I cut the trace between the lugs on the mids pot...

[rockon1]

In my V32 I cut the trace that connects the middle and outside lug of the mid pot. The amp sounds punchier,livelier. I like it! Only problem is I dont know what Ive done really. Ive been told it makes the tonestack more like a Marshall? Anybody have any insight? The link is to the schematic.Thanks Bob

http://www.schematicheaven.com/newam...2_palomino.pdf

.....

[jmaf]

Originally Posted by rockon1

In my V32 I cut the trace that connects the middle and outside lug of the mid pot. The amp sounds punchier,livelier. I like it! Only problem is I dont know what Ive done really. Ive been told it makes the tonestack more like a Marshall? Anybody have any insight? The link is to the schematic.Thanks Bob

http://www.schematicheaven.com/newam...2_palomino.pdf

.....

It's the same as turning it all the way up, for maximum midrange. If you felt it was punchier after cutting, rather than having it turned all the way up then the pot probably was not making good contact at the clockwise end of the taper.

Edit: Needless to say, you've neutralized the mid control, now it's turned all the way to 10 all the time.

[rockon1]

Originally Posted by jmaf

It's the same as turning it all the way up, for maximum midrange. If you felt it was punchier after cutting, rather than having it turned all the way up then the pot probably was not making good contact at the clockwise end of the taper.

Edit: Needless to say, you've neutralized the mid control, now it's turned all the way to 10 all the time.

Wow I guess that was a dumb mod! lol! Didnt notice the mid control doesnt work! Sure seemed to sound better-must be the placebo affect. Guess I'll have to return it back. Bob

[jmaf]

Originally Posted by rockon1

Wow I guess that was a dumb mod! lol! Didnt notice the mid control doesnt work! Sure seemed to sound better-must be the placebo affect. Guess I'll have to return it back. Bob

Maybe it did in fact sound better, it's a god time as ever to measure resistance there between the wiper and the clockwise lead when it's fully turned right, it should be very near zero, in the fractions of ohms. If it isn't then you found a bad pot and your mod wasn't entirely lost work.

[rockon1]

Originally Posted by jmaf

Maybe it did in fact sound better, it's a god time as ever to measure resistance there between the wiper and the clockwise lead when it's fully turned right, it should be very near zero, in the fractions of ohms. If it isn't then you found a bad pot and your mod wasn't entirely lost work.

Well unfortunately I just "fixed" it and didnt measure it. It does sound the same with the mid pot dimed. I never thought to dime the mid pot I guess.... Its a nice sound though. Serves me right for blindly trying a suggested mod without a bit of researech though. Many thanks! Bob

[rockon1]

Does this make sense?

"unhook the leg of C11 that is connected to the trace running from P3 to P4 and jumper from that leg of C11 to the wiper of P3 while cutting the trace between the wiper and outer terminal of P3."

Thanks Bob

[jmaf]

Originally Posted by rockon1

Does this make sense?

"unhook the leg of C11 that is connected to the trace running from P3 to P4 and jumper from that leg of C11 to the wiper of P3 while cutting the trace between the wiper and outer terminal of P3."

Thanks Bob

Apparently what it'd do is, speaking strictly from drawing this mod on a piece of paper and not having tried it, is probably turn your mid control into a more coarse bass control as C10 and C11 are identical and the mid pot is only 25K compared to the 1 Meg bass pot. You'd likely have less control over mid frequencies and more control over the low end. The two caps in parallel will add to 44 nF and you'll control how much of the signal is then grounded through the two pots, P3 and P4.

It probably shouldn't be a difficult mod to try. This one would keep your mid control in the circuit, I'm just not sure what the frequency response will be afterwards. Let us know if you try!

[rockon1]

Originally Posted by jmaf

Apparently what it'd do is, speaking strictly from drawing this mod on a piece of paper and not having tried it, is probably turn your mid control into a more coarse bass control as C10 and C11 are identical and the mid pot is only 25K compared to the 1 Meg bass pot. You'd likely have less control over mid frequencies and more control over the low end. The two caps in parallel will add to 44 nF and you'll control how much of the signal is then grounded through the two pots, P3 and P4.

It probably shouldn't be a difficult mod to try. This one would keep your mid control in the circuit, I'm just not sure what the frequency response will be afterwards. Let us know if you try!

Thanks. Im going to leave it. However R13 is the slope resistor and I bumped it up from 33 to 54K. Interesting slight shift the the tone controls/tone. I think a 100K pot and a 22K resistor would be very cool! Bob

[rockon1]

Switchable slope resistor added....76/33(stock)/54....Gettin crazy lookin in there! Bob

[jmaf]

Originally Posted by rockon1

Switchable slope resistor added....76/33(stock)/54....Gettin crazy lookin in there! Bob

It's looking good, thanks for sharing!

[rockon1]

Originally Posted by jmaf

It's looking good, thanks for sharing!

Thanks. For v32 owners who might be interested.

R45 controls the level of the "boost" feature. I removed the resistor and put a 100K pot in its place to make it variable.

C53 dumps some of the highs in the boost so I made ir switchable

R31 can be bridged to reduce the bass(which can get boomy stock) I put a switch across it to be able to switch it out(less bass). Basically a slight bass cut mod

R13 is the slope resistor. I added two 22K's in series with the stock 33 and added a 3 way switch to each to make it 76,54 and 33K (stock)

Also added a simple 120v fan with the push button switch. Bob