Univox 1221 by Wakarusa Amps...Wow!

[epluribus]

Wow! Yes, wow, you heard it here first.

I still have my first amp, a '69 Univox 1221 piggyback, advertised at 100W. 2 Channels, one with verb and trem, one without--a much more compact signal path. These amps were always known for being rich, deep, not real loud (2x6L6GCs) for "100" watts, and exceedingly clean all the way up to eight or nine. They had two channels with a Bright and Normal Input each, but the joke was that the jacks all joined together in the same circuit behind the panel--a one-tone pony. In other words, not enough personality on its own for most folks, but very pedal-friendly and cool in its own right.

So I brought my baby to Todd for a thorough check-up on the bench, incl. tubes, bias, caps where needed, etc. Todd knows my taste for things Blackface, Tweed, and Blues. Haven't had a chance to talk to Todd in great detail about what he did, but what an amp!

Only got to run it with a Weber Mass on it so far, for the neighbor's sake, but the intial returns are already very striking. Essentially, it's become a four-channel amp with very subtle tweaks on each, deftly retaining the stout Univox character that sets it apart from anything Fender, Vox, or Marshall.

Ch. 1 Bright has dirt that's very tweed-y, coming on early and agressive on the volume knob, with mountains of feel. Ch. 1 Normal is still agressive in the Tweed sort of way, but warmer, smoother, getting into the dirt a bit later on the knob and a little more gradually. A very comfortable and musical riff on Tweed grunt, while the cleans on both retain that ultra-present Univox signature.

Ch 2. Bright is subtly different from Ch 1. Bright, a bit smoother and fatter, and less apt to go into the break at similar levels--the difference is more feel than sound, though it's a slightly smoother grind than #1. Not really Blackface, the dirt is too sweet for that, but you may get the idea. Ch 2 Normal is the one that really alerts you to the split personalities...it's very clean, nearly stock Univox, playing just the way these typically do with just a shade of clean boost, very jazzy cleans all the way up to 8 or so, and easily the fattest of the channels.

So Todd, if you're tuned in, I'd love to know what all you did to make the amp play this way. Can't wait to turn 'er up proper tomorrow when everybody in the neighborhood is at work! Thanks man!

:BluesBros

--Ray

[Trout]

I find the U1221 to be an interesting amp.

I happen to own a really nice U1511
1511 (1 (http://www.univox.org/pics/amps/1511.jpg), 6 (http://www.univox.org/pics/amps/1511-back.jpg), 7 (http://www.univox.org/pics/amps/1511-back2.jpg)) - same as 1011 except with 4 6550 and 150W output

What I always found interesting about the U1221 was they advertised 100W? From a pair of 6L6GC's? Even in ClassAB1 it is tough to get over 55W from a single pair.

Yet from literature I have seen, and the Univox forum they do indeed claim 100W
1221 - 100W guitar amp, 2 channels with volume and tone each. "Effect" section with reverb and tremolo. Tubes are: 2 GL6GC's, one 12AU7, two 6AN8A's, and two 12X7A's

Ask your tech if he confirmed the max output, I would be really interested in hearing more facts on that. Those can still occasionally be had for a very reasonable price on fleabay.

I have only seen 1 other U1511 like mine in 10 years, But there is not much demand for 150W amps that knock down walls these days.:AOK

Trout

[Wakarusa]

First, thanks Ray. Now cut it out - you're going to make me blush and then all of my friends will call me a pansy.

FWIW, I'll normally discuss (in annoying detail) everything that went on with the owner, but we're in the odd situation where Ray's still in Indiana and I'm now in Georgia. That said, I'd love to take credit for genius, but simply t'ain't so. I replaced the electrolytics, replaced the out of spec oil-filled, threw in some decent tubes and did a tweak or two on the circuit (not much, really) to get it to behave a bit better.

As for the claim of 100watts, I didn't think to put the amp on the wattmeter so I don't know the true output. Given the circuit, I'd guess that it may not be 100W, but is probably significantly higher than your average 2x6L6 build. The magic behind the high output is that Ray's amp runs its' 6L6 plates in excess of 600VDC (Ray's came in around 625VDC at idle). They get away with this because the screens are held to a modest 320VDC or so with the screen and plate supplies decoupled by a voltage doubler.

The thing to keep in mind is that Univox did some interesting things in their designs that are atypical for that era of guitar amps. For instance, I originally intended to replace the 2 prong cord with a grounded 3 prong... until I realized the amp is double insulated and doesn't need the grounded cord.

The big difference between the channels is that one is loaded by the trem and reverb circuits while the other is not. Also, don't let the "bright" and "normal" labels fool you. Each pair of inputs shares a tone stack and differ in much the way Fender '1' and '2' inputs do. With your average Fender you get a 68K series impedance into '2' and a pair of 68K in parallel for 34K of impedance into the '1' jack. On the Univox it's all the same, just with 47K resistors instead of 68K.

Anyway, super pleased that you like the results. If there's more you'd like to know about the circuit just ask.

[epluribus]

Hey Todd, hope Ga's treatin' you well.

... I replaced the electrolytics, replaced the out of spec oil-filled...

I recall you suspected one or two specifically were out of spec. Which ones did you replace and what do you feel was the impact on performance and tone? I remember you thinking a drifted cap was part of the super-deep bass, not to mention eating up power to do it. (Deep bass which the amp still has, BTW, but much tigher and more focussed. And yes, it's louder. :) )

... threw in some decent tubes...

Haven't opened it up to peek at what you did yet--what tubes did you use? IIRC it had most of its OEM Mullards and one RCA that I bought in a hardware store in the mid-seventies. The power tubes were Sovteks I think, about five or so years old. What did you use? I'm guessing a good match on the power tubes and a well-balanced PI for starters.

Any changes to stock bias on the power tubes? I also wondered if you tweaked your choices of the first 12AX7 and the 6AN8 to control which one broke up first. The way the dirt comes on and the sound and feel of it are terrific, and I wondered how you shaped it.

and did a tweak or two on the circuit (not much, really) to get it to behave a bit better.

Fascinating, I suspected you'd approach the project like this. A few very well-chosen tweaks to optimize what it wants to do best, as opposed to
trying to make it do something it doesn't want to be. Proof's in the pudding--it's the same old Univox I've known all this time, without doubt, but it's
also significantly...well...better. What exactly did you tweak and why? Whatever it was, it took four cookie-cutter channels and made them very
different, yet all still true to the amp's native tone. BTW, they're also terrifically playable all the way up the dial.

As for the claim of 100watts, I didn't think to put the amp on the wattmeter so I don't know the true output. Given the circuit, I'd guess that it may not be 100W, but is probably significantly higher than your average 2x6L6 build. The magic behind the high output is that Ray's amp runs its'
6L6 plates in excess of 600VDC (Ray's came in around 625VDC at idle). They get away with this because the screens are held to a modest 320VDC or so with the screen and plate supplies decoupled by a voltage doubler.

Did you say this also makes the amp run cleaner, or was that something to do with the power supply? Knew I shoulda taken notes. :)
I find it intriguing that in an era when the mfgr's thought hi-fi clean was the holy grail for guitar amps, Univox actually incorporated a lot more hi-fi
architecture than the Famous guys, and that probably wasn't cheap. Unfortunately in light of the extra cost, these were dogs on the market in their day despite the fact that they take pedals exceedingly well and have tonal range to die for.

Anyhoo, some good stuff here to pass on to Univox.org.

While we're on the subject of getting big power out of 6L6's, it's interesting to note that the schemo appears to show a split-load inverter, something you don't associate with optimizing power. Also remarkable that such PI's are known for their breakup, yet these amps were famous for being squeaky-clean.

Also on the architecture end, one other thing I've always found fascinating is that they make excellent bass amps, probably owing to their higher-fi heritage, but certainly owing to the fact that, past the tone stack, they share exactly the same circuit as their "Bass" amp Univox cousin, the U-1236 IIRC. I think Univox was trying to get two products for the price of one here.

The thing to keep in mind is that Univox did some interesting things in their designs that are atypical for that era of guitar amps. For instance, I originally intended to replace the 2 prong cord with a grounded 3 prong... until I realized the amp is double insulated and doesn't need the grounded cord.

Not entirely surprised. These things tended to be built like tanks. Even the lowly 17 watt U-65Rn SS combo comes in a great cab.

The big difference between the channels is that one is loaded by the trem and reverb circuits while the other is not.

Also, don't let the "bright" and "normal" labels fool you. Each pair of inputs shares a tone stack and differ in much the way Fender '1' and '2' inputs do. With your average Fender you get a 68K series impedance into '2' and a pair of 68K in parallel for 34K of impedance into the '1' jack. On the Univox it's all the same, just with 47K resistors instead of 68K.

Always wondered why Univox (among others) chose the 47k's instead of .68's. BTW, I also note there's an additional 1M resistor to ground on the Bright sides. A certain Mr. Van Zile tells me the original reason for two inputs is that one is for loading single-coils correctly, and one for HBs. My Kzoo II is wired that way too.

In any event, now the 1221's bright inputs seem to hit the amp harder, as well as now being distinctly brighter. (On the KZoo's, it isn't so much tone as input level.) Wasn't that way before, but I wish it had been. Hm...did you replace those 1M resistors?

Anyway, super pleased that you like the results. If there's more you'd like to know about the circuit just ask.

Thanks again Todd. I'm sure I'll have many more to ask. Trout, jump in here anytime, we'll have to report back to the U-Page guys with our findings.

--Ray

BTW, what were your Before and After impressions of playing the amp? (Opinions biased tho they may be. :))

[epluribus]

I find the U1221 to be an interesting amp.

I happen to own a really nice U1511


What I always found interesting about the U1221 was they advertised 100W? From a pair of 6L6GC's? Even in ClassAB1 it is tough to get over 55W from a single pair.

Yet from literature I have seen, and the Univox forum they do indeed claim 100W

Hey Trout.

Just re-read this. Not only does the catalog brag 100W, there's a sticker with the model # on the back of the chassis, and it says 100 WATTS in big bold letters. Never sounded mean enough to be 100W to me before, but it's a heck of a lot closer now, esp for 2x6L6. It'll be interesting to run it with a clean boost.

--Ray

BTW, check the thread about the PI problem in the Princeton on the Amp Tech pages here. Nice discussion of Univox-style cathodyne PIs there.

[Trout]

I have been thinking about designing a couple turret boards for these babys. I do not know much about the one you have, But the U1511 sounds a hell of a lot like a Hiwatt through most of its volume range.

I have not experimented with any tweaks on it yet other than rolling a few different tubes through it. Right now beleive it or not, I have a quad of Valve Art 6550's in it and they sound REALLY sweet.

I have basically about 5 hours on this amp, It very difficult to find moments to open her up. Last time I did, I literally had a couple of instances of things falling off of the shelves from the thundering bass.

I think it is clearly more amp than I will ever use or need, But it sure does have a certain amount of mojo just sitting there.

Trout

[epluribus]

Hey Trout.

But it sure does have a certain amount of mojo just sitting there.

They do indeed have an ominous persona, kind of a power-plant chic somehow.

But the U1511 sounds a hell of a lot like a Hiwatt through most of its volume range.

Might be interesting to find a schemo of the Hiwatt and see what similarities actually lurk in there. Interesting what cool little features make the Univox line unique--features that lend themselves to tweaking in a distinctly Uni way.

I was looking at the schemo for the 1011 just now, ostensibly a very close cousin of the 1511, and I saw a couple of intriguing things in there. One is that it, like the 1221, appears to have a cathodyne PI--the Prin thread is getting into how to tweak and gain structure them.

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=250828

Kind of interesting that Univox stuck with such a PI when folks like Fender had long since jumped on the long-tail pair bandwagon.

The other is a subject that came up on another recent thread...

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=252511

...the 1011 appears to have a mid-scoop circuit by the volume pot similar to the Gib GA-19RVT. Though cavernous mid-scoop has always been a trademark of the Univox sound IMHO, I've lately thought it would be nice to make that little circuit switchable or adjustable.

--Ray

ps: On controlling the earth-moving volume. I discovered something about using attenuators without losing so much cab mojo. Try running the amp hot and dialing the output down, then running it into a smaller cab with a lower-rated speaker. You get the circuit saturating nicely but at a more usable level, and a saturated cab/speaker as well. Just gotta listen for pushing the speaker too hard and tearing it up.

[Trout]

I was looking at the schemo for the 1011 just now, ostensibly a very close cousin of the 1511, and I saw a couple of intriguing things in there. One is that it, like the 1221, appears to have a cathodyne PI--the Prin thread is getting into how to tweak and gain structure them.


The 1011 & 1511 actually use the same PCB board, The board has U1011 etched into it. I thank there are only a couple of different parts involved other than the obvious trannys and tubes.

Someplace, I think on my other PC I have detailed photo's of the 1511 guts.
There is another guy over on the Uni forum that has a 1511, Last post I saw of his was about it being to clean and wanting ideas on getting more grit out of it. He tried several things, But I suspect its not possible to saturate the transformer enough to get what he is after.

Trout

[epluribus]

While we're asking questions: Finally got time to start peeking under the hood. Just realized I don't know which tubes equate to V1, etc, and where they are on the schemo. The choice of tubes is interesting:

Two New Svetlana 6L6GCs. Great sounding tubes if you get good ones, that makes sense. Better than the Sovteks that were in there I would think. BTW, Todd, didn't you tell me once you liked those Shuguangs with the silver plates? (That they quit making...)

Two 6AN8As, one rebadged, a mid-seventies Rat Shack, and one OEM Mullard. (Reverb and Gain 2/PI, respectively) I bet that Mullard is in the PI/Gain 2 slot. That said, the pentode at Gain 2 on the schemo looks more like a gain recovery stage than providing any real boost, at least in stock trim.

One 70's RCA 12AX7A (I have a couple of those laying around here, pulled out of my Kzoo IIs. Hm...) and one new Sovtek 12AX7LE. (LE?) As Sovteks (IME) tend to be a bit edgy, break up easy, and be somewhat lively and microphonic, and since it's all the way on the right side presumably at V1, I'm guessing it's doing duty in the post-input first gain stage. That would leave the RCA for trem gain and verb recovery.

...But I suspect its not possible to saturate the transformer enough to get what he is after.

Yee...not sure I'd want to be standing next to it when he did. :eek:

--Ray

[Wakarusa]

The silver plate Chinese tubes are 12AX7, not 6L6GC. Most you see were originally Ruby branded and called "Silver Specials". It's a great tube but only in certain applications. I like 'em in V1 or V2 on a blackface Fender, but not so much any where else.

Shuguang did (does?) make a cheap 6L6GC that, for the money, isn't half bad. Not great, but not terrible and tend to go for less than $10 a tube. Makes 'em perfect for road spares for the budget minded musician. I wouldn't recommend them for this amp (spares or otherwise) because of the high plate voltage.

Reaching into fuzzy memories but I seem to recall the channel labels on the amp are opposite those on the schematic (it's Ch 2 on the amp that has 'verb and trem, right?). Anyhow, looking in the back of the amp the rightmost 12AX7 should be the first gain stage for both channels. Then (and I don't recall the order) there ought to be a 6AN8, 12AX7, and 12AU7 serving as reverb drive, reverb recovery & trem oscillator, and trem "drive" respectively. The leftmost 6AN8 should be the 2nd gain stage and phase inverter. I thought the sovtek in there was an LPS. Since it's a head, microphonics shouldn't be an issue.

Not sure why you think the pentode doesn't do much for gain. The first stage (12AX7) with 220K plate load, 2K2 bypassed cathode and 240VDC or so on the plate and driving into that tone stack produces a maximum theoretical midband voltage gain of around 75. So even a hot pickup pushing, say, 100mV at the input presents at most 7.5V at the input to the tone stack. You've got losses in the volume control and tone stack and in the 220K mix resistor just before the pentode. Knowing that the phase inverter provides little or no gain, and that to get the power section into compression requires 10's of volts (say 30 to 40), if it ain't the pentode then the wizards at Univox had some tricks up their sleeves that I haven't read about ;)

You can obviously try swapping the RCA and the Sovtek to see if it suits your tastes better. A Mullard would probably sound nice in the first slot as well. I think I tried it reversed and liked it the way it is better, but your ears are the final vote.

[epluribus]

Hey Todd.

The silver plate Chinese tubes... I wouldn't recommend them for this amp (spares or otherwise) because of the high plate voltage.

Hadn't planned on it, actually, it was just something that crossed my mind. I really like the Svets.

Reaching into fuzzy memories but I seem to recall the channel labels on the amp are opposite those on the schematic (it's Ch 2 on the amp that has 'verb and trem, right?).

Ch 1 actually, but no biggie--as long as one has it and the other one goes direct. Nice to have a choice of both in one amp, IMHO.

Anyhow, looking in the back of the amp the rightmost 12AX7 should be the first gain stage for both channels. Then (and I don't recall the order) there ought to be a 6AN8, 12AX7, and 12AU7 serving as reverb drive, reverb recovery & trem oscillator, and trem "drive" respectively. The leftmost 6AN8 should be the 2nd gain stage and phase inverter. I thought the sovtek in there was an LPS. Since it's a head, microphonics shouldn't be an issue.

Thanks Todd--the schemo doesn't label 'em, so I filled 'em in myself, but I wanted to get a more educated opinion on the V-slots than mine. (Geez, looks like I got 'em right.) The Sovtek may indeed be an LPS, I'll have to pop it out again and see. (I've been rolling tubes just to see what you did. Haven't found a better setup yet, however--this is a really nice selection you used.)

As for potential microphonics, I wasn't gripin' the choice...Kevin Silva of Uncle Albert's in Indy put me on to taking advantage of a certain amount of microphonics to enhance feel and responsiveness in some circuits. All tools is good tools if you use 'em right. He prefers Sovteks to JJ's, for example, in V1 slots for many amps just for that reason. In the case of the Kalamazoo Mod II, I'd have to agree, it's a much better tube for that kind of amp. So seeing the Sovtek in V1 made a lot of sense to me, AAMOF for a lot of reasons, but that was one of 'em.

But yeah, you're right (as usual :)) about the microphonics not being a big deal in a head.

You can obviously try swapping the RCA and the Sovtek to see if it suits your tastes better. A Mullard would probably sound nice in the first slot as well. I think I tried it reversed and liked it the way it is better, but your ears are the final vote.

Tried it, but I too like the Sovtek. I've been discovering what great things they can do for your gain structure. In fact, I think I have Sovteks in all of my preamps except for the JJs in the Deluxe Reverb II, which needs the taming influence. Sovteks just seem to be livelier and sparklier.

Speaking of gain structure, my impression is that the various stages now work together much better than they did before. I always got the feeling that they were saturating very unevenly, one stage compared to the next. Among other things, I gather the PI's saturation tone is much more a part of the package than it used to be.

Not sure why you think the pentode doesn't do much for gain.

My still-limited ability to correctly compute the values in a circuit. Not that a 6AN8A couldn't make a terrific gain stage, I just didn't see it. That said, now I'll go back and crunch the numbers for real.

The first stage (12AX7) with 220K plate load, 2K2 bypassed cathode and 240VDC or so on the plate and driving into that tone stack produces a maximum theoretical midband voltage gain of around 75. So even a hot pickup pushing, say, 100mV at the input presents at most 7.5V at the input to the tone stack. You've got losses in the volume control and tone stack and in the 220K mix resistor just before the pentode. Knowing that the phase inverter provides little or no gain, and that to get the power section into compression requires 10's of volts (say 30 to 40), if it ain't the pentode then the wizards at Univox had some tricks up their sleeves that I haven't read about ;)

Nope, no wizards in there that I know of...and I trust your science far more than mine. :) (But there are those Scottish girls in the reverb tanks.)

Just cleaned the beast up last night, got started on some of the cosmetics. Nothing drastic, I hate over-restoring and making cool old stuff sterile. So mostly it's making a new frame for the original grill cloth, tying down the old tolex in loose spots, and a replacement for the missing cab handle. Always like to do the mechanicals before the cosmetics on a restoration project.

Another thing--the wisdom (or not) of running it dimed. I ran it at various levels without the attenuator for the first time yesterday. Yee, as they say, Haa! :crazy It does not lack for power! This is one of those amps that rewards getting everything cookin' just right.

Eventually I ran all four channels wide open one at a time, which they do very well. Then, since it wasn't already loud and dirty enough, I jumpered the channels in different orders till I found a favorite. Loud, gritty, and compressed--great stuff!

...but...Longevity...not real sure I want to run it that hard for very long. IIRC you said it was built too light for that. Besides, it takes pedals so well there's other ways to get to Nirvana without beating it. Do you still recommend taking it easier on the amp due to its age and design? A Boogie it ain't. :)

Thanks again Todd, great stuff you did here.

--Ray

[epluribus]

A pic of the baby.

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/7746/071smallpo4.jpg

Basically cleaned it up, re-glued the loose tolex, made a new plywood frame for the grill cloth on the cab--no big changes really. (The badly-warped OEM frame was leaf-jointed masonite.) Used little or no new material to avoid over-restoring. I did nab a nameplate on EBay for the head--came from a U65Rn. Same size and type, fortunately.

Played it with various jumper setups today, and stuck a Humphrey Audio Modded Boss CS-3 comp in front of it. It makes the Aria Ironman sound terrific--Robben Ford's "Start It Up." A real thing of beauty Todd.

--Ray

[Geetarpicker]

I have a little Univox 2x12 stack from that exact same era with the same cosmetics, probably made in 1968 or so. My parents bought it new to hook up their Farfisa organ too! Mine is the x2 6L6 bass amp, with volume, treble,bass, deep and bright switches, and 3 inputs. Mine uses 3 preamp tubes, I think x1 12ax7 and x2 12au7. One cool thing with mine is if you balance the deep switch in the middle where it's not supposed to go the gain comes WAY up. Really sounds good then with a Gibson SG or LP, with the treble and volume dimed and the bass knob off. Sounds not unlike a JTM45 with the switch trick. Kind of a lucky accidental design "flaw" on that model.

[epluribus]

I have a little Univox 2x12 stack from that exact same era with the same cosmetics, probably made in 1968 or so. My parents bought it new to hook up their Farfisa organ too! Mine is the x2 6L6 bass amp, with volume, treble,bass, deep and bright switches, and 3 inputs. Mine uses 3 preamp tubes, I think x1 12ax7 and x2 12au7. One cool thing with mine is if you balance the deep switch in the middle where it's not supposed to go the gain comes WAY up. Really sounds good then with a Gibson SG or LP, with the treble and volume dimed and the bass knob off. Sounds not unlike a JTM45 with the switch trick. Kind of a lucky accidental design "flaw" on that model.

Sounds like a U-1235, 1969. 50 Watts advertised, which is probably a more honest claim than the 100 Watt tag the 1221 had. In '68 they had a Fender-looking nameplate, with the '69 red and black target one only lasting till around '71. If you check the catalogs on the Univox site, you'll note that the pix show speaker grills with metal trim on the sides to dress 'em up--that happened shortly after the '69 cosmetics went into production, (not to mention when they occasionally ran out of trim. :)) so yours is most likely early '69. The tranny and speaker codes should target the date the parts were tossed in the bins at least.

BTW, according to an online acquaintance with both the guitar and bass models, your 1235 is a cousin to the U-1220, basically the same amp once you get beyond the tone stack. My 1221 has a very different preamp section than your 1220, but is also a 2 x 6L6 on the power end, yet Uni claims "100" watts. Never sounded like 100 watts to me, but back in college it was one mean amp with a Fuzz in front of it nevertheless. :)

This is an insight into things Univox that I'd hoped to broach along the way in this thread. Uni's PA amps, bass amps, and guitar amps shared a ton of the same circuitry. I've always suspected they started with a PA amp, added a few parts on the assembly line for a bass amp, and a few other parts for a "guitar" amp. Three amps for the price of one assembly line, and low inventory costs to boot. Besides, back then some factions in the design world still thought clean hi-fi amps were the holy grail for guitars, so the hi-fi/PA/bass heritage makes sense. But in any event, when they were new, they were not highly regarded due to their clean character and their soft volume vs. the advertised "power."

In light of what we know now, it's interesting that apparently Univox never thought to tweak the amp to color tone and saturate in the way we think of as "correct" today, but as Todd has so aptly demonstrated, just a few changes makes these an entirely different animal. Since getting mine back and plumbing the depths of its new character, it occurs to me that these have incredible potential for just a few mods.

As for the JTM45 thing, you're not the first person to compare the two. Might have to do with the fact that it gets so much grunt from the cathodyne phase inverter, which we've not really gotten into here yet, but mine doesn't use a cathode-follower tone stack among other things, so I'd be curious to see if the 1235 had a more Tweed/JTM topography. Personally, I don't hear JTM45/5F6A Bassman as much as I do more of a cross between tweed dirt and blackface tone, as well as being entirely different from Fender's Brown era. Never understood where the online talk of a Univox being "Marshall-y" came from, but it may just be my particular model of amp.

Anyhoo, as you've discovered, these are capable of some very cool stuff when set up right. Post-Wakarusa, now it does it without the pedals. Cool.

:BluesBros

--Ray

PS: Check this out.

http://www.univox.org/

[soulohio]

I have a 1x12 univox combo which has tremelo and is similar to the U48-B. This is a one trick pony but I have been told this circuit is similar to a boutique amp like a matchless...i have never touched this amp and I am sure that it could use some service....i think i will contact mr wakarusa...by the epluribus, that is a way cool amp!

[epluribus]

I have a 1x12 univox combo which has tremelo and is similar to the U48-B. This is a one trick pony but I have been told this circuit is similar to a boutique amp like a matchless...i have never touched this amp and I am sure that it could use some service....i think i will contact mr wakarusa...by the epluribus, that is a way cool amp!

Hey SoulOhio, thanks! I'm kinda partial, natch, but I'll take it anyway.

A guy on the amp pages asked for a pre-WakyAmps review, so I'll momentarily derail my thread instead of his. Worth noting that post-Todd the 1221 still has all the advantages, along with the above new ones.

******

I really dig that... What kinda tone do you get?

That's a tough one, I grew up with this amp, so I'm quite biased. Also, it doesn't really sound like anybody else IMHO.

Very jazzy clean, internally it's basically a cross between it's bass amp cousin and a guitar amp, as Univox used very similar circuits past the tone stack. (Kind of full-ranged for a guitar amp, but very well-voiced.) Much meaner looking than it delivers for starters, even though it puts out a lot of power for 2x6L6GCs.

Tone-wise, not a Fender knockoff by any stretch, but mid-scooped, clean, and full-bodied like the bigger Blackface circuits, and the cab is exceedingly stout. (A clean Vibro-King gets fairly close, minus the extensive Univox cab dynamics. The 1221 has much more clean reach in the low end, and it stays very focussed all the way down. The bottom on a Twin is somewhat higher up the EQ curve--but the 1221 can't touch the saturation characteristics of either one.) That said, it also doesn't have that "shimmer" in the hi end you get with a BF, rather it has pick detail and presence that are trememdous in their own right, and it adds a sweet choral thickness to the notes very differently from the way big Fenders do. I particularly like what it does to the bright vintage-voiced HBs in my Sheraton II, for example. Haven't heard another amp that does these things quite the same way.

Dirt-wise, in stock trim, incurably clean. Breaks up a bit with clean boost or jumpered, slightly Tweed-ish, but gets rather ratty and un-Tweedy if you hit the front end very hard. However, due to it's hi-fi-ish nature, it takes most pedals exceedingly well. Back in the days I used a borrowed Fuzz in front of it sometimes--a dose of Fuzz blended with a little clean boost made this one monster amp. The tone knob isn't enough to shape mid-boost, but EQ on the front works great for making it sit in a mix. (It'll fight your bass player.) With a modern hi-gain pedal in front it does down-tuned thump with ease--and at survivable volumes.

BTW, this amp has a subtle but very distinct feel to it, responding very well to the smallest expression. (Playing it since '72, I've gotten pretty spoiled.) One bad thing about distortion pedals is they make it seem stiff by comparison. As a matter of fact I rarely used pedals for that reason, finding other avenues to get there instead. I'm only now shopping modern dirt FX for it, so the jury's out on the current crop.

It's so different from anything Fender or Marshall, not to mention Vox, Ampeg, Kustom, or Valco, that I've had to adjust each time I use one of those. But over the years my guitars have evolved to be set up for it, and eventually you find out where all the goods are. I get tremendous performance out of it, personally, but it's kind of written its own standards over time--hence the bias in my opinion.

Will it replace your Bassman or Bluesbreaker anytime soon? Not a chance. Does it do cool stuff you don't hear very often? Absolutely. If the big-seller guys are your tone, this likely isn't for you. But if you have a few spare bucks and want some cool "new" turf, this family of big Univox might be worth a look.

--Ray

[Mr. Mandolin]

sounds very cool, I have googled it a little and am very interested. These seem to be well reguarded but are still cheap. I may have to check one out.

do you have any sound clips?

[Mr. Mandolin]

I found a clip or two on you tube of '65 u305 combo is this about the same sound as a 1221?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUEJWY3ozQI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIFJEac2GM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIFJEac2GM

I'm thinking that this would sound fab with a couple cannabis rexes in it

[epluribus]

I found a clip or two on you tube of '65 u305 combo is this about the same sound as a 1221?


Whoa, big different! Great little amp, that 305, lots of grit and compression...sweet. Love the voice too, just a classic combo sound. This must be where the Marshall-y thing comes from. Think of the 1221 as the 305's uncle with a Buick. It's jazzier, cleaner, and tons of depth in the voice even for a 2x12 piggyback. You gotta run a 1221 at 8 or 9 to even start getting dirt, and it won't get anywhere near as torn up and compressed unless you jumper it or use a clean boost. Pre-Wakarusa, I got great results using a Humphrey Audio Modded Boss CS-3 comp in front of mine--tone that would compare very nicely to that 305, albeit with a more Fender-y mid-scoop. Post-Waky, the U can do it without the pedal just fine.

What you couldn't hear on YouTube, BTW, is the low end dynamics and the pick presence and detail--a hallmark of every Univox I've ever played, even the SS guys. Expecially noticeable on the cleans, but not very apparent on YouTube. Anyhoo, it's a sound they just seemed to be big on--even their cheap SS combos like the U65Rn did that.

Now post-Todd, the 1221 has much of that hot compressed thing goin' on, not quite that thick perhaps, but definitely in the ballpark. The 1221 is also far more throaty than that, tougher, IMHO as a sometime FOH, to sit in a mix, but also smoother and prettier. I'll have to stick an EQ pedal in front and see if I can find some extra mids to get that 305R tone with a Strat--very very cool.

Big thing is now that I heard the clips, I'll have to pull up the schemos and see just how related these two are. IIRC, they're both based on fairly old Univox circuits, the 305 actually being the older. Waitin' to hear from a guy on the Univox forum to see if he can email me a 305 schematic.

As for sound clips, 'fraid I have none. Recording rig on the PC is down right now--drivers fightin' with XP--and a solution is down my list a ways for now. :)

--Ray

PS...yeah, Univoxes do tend to run cheap on The Bay. Strangely, you can get the big piggybacks for nearly what the combos run, esp if somebody's just selling the head. The mid-sized heads like mine tend to be the best bargain, as the newer Jeff Beck-era big guys look meaner and pull down a bit better mystique money. But the big guys can be thundering loud.

[Mr. Mandolin]

yeah thats what I thought! I really like the sounds that are being described. I am now in the market for a 1221! I'd like one in good condition, I don't "need" speakers in the cab, but the head must be working and overall the tolex and stuff should be in good condition :) if you or anyone hears or sees one please PM me I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks

[epluribus]

Keep your eye peeled on EBay, they pop up regularly. If you don't see the 1221 (semi-rare, not really collectable) they built several closely related models--you can research schemos and stuff on Univox.org. Also, the 305R is a relatively unknown model, so you may be able to snag one of those without a huge premium--at least if the buyers haven't seen YouTube lately.

Beauty of the whole EBay thing is, if you get one and it's not your cup of tea, you can put it back on the block and be out one-way shipping more or less.

Keep us posted.

--Ray

Oh yeah...watch the "1221" moniker. They actually made two different products with that name...the 100W U-1221 piggyback (mine) and an earlier 50W head also called a "U-1221," but marketed in a piggyback package called a "U-1220." Weird. Check the tube description and compare it to the specs at Univox.org to determine for sure which one you're looking at. Lotta owners out there who can't tell one from the other. BTW, I've seen several U45B's go for cheap cuz the owners listed 'em wrong, same sorta reasons.

[Mr. Mandolin]

thanks i,ll keep my eyes peeled

[epluribus]

I found a clip or two on you tube of '65 u305 combo is this about the same sound as a 1221?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUEJWY3ozQI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIFJEac2GM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIFJEac2GM

I'm thinking that this would sound fab with a couple cannabis rexes in it

Hey guys, just got a note from an amp tech who owns and has schemos for the 305R. He too has seen the vid, and there's significant question as to whether the model is actually a 305R, or stock. The controls appear to be in different places, apparently. Not saying anything about the guy in the vid, as veteran Univox owners know that Uni's nomenclature can be a bit bizarre to say the least. It's just that neither he nor I have heard a big, unmodified Univox do that all by itself. Cool tone, great clips, and I'm very intrigued, so More films at eleven. Just an FYI.

--Ray