Steve Farris ODS #075

[talbany]

Tonestacks:

"Skyliner": http://ampgarage.com/forum/files/124_schematic_182.pdf

"Classic" (similar to the tonestack of #075, the Farris amp): http://ampgarage.com/forum/files/124_sc ... 84_208.pdf

"Tony's #13/40 Layout": http://ampgarage.com/forum/download/file.php?id=10532

As you can see, the tonestack of Tony's #13/40 is neither a "classic" nor a "skyliner" tonestack.

Cheers,

Max

Great point but I don't think that schematic is like the Ferris amp.. 1st #075 had the center off R/J switch as the boost and didn't believe this to be relay driven either..Also the pictures of #40 and the hand drawn layout HAD did clearly reads .02 and .002 hanging off the bass pot.. Even the TS between #40 and #13 were different..Although both had basically the same R/J switching network #13 had a 1M Bass and 1M treble pot.. Pretty noticeable difference in tone and functionality..My info was taken from actual pics and a Hand drawn layout done by HAD himself..Oh believe me I would love to get inside the Ferris amp and compare the schematic..
BTW the word classic seems to be tossed around quite a bit myabe you can clerify as to the true definition of the Classic stack and if I need to make some changes to the layout I will be more than happy..

All Best..

Tony

Could we see this?

Chris sorry No can do.. I promised the the person who gave it to me I wouldn't post it due the authors signature..Just going to have to trust.the pics I used were on the Livesley site #40..

[ChrisM]

Figured it would be something like that. I keep looking forward to the time new Dumble gut pics surface, just very intriguing to me.

[talbany]

Figured it would be something like that. I keep looking forward to the time new Dumble gut pics surface, just very intriguing to me.

Chris if it's the stack your interested in #13 is pretty much like 40 with the exception of the 1M Bass and 1M treble pot..neither had preamp boost..Also same funky OD entrance network..Hope this helps.. #13 was an ODSR..
Tony

[Max]

ODS generations:

1. generation (the "Lindley amps"): small chassis, like #001, #003, #004, #008

2. generation: 19" (more or less) silverface chassis, sliding switches, Columbia Flexfoam coax, like #40

3. generation: 19" (more or less) silverface chassis, tumbler switches, #6X

Transition generation:

Chassis as in / similar to 3. generation (Farris amp e.g.) and some blackface (#084 e. g.). Some with Ratio (front or back) and Presence (front), some with Ratio on the front but still with Accent switch. Some with manual/pedal on the front, some with manual/pedal on the back. Some with a footswitchable "Preamp Boost", some without, but with a PB-position of the Jazz/Rock switch (All with footswitchable PB have this PB-(middle)position of the Rock/Jazz switch, too), snubbers, "trigger"-pot.

These "Transition generation amps" are the first with a "classic" tonestack.

4. generation: 19" (more or less) blackface chassis, Ratio and Presence on front, Deep switch. Classic tonestack. (#0124 e. g., before the mod into a Skyliner of course)

5. generation: as 4. generation, but Skyliner tonestack with a "Mid"-switch, some with new front design and logo (#155 e. g.)

After this: Bluesmaster, HRM, Ripper etc.

The tonestack of Tony's #13/40 amp is a kind of mixture of different versions of the different tonstacks of the 1., 2. and 3. generation amps. The tonstack of the 1., 2. and 3. generation amps is not a "classic" tonestack.

#13/40 does not have a version of the "classic" tonestack.

#075 does have a version of the "classic" tonestack.

Cheers,

Max

[talbany]

Max
Thanks for the clarification..Do you know if those like #40 that went overseas were built with a unique stack (Careful not to give away the good stuff) Since he didn't know where those would land (no contracts) or just a part of the evolution..Wondering?

Tony

[Max]

Max
Thanks for the clarification..Do you know if those like #40 that went overseas were built with a unique stack (Careful not to give away the good stuff) Since he didn't know where those would land (no contracts) or just a part of the evolution..Wondering?

Tony

Tony,

as far as I remember, the stack of the 2. generation is only a bit different from 3. generation stacks (different pot values e.g.). 3. generation amps are a bit less "midrangy" for my ears (small difference).

marcos once posted some of the differences between 2. and 3. generation amps.

What I call a "generation", are amps that are a lot more similar (specifications and tone) to those of the same generation than to those of an other generation.

But of course, as "custom made", all amps from the same generation differ in some technical specifications and in tone, too.

From what I have seen, I doubt, that the amps exported to Europe in general had a special kind of tonestack. What is possible of course, is, that a special individual amp was made a bit different, because a special client liked some special kind of tone.

To make this clear: I think, that this #13/40 amp is done in a way, as Dumble would perhaps have made a specimen of a 2./3. generation amp to suit the special taste of one of his customers.

Have a great day,

Max

[talbany]

Max
Cool!!.. Thanks

T

[David Root]

I did basically the same thing as Tony did, only 50W, but still a #13/#40 cross, although my built in loop is likely different than Tony's. Mine is the loop from Normster's '97 ODS, permanently in series.

One difference: mine doesn't sound "close to the edge" with a Strat. OTOH I haven't cranked it with the Strat, and only two tubes instead of four, BUT it sounds great so far, clean and OD.

Unlike Tony, I put in the FET board and set the trimpot pretty high. In OD it is right there, just fantastic violin sustain with a Les Paul. I run the LP at 7 on both pickups. Probably too high for slide but I usually just use my fingernails/fingers. Light touch, not heavy, hard picking isn't necessary to my taste.

[talbany]

Max
Thanks for the clarification..Do you know if those like #40 that went overseas were built with a unique stack (Careful not to give away the good stuff) Since he didn't know where those would land (no contracts) or just a part of the evolution..Wondering?

Tony

Tony,

as far as I remember, the stack of the 2. generation is only a bit different from 3. generation stacks (different pot values e.g.). 3. generation amps are a bit less "midrangy" for my ears (small difference).

marcos once posted some of the differences between 2. and 3. generation amps.

What I call a "generation", are amps that are a lot more similar (specifications and tone) to those of the same generation than to those of an other generation.

But of course, as "custom made", all amps from the same generation differ in some technical specifications and in tone, too.

From what I have seen, I doubt, that the amps exported to Europe in general had a special kind of tonestack. What is possible of course, is, that a special individual amp was made a bit different, because a special client liked some special kind of tone.

To make this clear: I think, that this #13/40 amp is done in a way, as Dumble would perhaps have made a specimen of a 2./3. generation amp to suit the special taste of one of his customers.

Have a great day,

Max

As per Max's post the layout has been updated with the correct historical data to show the unique design of the stack was voiced for a certain sound/client and not consistent with what we regard as the Classic stack Thanks again Max..This is version 4.4 with the previous being 3.3 so if you wish to update..Here you go!!.. Enjoy

Tony

[marcos]

Max
Thanks for the clarification..Do you know if those like #40 that went overseas were built with a unique stack (Careful not to give away the good stuff) Since he didn't know where those would land (no contracts) or just a part of the evolution..Wondering?

Tony

Hi Tony,
it was my suspicion ,too, that the export amps may have been built with
this unique tonestack.However, a tech who serviced a good number of these amps (#19 up to #60something) told me that all of them were very similar.In particular, he told me that my personal amp was the exact circuit as #19, which was the Roy brothers` showroom amp.
Another possible explanation: The Roy brothers liked the #19 amp so much that they had Dumble make all the amps for them to the same specs.
From the collected info I have there seem to be at least four different
version of the early tone stack: 1 Meg Treble/Bass pots,
500 K Treble/1 Meg Bass, 500K Treble and Bass (mentioned in one of
Jelle´s posts), 250K Treble 1 Meg Bass.
Marcos

[talbany]

Max
Thanks for the clarification..Do you know if those like #40 that went overseas were built with a unique stack (Careful not to give away the good stuff) Since he didn't know where those would land (no contracts) or just a part of the evolution..Wondering?

Tony

Hi Tony,
it was my suspicion ,too, that the export amps may have been built with
this unique tonestack.However, a tech who serviced a good number of these amps (#19 up to #60something) told me that all of them were very similar.In particular, he told me that my personal amp was the exact circuit as #19, which was the Roy brothers` showroom amp.
Another possible explanation: The Roy brothers liked the #19 amp so much that they had Dumble make all the amps for them to the same specs.
From the collected info I have there seem to be at least four different
version of the early tone stack: 1 Meg Treble/Bass pots,
500 K Treble/1 Meg Bass, 500K Treble and Bass (mentioned in one of
Jelle´s posts), 250K Treble 1 Meg Bass.
Marcos

Marcos
Thanks for the in-depth description..Kinda makes sense.. He more than likely used different value treble pots for certain voice-ings.. Normally when you change the treble pot the bass pot follows...Also by changing the pot values your shaping the tone of both clean and OD.. Simple efficient way to do it I suppose..


Tony

[Max]

As per Max's post the layout has been updated with the correct historical data to show the unique design of the stack was voiced for a certain sound/client and not consistent with what we regard as the Classic stack Thanks again Max..This is version 4.4 with the previous being 3.3 so if you wish to update..Here you go!!.. Enjoy

Tony

Hi Tony,

I am not sure, if we did not perhaps misunderstand one another in regard to the tonestack topic. Let me try to explain it like this:

Please look at the pictures of #40 here: http://www.roblivesey.com/dumble/

My comments:

- #040 may be one of the amps that have been made for the export to Europe, may be not. I don't know for sure.

- #040 is a typical 2nd generation ODS (chassis, parts, layout etc.). The cabinet has the specs of the current combo cabs.

- I don’t see any obvious difference at all between parts and layout of the tonestack of #040 and the parts and layout of the tonestack of the 2nd generation amps that have been exported to Europe.

- I think, that the ODS that have been exported to Europe have the same tonestacks as those that have been sold in the US.

- The tonestack of #040 seems to be completely “stock” – nothing special = usual 2nd generation tonestack.

- The tonestack of #40 is not a “classic” tonestack.

- I have seen tonestacks in 3rd generation amps that are a bit different from those in 2nd generation amps (pot values e. g., see the posts of marcos in regard to this).

- Both, the 2nd generation amps and the 3rd generation amps, don’t have a “classic” tonestack.

- The earliest "stock" “classic” tonestacks I have seen in an early 100W SSS and in “transition generation” ODS.

I wrote in regard to the tonestack of your personal #013/040 built:

"To make this clear: I think, that this #13/40 amp is done in a way, as Dumble would perhaps have made a specimen of a 2nd/3rd generation amp to suit the special taste of one of his customers.”

What I meant by this, is not, that I think, the tonestack of #040 really was made for some special client in a special way, but that you, Tony, have built your “mixture” kind of (#013 and #040) built in a way, as Dumble would perhaps have made a special specimen of a 2nd/3rd generation amp to suit the special taste of one of his customers.”

All the best,

Max

[talbany]

Max
You are correct.. The #40 layout is just that #40...
The amp I built was taken from the layout of #13 as posted by me here..

http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 75&start=0

So there seems to be some confusion of this mixture of stacks I used #13/#40

The tonestack of Tony's #13/40 amp is a kind of mixture of different versions of the different tonstacks of the 1., 2. and 3. generation amps.

when in reality my stack was taken from #13 and the layout was #40 not a mixture as you posted above..I don't know how that came about ..however like you and Marcos point out both #13 and 40 are both second generation and not classics.(Regardless of certain pot values which may of added to the confusion)

So with all that being said this quote confused me which lead to my changing the Layout..

To make this clear: I think, that this #13/40 amp is done in a way, as Dumble would perhaps have made a specimen of a 2./3. generation amp to suit the special taste of one of his customers.

I will say this in regard to your above statement .. The addition of the mid boost (.002/500pf) switch I did on my amp would technically put it in the 2/3 generation but it would be more like #13/#124...

Also My referencing of the phrase classic was used in the common sense of the word and not technical as at the time of the layout I didn't know the phrase classic referenced a particular design...

I see you did clear up these issues by your most recent post but just thought I would clear up a few things myself...These forums can be confusing!!... Be Well!!

Tony

[Max]

Also My referencing of the phrase classic was used in the common sense of the word and not technical as at the time of the layout I didn't know the phrase classic referenced a particular design...

Hi Tony,

from what I understand so far, the tonestack in this schematic is a version (150k slope resistor version, 100k slope resistor versions exist too) of the "Classic" tonestack = the typical tonestack of all "transition" and "4th generation" Dumble ODS amps berfore the "Skyliner" tonestack had been introduced:

http://ampgarage.com/forum/files/early_ ... v0_353.pdf

Is our understanding in regard to what is called a "classic" tonestack the same?

Have a nice weekend!

Max

[talbany]

Is our understanding in regard to what is called a "classic" tonestack the same?

Max
My info concurs...Would you say the the 1 constant he used throughout the life span of the classic era stack that separates or identifies the Classic from following generations would be the 100k mid pot and could be used as the determining factor here.. My info says it does..Thanks!!

Tony