful Woman :yes:

(politically correct speech for FAB) :yes:

Jim

kpaxfaq
04-16-2010, 07:06 PM
I would return unit after learning all of the updated details. I didn't want to be a negative nelly until we saw the final product in your hands. I just picked a 222C from Bricktop 100% restored including new power cans in great cosmetic shape with perfect wood case for $500..... and just sent PM less than hour ago on pilot 602 fully restored, PS cans and all for $300....that is two beautiful vintage tube pieces you could have with $500 dollars to spare for.......MORE TUBE PIECES :D:D

Keep your eyes peeled in Barter Town because a lot of times people (this includes myself) are always searching for the Nirvana and or they just like to buy/sell/trade different pieces to try one they never had. :smoke:

Just as long as when you get a good deal from fellow AK'er you look to "pay it forward" to another AK'er when you're ready to sell! :thmbsp:

jaymanaa
04-16-2010, 07:06 PM
Polish the outside part of the jacks with either Mothers, or Wynol metal polish. For the inside, use a Q-tip with just enough of the cotton removed for a snug fit. Run the Q-tip slowly with a cordless drill. I can't believe it every time I see an amp that has been "rebuilt", but still has filthy connections on jacks, switches, pots, etc. Nobody likes to do the hard part of restoring. I can't believe they sent it out like that for that kind of scratch. Jeesh.:no:

ckreymann
04-16-2010, 09:05 PM
What mean BBW?

Buyer BeWare, fancy words are Caveat Emptor.

Chris

JonL
04-16-2010, 10:16 PM
Buyer BeWare, fancy words are Caveat Emptor.

Chris

Thank you. I was aware of the other meaning, it didn't seem to fit here. :D

ampsandsound
04-17-2010, 01:06 AM
SEND IT BACK. Look at new equip.... or contact NOS Valves. Having a AK memeber help you set things up might make the learning curve a bit easier.

bronco
04-17-2010, 09:39 AM
Keep in mind whatever you end up doing, with this amp or a different one, that there is no, none, nada, chance that it will be the last tube amp you purchase. You will soon have lots of amps for comparison. They are like crack, and you will now have a monkey on your back for the rest of your days. Boxes of tubes, amps, preamps, tuners, capacitors, all in your future now. Resistance is futile. :smoke:

ckreymann
04-17-2010, 10:37 AM
They are like crack, and you will now have a monkey on your back for the rest of your days. Boxes of tubes, amps, preamps, tuners, capacitors, all in your future now. Resistance is futile. :smoke:

Yes, you have been assimilated. The collective has spoken...:yippy:

MickeySmile
04-17-2010, 10:38 AM
Keep in mind whatever you end up doing, with this amp or a different one, that there is no, none, nada, chance that it will be the last tube amp you purchase. You will soon have lots of amps for comparison. They are like crack, and you will now have a monkey on your back for the rest of your days. Boxes of tubes, amps, preamps, tuners, capacitors, all in your future now. Resistance is futile. :smoke:

Is it what i am doing right now? :D

ckreymann
04-17-2010, 11:28 AM
Is it what i am doing right now? :D

Your message speaks for itself, it does........

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 01:19 PM
Keep in mind whatever you end up doing, with this amp or a different one, that there is no, none, nada, chance that it will be the last tube amp you purchase. You will soon have lots of amps for comparison. They are like crack, and you will now have a monkey on your back for the rest of your days. Boxes of tubes, amps, preamps, tuners, capacitors, all in your future now. Resistance is futile. :smoke:

I kinda went through this with vintage solid state as I got into 2-channel again. I went through 2 receivers, 2 sets of speakers and 2 other turntables before I settled on what I have now, all in less than a year. Now my sources and speakers are here to stay and the amps will come and go as I try different things. The 222C sounds so damn good , but with the little details like the inputs, I must send it back in fear of what else may have been overlooked. I DO want to get a restored 222/299 or a Fisher X-100-B after I send this amp back. It is like crack.

kpaxfaq
04-17-2010, 01:49 PM
If you subscribe for $25 a year you can check out Barter Town here. Post a wanted add! You'd be surprised what people have sitting around that they may be willing to sell/trade! Also, if you're patient there are plenty of great units for sale there, many restored by great members here who are very knowledgeable and know what they're doing. A lot of times someone may restore something, use it for a few months then look to fund a new project, or you may have something in your possession they are looking to try. Like many people have already said, it's like crack! :smoke:

Not trying to sound like a saleman but my first Barter Town purchase was worth $25 alone knowing it came from another highly regarded AK member and not some shadeball ebayer who sent it to his "tech"

-Kory

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 02:07 PM
I called Pierre at Mapleshade and had a not so pleasing talk with him. He just wouldn't have it that the inputs are creating a hum/buzz beacause they tested it as is before it left the shop. He wouldn't tell me any specs when I asked and said he could care less about frequency response. But I was the one wanting to know! He said they don't test for that because it has nothing to do with how the human ear hears music. I then asked about the electrolytics and transformers...he said they do replace ALL electrolytics and the selenium rectifier. About the inputs...he said they used steel wool to clean off the inputs and said its better to get as much of the plating off as possible for better contact. I have heard the exact opposite. He then suggested that I use SilClear(by Mapleshade) or DeoxIT Gold on the inputs to help conductivity. :screwy: Is it just me or is that a contradiction? There is a reddish color on the inputs that looks like rust, but I think its the actual metal under the plating. Either way, it rubs off like rust. The inside of the inputs look dirty too. Also, when I adjust the volume, I get a scratchy noise like the pot is still dirty. When I told him that my McIntosh phono section was quieter than his "world class phono stage" he said, "I have no doubt that your solid state Mac is quieter than the Scott." He was very argumentative when I suggested all of this and even asked if I wanted to just send it back. I told him yes, I would. Every problem that I could come up with, he had an answer for that didn't really make sense to me. He just kept saying his Scott will whip $20k solid state amps and $7500 tube amps. Then his phone cell phone broke up and I received no call back...I also tried calling him back, but no answer. :thumbsdn:

Bottom line, when I get the inputs to act normal and not buzz, this amp sounds incredible! I love the way tubes recreate music, the tones are much more real and the sense of depth is better than solid state. I WILL post pics today. I think tomorrow Idatlof is going to bring his Fisher 400 over for a head-to-head comparison with the 222C. :music:

Cory

KT88Lover
04-17-2010, 02:15 PM
I called Pierre at Mapleshade and had a not so pleasing talk with him. He just wouldn't have it that the inputs are creating a hum/buzz beacause they tested it as is before it left the shop. He wouldn't tell me any specs when I asked and said he could care less about frequency response. But I was the one wanting to know! He said they don't test for that because it has nothing to do with how the human ear hears music. I then asked about the electrolytics and transformers...he said they do replace ALL electrolytics and the selenium rectifier. About the inputs...he said they used steel wool to clean off the inputs and said its better to get as much of the plating off as possible for better contact. I have heard the exact opposite. He then suggested that I use SilClear(by Mapleshade) or DeoxIT Gold on the inputs to help conductivity. :screwy: Is it just me or is that a contradiction? There is a reddish color on the inputs that looks like rust, but I think its the actual metal under the plating. Either way, it rubs off like rust. The inside of the inputs look dirty too. Also, when I adjust the volume, I get a scratchy noise like the pot is still dirty. When I told him that my McIntosh phono section was quieter than his "world class phono stage" he said, "I have no doubt that your solid state Mac is quieter than the Scott." He was very argumentative when I suggested all of this and even asked if I wanted to just send it back. I told him yes, I would. Every problem that I could come up with, he had an answer for that didn't really make sense to me. He just kept saying his Scott will whip $20k solid state amps and $7500 tube amps. Then his phone cell phone broke up and I received no call back...I also tried calling him back, but no answer. :thumbsdn:

Bottom line, when I get the inputs to act normal and not buzz, this amp sounds incredible! I love the way tubes recreate music, the tones are much more real and the sense of depth is better than solid state. I WILL post pics today. I think tomorrow Idatlof is going to bring his Fisher 400 over for a head-to-head comparison with the 222C. :music:

Cory

Mapleshade is a well known rip

Sorry for your problems

I'd box it up and ship it back, TODAY

Hope you paid with a credit card that's on your side

Jim

jaymanaa
04-17-2010, 02:17 PM
People rave about 25 dollar Maggie tube amps too, when they are used to solid state stuff. Don't worry that the amp is so good you'll never find a better one. I could point you to over a dozen amps under 7.5k that would embarrass the Scott, no matter what they did to it. Send it back and do some homework.:thmbsp:

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 02:18 PM
Hope you paid with a credit card that's on your side

I hope so too, I gave my friend cash and he used his Visa for me.

Mike Stehr
04-17-2010, 02:24 PM
I would be livid after that phone call.

KT88Lover
04-17-2010, 02:37 PM
I hope so too, I gave my friend cash and he used his Visa for me.

Let it linger and you'll wind up keeping it

Ask me how I know

Hint: I suffered a similar learning curve

That is why I am being so adamant when I tell you, if you are unhappy right now right this minute about anything surrounding this amp

SEND IT BACK TODAY!

There still remains too many unaddressed issues in your mind, this is NOT the way to start out

You will never be completely secure with this buying decision and that is going to intrude on any enjoyment this thing can give and that sucks

Even if you keep it for 100 years it will ALWAYS annoy you and you will forever be listening for problems rather than to music

And it doesn't matter what those jokers tell you

I'm telling you, I know this for a fact, the hard way :yes:

Jim

jaymanaa
04-17-2010, 03:03 PM
I'm surprised Mapleshade doesn't read AK. If they did, surely they would have sent you something extra good just for the review. FWIW, I have better luck dealing with site sponsors.:yes:

KT88Lover
04-17-2010, 03:07 PM
I'm surprised Mapleshade doesn't read AK. If they did, surely they would have sent you something extra good just for the review. FWIW, I have better luck dealing with site sponsors.:yes:

They don't need to, after all they've cornered the market on Magic Wood! :D

Jim

pete1729
04-17-2010, 03:17 PM
I'd like to thank Sonance for sticking with this thread, I'm sure it wasn't easy.

When I first stepped into this realm it was a little daunting and seemed like a gamble. I had a grand to spend on a vintage amp and I asked the AK opinion mill. After some spirited debate it was decided that I should get an MC240. Good advice for which I am greatful.

Also I'd like to thank Sonance for his commitment to finding out the reality of the Mapleshade unit and his honest appraisal of it.

I would suggest returning it. For the price and the hype it should be flawless, the scratchy control would have sealed that decision for me. The longer you listen to it, the less likely you are to want to turn it loose.

1MOR
04-17-2010, 04:08 PM
Sonance, send it back. You have a noisy pot, cruddy input jacks, a "selection" of tubes and the Mapleshade owner who appears to be less than accommodating. Plus, you are out $1300 and shipping. Undoubtedly, you may experience other problems in the future.

Several years ago, I began to actively monitor Epay for Scott tubed equipment. After a few months, a buy it now offering popped up one morning for a Scott 222C and a Scott 350B tuner at a price that seemed to be almost too good to be true. After a few questions to the owner, I took the plunge. About a week later, both pieces arrived, well packaged and double boxed. Both pieces were in excellent - excellent+ condition. There was a complete set of Telefunken tubes in each piece.

Both were sent off to a well known professional who posts and advertises here on AK, for safety checks, safety mods and an alignment of the tuner. All the pots and controls are noise free. The input jacks are clean and form tight connections and, I have retained the Telefunken magic.

The tube magic was/is intoxicating. With patience and some luck, you will find some great tube equipment and after restoration, you will have spent far less than what you have in the Mapleshade amp.

Of course, as with the other opinions voiced here so far, your mileage may vary, but not by much. Good luck!

Ty_Bower
04-17-2010, 04:16 PM
Bottom line, when I get the inputs to act normal and not buzz, this amp sounds incredible! I love the way tubes recreate music, the tones are much more real and the sense of depth is better...

There are plenty of vacuum tube amplifiers that give that sense of depth and realism. You shouldn't have to fuss with worn out corroded RCA jacks and scratchy volume pots. I'm sure the Scott is a fine amp and has a lot of potential, but Mapleshade ought to have completely refurbished the unit if they're going to sell it for that kind of price. I'm not in the business of selling amps, but I've built and rebuilt a few. I'll keep the tubes, chassis and the transformers but everything else gets replaced. Fifty year old caps, resistors, switches, pots, and sockets all go in the trash. Phenolic circuit boards are no good by now, and must be replaced with good quality FR-4 boards. If the insulation on old wiring is brittle and cracked, new wiring is probably in order. I've never spent $1300 on any one of the amps I've owned, and if I had I would expect an awful lot from it.

bharper
04-17-2010, 04:35 PM
the saga continues....

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 07:45 PM
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5314/dsc03858qc.jpg

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/9572/dsc03831ub.jpg

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3702/dsc03832p.jpg

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/228/dsc03837d.jpg

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/9940/dsc03838z.jpg

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/4149/dsc03859x.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/1001/dsc03851c.jpg

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5007/dsc03849g.jpg

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/9904/dsc03850uh.jpg

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8548/dsc03857w.jpg

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 07:47 PM
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/416/dsc03865gegyr.jpg

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/323/dsc03870j.jpg

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/1407/dsc03872e.jpg

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/9595/dsc03864i.jpg

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/9463/dsc03861w.jpg

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/701/dsc03860vs.jpg

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/9024/dsc03869d.jpg

Andyman
04-17-2010, 07:51 PM
Those filter caps look pretty stock to me, but I could be wrong.

For $1300, I'd expect new ones (or new ones wired in underneath) seeing as they are usually the FIRST thing replaced in a vintage amp...

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 07:56 PM
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/5567/dsc03839c.jpg

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6188/dsc03841m.jpg

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/9291/dsc03843k.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6339/dsc03853w.jpg

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/9334/dsc03846k.jpg

http://img532.imageshack.us/img532/3007/dsc03847b.jpg

Let me know what you all think.

jaymanaa
04-17-2010, 08:04 PM
I wouldn't dream of sending that out of my shop as restored. My honest opinion is that it's a joke, and not a very funny one. That thing is worth maybe 400 bux tops.

jaymanaa
04-17-2010, 08:06 PM
I'd love to get ahold of that rascal for about an hour to measure distortion, frequency response, and output power.

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 08:08 PM
So, I cleaned the RCA inputs with 99% alcohol and q-tips and was amazed at how much crap came off with just the little work I did. These pics are of after a few seconds of work. Also, I kinda squeezed the RCA's on my SL1200 to make better contact with the input. The two things combined made then hum/buzz go away and I can listen to LP's finally. I'm going to send it back first thing Monday morning. It's too hard not to listen to it for a few days while I have it. :smoke:

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/9459/dsc03873s.jpg

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 08:10 PM
I'd love to get ahold of that rascal for about an hour to measure distortion, frequency response, and output power.

I'd LOVE for someone to do that for me, but I don't think anybody around here would/could do that. If I lived in Kansas I'd bring it over right now.

jaymanaa
04-17-2010, 08:12 PM
I applaud the way you have handled the whole situation. This must have been a grueling couple weeks for you. I would also add that Mapleshade isn't alone in poor quality resto service. I think it would be awfully hard for me to make any money doing stuff the way I do it. On a typicall integrated like the 299, I would end up well over 40 hours most of the time.

apurcell22
04-17-2010, 08:16 PM
:thumbsdn:I would call B.S. those electrolytics are stock. He is a liar and a thief. I will never do business with them. Sorry you have to deal with this. My vote would be to send it back.

Al

1MOR
04-17-2010, 08:21 PM
Looks like a rattle can paint job on the trannys. The shields are missing on the 12AX7s.

Sonance'84
04-17-2010, 08:27 PM
Looks like a rattle can paint job on the trannys. The shields are missing on the 12AX7s.

I took the shields off to see the 12AX7's and just left them off because it looked better. Should I leave those on? And yes, you can see a little over-spray on the chassis right by the trannys.

targeteye
04-17-2010, 08:32 PM
I took the shields off to see the 12AX7's and just left them off because it looked better. Should I leave those on? And yes, you can see a little over-spray on the chassis right by the trannys.

I am beside myself with disbelief. On a good note. Google finds Audio karma threads very well. If these folks are watching this thread they would be wise to take head and make this right.

Steve

JonL
04-17-2010, 08:37 PM
.... And yes, you can see a little over-spray on the chassis right by the trannys.

They didn't even take the transformers off to paint them????

1MOR
04-17-2010, 08:38 PM
I took the shields off to see the 12AX7's and just left them off because it looked better. Should I leave those on? And yes, you can see a little over-spray on the chassis right by the trannys.

As they just snap off and on, snap them back on and see if you have less background noise. At this point, probably won't make a difference either way.

1MOR
04-17-2010, 08:43 PM
I am beside myself with disbelief. On a good note. Google finds Audio karma threads very well. If these folks are watching this thread they would be wise to take head and make this right.

Steve

If Mapleshade is watching this, they ought to drive to your house, pick up the amp, reimburse you for the full price including shipping, shine your shoes and give you your choice of a bunch of their CDs.

After seeing what you have gone through with this, I do not plan on buying anything from Mapleshade again, ever!

I have purchased quite a few CDs from them in the past.

ckreymann
04-17-2010, 08:49 PM
I took the shields off to see the 12AX7's and just left them off because it looked better. Should I leave those on? And yes, you can see a little over-spray on the chassis right by the trannys.

Put the shields back on so you won't forget them when you box it up. And yes, they should be left on.

Normally, I'd pull the PT, remove the bells and check/rewire connections, new fish paper and tape, etc. That's when you paint it, not on the chassis. You can't reach the little corners to remove rust and old paint...I use a wire wheel.

Wiring discipline is dismal. Faceplate looks average...I'd expect pristine for the money.

Let's play "Find Waldo"! I see at least one solder joint they missed.

Sonance, the pictures tell me that this unit is worth nowhere near what they charged. Send it back, dude, and allow the good folks in this forum to advise you before your next purchase.

Chris

Kegger
04-17-2010, 08:51 PM
I'm not one to bash others, BUT

That thing is a joke, $1300.00 for a "rebuilt/restored/modified" vintage tube amp and
the original power supply electrolytic's are still in there! Not to mention there old and
tired but if it's modded an upgraded I'd expect a bit done in the supply like upping the
original supply capacitance, as quite often original amounts are quite small by today's
standards, but at least replace those ticking time bomb lytics in the high voltage.. :(

andy
04-17-2010, 09:49 PM
I'm surprised they're using Xicon caps and resistors. That's just Mouser's house brand. For $1300 I would at least go with something name brand like Nichicon.

A full set of vintage tubes would be nice for that kind of money. Those Scotts usually came with Telefunkens, and Mullards, so it would be hard to improve on that.

I still don't like the lack of a bottom cover. It's dangerous, and looks unprofessional (never mind the questionable reasoning behind it). Amplifiers are at least as much engineering as they are art. He either doesn't understand engineering, or he's deliberately misleading people with lots of good sounding pseudoscience.

As far as not measuring frequency response goes, how can he be sure it's working properly if he never hooked it up to a signal generator and oscilloscope? A lot of tube amps I have restored sound fine by ear, but when I check their frequency response I find all kinds of hidden problems. Minor problems with the preamp and tone controls can be tough to spot without measuring.

sheltie dave
04-17-2010, 10:02 PM
Sonance, I hope you can filter some of the bad vibes out from this thread, and realize there really are a lot of good people who have posted that want to see you get a GOOD deal.

Some of these Scotts are among the best tube amps you can get on the market for the price, especially after one has been totally refurbed by one of the expert and ethical tube techs that are here.

Please take heart that there are techs that WILL look out for your best interests, that will NOT bullshit you, and after dealing with one of them, you will find a friend for life.

A Zenith, RCA, EH, GE AX7s, and Sovtek rectifier will get stomped by an average performing original Scott, so don't let the shinola sales pitch hold too much sand in your book. It gets my blood pressure up a bit to think of all the folks who have sent good money to fraudelent or deceptive hucksters of the Maple Shade ilk, but it does make the honest techs even more busy.

kpaxfaq
04-18-2010, 01:17 AM
I agree with Jaymann, $400 tops is what that is worth.

hair-old
04-18-2010, 01:33 AM
So, I cleaned the RCA inputs with 99% alcohol and q-tips and was amazed at how much crap came off with just the little work I did. These pics are of after a few seconds of work.

quit smoking.....:thumbsdn:

Mapleshade does excellent work,the tubes they provide are for temporary enjoyment.Your mission,should you chose to accept it it to find the correct
telefunken tubes for the unit,quite easy since mapleshade has already replaced every single electrolytic cap(:Once that is done,you will have turned back the hands of time 50 years.Your Scott amplifier is one of the worlds finest tube units,enjoy it.

Scuzzer
04-18-2010, 01:46 AM
Mapleshade does excellent work,the tubes they provide are for temporary enjoyment.

The pics show an incomplete average joe beginner recap job and it would be hard to find cheaper caps to use. The tubes are bargain
basement replacements, it would be hard to find cheaper ones here as well. This unit still has the original electrolytic's, All for oh $1300.
Really?

kpaxfaq
04-18-2010, 01:50 AM
quit smoking.....:thumbsdn:

Mapleshade does excellent work,the tubes they provide are for temporary enjoyment.Your mission,should you chose to accept it it to find the correct
telefunken tubes for the unit,quite easy since mapleshade has already replaced every single electrolytic cap(:Once that is done,you will have turned back the hands of time 50 years.Your Scott amplifier is one of the worlds finest tube units,enjoy it.

Maybe he is Mapleshade???

Kegger
04-18-2010, 01:51 AM
Alright Alright, I'm closing this thread before it gets any "Bashier"
I think we all got the idea of what this particular amp was about.

Original poster if you have anything to add once you send the amp
back u can either pm me and I'll add it or u can start a new thread.