![[-]](https://theultimatetone.com/images/collapse.png "[-]")
08-24-2023, 08:59 AM
Hi Guys
Post-2 paragrapph-3 describes the use of parallel and nonparallel tube rectifers and the resulting sag produced.
In a way, saying that the parallel rectifiers "allows more current" is correct but also a bit misleading. The current has to be available from the PT to begin with, so what is really happening with parallel tube rectifiers is a reduction of the net diode resistance and thus a reduction of the sag. It is an attempt to overcome the imperfection off the device itself; current is increased for any given amount of sag compared to the use of a single rectifier.
It should also be noted that Fender was still following hifi rules and a hifi ethos for its amp designs up until the 1970s. Eliminating or reducing sag by adding a second expensive rectifier tube falls into that ethos. That players would remove one rectifier tube shows the difference of attitude between the designer and the user
Post-2 paragrapph-3 describes the use of parallel and nonparallel tube rectifers and the resulting sag produced.
In a way, saying that the parallel rectifiers "allows more current" is correct but also a bit misleading. The current has to be available from the PT to begin with, so what is really happening with parallel tube rectifiers is a reduction of the net diode resistance and thus a reduction of the sag. It is an attempt to overcome the imperfection off the device itself; current is increased for any given amount of sag compared to the use of a single rectifier.
It should also be noted that Fender was still following hifi rules and a hifi ethos for its amp designs up until the 1970s. Eliminating or reducing sag by adding a second expensive rectifier tube falls into that ethos. That players would remove one rectifier tube shows the difference of attitude between the designer and the user
