mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
In terms of the complete, original faceplate/control panels - no they're not the same. Two more slide switches on the ST-70.
Eico ST 70 or Fisher KX-200
- Thread starter nj pheonix
- Start date
In terms of the complete, original faceplate/control panels - no they're not the same. Two more slide switches on the ST-70.
Buzz I started another thread after contacting guy who made my SCA 35 faceplate. Same vein Needs quantity. I didn't mean to step on your toes. I have no affiliations. I was just trying to stir up enough interest to make the numbers work. If you want to be the facillitator by all means. I'm only in it for the face plate. (pretty ironic when i haven't landed the amp yet, I'm cautiously optimistic. Again as long as they're nice and come in at a decent price point, put me down for one.
oh one other thought, The tuner in that line has the same blank, maybe stir some interest with somebody with a set.
Not stepping on my toes . . .this is all a hobby for me.
Another, less expensive alternative for short runs is to get blank panels made and painted a background color, and then have a trophy ship silkscreen them.
The hard part is doing the artwork -- one for the fab shop and the other for the decoration (e.g. screening).
Another, less expensive alternative for short runs is to get blank panels made and painted a background color, and then have a trophy ship silkscreen them.
The hard part is doing the artwork -- one for the fab shop and the other for the decoration (e.g. screening).
This may sound a bit 'edgy'....but I've been thinking about a clear plexiglass type face plate for my 'missing' 222 plate. I was thinking that if 'tinted' from the backside, it makes for a nice deep look from the front.....and something different, like maybe a red or blue.....might make for a VERY different 'look' to the amp. Of course, 'lettering', cutouts, drilling.....all that....might still be a problem. But, the 'engraver' at the local 'Things Remembered'......or even a silk-screen shop might be the way to go.
Anyway....that's all for down-the-road. Right now...bigger fish to fry! Getting this computer failure resolved is my current priority at the moment!! I pulled the hard drive, and guess what......it looks just like a hard drive!! Put it back in, and guess what? Nothin's changed!! Oh well......
TSD
Anyway....that's all for down-the-road. Right now...bigger fish to fry! Getting this computer failure resolved is my current priority at the moment!! I pulled the hard drive, and guess what......it looks just like a hard drive!! Put it back in, and guess what? Nothin's changed!! Oh well......
TSD
Just out of curiosity, i reread WC post and looked at the 3 Scotts he was mentioning. I hadn't given Scott much thought. Anybody want to give opinions on the Scott before i commit (some thought i should've been committed years ago)?
Just to clarify those Scott considerations, the 299C/D, the 233, AND the LK-72 are all 7591 based amps........with very similar circuitry......traditional 'Scott' character as far as 'sonics' go...... and from my perspective, any of these would be a 'better' choice than either the Eico or Fisher. But, again, that's just my opinion.....and we all know what is said of 'opinions'.......lol. Later, TSD
jaymanaa
RIP 1961-2018
Try to read the old ads on the Scott, and esp. read the service manual or operators manual (one in the same I think). I'll see what I can find real quick.:scratch2:
Freo-1,
I've done some pretty recent 'testing' of alternates for the 6U8..... including the 6GH8, the 6BL8, and the 6HL8. I've compared these tubes in the Scott.... and then listened again to other amps like my Fisher 500B, 500C and 800. I was a HUGE fan of the simple and available 12AX7.....and for years considered that to be the one and only tube that 'should' be in the front end of an amp. Then I got an ST-70 with the 7199, an SCA-35 also with the 7199....some Mk IIs and Mk IIIs w/ the 6AN8s, and even the ST-35 w/ the 6DJ8. Suddenly my world was opening up. Then along came the Scotts......and I really started to wonder. So....many evening were spent just tube and amp rolling. Honestly....to the point of ad-nauseum! I truly believe there is a time when you lose your original point of reference......and I think that happened to me. I ended up just tube rolling in the Scott alone one evening......and came to a very similar conclusion about the 6U8 that I did with the 12AX7; that being that 'good' tubes can sound good.......and crappy tubes can sound crappy!' I hear some pretty distinct differences between the characteristics of a Mullard or a Telefunkin vs that of cheap Chinese or Asian 12AX7.... and even some US 12AXs.....IN SOME AMPS! In other amps......I honestly couldn't tell ANY difference between these tubes. And, that included using tubes that clearly sounded different when placed in other amps. Likewise, I rolled around a number of tubes in the Scott.......and eventually settled on a pair of old US 6U8s that really sounded great!! I found the 6BL8s to be more consistent.....the HLs to be 'lack-luster'.....and for some reason I just can't get my head around the GH8s. But, one thing I'd report as my findings, perhaps not what others have found...but I did note that the Fisher amp seemed FAR more 'agreeable' with a varying level of tubes than did the Scott. I found my Sherwood to be VERY fussy about tube types.......and sonic differences were much more easily noticed in that amp than in any other I tried. Just fwiw..... Tom
I've done some pretty recent 'testing' of alternates for the 6U8..... including the 6GH8, the 6BL8, and the 6HL8. I've compared these tubes in the Scott.... and then listened again to other amps like my Fisher 500B, 500C and 800. I was a HUGE fan of the simple and available 12AX7.....and for years considered that to be the one and only tube that 'should' be in the front end of an amp. Then I got an ST-70 with the 7199, an SCA-35 also with the 7199....some Mk IIs and Mk IIIs w/ the 6AN8s, and even the ST-35 w/ the 6DJ8. Suddenly my world was opening up. Then along came the Scotts......and I really started to wonder. So....many evening were spent just tube and amp rolling. Honestly....to the point of ad-nauseum! I truly believe there is a time when you lose your original point of reference......and I think that happened to me. I ended up just tube rolling in the Scott alone one evening......and came to a very similar conclusion about the 6U8 that I did with the 12AX7; that being that 'good' tubes can sound good.......and crappy tubes can sound crappy!' I hear some pretty distinct differences between the characteristics of a Mullard or a Telefunkin vs that of cheap Chinese or Asian 12AX7.... and even some US 12AXs.....IN SOME AMPS! In other amps......I honestly couldn't tell ANY difference between these tubes. And, that included using tubes that clearly sounded different when placed in other amps. Likewise, I rolled around a number of tubes in the Scott.......and eventually settled on a pair of old US 6U8s that really sounded great!! I found the 6BL8s to be more consistent.....the HLs to be 'lack-luster'.....and for some reason I just can't get my head around the GH8s. But, one thing I'd report as my findings, perhaps not what others have found...but I did note that the Fisher amp seemed FAR more 'agreeable' with a varying level of tubes than did the Scott. I found my Sherwood to be VERY fussy about tube types.......and sonic differences were much more easily noticed in that amp than in any other I tried. Just fwiw..... Tom
might change gears now. eico i was watching on ebay near 600 now maybe starting point getting too rich. what did the other amps sound like? lol
Would you believe 635 + 75 shipping. One went on BT today for 400. Unbelievable! At this rate you guys will be moguls
No offense Frannie
jaymanaa
RIP 1961-2018
That's stupid money for that. Have you followed any 200s?
jaymanaa
RIP 1961-2018
That sounds about right, even a good deal if the iron tests out. I paid 125 for my KX 200 working but needing a recap, but that was 6 years ago.
