Build in the Dumbleator, or not?

[mlp-mx6]

I'm about to start on my 20W ODS build. I have an ODS-style black chassis. It has holes for 4 output tubes, though I'm only planning to use 2. (The last one will hold a filter cap can.)

I am debating as to whether or not to install a Weber octal-to-9pin converter and have 4 9-pin tubes - 2 in the preamp, one for the Dumbleator, and 1 for the PI.

Your thoughts?

[Normster]

I'm about to start on my 20W ODS build. I have an ODS-style black chassis. It has holes for 4 output tubes, though I'm only planning to use 2. (The last one will hold a filter cap can.)

I am debating as to whether or not to install a Weber octal-to-9pin converter and have 4 9-pin tubes - 2 in the preamp, one for the Dumbleator, and 1 for the PI.

Your thoughts?

I've got a similar debate going on. Reverb or Dumbleator? So far I've been satisfied with running a reverb pedal through the passive loop, but I'm really curious to see if the Dumbleator makes a difference. On the other hand, it's kind of nice to just grab the amp and leave the pedals behind so a reverb is still a viable option. I guess I should just do like Gary does and put in both.

BTW, my chassis has 4 x 9-pin and 4 x octal so I'll be running a 5AR4 rectifier, JJ cap can, two 6V6's, and four 12AX7's.

[swt]

all my dumble clones have the dumbleator built in. It's a really cool adition. I also put a dpdt bypass, to get it fully out of the circuit. If you plan to use delays, or chorus, or even reverb, this is the best choice, and if built properly, it won't change the sound too much, barely noticeable...

[mlp-mx6]

Reviving an old thread - because it has taken me this long to get back to this project.

To recap - I have an ODS-style chassis w/ 4 octal and 3 9-pin socket holes. I have a plate (from Weber) that can convert an octal to a 9-pin, and I am only planning to use 3 of the octals, so TECHNICALLY I could put a Dumbleator loop in the amp. Rear panel control room is tight, of course.

What do you guys think? Build in the loop, or just go with what HAD put in there?

[Funkalicousgroove]

It really has a HUGE effect on the overall feel and tone when you add things like Spring Reverb and built in Dumbleators. I STRONGLY reccommend that they be separate devices, that being said, if you ARE going to build in a D-lator, I'd REALLY consider giving it it's own power supply so that it operates as intended. Just my $.02

[mlp-mx6]

Funk,

Thanks for the perspective. I've been thinking about it more and since I already have one with the built-in d'lator, perhaps I should build one without just for comparison. Although I am planning for 6V6s in this one - well, it will have about 420V on the plates, anyway, so I can put whatever I want in there.

The first one I built is actually more like the Fuchs TDS - dedicated clean, then a clean/od choice, switchable between them all - with built-in d'lator. I really DO like the tone of this amp, but variety is the spice of life, right?

Besides, I can get another chassis from you for the next one, right?!? (wink) Not to mention needing to build a standalone D'lator! Do you have/make/sell an ODS chassis with 4 preamp tube sockets?

Michael

[Sven]

Greetings,

An ideal Parallel FX loop idea is presented with this drawing. One would have an option to completely (hard) by-pass the FX loop. When the loop is in, than it would be ideal if the ¨dry¨ signal would not pass through any ckt. The ¨wet¨ signal would be ideally passively dealt with, while it is also obvious that active valve ckt. would be more likely and perhaps obligatory inclusion. This is very rough idea, but its realisation would yeald the best results, if it would be possible.

Excuse me for previously posting the wrong drawing - this is the correct one (too much zeal - too quick, can hurt!).

[Bob-I]

Greetings,

An ideal Parallel FX loop idea is presented with this drawing. One would have an option to completely (hard) by-pass the FX loop. When the loop is in, than it would be ideal if the ¨dry¨ signal would not pass through any ckt.

In your drawing the effect would not work at all. Electricity passes through the path of least resistance, therefore no signal would pass at all through the effect, 100% will pass through the wire.

[roknroll]

Just finished a clone with a built in Dlator and bypass switch. It seems to be colorless. no difference in tone either way on or off. 12ax7 was to aggressive. Switched to a 12at7 and it was more under control. Will try 12ay7 and 12au7 one of these days.

[Tonegeek]

I like my onboard D'lator. Funk is right that it changes things - more drain on the PS, the extra circuitry, etc. I don't know what effect the extra power draw has, but tone change with the circuitry in or out is barely noticeable. Mine seems to drop a barely noticeable amount of high end when the loop is in circuit. It does not bother me though. I worked out a bleeder arrangement that brought the highs back, but ended up not using it. The good and bad about the D'lator is that now you have 2 more level adjustments that will affect the gain and tone (I really like that extra gain stage). This gives you more versatility but also may make it harder to find your sweet spot. I am finally used to mine and know exactly where to set the levels to get the sounds I want. I would say if you are a Dumble purist and don't mind the extra baggage, build a stand alone D'lator, but if you have a beefy PT and the room, with only a few extra parts you can build it in.