40 minutes of Robben F recording for his new album

[norburybrook]

Can you elaborate on your thoughts? I don't mean this in a contradictory or argumentative manner, just wondering what your observations are to lead you to this conclusion. 102 is very well seasoned from decades of use and smooth as a gravy sandwich. And of course in Robben Ford's hands, a masterpiece.

Dave,

I think there's a large dose of dry humour in there.....

I think hitchaster meant his #102 doesn't sound like that

M

nah.. no humour.. i really think the amp he's playing is different then the 102 schem everyones building. unless the goofy red knob twin PT makes all the difference.. yeah mine was a dud with vintage fender iron and sounded too gainy to me. not sure if two rock and bludo clones are the same.. the bludo sounds really good but it sounds more high plate than robbens... two rock TS1 i haven't heard but wonder if the schematic is exactly the same. i had a quinn RF amp and it was ok... but he did the 102 schem and i assume it was too gainy to him as well.. so it had a gain reduction mod in it. it sounded ok but i sold it. i think the schem is wrong and it shouldn't need a "mod" to sound in the ballpark.

Interesting, I've made 2 #102's and they both sound the same as far as two hand built amps can. Neither is particularly gainy when set as per the layout. My #102 is the amp Larry Carlton used in the Uk and he's certainly not into gainy these days. He loved the amp. For my ears the #102 built from the layout/schematic here is the 'ford' sound.

Robben plays LOUD..even in the studio you can hear that amp is LOUD. I think sometimes people if they're on their own don't have the amps loud enough when trying to get 'that' tone

YMMV of course but Being too gainy isn't a characteristic of the #102's built form here.

M

[hitchcaster]

yeah i don't know why quinn would of done the gain reduction mod in his 102 clone.... it was basically the 102 schem but of course not that red twin PT so thats the other mod. the quinn wasn't that great but nothing wrong with it.. i should of bypassed his mod in the lead channel and see what it sounded like as 102 schematic. maybe ill buy a bludo and see what that does and if its the same schematic.. my 70's clones sound awesome. cleaner but raw. robbens clips in the studio sound more chimey to me.. more fendery but not. you can only go so loud alone like that with headphones and tracks. so its not wide open there.

[norburybrook]

yeah i don't know why quinn would of done the gain reduction mod in his 102 clone.... it was basically the 102 schem but of course not that red twin PT so thats the other mod. the quinn wasn't that great but nothing wrong with it.. i should of bypassed his mod in the lead channel and see what it sounded like as 102 schematic. maybe ill buy a bludo and see what that does and if its the same schematic.. my 70's clones sound awesome. cleaner but raw. robbens clips in the studio sound more chimey to me.. more fendery but not. you can only go so loud alone like that with headphones and tracks. so its not wide open there.

here's my #102 on OD everything set at 12 O clock into a 1x12 EVM so pretty loud.

https://open.spotify.com/track/62bbvJoB ... 9Q4Yq6jY2g

Guitar is a filtertron telecaster. You can hear plenty of clarity/Chime and it's definitely not to overdriven at all.






M

[Audiodog]

Tony, what makes you certain 102 has a polyprop mid cap?

I’ve read a lot of speculation that Robben Ford’s amp is actually low plate.

Well, that's an interesting thought. But didn't Tony and/or others here document the actual amp? Could the plates have been changed when it was converted to Skyliner?

That's definitely a high plate sound If you listen carefully it' doesn't sparkle on the top end like say a Fender BF-AB type would. The higher plate values shifts the -3dB knee lower more to the upper mids, Two things happen? the mids are pushed forward, couple that with a polypropylene mid cap gives you that clear bell like attack (with humbuckers) instead of the ice pick to the ear Also the NFB on V1B smooths and compresses. (Classic High plate sound). BTW The Polyprop cap is IMO a must if you are trying to get as close to 102 as possible. It;s a little weird at first but grows on you.

Thanks Marcus for posting this!

Tony

[talbany]

Tony, what makes you certain 102 has a polyprop mid cap?

Scott
There are quite a few things here that leads me to believe 102 does not have a Polyester mid cap.
So far I've built around a dozen or so 102s over the years. Some with NOS (including new and used) vintage CTS pots (including 2-35's) Dumble used.
Some of these amps varied a bit depending on the parts?
The one thing all those amps had in common were they were (high plate) dark. Even trying several different type Silver mica's I still had to run the treble pot (2-35 250k) up past 12:oclock even then the amp was nowhere near as bright as 102?.
Even with the amps loaded NOS CTSs and if I set the amp up like Robben's 102 (Treble 3, mid 4. bass 4) My amps were too dark! even with the bright switches on..
From what I know 102's mid cap composition is unknown? (other than marked G.E) and being a light brown.
After going through a bunch of pic's I noticed Dumble sometimes would use a Polyprop on a few high plates. One had an 800V 716 in it. After ordering a few put it in and the amp brightened right up.
Mids were clear bright (Just like 102) and I can now set my CTSs the same as Robben liked to run his and through a set of 65s can get that same bright midrange Robben gets. Just so I was not hearing things I ran it by Charlie and Gil.
So to answer your question? No I do not know for sure if 102 has a Polyprop mid cap other than to say that after installing one, my high plates now sound very close to 102 at the same exact pot settings. So for me that was my missing unknown 102 part.

AFAIK Dumble used Polyprops in high plates' only. They do not work as well on a low Plate..IMO?

Thanks for the post on the 34's...Will check them out. BTW Is there a Trans-conductance # you recommend??

Tony