Fryette Power Station

[M3thoms]

Hey gang, long shot but has anyone got any info on the internals of a Fryette Power Station load box. I want to try and build one that’s as transparent as this model. A schematic, partlist and gut shot would do nicely but I’m aware pigs might fly as far as that’s concerned. Let me know!

[neskor]

no schematic available, as I know
check the picture for internals

[M3thoms]

Amazing, thank you for the picture. I shall keep scouring the internet

[M3thoms]

no schematic available, as I know
check the picture for internals

Would it be possible for you to send more photos showing the device in greater detail? How would I go about constructing my own schematic from this gut shot?

[neskor]

more pictures

[Reeltarded]

no schematic available, as I know
check the picture for internals

Would it be possible for you to send more photos showing the device in greater detail? How would I go about constructing my own schematic from this gut shot?

Nearly impossible. Highly unlikely.

You can extrapolate the core function just by seeing the 12.5mH choke that is the main load inductor and finding out what speaker it mimics.

The rest is a 50w tube output section (including PI) with a resistor instead of a choke. It has some tone stack. (unlikely that values are based on usual TMB values, probably 100k slope with lower value pots)

I don't know what other controls, but it has an internal line out to harness the signal from load to PI input.

It's all you need to know. lmao

[wpaulvogel]

I once considered building a similar device in the hopes of saving money. Fact is that I bought a PS100 for $700 and I love it. If I want to sell it I’ll get most of my money back and it’s just to easy to keep it. It allows so much more than just being an attenuator that it’s not feasible to build anything comparable. By the way I don’t attenuate with it. I use it for wet/dry, yes it absorbs 1/2 the amps power but then it re amps it with the effects at full power. I use it with a 100 watt Super Lead and two Marshall 4x12 cabs.

[M3thoms]

I once considered building a similar device in the hopes of saving money. Fact is that I bought a PS100 for $700 and I love it. If I want to sell it I’ll get most of my money back and it’s just to easy to keep it. It allows so much more than just being an attenuator that it’s not feasible to build anything comparable. By the way I don’t attenuate with it. I use it for wet/dry, yes it absorbs 1/2 the amps power but then it re amps it with the effects at full power. I use it with a 100 watt Super Lead and two Marshall 4x12 cabs.

Yeah I mean I don't have a spare £700 lying around. Plus I'm an ambitious sort and I feel like a challenge. My motivations are twofold number 1: I could use a device like this and making it would most likely be cheaper than buying it. Number 2: Whilst it's understandable designers want to keep their designs secret, restricting access to schematics I find to be unethical. It restricts development as many users of this platform have argued in the past. Number 3: I think it would be fun.

[M3thoms]

more pictures

Thanks Neskor, really helpful pictures

[Reeltarded]

I once considered building a similar device in the hopes of saving money. Fact is that I bought a PS100 for $700 and I love it. If I want to sell it I’ll get most of my money back and it’s just to easy to keep it. It allows so much more than just being an attenuator that it’s not feasible to build anything comparable. By the way I don’t attenuate with it. I use it for wet/dry, yes it absorbs 1/2 the amps power but then it re amps it with the effects at full power. I use it with a 100 watt Super Lead and two Marshall 4x12 cabs.

Yeah I mean I don't have a spare £700 lying around. Plus I'm an ambitious sort and I feel like a challenge. My motivations are twofold number 1: I could use a device like this and making it would most likely be cheaper than buying it. Number 2: Whilst it's understandable designers want to keep their designs secret, restricting access to schematics I find to be unethical. It restricts development as many users of this platform have argued in the past. Number 3: I think it would be fun.

It will not be cheaper than $700.

[M3thoms]

I once considered building a similar device in the hopes of saving money. Fact is that I bought a PS100 for $700 and I love it. If I want to sell it I’ll get most of my money back and it’s just to easy to keep it. It allows so much more than just being an attenuator that it’s not feasible to build anything comparable. By the way I don’t attenuate with it. I use it for wet/dry, yes it absorbs 1/2 the amps power but then it re amps it with the effects at full power. I use it with a 100 watt Super Lead and two Marshall 4x12 cabs.

Yeah I mean I don't have a spare £700 lying around. Plus I'm an ambitious sort and I feel like a challenge. My motivations are twofold number 1: I could use a device like this and making it would most likely be cheaper than buying it. Number 2: Whilst it's understandable designers want to keep their designs secret, restricting access to schematics I find to be unethical. It restricts development as many users of this platform have argued in the past. Number 3: I think it would be fun.

It will not be cheaper than $700.

Okay, money aside I'm still going to try and build it. Thanks for your financial input.

[cdemike]

Why not just build a reactive dummy load and reamping device without necessarily copying the Power Station? It seems to me that there's enough information about the Power Station to inform tweaking a something of your own design, and there's a ton of information on the Fryette Youtube channel, including this video even gives some component values: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X16g7y2fSDE

Based on what I'm getting from the video and the other videos on their channel about the Power Station, it seems like it's a fairly similar design to the JohnH attenuator from the Marshall Forum (https://www.marshallforum.com/threads/s ... ing.98285/). There is no shortage of good attenuator and dummy load designs, and feeding the line-level signal to a linear power amp executes the same design principle. I'm really not convinced having the tube output section as in the Power Station is necessary, since it seems to me that the goal of the reamping device would high-fidelity reproduction of the input signal over a variety of volume levels, not to sag, distort or any of the other characteristics guitarists typically look to tubes for. In other words, it seems to me that a solid state HiFi output section would be perfectly fine, and that'd be a major way you could improve on the design -- less heat, no risk of cooking it with a bad speaker cable, etc. I suspect the reason they used a tube output section on the Power Station was to avoid criticism from purists who think the entire signal chain must be tube-based at all costs, no matter how nonsensical that philosophy is on a technical and historical level (EVH, Jimmy Page, and all the other people who used Echoplex preamps didn't seem to mind the first amplification stage of their signal being a non-transparent JFET-based boost!). On the other hand, if you're really committed to an all-tube signal amplification chain, you'll be on the hook for the usual power transformer, output transformer, etc., so I'd be interested to know if it'd be better to do something more in line with the HiFi designs I've seen like using ultra-linear operation, higher dissipation tubes like 6550 or KT88/90/120, and so on. You'll already need to buy the parts, so if going down the tube road, why not build a really nice HiFi output stage? That'll get expensive quickly, though, so I maintain that the solid state output section would be best.

[Reeltarded]

I don't understand the tube power. I already use tube amps. All loaded, all sub-mixed, effected, and stereo to massive power and sixteen 12s.

Slew matters for impact and clarity.

The extra tube output is actually anything but transparent at unity.

I admit that the device makes me angry. lol For instance. The Devil is a powered speaker.

[JD0x0]

I don't understand the tube power. I already use tube amps. All loaded, all sub-mixed, effected, and stereo to massive power and sixteen 12s.

Slew matters for impact and clarity.

The extra tube output is actually anything but transparent at unity.

I admit that the device makes me angry. lol For instance. The Devil is a powered speaker.

Yeah, the whole 'magic' of tubes is the lack of transparency. I'm not sure why you'd want a power amp coloring your tone, unless you're only connecting a preamp to it, and want the power amp coloration. I think a "Power station" device would work a lot better with a high headroom Class D output. Less coloration, less weight, less cost, more power output and more simple to build. You could turn your 4 watt Champ into a 1000 watt amp, if you wanted to, while still being able to moderate a 100 Watt Marshall down to manageable levels just by turning the volume control down. Don't have to worry about 'opening it up' for that tube tone, as it will essentially sound the same at all levels. (Discounting for Fletcher Munson curves and speaker response)

[neskor]

You have something lake that: Boss Waza TAE