Are carbon films worth the trouble?

[WhopperPlate]

Here's one other thought for you. If there was a magic resistor, or cap, or whatever, that made amps sound GREAT, the folks with lots of money at risk making entire amps would have long ago figured out, even if crudely, what that different part is/was, and be using only that in their amps.

There are many “ magic “ parts used consistently by builders who select their preference. I haven’t seen a bludotone without a koa Speer…Friedman likes sozo blue caps …germino uses sozo yellow consistently …and everyone seems to use orange drops with very consistent good results

These all have their “magic” in their given context. Germino definitely is its own thing and different from Marshall , yet they are the same schematic.

I don’t really understand why we keep referring to a singular “ magic “ component . My point is that all parts , at least in my experience , have a unique tonal effect for any number of reasons, known and unknown.

Ok. Here's how to do that.

Get a disinterested party to run a blind ABX test with you as the subject. If swapping carefully value matched parts in such a blind ABX test shows that you personally can reliably do better than guessing at identifying a part change, and for extra points identify that some brand/material/age of parts is always better, great! You have proven that you personally can identify which parts are better to your hearing. If you prove that you in fact can't do better than random chance, you have actually proved something valuable; you've proved that single part variations do not get detected per se by your hearing, and you can quit searching for mythical parts to make the amps better.

This gets rapidly more complicated if you enlarge the range to "does one amplifier sound better with X parts or Y parts?" or "must I just use X material resistors/caps/wire/solder to get a good sounding amp?"

I understand the response is designed to be inclusive of the larger audience reading….

…but with all of my testimony…and other’s… in this thread alone … with hundreds upon hundreds of hours of obsessive nitpicking testing and comparing of components ……do you really think I can dismiss all of that by finding someone approved by you to put my hearing to the test?

As if I am guaranteed to discover I can’t hear or remember accurately enough to maintain my convictions?

please excuse me if I have my reservations. I don’t fault you for having your own about any of my claims, as I can’t reasonably expect anyone to take my word for anything, but I can only insist that there hasn’t been enough evidence thus far for me to “quit searching”.

I said it once already : what matters most for the player is how inspired one becomes when they play . Is there a tool to measure that? In the right context some might argue how much money they would spend lol .

I have discussed in different threads about swapping entire sets of resistors , from one brand to the next , within an amplifier . the differences are evidently large enough to inevitably determine whether a professional player is begging to buy it or not … I am not talking about amateurs practicing for their YouTube recitals … but ironically these changes are all easily detectable by non musicians alike when interviewed …something like that is not a small difference .

It’s also the difference between my wife closing the door to my shop or not lol

I do believe in magic circuits, and carefully setting gains, noise budgets, frequency rolloffs and the like. And in carefully, carefully, carefully characterizing speakers. It's simply amazing how much difference a different speaker can make to an amp's sound, even one of the same brand and manufacturing date. Speakers are acoustic creators, and have their own voices. This can, and has been measured. I find it strange to find yet another internet discussion on whether carbon comp, carbon film, whatever, has a huge effect on tone, and so little discussion of the known huge effect of speakers and cabs. But that's just me.

I repaired/reconed speakers professionally for about a decade . I stopped because the glue fumes were too toxic , even with proper ventilation and protection , it was just too much for me . Made me grumpy and irritable .
Nasty.

I digress, I have tested repaired and installed countless speakers. To emphasize the point you made , practically no two speakers are exact. Some companies are far more consistent, and amazingly so. A simple tap test with your finger on a speaker cone can let you know plenty on this factor . As correct as you are about speakers , in my experience it’s certainly not enough to negate the effects of tonal effects varying electronic components within the amplifier .

I make sure I use the same guitar and speaker combination for any comparison , but I find the instrument that works best for distinguishing nuance is a Stratocaster with single coils into an overdriven preamp . Overdrive highlights ugly .

[Reeltarded]

You guys are pissin' me off! Just down the forum list.. there is a place so pedantic and so superstitious that only the most technically oriented shamans aren't evaporated by rays of zealotry previously only known to pastry makers and chocolatiers.

Are you telling me the red caps and brown resistors are the same as everything else that meters identically? If that is what you are saying.. I swear I will go tell them you said that.

I am willing to believe that chemically identical and structually identical things are identical. I am willing to believe that there is a difference in Solingen and Sheffield. Process, you know.

Lead dress and output transformers are most of the difference, but there is something else that can only be accounted for by perception and action. I have played hundreds of 'so similar as to be considered identical' devices that had vastly different touch and harmonic content. Marshalls from 69-72 are downright ignorant to the existence of each other in the same batch and consecutive. I'll bet we could check test signatures and come up with highly reasoned answers without opening them. It would all come down to tolerances and batch periods. This is half the reason we are having this conversation. Memory of that time when that thing happened. If I ate a thousand acorns, I'll bet one wouldn't taste like shit.

It would be easy to string up a test rig with a common Marshall from input to tonestack with NO VOLUME CONTROL and swap resistors on the CF until we find some trend toward chemistry playing some part and process playing some other part. Here, I am willing to believe the binder theory plays a role in how the fields are projected on a micro scale and that having the largest effect on what we find in there.

Resistance is futile. Viva la Capacitance.

I am partial to fields. Disclaimer.

[WhopperPlate]

Marshalls from 69-72 are downright ignorant to the existence of each other in the same batch and consecutive. I'll bet we could check test signatures and come up with highly reasoned answers without opening them.

The Iskra era throw me a dogbone…

[dorrisant]

It would be easy to string up a test rig with a common Marshall from input to tonestack with NO VOLUME CONTROL and swap resistors on the CF until we find some trend toward chemistry playing some part and process playing some other part. Here, I am willing to believe the binder theory plays a role in how the fields are projected on a micro scale and that having the largest effect on what we find in there.

I vote for something like this.

[bepone]

The only thing I want is to get the sound I want using cheap and easy to find in production parts . Like I have tirelessly emphasized: this has proved challenging …

I actually don’t want to believe there is any difference between anything. It’s far easier and cheaper if there wasn’t …

of course, and life simpler too ! we just need Eric Johnson parts!

[bepone]

The Iskra era throw me a dogbone…

i will send you some set! nobody will care, and be jelouos, because , there is no difference!
technically the most rare Iskra is 220k, i have 104 pcs only i will wait one more decade and then change them for appartement

[bepone]

It would be easy to string up a test rig with a common Marshall from input to tonestack with NO VOLUME CONTROL and swap resistors on the CF until we find some trend toward chemistry playing some part and process playing some other part. Here, I am willing to believe the binder theory plays a role in how the fields are projected on a micro scale and that having the largest effect on what we find in there.

Interesting when we are speaking about Marshalls.. one thing comes to my mind.. for the people who claim that there is no difference, lets try opposite method:

- here is original Marshall from 70ties
- lets make one clone that is sounding the same

It is enough.. result is 99% failed.

Question: why your amp doesn't sound like orig Marshall? somebody tried to think about this problematic?
What would be the answers?

[Reeltarded]

Well, the problem is 90% output transformer. There are obvious differences when production changed on board types. 70-71 are a nightmare to keep up with. 71 and 72 50w amps are the best they ever made.. but then there are the 68-70 amps when they ran low on OTs and used higher impedance for a batch. You are looking for the 2k2-2k5 100w amps. TRUST ME IM A FANATIC

[Reeltarded]

Marshalls from 69-72 are downright ignorant to the existence of each other in the same batch and consecutive. I'll bet we could check test signatures and come up with highly reasoned answers without opening them.

The Iskra era throw me a dogbone…

Piher amps sound better. Prove me wrong!

Piher with Wima is angry.

[bepone]

Piher amps sound better. Prove me wrong!
Piher with Wima is angry.

And cheap MF with Orange drops 715 is hysterical disaster doesn't have any connection with Marshall sound

[martin manning]

We're talking about resistors here. The effects of caps and OT's is another subject.

[WhopperPlate]

Marshalls from 69-72 are downright ignorant to the existence of each other in the same batch and consecutive. I'll bet we could check test signatures and come up with highly reasoned answers without opening them.

The Iskra era throw me a dogbone…

Piher amps sound better. Prove me wrong!

Piher with Wima is angry.

Well, the problem is 90% output transformer. There are obvious differences when production changed on board types. 70-71 are a nightmare to keep up with. 71 and 72 50w amps are the best they ever made.. but then there are the 68-70 amps when they ran low on OTs and used higher impedance for a batch. You are looking for the 2k2-2k5 100w amps. TRUST ME IM A FANATIC

“90% output transformer”
My precious …incontestable …

All my favorite Marshall tones were iskra amps . A bit more balanced to my ears . In all the amp archive photo hunting I have done, 68-72 era seems to usually have more iskra than Piher . Being a fellow fanatic you could very well know better than I. It always stood out to me that guys like yngwie and Michael Schenker were devout lovers of the 1987 amps from this era specifically. No other eta utilized iskra afaik . Please correct me if I am wrong .

Wima are definitely something different than those Phillips

When I utilize piher in a build they sound more like stereotypical Marshall imo . 70s. They really can add woody tone . #183 circuit with v2 grid input comes to mind. That’s a well discussed area of application. Same effect is easily observed vs Iskra when used on v1 in a super lead …whether it’s 68k or anything other experimented value of piher … ime

Wild tangent: I have an early red face Echoplex ep3 with what appears to be piher resistors… they have the same coloring and body shape when I compare them to my nos stash….maybe someone knows better … anyways , all other Echoplex I have ever owned or played either had CC , or later units had tan smaller CF . I have compared it to others from that era with the early preamp but different resistors, going outta my way to hunt down others , but no luck. That one is the most unique sounding ep3 I have ever played. In fact , if I were to keep just one piece of gear on a desert island (besides my guitar and amp) this would be it….

[quote=WhopperPlate post_id=449754 time=<a href="tel:1677220702">1677220702</a> user_id=8476]
The Iskra era throw me a dogbone…

i will send you some set! nobody will care, and be jelouos, because , there is no difference!
technically the most rare Iskra is 220k, i have 104 pcs only i will wait one more decade and then change them for appartement
[/quote]

lol you make me laugh!

Ahhh those elusive 220k ! I gave talbany 1 of my last 3! I thought I had more lol

That’s a wonderful gesture on your part , I would be humbled to receive such a kindness . I have aspirations of building another 69 era super lead replica with all iskras …sorry Reeltarded

PM me and I can we talk about any “magic parts” I might have that you might want .

Reeltarded…btw thanks for that OT impedance detail on those amps …do you know they date ranges specifically where those predominant?

[quote=Reeltarded post_id=449753 time=<a href="tel:1677218983">1677218983</a> user_id=6156]

It would be easy to string up a test rig with a common Marshall from input to tonestack with NO VOLUME CONTROL and swap resistors on the CF until we find some trend toward chemistry playing some part and process playing some other part. Here, I am willing to believe the binder theory plays a role in how the fields are projected on a micro scale and that having the largest effect on what we find in there.

I vote for something like this.
[/quote]

If any of the more scrutinizing members have any further suggestions for necessary testing parameters … beyond the critically tested and proven ears ( which a testing protocol could also be detailed again , minus the skeptical ad nauseam )… let’s hear them !

[sluckey]

I don't have any techno babble to add but to answer the original question, "Are carbon films worth the trouble?", I say absolutely. Just look at all the comradery shared just at the mention of carbon film. I am entertained and that makes it worth the trouble to me. How 'bout you?

Long live carbon, the basis for all of us.

[dragonbat13]

I'll tell you one thing. A few places in my board are gonna end up with carbon comp, just because I can't find anything with long enough leads to stretch the darn turrets.

I am not too thrilled about the metal film with longer leads soldered on. But what I will most likely do is build it with added leads, try it out for awhile, either find some longer carbon films or use carbon comp.

Heck I may even use some pulls from some of my junk I have laying around.

And my hearing is on the lower spectrum of good with all the 100 watters, concerts, tractor pulls, ect. So if I hear a difference it will most likely be a difference anyone can hear. Or feel. Or whatever.

[dragonbat13]

I've decided what I'm going to do.

I plan on measuring out the metro board with shorter lead spacing , send the DIYLC file to Hoffman and have an updated board built that will take modern parts.

If I'm not mistaken metal film and carbon film resistors are approximately the same size, so I'll be able to swap out parts over time.

This amp was intended to be a long term, modifying, trying parts, to get it how I want. I'm just figuring I'm starting off with a clean slate with the parts I've chosen at the moment