102 Feedback City

[vibratoking]

Tony, I was thinking about the looper thing a bit more. I use the looper to repetitively send a signal to the amp as I tweak it or use switches to change component values.

It is probably obvious to you, but in the case of listening for feedback it won't be the same because there won't be acoustic feedback due to the fact that there is no guitar or pickups. Although, the looper setup might be used to indicate that mechanical feedback is occurring if the head is left in its postion on top of the speaker cabinet and some feedback exists. That might be an interesting test in addition to removing the head from the speaker cabinet and actually playing the guitar and observing the feedback level.

Just kind of thinking out loud here.

[Dr d]

Hi Tony, how spooky is this.... I have just completed a 50W #123 variant with some Phier resistors (prompted by your recent build) in the "right" places and this thing sings. I think the Phier resistors add a distinct character and strangely enough this amp tips readily into feedback too. Coincidence?!!!!

[amplifiednation]

Alright, so here's my 102. This has LNFB on V1 and snubbers... This also has the higher filtering 110uf I believe.

No mid boost, no PAB...Les Paul with Throbaks, through the D-lator. Not nearly the Feedback that Tony has, but still seems to take off! Is this the norm or not? My other amps don't do this. I do have the gain up..

http://youtu.be/m5faidw_hO4

[boldaslove6789]

My Quinn Does this kind of feedback with ease:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvFGgLHV ... ature=plcp

[talbany]

Thanks to all for checking it out and the wonderful advice and comments!! I figure one of the reasons for this amps wonderful tone is because so many here donated there awesome nos parts and was really a community build of sorts so it has everyone's mojo and the amp garage magic behind it.. I am glad it turned out the way it did so maybe now perhaps we can demystify some of that Dumbleore together..
You better believe this amp will be poked and prodded more ways than Heather Graham in a Red Sox bra

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdoLNHJjLTc

Taylor wonderful job on the amp.. Play the hell out of it

Greg
Yes Shad builds Killer Amps..
Gotta run.. Talk soon

Tony

[brentm]

Wow... this has really been an eye opening thread! I was putting together a 124 but now changed it to a 102.

It's interesting in the way the amp responds to the guitar. Right around 0:14 of Video 8, it almost sounds like a russian big muff (which I really like btw).

I bet you could have a ton of fun trying to get your touch, gtr vol, and pick attack to respond how you want it to on this type of amp. It's something my Two Rock CR doesn't do, at least with such ease. Having an amp like that is almost like having another instrument to learn... I hope mine sounds as great as these amps do!

[Max]

I was putting together a 124 but now changed it to a 102.

Considering all the differences (circuit and parts used etc.) between what’s known about the original ODS #102 http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 264#140264 and Tony’s clone:

Why do most of you apparently think that it makes sense to still call this a clone - or at least a version of a clone - of RF's ODS #102? Don’t you think that this could perhaps confuse members and/or guests here - at least if they are new here?

Don’t you think that perhaps there might be some point, when composing a variation on a theme results in a new theme and no longer in a variation? And don’t you think, that it could perhaps confuse some new members and/or guests here, if we still call a perhaps new theme in a way suggesting that it’s still a variation of a well known theme?

Would e.g. calling a clip that has been recorded by using the bright channel of a JTM45 that's equipped with KT66 tubes a "clip of a 5FA6 Fender Bassman clone" IYO really make a lot of sense? Don’t you think that such a perhaps a bit sloppy denomination might be rather confusing than informative?

It’s not that I'm sure, that Tony’s clone is such a "new theme", but I’ve at least some doubts concerning this.

But please don’t take me wrong now:

IMO this kind of approach to "cloning" Dumble amps generally makes of course perfect sense, as in the end it isn’t – at least in my opinion – important, that some clone has exactly the same circuit and/or tone and feel as some original Dumble amp, but that it has the circuit, tone and feel making its user happy.

Have fun!

Max

PS: As this was tale 1001 but I'm not Scheherazade, I fear that Schahrayâr might not have fallen in love with me (yet?). So perhaps I better run! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8F2sXQtMlk

[ToneMerc]

My next build will be a 123 using the same components and lead dress to see if I can replicate it...Wish me luck!!!
Tony

You know I got you.

TM

[brentm]

I was putting together a 124 but now changed it to a 102.

Considering all the differences (circuit and parts used etc.) between what’s known about the original ODS #102 http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 264#140264 and Tony’s clone:

Why do most of you apparently think that it makes sense to still call this a clone - or at least a version of a clone - of RF's ODS #102? Don’t you think that this could perhaps confuse members and/or guests here - at least if they are new here?

I'm not sure that any of the amps here could be called "clones", or I guess it depends on how exacting your standards are for such a term. When reading (and re-reading) your post, I was imaging that machine I wished for as a child. You know, the one where you put something in it, push a button, and an identical copy comes out the other side. This way, I could have all the cool toys my friends had without having to beg mom and dad for them.

Back to the exacting standards for the clone. For me, personally, I'll follow the thread and values as close as possible. Not having verifiable pictures of #102 seems to pose the biggest question mark. I wasn't sure of the layout was done with first hand knowledge or from conversations with another tech who had documented it?

At any rate, I'm not sure many of the amps built here are "clones" in the sense of the term "identical copy". Not having Sprague Q-Line resistors, Piher resistors, correct era 6PS caps, or potentiometers from various harvests, it seems that they all likely would be a slight variation on a design. Even having those NOS parts, one could argue the variation of tolerances on the parts might still exclude it from clone status. I don't know. At the end of the day, I still think it's cool that this group of smart folks exist that help make it easy for guys like me to even attempt such projects.

[brentm]

Just out of curiosity, what component do you have where the 820r resistor lives on the layout? It looks like a Sprague TVAN cap, but its hard to see...

[surfsup]

Here is another one clean channel with the PAB on lightly over a few passes..

That's awesome! Actually doesn't sound bad but I can see how it gets old on EVERY note...

Could you be picking up the amp/speaker externally? Have you recorded with that guitar before? In that same room? In that same position amp to guitar to mic to room? What about your recording setup are you sending a signal from the guitar to the recording equipment (dry) and reamping out of the recording setup into the amp? Do you have monitors still your recording setup that are playing your amp signal back into the room? Did you try to pull the amp head off the speaker cab? etc (maybe all this has been suggested I just read the first few posts)

[johan]

*subscribe*

I would like some more of that bloom/feedback on my 102's as well.

[Max]

I'm not sure that any of the amps here could be called "clones"...

But obviously "the amps here" are called "clones" - at least by many members here.

When searching for posts http://ampgarage.com/forum/search.php?mode=results with the term "clone" I got 5286 matches, including this one:

I'd hate to get down the road and wonder if these caps didn't fit the bill in a respectable clone.

http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 678#193678

And IMO it might be confusing - at least for new members and/or new guests here - to name an amp like this e.g. http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 072#199072 a "2nd gen"(eration) amp.

All the best and lots of fun!

Max

[brentm]

I'm not sure that any of the amps here could be called "clones"...

But obviously "the amps here" are called "clones" - at least by many members here.

When searching for posts http://ampgarage.com/forum/search.php?mode=results with the term "clone" I got 5286 matches, including this one:

I'd hate to get down the road and wonder if these caps didn't fit the bill in a respectable clone.

http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 678#193678

All the best and lots of fun!

Max

Hey hey... careful now Not to be taken out of context

I'm not sure many of the amps built here are "clones" in the sense of the term "identical copy"

But we all know that a "IBM clone PC" is not an identical copy of an IBM PC. The term that was coined back in the early years of personal computing really meant that it was about 99 percent PC compatible. I still hear people say "oh, I just have a clone PC" implying it's not a name brand.

Obviously, Dumble is a brand, which was trademarked at one time. It seems prefectly reasonable that amplifiers built on that platform, which resemble the topology and layout of a Dumble amplifier, could/should/and are called a clone. At anyrate, this is off topic to the OP.

[Max]

Obviously, Dumble is a brand, which was trademarked at one time. It seems prefectly reasonable that amplifiers built on that platform, which resemble the topology and layout of a Dumble amplifier, could/should/and are called a clone.

I've strong doubts, that it's "perfectly reasonable" to call something similar a clone, because AFAIK clone suggests identical and not similar.

But anyway - you got me wrong:

I don't think that it might be confusing to call Tony's amp a Dumble clone.

But I think that it might indeed be confusing to label e.g. Tony's amp "102":

On a side note, on the layout of 102 I see two snubbers on V2. But it seems you don't have them on this amp.
I'm I wrong?

http://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 302#199302

A nice day to all here!

Max