Bandmaster AB763 Problem

[Leo_Gnardo]

CE was never mentioned except it was noted that their part number matched the one in question.
The linked thread was several years old and I got the idea the problem units were discontinued?

On occasion, within the last few years, trying to order certain "authentic" Fender transformers from CE's catalog, they said "no longer available." Perhaps some of these were the trouble tran's. In any case CE has always done right by me, no complaints. There are substitutes for the no-longer-available parts, made by Hammond, a tad more costly. I think it's smart of Hammond to recognize this market and offer transformers to fit the bill.

[bob p]

Google for the specific part number "P-TF22848" and see how many vendors use that product code.

[g1]

I'm with ya Bob, but just sayin'.
JM took it to be that the pic had been identified as a CE part which it had not been.
But as you were probably also thinking, the response to attempts to return the defective parts sounded remarkably similar to recent responses regarding tube returns.

[Enzo]

22848 is a fender part number.

P-TF22848 is not a fender part number, it is a vendor part number for a replacement part for the fender. They are not fooling anyone or trying to, they use the same base number to eliminate confusion. They could have called it the P-TF87654 but what would be the point? Just as other brands use the Accutronics code numbers for their equivalent pans.

If you look at the AES offerings, they have output transformers like that one described as "replacement for fender thus and so", if you look further they have other transformers that are described as "Fender Original" transformer for whatever.

[bob p]

The confusion comes along when they mix both fender and non-fender transformers on the same catalog page, which has a Fender Registered Trademark logo at the top of it. If you have a copy of the print catalog you'll see that it's not particularly clear. If you use the web site at CE it's not particularly clear either. On the other hand, a supplier like Angela cleanly separates the genuine fender from the non fender stuff on separate pages that are titled Genuine Fender and replacements for fender, so there's no mistaking one for the other. CED's website, which I've always thought was quite poor, mixes them all together. It's as bad as their print catalog. Mixing everything together makes me wonder if they want customers who aren't paying close attention to make a mistake.

[Enzo]

I am looking at the CE book - the black cover 2012 issue is the one I have handy.

Transformer section, one page has Fender at the top of the page "Replacements for Fender AMplifiers

In the text on the page are listings of various transformers and the amps they fit. Among the others are certain models that are identified with the red letters "Fender Original!" The others are not identified as Fender Original parts. I don;t find it unclear at all.

On the opposing page are Marshall transformers, the same pattern emerges, some are labelled in red as Marshall Original, while the rest are not.

I myself find it more convenient to list them all together, I find no need to invoke a conspiracy.

[g1]

Sadly, I don't think CE has it together enough to be trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes.
I think the confusion regarding the original vs. replacement is more due to ineptitude or lack of proof-reading than any malicious intent.
Why would you write up an original Fender part but use your own part number prefix tacked on and then say "equivalent to Fender part #xxyy ? Why not say this IS ACTUAL Fender part number xxyy ? That's how they're doing it on the website anyway.
And they use the same Fender logo with the copyright symbol for both the original and replacement ads.
Actually, the copy is pretty much identical with the only difference being the word replacement or original.
For the Marshall stuff, they use the word genuine. And it seems they only use the TM marking for the genuine items.

[bob p]

Enzo you don't find this confusing because you've been doing this professionally for decades. You know all of the insides and outsides to the amp rebuilding business, what parts are original and what parts are not. That's not the case for young hobbyists and people who are just getting started. The use of the Fender registered trademark logo on the top of a page that lists non-genuine fender replacement parts is just wrong. You know enough not to be fooled. It's not fair to assume that everyone is as smart as you are. I know people who are pissed at having bought iron from CED that they thought was fender and turned out to be non-fender. Admittedly, it didn't happen with the 2012 catalog, and they way they describe genuine vs. non-genuine product has changed in their catalogs over the years.

Part of the problem is that the CED catalog and web site are both designed by a graphic artist who doesn't know a transformer from a hole in the ground.

Welcome to Erica Odello's Grahpic Design Website!

Erica Odello- Web Samples

I've always thought the CED site was just awful. Now I know why.

[Bruce / Mission Amps]

I KNEW that green segmented-looking wire looked goofy. Good comment too about getting a neater wind while pulling in a kite... thanks for passing that along bob p.

Bruce, do you know who makes transformers for Magic/Ruby? I get some from them, never a problem.

In fact can't say I've ever had a problem with replacement iron. Just lucky I guess. So far haven't gotten any from Triode, Magnetic Components, Marvel. (At least not to my knowledge.) OTOH had a brand-new 2000-series Marshall come in with a shorted secondary, right from the factory. Replacement from CE worked perfectly. Mostly I buy iron from Magic Parts and CE.

Whistling thru the graveyard, on El Dia de los Muertos...

Not sure anymore.... they used to work with TMI, also in Illinois and PACTRAN in California... but I think they might have even tried Woodward-Schumacher for a while.
The TMI trannys were terrific... PACTRAN were excellent too.... but, Mag-Comp are also very very good.
Like I said, I've used hundreds from many vendors and none are without a dog here and there.

[J M Fahey]

Part of the problem is that the CED catalog and web site are both designed by a graphic artist who doesn't know a transformer from a hole in the ground.

Welcome to Erica Odello's Grahpic Design Website!

Erica Odello- Web Samples

I've always thought the CED site was just awful. Now I know why.

FWIW and not meaning to be rude, that Web designer has a less than stunning own page, which is weird, because it's the first thing any prospective customer will see, and links to only 3 customers.

Of those, both Antique Electronics (which signs Antique Electronic Supply) and CE have the exact same page template, obviously with different text and logos.
Not exactly a source of hot new ideas.

[g1]

FWIW and not meaning to be rude, that Web designer has a less than stunning own page, which is weird, because it's the first thing any prospective customer will see, and links to only 3 customers.

Of those, both Antique Electronics (which signs Antique Electronic Supply) and CE have the exact same page template, obviously with different text and logos.
Not exactly a source of hot new ideas.

Not only that, but the other 2 customers appear to be dead ends, and on closer inspection, the CE connection only seems to be as a "consultant".

[Leo_Gnardo]

Of those, both Antique Electronics (which signs Antique Electronic Supply) and CE have the exact same page template, obviously with different text and logos.
Not exactly a source of hot new ideas.

Add to these, "Amplified Parts", apparently another name under which CE/Antique does business, angling for the guitar building & modification market. Not that I have anything against CE - I've been well served. And I manage to navigate the catalog just fine. Website, not so much. I wonder if these are the 3 outfits Ms Odello claims as credits.