AMPEX 351 - need help identifying parts

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

flaheu

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
470
Location
Land of the chicon south - yep
Hello guys,

A friend of mine insists that I build one Ampex 351 for him, he had once used it and fell in love with it !

schematic:

http://flaheu.fileave.com/AMPEX 351/Ampex351.pdf

I would like to identify the TXs, or would like to find equivalent with possibly the same "color", as this is, of course, why he liked it.
The output TX seems to have a dual winding for feed back I suppose....

If anybody knows this beast and could provide info/advice, that would be great :grin:
 
Hi,

I have just recently rebuilt a pair of stock 351 electronics. I was the one at least partially responsible for getting Brian to clone the 351 input transformer back in 2004 or so.

I can't wait to try my 351s with some ribbons!

Chris
 
Hi there,

Fazeka, how could you describe the sound of these ?
I know tons and tons of hit records were recorded trough these.
I haven't heard any myself, my friend would descibe it as "quite flat until 8K, and then something happens, don't know what, but something exiting !"
I know it's difficult to describe sound with words, but, if you have to describe the sound of it, what would it be ?
 
[quote author="flaheu"]I know tons and tons of hit records were recorded trough these.[/quote]

Really? I thought they just used the recorder and that the mic pre was looked upon as pretty much rubbish suitable for recording the "take 176...like you mean it this time"-part.
 
[quote author="flaheu"]Hi there,

Fazeka, how could you describe the sound of these ?
I know tons and tons of hit records were recorded trough these.
I haven't heard any myself, my friend would descibe it as "quite flat until 8K, and then something happens, don't know what, but something exiting !"
I know it's difficult to describe sound with words, but, if you have to describe the sound of it, what would it be ?[/quote]

Let me just say this first:

Tons of records may have been recorded through the 351 transports and electronics, but I dont think tons were recorded using the 351 mic pres.

When I was younger (sounds like a song), there was some famous cat that said these were kewl as mic pres ("phat" comes to mind). I got a pair of them for a song before everyone went ga-ga over them and then the prices got stoopid.

Then I grew up and heard real mic pres like APIs and Neves, etc.

If I had to pay for mine like everyone is now, there's no way I'd put money into a pair. Better spent money would lie with almost any other pre.

It's a trajesty that people are separating transports from their electronics because a certain cat said they were kewl.

With that said, my electronics sound slightly dark with quite a bit of gain. I hear they sound great with ribbons because of this. I have yet to try it with ribbons as I don't have any right now. It sounded pretty kewl with an SM-58... for what it's worth.

Chris
 
I have used the ones at Electrical Audio that have been stripped down and tweaked. They made me a believer. It's a lot of work though. More than my attention span would condone.
 
[quote author="eskimo"][quote author="flaheu"]I know tons and tons of hit records were recorded trough these.[/quote]

Really? I thought they just used the recorder and that the mic pre was looked upon as pretty much rubbish suitable for recording the "take 176...like you mean it this time"-part.[/quote]

Rubbish eh? Well the joke's on them: the line input is the same path as the mike input, but with a pad on it. That is unless the unbalanced input, which bypasses the input xfmr and the first triode stage, is used
 
[quote author="Bryson"][quote author="eskimo"][quote author="flaheu"]I know tons and tons of hit records were recorded trough these.[/quote]

Really? I thought they just used the recorder and that the mic pre was looked upon as pretty much rubbish suitable for recording the "take 176...like you mean it this time"-part.[/quote]

Rubbish eh? Well the joke's on them: the line input is the same path as the mike input, but with a pad on it. That is unless the unbalanced input, which bypasses the input xfmr and the first triode stage, is used[/quote]

That was the standard practice in most studios.

Peace,
Paul
 
Back
Top