[Jukebox-list] RE: AMI G-200 questions.

[S.R. Boland]

> Oh, and here's photos of mine.  Hope you like it. 
> It was cheap and an easy fix up.  I think the G is 
> WAY under valued.
>
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v196/JimDouglasJr/AMI%20G120/

It looks fantastic!!!  Beautiful job!  I agree on the
"undervalued" judgment.  But it seems that most people
in the market for a juke are put off by the boxy looks
of the G; they're looking for curved glass, rounded
corners, lighted pilasters, lots of chrome, etc., as a
primary consideration (which I can certainly
understand).  To me, the G-200 represents a very good
value, considering what prices are in the vintage
jukebox market (there's no chance I'll be getting a
Seeburg VL200 in the near future!).

> The 'horns' refer to the extended chambers and/or
> ports that the sound travels through.  The bass is 
> provided by 2 regular speakers, but their signal is 
> enhanced by traveling through a specially designed 
> exit chamber.  Think old Victrola horn.  The high 
> frequency horn is a straight forward horn design, 
> much like a Victrola horn. The 'horn' is used to 
> collect and redirect sound waves out in a specific 
> direction, much like a cars headlight reflector 
> throws all available light forward.  These horns are
 > incredibly efficient at producing sound.  Many
times > more efficient than simply mounting a speaker
in the
> front of the cabinet facing out.  This allows for 
> less power consumption and a
> cooler running amplifier.
> 
> What AMI did was emulate the high end audio speaker
> cabinets of the time 
> (The general population,  couldn't afford high end
> audio or really even know about it, hence the bright
> colors of the cabinets for mass appeal).
> What we have here is, to use the modern term, a
> sub-woofer and a solid state tweeter.   That's all.

That's a wonderfully detailed explanation of the horn
system; I understand it a little better now!  I can
see that the design on the G was quite advanced for
its time.  It's still hard for me to believe the bass
on the G200 is achieved with two 8" drivers (that
seems like a pretty small diameter to deliver bass),
but I guess I'll have to hear it to believe it.

> Controls are on the amp.  There's one just for high
> frequencies. (I keep mine at 'max')
> The other control is a general tone compensator with
> pre-sets. From left to right:
> 1. Full treble, reduced bass
> 2. Full treble, full bass.
> 3. Full bass, reduced treble. (I keep mine here)

It looks like the tone settings are somewhat limited,
but probably all that's necessary.  I'm interested in
rich bass tones, so I'd probably set mine up like
yours.

> -- How powerful is the amp, in terms of watts/RMS
> rating?
> 22 - 25 watts. HOWEVER, the speakers are matched for
> this, so the output is 
> tremendous.  My amp has NOT been rebuilt, and turned
> up full blast is deafeningly loud with next to no 
> distortion.
> ***Watt ratings are not necessarily a rating of
> quality or volume.***
> My G, all by itself, could EASILY fill a large
> auditorium.  These were incredible machines, and 
> genius with the horn at the top tipped up slightly. 
> Sound isn't lost in carpets, furniture, or people 
> legs.

Can't wait to hear one!

> Amplifiers of this age that are beginning to sound
> bad usually require new capacitors (the larger round
> and can shaped components).  This amp is an 
> easy re-cap/rebuild and the kits are available for
> about $50.  The early capacitors were literally
wound > with paper and a waxy electrolyte that breaks
down 
> over the years.  Of course new tubes will sound
fantastic...

I can see that a re-cap job would be my first step if
I get a box that hasn't had that done already.  I can
also see that I will need to become handy with a
solder gun!

> Oh, and that's why I keep my tone compensator where
> I do.  Nice bass and plenty of treble at this 
> setting.  Remember, it's never going to be a Bose 
> 5.1 surround system. 

It seems to me that jukebox tube amp designs and
speaker configurations optimize the sound of the old
45 rpm records.  I think that '50s and '60s 45s were
also mastered/pressed in a way that they would
actually sound best in jukeboxes of that era.  My old
records never sounded as good played at home as they
did when I'd find the same songs in a jukebox
somewhere.  That's part of the appeal for me.

> -- Do reproduction trim parts exist?
> 
> No, but parts machines are out there and there are
> juke junkers that have parts.  The trim parts on F 
> and G models are readily available and clean up
well.

Actually, I'm an Internet research/information junkie,
so I've done multiple searches on parts for the G. 
I'm amazed to see the extent of what's available out
there, both in the US and overseas.  It's very
encouraging, considering the G isn't super-popular
like the H and I models seem to be.

> Tonearm is easy to adjust and I have my G tracking
> at about 4 grams.  If you have the original GE 
> cartridge in it, there's a simple mod you can make
to 
> the needles that allow for use of stereo records and
> better compliance of the stylus.  Simply remove the 
> rubber supports. They aren't needed.

Good info.  From what I've read, 4 grams seems to be
about as light as you can go with these machines. 
That's heavy by most standards, but jukeboxes
evidently go by different rules!

> Hope some of this helps.

It all helps a lot, believe me.  Thanks for letting me
know what I'm getting myself into!

S.R. (Boris) Boland
digiovanni13 at yahoo.com


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. 
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html