Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Overdrive Special, Steel String Singer, Dumbleland, Odyssey, Winterland, etc. -
Members Only

Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal

Post Reply
Max
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 6:08 pm

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by Max »

jelle wrote: Mon Apr 08, 2019 3:06 pm ... Looks like we are in agreement. ...
Hi, Jelle, hope you're fine!

As you pointed out, the coax with the "Tandy Wire" label you'll find inside most of the "transition generation" and "4th generation" ODS chassis looks and feels very similar to the black coax you'll find inside most of the 2nd and 3rd generation ODS chassis with a serial number > #0040 (with the exception of the Columbia Flexfoam 1389 between the FET-input and the FET-board). But AFAIR "Tandy Wire" isn't the label of the manufacturer of this coax cable but the label of (one of?) the distributors (Radio Shack). So the black coax without the "Tandy Wire" label might indeed be identical in a technical sense, but - if identical in a technical sense - perhaps distributed by someone else or perhaps before Radio Shack became the (exclusive?) distributor of this coax? What do you - or someone else here - know concerning this topic?

All the best,

Max
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Max Wrote:Your personal opinion (AFAIU):
At the very beginning - IYO in the mid to late 70ies - ODR #0060 started its life in an unmodified empty 3rd generation style (toggle switches) ODR chassis with a circuit and with parts (Centralab 500KL treble pot, Piher carbon film resistors e. g.)
I never made any mention of the chassis being “3rd Generation” as I don’t necessarily subscribe the generation taxonomy that has been developed here. My opinion is that the chassis was fabricated sometime in later 1970’s...more like the 1978 to 1979 timeframe. Back in those days, to make a chassis like this it would have to have been stamped out on punch-press. The tooling to punch the flat was extremely expensive as it was all fabricated on traditional, non-CNC machine shop equipment. My opinion is that the original dies for the ODR chassis had the rectangular slots for slide switches. These same dies were likely modified for the round thru-holes for the mini toggles early on. The chassis fabricator surely had a minimum run and Dumble would have been forced to purchase this amount of ODR chassis on the first run. I believe Dumble had the fabricator modify the original stamping dies possibly after the first batch of chassis were made (converted from rectangular switch slots to round thru-holes). If you have had these two different ODR chassis to study in person, you will find they are dimensionally identical to one another. There are only two differences. (1) The aforementioned switch holes and (2) the side gussets. The side gussets as found in #0060 have formed reliefs for better mounting screw clearance. With the non-relief gussets found on some ODR chassis…the mounting screws get pretty close to the gusset and steel being harder than aluminum can cause cutting into the gussets. This is why he implemented this change. But if you study those examples that exist, you’ll find that the #0060 chassis was originally designed to use all the boards, jacks, relay, etc. from the earliest versions of the ODR. The modifications made to #0060 are actually fairly extensive and many new holes were punched and drilled to make the amp as it is today. Many hours went into building #60 due to the many hand operations required to make everything “fit”. This very well may explain why no other ODR has surfaced with a similar layout/circuit.

And yes, given I found evidence that the #0060 chassis had a Centralab RV4 Treble pot installed at one time…my suspicions are that it had the 500K Treble pot along with the 250K Mid (CTS) and 1MEG Bass (CTS) pots in the tonestack. It also had the singular, long black pre-amp board, The CalRad Relay and the FET board situated at the of the chassis (not the front as found on #0060 today).

Regarding the Silk-Screening of the various Dumble chassis I’ve seen in person. My opinion is that he might have been setup to do silk-screening in-house or he had access to someone who could screen for him. I doubt it was the same vendor that stamped, bent and welded up the chassis for him. You have a lot of flexibility with silk-screening so the many changes you see employed over the years are easy and inexpensive to implement. Back in the 1970’s your options for metal decoration were limited as metal lithograph or rotogravure were prohibitively costly unless your volumes were substantial. That’s why most every guitar or bass amp chassis from the era was silkscreened…as it was a cost effective method of metal decoration. Actually, it still is though it is become less and less common with all the options available today.
At some later point in time Alexander Dumble modified the original chassis in order to prepare it for the implementation of a nearly completely new circuit similar to the circuit and with the kind of parts (Sprague Q-Line carbon film resistors e. g.) shown here
Given the actual amplifier (#0060) shows substantial evidence of having the early style FET, the early reverb jacks plus the RV4 pot installed…it tells me that it was indeed built out like an early ODR. It also likely was delivered to Jackson Browne at this point. Given the low sequential serial number that is consistent with two other known ODR’s #0058 & #0059 that were built for and belonged to JB…it was surely originally made within close proximity (Maybe a year) to these other two ODR’s. The amp went back to Dumble who decided to modify it. I have no idea how many iterations of modifications it went through, however, it clearly is far removed (circuit and component wise) from an early ODR.
Then - again at some later point(s) in time - Alexander Dumble updated this circuit to its current ("skyline") specs, similar to the specs of the circuit shown here (of course with the exception of the reverb circuit of ODR #0060): Correct? If so, then let's compare your personal opinion with
Max, I have no clue of the timing or the iterations. All I know is that it surely was an early ODR as described previously and eventually, it became what it is today. I do know that there are many parts that date to 1981 in the amp (including the can lytics) but the newest part in the amp is the Texas Instruments solid-state voltage regulator. So I know it could not have been fully completed before 1982. The white jacketed coax would seem to date it deeper into the 1980’s though this I’m not really confident is the case…but maybe…hard to say for certain as there is no circumstantial evidence to pinpoint when it was completed unless Jackson Browne recalls…which is doubtful.
So our personal conclusions and opinions in regard to the timeline for the chassis-mods you describe and in regard to the specs of the first original circuit of ODR #0060 are (and perhaps will stay) different…
But IMO in regard to the topic of this thread (OD-50WX #006X) it doesn't matter very much, if your or my speculations in regard to ODR #0060 are correct or if we both are wrong. Or do you think, that our different personal opinions concerning ODR #0060 are of great importance in regard to the OD-50WX #006X topic?
The relevance to the #006X ODS revolves around the serial number on the chassis. #0060 (Not an ODS but clearly using the same master serial number range as the ODS) most logically would have been stamped prior to the #006X being stamped? Right? It is somewhat obvious that the ODS #006X was built in 1979. How many amps a year was HAD actually producing in 1979? Great question…nobody really knows but we do know he was still in Santa Cruz and he did have Jack Smith helping him from time to time. Was the ODR #0060 stamped and left unused for years? I do not think so. I think it was built just like #0058 and #0059 were and delivered to JB. It came back to HAD at a later point in time and got modded. How many times did he mod it? Nobody but he or JB know for sure. But the better question is does JB care? I doubt he does :D


Best Regards,

GPD
User avatar
martin manning
Posts: 14308
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:43 am
Location: 39°06' N 84°30' W

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by martin manning »

Seems like this style of chassis with in-set side plates and rivet nuts for the chassis mounting screws must have been the standard for some limited time period. Regarding the manufacturing process, many if not all of the required punches would be standard fare at the time, so perhaps a limited run would not be too expensive, and there would be many tool and die shops working with aluminum around that time in the aircraft industry.

I'm still looking to do an A-B test of old vs. new MF plate load resistors to see if there is any audible difference. Knowing that this lore is based in audiophoolery makes me all the more skeptical. I could even devise a way to return loaned parts (4x 100k) in original condition. My plan is to swap out all four plate loads using switches, with minimal added wire length. That should reveal anything that might be there. Any takers?
Max
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 6:08 pm

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by Max »

talbany wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:29 amSame here I've never seen a "Tandy" branded coax in an original 1st, 2nd, and 3rd generation ODS ...
Tony, as I just remember, we (Jelle, you, me, and probably many more members here) all have already seen a "Tandy" branded coax on this picture of a 3rd generation ODS chassis https://ampgarage.com/forum/download/fi ... &mode=view you posted here: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 82#p151482
The complete label on the coax between the "VOLUME" pot and V1 will IMO read: "TANDY WIRE & CABLE TYPE RG-95/U" (on the picture you can only read the part highlighted in red: " ... & CABLE TYPE...".
GPD wrote: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:02 am ... Many hours went into building #60 due to the many hand operations required to make everything “fit”. This very well may explain why no other ODR has surfaced with a similar layout/circuit ...
IMO - based on the pictures of ODR #0057 posted here: ("Dumble #0057 - Santana") http://thesubjectmatter.com/dumblearchive.html - at least the chassis of ODR #0057 and the chassis of ODR #0060 look rather similar. So why do you think, that their layouts/circuits are very different ( ... "no other ODR has surfaced with a similar layout/circuit" ... )?
GPD wrote: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:02 am ... Given the low sequential serial number ... [Max: of ODR #0060] ... that is consistent with two other known ODR’s #0058 & #0059 that were built for and belonged to JB…it ... [Max: ODR #0060] ...was surely originally made within close proximity (Maybe a year) to these other two ODR’s. ... I think it ... [Max: ODR #0060] ... was built just like #0058 and #0059 were ..."
.
IMO - based on the pictures of ODR #0058 posted in this thread: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27806 - ODR #0060 wasn't "built just like #0058", but was built with a very different layout ( e. g.: two rows of preamp tubes in ODR #0058 vs. one row of preamp tubes in ODR #0060) .
GPD wrote: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:02 am ... It is somewhat obvious that the ODS #006X was built in 1979. ...
Indeed. The date engraved on the FET-board of ODS-50WX #006X says "5-14-79": https://ampgarage.com/forum/download/fi ... &mode=view
So IMO speculations concerning the history of ODR #0060 aren't needed for dating ODS-50WX #006X.

Cheers,

Max
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Max Wrote: IMO - based on the pictures of ODR #0057 posted here: ("Dumble #0057 - Santana") http://thesubjectmatter.com/dumblearchive.html - at least the chassis of ODR #0057 and the chassis of ODR #0060 look rather similar. So why do you think, that their layouts/circuits are very different ( ... "no other ODR has surfaced with a similar layout/circuit" ... )? ]
Well, I have not seen inside of #0057…that’s problem #1. I’m not aware of any internal shots of this amp being available. If they were, then I could answer this question. Looking at the exterior of #0057’s back panel the two added pots are in a different location compared to #0060 and obviously not the same setup either. The XLR is of the male variety…a little odd all by itself. Then there are the two “binder” screws situated by the silk-screened back logo…not sure what they are supporting on the inside of the amp. The cabinet, itself, looks like the earlier ODR style as it does not have the “eyebrow” recess routed on the top front edge. The front panel with the suede trim, aluminum trim and wooden filler strip are also very typical of the early ODR’s. The back tube shield panel has a different vent hole shape compared to other ODR’s I’ve seen. Interesting that #0057, #0058, #0059 and #0060 are all ODR’s…No?
Max Wrote: IMO - based on the pictures of ODR #0058 posted in this thread: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27806 - ODR #0060 wasn't "built just like #0058", but was built with a very different layout ( e. g.: two rows of preamp tubes in ODR #0058 vs. one row of preamp tubes in ODR #0060)
Yes, I’ve contemplated #0058 for quite some time. The layout & construction inside the chassis is obviously very different compared to an early ODR or #60. I have not seen enough gut shots of #0058 in high enough resolution to draw any firm conclusions other than it is another oddity of an ODR. With the 4 x Noval tubes in the middle of the chassis with the circuit boards with the thru-holes for these tubes as found on other Dumble PCB constructed pre-amps. Dale’s, IRC’s, Piher’s, Electra’s, 6PS’s, etc. the usual suspects as far as component selection goes. I cannot see the back of the chassis thru-holes which is a head scratcher for certain but without clear pix…it is a tough amp to get your head around everything that is going on with that chassis/layout. Was it built this way from the beginning? Or was it modified over time? It was a Jackson Browne amp before it became the Rick Vito amp…was HAD experimenting with construction methods that would reduce his labor time for assembly? I don’t know…but obviously very unlike an early ODR and definitely unlike #0060.
Max Wrote: Indeed. The date engraved on the FET-board of ODS-50WX #006X says "5-14-79", So IMO speculations concerning the history of ODR #0060 aren't needed for dating ODS-50WX #006X.
So bringing this back to the original discussion…so if #006X was built in 1979. When was #0060 originally built? I believe originally in the late 1970’s and then modified through the early 1980’s. How about #0057, #0058 or #0059? All are ODR’s and all are sequentially numbered…interesting? No? Then there is #008X which is also an ODR but is very clearly an earlier ODR (You would classify it as a 2nd generation type amp even though it has reverb). This amp was, without question, built in 1978. It was ordered by the original owner in 1977, delivered in 1978 yet has a serial number in the 80’s? The owner specifically requested the amp be modelled after what Lowell George was using and that’s exactly what he got. How does one explain the gigantic disparity between serial numbers? It almost assumes that HAD pre-serialized some of the chassis before turning them into amps and then serialized others after he built them. Puzzling for certain.

Best Regards,

Gabe
Max
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 6:08 pm

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by Max »

GPD wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:42 am ... The XLR ... [Max: of ODR #0057] ... is of the male variety…a little odd all by itself. ...
Hi Gabe,

it's female:
ODR #0057 - back.jpg
source: http://thesubjectmatter.com/dumblearchive.html

Here's the same female XLR on the back of OD-120WR #0137:
ODR #0137 - back.JPG
source: http://thesubjectmatter.com/dumblearchive.html

So perhaps the footswitch of ODR #0057 engages/disengages OD, PB, Reverb (just like the footswitch of ODR #0137)? BTW: The same female XLR is on the back of ODS 150W #0121, too (footswitch: OD, PB, Reverb, Tremolo).
GPD wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:42 am ... Then there is #008X which is also an ODR but is very clearly an earlier ODR (You would classify it as a 2nd generation type amp even though it has reverb).
IMO the classification of the chassis of ODS amps without reverb into different chassis-versions ("generations") with a verly similar exterior look makes some sense, because:
1. AFAIK Mr. Dumble built around somewhere between 200 and 250 ODS amps without reverb.
2. in at least 50% of the ODS chassis with a similar look you'll find a similar circuit, too (concerning this see the "Dumble Files" section). So when discussing the more general circuit-specs of ODS amps without reverb, referring to the exterior look ("generation") of their chassis, might IMO help to avoid misunderstandings. But - of course - this is only my personal opinion.

But IMO this kind of classification of the chassis of all the other Dumble "models" (ODR, DL, SSS, etc.) wouldn't make a similar amount of sense, because:
1. AFAIK Mr. Dumble built only less then 20 DL amps, less than 20 ODR amps, less than 20 SSS amps etc.
2. You'll have a hard time to find more than perhaps 2 or 3 very similar looking DL-,or ODR-, or SSS-, etc. chassis at all.
3. If you should find some very similar looking DL-, ODR-, SSS-, etc. chassis at all, the probability, that you'll find e. g. two rather similar ODR-circuits inside two rather similar ODR-chassis, is IMO much smaller than 50%.

As you're interested in the history and specs of ODR-amps, here are some links to threads concerning this topic:
ODR #0013 and ODR #0057: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=407
ODR #0058: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27806
ODR #0059: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=22968
ODR #0060: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=17935
ODR #0137: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16246

Kind regards,

Max
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Max Wrote: Hi Gabe, it's female: ODR #0057 - back.jpg Here's the same female XLR on the back of OD-120WR #0137: ODR #0137 - back.JPG So perhaps the footswitch of ODR #0057 engages/disengages OD, PB, Reverb (just like the footswitch of ODR #0137)? BTW: The same female XLR is on the back of ODS 150W #0121, too (footswitch: OD, PB, Reverb, Tremolo).
Hello Max,

I’m glad you pointed this out…as I never paid much attention to the footswitch connectors on #0057, #0121 and #0137…but now I have. You are correct, this definitely is female (not male) but also definitely not an XLR connector. XLR connectors go way back…originally developed by Cannon and later produced by EV, Amphenol, Shure, Switchcraft (HAD’s brand of choice) and several other lower end non-USA companies. True XLR’s go up to 7 connectors. The part used on #0060, for example, is a C4F of the locking variety. A similar part is found on many other Dumble products as you surely know. BTW, this part is still mfg. and sold by Switchcraft today, however, the casting has changed over the decades so it isn’t really identical to what HAD used on the 1970’s to early 1980’s Dumble products.

Now, back to the 3 amps you mentioned…

What HAD is using on these 3 amps is not an XLR connector but rather an aviation or industrial connector. It appears to have 10 x connectors and on #0057, you can see it has been adapted to the flange of your typical Switchcraft “C” series circular panel mount. You can also clearly see that they have male threads on them for a secure connection which is typical of this type of connector. I have seen aviation connectors like this with integral flanges just like on #0057 but I do not think HAD sourced one of these but rather made an adaptation to an XLR housing. The other two amps simply have the circular connector mounted to the chassis without a flange…obviously, the chassis was punched to accommodate it whereas the #0057 was designed to use a Switchcraft “C” XLR type mount so he adapted it. It makes perfectly logical sense that he used this connector so he could support more footswitch functions.
http://www.electricstringedinstrument. ... ector.jpg

Of course, it would not be long before HAD abandoned the “C” series XLR in favor of Switchcraft panel mount DIN connectors…take up much less space and serve the same purpose.

A couple of interesting observations regarding the two ODR’s I’ve worked on (#0060 & #008X). The #008X came with a modified stamped steel Fender footswitch. HAD added a hand engraved aluminum bezel to the top and a single LED. The two switches activate or inactivate the OD and the Reverb.

http://www.electricstringedinstrument.c ... switch.jpg

For #0060, the footswitch is of the Walnut wedge type and only has a single switch and an LED. It was hand engraved “Jackson Browne” on the front leading edge. It simply activates or inactivates the OD. What is interesting is that the XLR is wired to allow for both the OD and the Reverb to be controlled by a footswitch so perhaps the footswitch that Jackson Browne had provided with #0060 when he sold it actually belonged to a different amp? Maybe…seems odd that Dumble would have wired the jack for both OD and Reverb but provide a footswitch that only works for OD. The Rock/Jazz switch on the front of the amp will give you a master PAB option (PAB active in both clean or OD mode when in the center position) but the slide switch in the back works with the footswitch only…it allows the PAB to be active or inactive when the OD is engaged via the footswitch.
http://www.electricstringedinstrument.c ... switch.jpg

Back to one of my previous questions that I would like to hear your answer to.

Max what is your opinion or speculation on the “How” a very earlier style ODR was built and assigned the serial number of #008X in 1978 yet #0057, #0058, #0059 and #0060 all have substantially lower numerical serial numbers relative to it yet seem to all appear to have later version ODR features? I can confirm, without a doubt, that #008X was ordered in 1977 and delivered in 1978. Every single component in this amp has date codes that predate 1977 too. So when do you suspect #0057 was built? And #0058? And #0059 and #0060? And why do they all have such relatively low serial numbers? Or I suspect the better question is, why does #008X have such a high serial number?

Best Regards,

Gabe
Max
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 6:08 pm

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by Max »

GPD wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2019 2:12 am ... What HAD is using on these 3 amps is not an XLR connector but rather an aviation or industrial connector. ...
Hi Gabe,

AFAIR these are female EIAJ Circular 10-pin audio/video connectors, e.g. used for connecting a professional video camera with a professional video recorder. Here are some links to infos concerning this kind of connectors:
http://www.labguysworld.com/Connectors.htm
https://www.markertek.com/product/e10fc ... le-chassis
https://www.amazon.com/Hirose-EIAJ-Circ ... B00A0G5N1K

I'll come back to your questions concerning the manufacturing dates of these ODR amps as soon as I find some more time for this topic.

Best regards,

Max
User avatar
martin manning
Posts: 14308
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:43 am
Location: 39°06' N 84°30' W

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by martin manning »

We had some discussion on this type of connector here: https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8&p=380903
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Max Wrote: AFAIR these are female EIAJ Circular 10-pin audio/video connectors, e.g. used for connecting a professional video camera with a professional video recorder.Max
Thanks Max...very interesting! That looks to be very close (if not) the exact part on #0121 and likely the other two amps too. Reading the posts that Martin pointed me towards shows Charlie shared some very nice resolution pix of both sides of the connector...looks like the EIAJ 10-Pin you referenced for positive.

BTW, this nearly identical appearing circular connector is used in a multitude of Aircraft and industrial applications too. The male connector looks more heavy duty though. If you've ever spent any time in a process mfg. facility you'll fine these hooked up to the process control systems (which all have monitors on the panels). They make male and female versions of this and even some that have the flange like the XLR's Dumble used. I had one of my employees take a walk outside one of our plants where we've got a "junkyard" of old PLC's and process control equipment that we scavenge for parts for some of our older equipment to see if he could find one for me...we'll see what surfaces :)

Interesting this was intended for AV applications but looks like the exact part I've seen in industrial/aviation applications...very enlightening and surely something HAD might have run across while scouring the surplus shops of SoCal...sadly, so few still remain today.

Best Regards,


Gabe
User avatar
martin manning
Posts: 14308
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:43 am
Location: 39°06' N 84°30' W

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by martin manning »

GPD wrote: Sat Apr 13, 2019 2:19 amBTW, this nearly identical appearing circular connector is used in a multitude of Aircraft and industrial applications too.
That's probably why it's still in production ;^)
talbany
Posts: 4696
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:03 am
Location: Dumbleland

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by talbany »

. Have you ever seen or heard of a Dumble amp with Tantalum loaded bypass caps or were all of them aluminum? (another part I prefer)

good question…I’ve obviously seen plenty of tantalum cap’s in original Dumble amps but I don’t recall ever seeing a tantalum cap used in a cathode bypass application.
Gabe

Now we have :wink:
Dumble ODSR (1).jpg
BTW. Is that the "later" Rodderstien (MF) resistor on the slope? on #0060.(Skyliner update) If so do we know when Dumble started using them.I have not seen them in any 2nd or 3rd generation amps yet?
Slope#006.jpg
Thanks!

Tony
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
" The psychics on my bench is the same as Dumble'"
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Tony Wrote:Now we have :wink:
Hello Tony,

That's the JB/Vito #0058? Correct...the picture is burry but yes, you can clearly see tantalum cathode bypass capacitors installed. An interesting choice...I can honestly say I never considered using a Tantalum in place of a traditional aluminum electrolytic. Tant's have some definite downsides in audio applications. Interesting that HAD used 3 x IRC MEB's and then a singular Electra for the cathode resistors in those circuit locations.
JB_Vito_Cathode_Bypass_Tantalum.jpg
Tony Wrote:BTW. Is that the "later" Roederstein (MF) resistor on the slope? on #0060.(Skyliner update) If so do we know when Dumble started using them. I have not seen them in any 2nd or 3rd generation amps yet?
Well, see below...you be the judge. I definitely has the look of a 1980's vintage Roederstein "ERO" MK3 type resistor. The color of the actual part in #0060 is a little off compared to most of the MK3's I've got in inventory but that's no big deal I've seen MK3's with color variations before. The part is about .340" x .120" which would be consistent with the MK3's. I've heard some speculate it is an old Philips MR30 but that's not realistic given the totally different construction of the MR30's, the different color and the length (.430" versus .340"). I would say, sonically, the MK3 and MR30 are very similar sounding parts in this spot. BTW, the ceramic bodied MEPCO right next to it is exactly .8125" long so proportionally speaking, and looking at the pictures you can see it is indeed in the ballpark of .340" long. Having measure the actual part...I know it is .340" long :D
#0060_Slope.jpg
To be honest, I'm not 100% certain as to exactly when the ERO MK3's hit the market. I have some which I believe have later 1980's date codes on the boxes. So I know #0060 was configured differently than it is now as we discussed previously (treble pot washer indentations on the inside of the chassis, earlier different location FET board installed & the Reverb Jacks in the early locations installed, etc.) but now we have a better idea as to when it might have been converted into what we see today...this part would surely be newer than the 1982 coded T-I Voltage Regulator.

Best Regards,

Gabe
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
talbany
Posts: 4696
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:03 am
Location: Dumbleland

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by talbany »

Gabe
Thanks for getting back to me!

Hello Tony,

That's the JB/Vito #0058? Correct...the picture is burry but yes, you can clearly see tantalum cathode bypass capacitors installed. An interesting choice...I can honestly say I never considered using a Tantalum in place of a traditional aluminum electrolytic. Tant's have some definite downsides in audio applications. Interesting that HAD used 3 x IRC MEB's and then a singular Electra for the cathode resistors in those circuit locations.
Yes, this is the JB/Vito ODSR. However, these are not the Tantalum caps I was referring to in my previous post. The ones I was wondering about were the early solid-electrolyte 150D Spragues shown here and in my Music man?.. These smaller Taints used like in 58 were also widely used by (hold your ears) Boogie :lol:
I do hear the difference in the different type bypass caps yet still to this day cannot tell much difference in the type of bypass resistor so it does not surprise me that HAD would mix and match bypass resistors IMHO. There is no denying the stability a precision MF resistor brings to the operating point of the cathodes.BTW. The big problem (for those that don't know)with using these caps in any circuit is by exceeding the reverse voltages the cap will "yes Explode!. I have also heard good things about Tant resistors in audio circuits but have not used them yet?
https://www.tedss.com/LearnMore/Solid-T ... Capacitors
Sprague-150D-Series-Tantalum-Capacitors.pdf
f0bc74841be706de29e1f825fd3966d5.jpg
MM.jpeg
Yes those are the MK3's. In a bright light (or flash) they take on a greenish hue and look navy blue with no direct light and yes the size looks correct as well. I've also used these resistors as well in plates and slopes and have a transparent sound with a pleasing (never harsh)top end. BTW. When 124 was updated from a Classic to a Skyliner he also replaced the slope with a 150K MK3 as well. 124 was originally built in 84 and the update done in 88. Given it's the only MK3 in the amp and part of the Skyline update we can assume he started using those resistors sometime after 84.Correct?
(note :still has the Q-lines and 77 Dales)
ODS_124050.jpg
All the Best!

Tony
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
" The psychics on my bench is the same as Dumble'"
GPD
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:23 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Dumble Serial number 006X OD50WX

Post by GPD »

Tony wrote: Yes, this is the JB/Vito ODSR. However, these are not the Tantalum caps I was referring to in my previous post. The ones I was wondering about were the early solid-electrolyte 150D Spragues shown here and in my Music man?.. These smaller Taints used like in 58 were also widely used by (hold your ears) Boogie :lol: I do hear the difference in the different type bypass caps yet still to this day cannot tell much difference in the type of bypass resistor so it does not surprise me that HAD would mix and match bypass resistors IMHO. There is no denying the stability a precision MF resistor brings to the operating point of the cathodes.BTW. The big problem (for those that don't know)with using these caps in any circuit is by exceeding the reverse voltages the cap will "yes Explode!. I have also heard good things about Tant resistors in audio circuits but have not used them yet?
Hello Tony, yes, I am well aware that Boogie used Tantalum bypass caps in their Mark series amps...I actually have an old Mark III that started life as a IIC and was converted by Tony Benedetti at the factory to a Mark III in the 1980's...interesting story that amp. Sounds like a Boogie for sure :). I also have an old Studio 22+ that was brought in for repair and the owner never returned to pick it up. I actually like the amp...nothing spectacular but it does one specific type of boxy sounding distortion really well.

Regarding the impact on the sonic voice of an amp and cathode resistors...

Originally, my logical thought process was that the plate resistors are most critical, the grids have some impact too but the cathodes (being bypassed with a capacitor) should be less noticeable. I've since changed my mind. Dumble seemed to really like the old light gray molded IRC MEB's in this spot for a number of years and I suspect he ran out of inventory at some point in time and moved on to different brands. I do agree, however, that the difference in the voice of an amp with the MEB's versus some other NOS military type RN65 resistor is, however, subtle. I personally like the CGW NA65's in this spot but these are just as hard to find as the IRC MEB's. Anyway, having played around with the Dumble High and Low Plate circuits now...I understand much better how his combination of specific components build out the sonic signature of his various circuits. So now I do feel that the cathode resistor brand/type matters. It isn't an overly dramatic difference...but everything works together to build out the basic voice of the amp. That said, I still hold to the reality that the plate resistors matter the most and color the sound the most.

I think what guys like Jelle Welagen are doing (hunting down the specific parts HAD used) is very noble (and difficult)...trying to recreate these legendary amplifiers by replicating every detail.

As far as Tantalum versus traditional aluminum electrolytic caps...I haven't experimented with cathode bypass caps and honestly cannot give feedback on this but I can say that altering capacitance values in this spot can and will make an audible difference in the voicing of any amp (but you know this already :D )

Best Regards,


Gabe
Post Reply