Layout 5th Generation 183

[ampdork]

Dropping string is 3K, 22K, 2k2

The nodes in 183 are physically reversed then what is commonly seen with the PS supply but the actual circuit is the same.

[Chad]

I hear ya, No I like Dumbles and I agree the 183 is a great sounding amp but I'd like to hear a little more gain in a more classic rock context or a more hard rock. But hell maybe that's the style most don't like to hear from a Dumble.Oh well. who knows, if I ever get a way to record some clips I can embarrassed myself with my not so fabulous playing skills and my possibly not so good sounding bluesmaster clone . I would love to have someone critique my amp anyway. Just waiting for the funds to come in to do so. Thaks, Chad

Hey Chad,

You probably have a better amp than 183 for harder rock, as 183 does not compress when you turn the gain up. (Which is why I dig it so much!) Here it is doing something heavy. The leads are totally clipping, sorry about that. You can get an idea of what it sounds like in heavy situations though. I still love it! Even with lots of gain, you can almost hear the acoustic propertys of the guitar undrneath the overdrive. Very cool for me!

http://www.soundclick.com/player/single ... i&newref=1

VERY GOOD VERY GOOD!

Wow not bad ,not bad at all. Thats more up my ally Tag. I like it Thanks for the clip. Chad

[talbany]

Ver 7 up

Tony

[Max]

Ver 7 up

Tony

Hi Tony,

do you know if the original #183 has a three position rock/jazz switch with a PB middle position?

All the best and have a great weekend!

Max

[talbany]

Max
Not sure.. AFAIK.. It does not!!

A great weekend back..

T.

[talbany]

Max
Do you have any historical info on the Music Man transformer amps.. Like how many were built..There has been little to no info on these amps other than I know they were built in the 180-190 range..Skyliners..

Thanks Again..

Tony

[Max]

Max
Do you have any historical info on the Music Man transformer amps.. Like how many were built..There has been little to no info on these amps other than I know they were built in the 180-190 range..Skyliners..

Thanks Again..

Tony

Hi Tony,

AFAIR Alexander Dumble used MM power and output transformers already in at least some of the 4th generation "classic" ODS amps built around 1984 and in the series # range of 12X. Because he IMO knows how to get every tone he wants, IMO he has the freedom to use very different kind of parts to build even very similar sounding amps.

IMO he just takes what is available of all the parts which he knows to be suitable in principal for the kind of amp he wants to build at a given point in time. Because of this you meet different kind of parts even in amps from the same "generation" or year (just remember all the different MF resistors you find in his 2nd and 3rd generation ODS amps).

IMO Dumble amps are one of the best poofs that the common belief that certain parts or materials in general sound "good" or "bad" is just a prejudice that delivers a nice topic for gearhead chats. I personally have no doubt at all that Alexander Dumble could build a second #075 or #124 or #183 or #102 or #whatever without any of the original parts you find in #whatever - if one of his customers should ask for such a thing.

I've talked at lenght about this with the late Jimmy D'Aquisto and he, too, had the opinion that it would not be a general problem if some woods shouldn't be available any longer, but that you can't of course just replace a European spruce top with a Sitka spruce top, but you would have to change the complete construction (bracing, dimensions, top shaping, tailpiece lenght, string pressure etc.) to get the same tone with a Sitka top as with a Euopean spruce top. That is btw one of the reasons why he liked the archtop kind of acoustic guitar construction, because in his opinion it delivers a large degree of freedom for the designer.

And IMO Alexander Dumble has a similar approach concerning parts and materials: If certain parts are not available he just takes other parts and of course adjusts the complete circuit (to the extent needed in such a case) to get the tone his customer is asking for.

Does this answer your question, or did I misunderstand what you would like to know?

Have a nice weekend,

Max

[Mr Dumble]

Hi Tony,

AFAIR Alexander Dumble used MM power and output transformers already in at least some of the 4th generation "classic" ODS amps built around 1984 and in the series # range of 12X. Because he IMO knows how to get every tone he wants, IMO he has the freedom to use very different kind of parts to build even very similar sounding amps.

IMO he just takes what is available of all the parts which he knows to be suitable in principal for the kind of amp he wants to build at a given point in time. Because of this you meet different kind of parts even in amps from the same "generation" or year (just remember all the different MF resistors you find in his 2nd and 3rd generation ODS amps).

IMO Dumble amps are one of the best poofs that the common belief that certain parts or materials in general sound "good" or "bad" is just a prejudice that delivers a nice topic for gearhead chats. I personally have no doubt at all that Alexander Dumble could build a second #075 or #124 or #183 or #102 or #whatever without any of the original parts you find in #whatever - if one of his customers should ask for such a thing.

I've talked at lenght about this with the late Jimmy D'Aquisto and he, too, had the opinion that it would not be a general problem if some woods shouldn't be available any longer, but that you can't of course just replace a European spruce top with a Sitka spruce top, but you would have to change the complete construction (bracing, dimensions, top shaping, tailpiece lenght, string pressure etc.) to get the same tone with a Sitka top as with a Euopean spruce top. That is btw one of the reasons why he liked the archtop kind of acoustic guitar construction, because in his opinion it delivers a large degree of freedom for the designer.

And IMO Alexander Dumble has a similar approach concerning parts and materials: If certain parts are not available he just takes other parts and of course adjusts the complete circuit (to the extent needed in such a case) to get the tone his customer is asking for.

Does this answer your question, or did I misunderstand what you would like to know?

Have a nice weekend,

Max[/quote]


Great post, and I totally agree. IMO, he goes to it at a totally different angle than people trying to "clone" his sound. He knows what tone he wants in his head, and just adjusts what he has available to get the final result. I think somone should take this approach to getting Dumbles sound. Listen to the tone of the amp, and use whatever means needed to get the end result. Forget the schematics, or only use them as the most basic guideline. Use whatever means SOUNDS right, regardless of if it was ever seen in a Dumble amp before or not. Who cares? The only thing that should matter is if it sounds the same. All this "cloning" going on, and IMO, no one has nailed it yet. Use the old ear, and if it sounds right, thats it! The big problem is when that occurs, others will look inside and say..NO NO, that cant be right! Dumble did not do it that way. Then report on the net the guy does not know what hes doing, and bad mouth it. LOL!!

[Structo]

How many amps have you built Tag?

I don't think I am alone when I say I find your username offensive.

[nix]

Because he IMO knows how to get every tone he wants, IMO he has the freedom to use very different kind of parts to build even very similar sounding amps.

IMO he just takes what is available of all the parts which he knows to be suitable in principal for the kind of amp he wants to build at a given point in time. Because of this you meet different kind of parts even in amps from the same "generation" or year (just remember all the different MF resistors you find in his 2nd and 3rd generation ODS amps).

IMO Dumble amps are one of the best poofs that the common belief that certain parts or materials in general sound "good" or "bad" is just a prejudice that delivers a nice topic for gearhead chats. I personally have no doubt at all that Alexander Dumble could build a second #075 or #124 or #183 or #102 or #whatever without any of the original parts you find in #whatever - if one of his customers should ask for such a thing.


etc...

Max

While I see what you're saying about his ability to coax a random collection of parts in a tonal direction, generally speaking, it's been shown (historically) that even HAD has trouble creating matching identical clones of previously manufactured amps. Even using the same exact parts...i.e.: Santana's vintage Overdrive Reverb, which he attempted to clone in recent years (the result of which is a nice amp that doesn't sound identical to the original), as well as the well-known story of SRV's dissatisfaction with his second Steel String Singer (the black-panel follow up to the 'King Tone Con-Soul').
I have great respect for Dumble and his unique talents in amp design and execution, however, I respectfully disagree with the commonly held idea that he possesses some mystical quality that allows him to defy the laws of physics. He's a very, very clever human, but still a human subject to the same realities as the rest of us.
That said, I know that it is possible to get an amp to sound very close to another while using components that are distinct from the original. Andy Fuchs is an example of someone who has made models that have a very close sonic relationship to some Dumbles, while not strictly adhering to the accepted layout, bill-of-materials, etc.
Personally, I believe the reason HAD has been able to make amps using differing materials that all have his sonic finger-print, is that he is a fairly accomplished guitarist with good ears for tuning a given completed circuit.

It's been my observation that some Dumbles of the same circuit-style/generation perform considerably better for certain sounds than others. The only explainable difference is often components used. I tend to believe his more outstanding amps were happy accidents, performing beyond even his lofty standards. Similar to how original Marshalls from the late '60s have a pretty wide window of brilliant to mediocre, one to the next (I do recognize the difference in quality-control..simply used as an example).

[talbany]

Max
Thanks for the response..

Over the decade I've been building I've used just about every popular cap types, pot types resistors transformers etc. in all types of combinations in all different types of topology's.. Each brings its own flavor to the tone. So I understand this philosophy of component interaction.. I compare it closely to that of a gourmet chief.. Someone who can take a few ingredience and turn it into something wonderful and flavorful...On the flip side there are some component types he stuck with (for the most part over the years that brings his fundamental type tone).. some being Pot types, Jack types, resistors, tone caps, lead dress, grounding scheme circuit board material, wire type,
There are some exceptions throughout the different generations of coarse..

On the topic of amp consistency.. We've built many amps back to back (Some PCB) same exact parts (measured) same transformers same exact board... Part for part identical and still the build can yield different results.. Some very noticeable others very close...Even in a single channel Fender/arshall style amp not as complex as the ODS..IMO even if you use and measure each component value get them as close as possible to an original there is still no guarantee the 2 will yield identical sounds especially in dealing in harmonic content. (Just look at all the variables in the tubes alone)...Not saying it can't be done I just wouldn't bet the farm on it.. Perhaps one could tweak his way closer..IMO if the amp has some amount of time on the components this adds an extra ingredient that is hard to measure and simulate ..IMO the X-factor.. Then again it's all in the perspective of the players ears, soul and his /her frame of reference or experience. All in MHO of course!!

Tony

[Mr Dumble]

How many amps have you built Tag?

Played enough to know there are no other HADs around. Part of my opinion on his ability to due the above is based on having played 4 Dumbles side by side. For one example, his ability to get tones so similar using both EL34 and 6L6 tubes is pretty amazing.

I don't think I am alone when I say I find your username offensive.

And you think I care?

[ChrisM]

How many amps have you built Tag?

Played enough to know there are no other HADs around. Part of my opinion on his ability to due the above is based on having played 4 Dumbles side by side. For one example, his ability to get tones so similar using both EL34 and 6L6 tubes is pretty amazing.

I don't think I am alone when I say I find your username offensive.

And you think I care?

The dude used surpus parts and often whatever he had on hand.

[chris_sanford]

Chris,

#183 does not show that way....? look at the pic....maybe I am not looking at it correctly.

Sorry, I've never seen the pic of the real thing, so I'm just speaking in general terms based on the amps I'm familiar with.

chris

[Max]

he stuck with (for the most part over the years that brings his fundamental type tone).. some being Pot types, Jack types, resistors, tone caps, lead dress, grounding scheme circuit board material.

.

Hi Tony,

based on my own experience with at least twenty of his amps I agree only concerning the "Jack Types". But others may of course know other amps.

@nix:

I decided to base my own opinions about Dumble amps, and what I tell here in accord with these opinions about Dumble amps and their specs etc., only on my own first hand experiences and I sometimes quote some interviews that I think are credible.

And because I am not familiar with Santana's and SRV amps and because I don't know from a first hand source if these have really been ordered to be 100% exact tonal copies of other amps (what I doubt), and because I never have read quotes in which SRV or Santana critizise their amps as not beeing the tools they have ordered, I simply don't know if your arguments and conclusions may be right or wrong. IMO both can be the case.

Tony and nix,

Have a great weekend and thanks for your personal perspectives,

Max