PPIMV diagram for 18 watt lite IIB?

[fish22]

Hey everybody, working on a lite IIB build.

I'm going to try a few volume options including VVR, PPIMV, both, etc...

Can someone point me in the direction of a PPIMV wiring for an 18watt?
I can only find a few variations on different types of 18watts.

Also, curious if a Spitfire MV would work, because its the only master volume I've liked in person.

I've done some searching and can't seem to find exact answers.
I realize MVs are pretty simple, so forgive me as I am still pretty new to amps!

Cheers!
Wyatt

[martin manning]

Attached below is KF Type 2 PPIMV for 18W, with Lar-Mar mod. It is known for transparency, and it has virtually no effect on the circuit when fully-on. The Matchless Spitfire master is sometimes called a cross-line MV. It is very simple, and you could try that very easily to see how you like the sound.

[M Fowler]

PPIMV for 18w attached.

[martin manning]

500k pots with 5M safety resistors is more transparent in that the circuit is minimally affected at all MV settings. Using 1M pots and 1M safety resistors as shown in the schematic Mark posted will extend the low-end by an octave at low MV settings, but that may not be a bad thing given the human ear's apparent volume vs. frequency sensitivity. The 1M safety resistors will have a better chance of saving the power tubes in the event of a pot failure, so I think I'd support going with those values.

[angelodp]

Martin, I am planning a PPIMV for 100W Super Lead. Is the diagram you posted applicable? if not might you have the version that would work on the 100 watter.

[martin manning]

Your Superlead has 220k grid resistors and fixed (not cathode) bias. I'd use the standard Lar-Mar MV circuit for fixed bias with 250k pots and 2M2 safety resistors.

[sluckey]

Mod Edit--- removed spammers comment and url...

You back in business?

[pompeiisneaks]

Mod Edit--- removed spammers comment and url...

You back in business?

I don't believe this is the same Ken Watts as Watts audio, that was a US backed venture, and without going into too much personal detail about the user, when I approved the account I thought it odd they weren't from a US IP address... maybe just a big fan? This could be someone attempting to build a business from outside the US based on the old work of ken watts? If so, and you want to be clean about that, and have bought the rights etc, fine by me, if not, it seems a bit shady...

Edit: I should add, that the old ken watts audio site went down in a state of 'a bit shady' by stopping delivering products people had paid for, and just shutting down, so buyer beware...

~Phil

[Colossal]

Mod Edit--- removed spammers comment and url...

You back in business?

I don't believe this is the same Ken Watts as Watts audio, that was a US backed venture, and without going into too much personal detail about the user, when I approved the account I thought it odd they weren't from a US IP address... maybe just a big fan? This could be someone attempting to build a business from outside the US based on the old work of ken watts? If so, and you want to be clean about that, and have bought the rights etc, fine by me, if not, it seems a bit shady...

Edit: I should add, that the old ken watts audio site went down in a state of 'a bit shady' by stopping delivering products people had paid for, and just shutting down, so buyer beware...

~Phil

Yes, I thought this was odd. The way the post is written looks bot-ish. My finger was hovering over the Ban button.

[pompeiisneaks]

I just scanned it for malware, seems clean, probably just someone trying to capitalize on a known old site to sell things...

Still I'd agree to the sentiment 'buyer beware'. I also feel that maybe I should remove it from the thread as it basically has nothing to do with the thread? hmm...

~Phil

[pdf64]

... I also feel that maybe I should remove it from the thread as it basically has nothing to do with the thread? hmm...

There don’t seem to be any relevant resources at the linked site. So however mysterious / convoluted, the post seems pretty spammy and the member rather bot-like.

[pompeiisneaks]

... I also feel that maybe I should remove it from the thread as it basically has nothing to do with the thread? hmm...

There don’t seem to be any relevant resources at the linked site. So however mysterious / convoluted, the post seems pretty spammy and the member rather bot-like.

That's enough confirmation to me, that's the third person, myself, you and Colossal all feeling it's not worth the time. I'll leave our comments but edit out references to the account itself and their comments.

Edit: Done and the count was 4, I forgot the original catcher of the spammyness was sluckey
~Phil

[Colossal]

Bye now, spammer