Pignose 7-100 Tone Query

[overdrive]

What accounts for the Pignose 7-100's slightly 'tubey' sound compared to other SS amplifiers? It appears to be a relatively simple PCB/component circuit.

Reason for asking, overheard a demo recording session the other evening & what sounded like a mildly-cranked valve amp turned out to be one of these small amplifiers mic'd with a Neuman.

[booj]

Post the scat. Perhaps the folks at Pignose are on to something. Randall, Kustom and Rickenbacher SS amps have a rep for sounding good as well.

[J M Fahey]

Some details to account for it:
*Very* simple amp, not "improved" but raw overdriven sound.
Power amp distortion. Does not even *have* a preamp.
Low or no damping at all.
Excellent speaker.
Relatively low gain forces the guitar player "play more" to avoid holes in performance.
Excellent guitar player.
Very probably professionally recorded, the engineer must have tweaked the tone the right way.
That about sums it up.
Most of this applies to Champ-type amps too.

[overdrive]

Some details to account for it:
Power amp distortion. Does not even *have* a preamp.
Low or no damping at all.

Thanks for the input. BTW, how does the amplification get by without a pre-amp & is the 'damping' factor in reference to the speaker or the electronics?

Based on its inherent simplicity, I'm surprised there isn't a lot of DIY project info available to re-create something like this...then again, it's probably more cost & time effective to simply go out & buy one.

[teemuk]

Based on its inherent simplicity, I'm surprised there isn't a lot of DIY project info available to re-create something like this...then again, it's probably more cost & time effective to simply go out & buy one.

The required power and interstage transformers are something you can't find too easily if you want to DIY that type of thing nowadays. There's hardly any point for anyone to manufacture such anymore. If you can find a very, very old radio that has those you can cannibalize 'em for a DIY project but the chance is that such radio is already pretty much a Pignose circuit to begin with.

Yes. It's easier to buy one today.

[daz]

Hmmm....to my ear it sounded rather....well, lets just say i didn't find it nearly as good as you guys appear to. I had one and to be blunt i thought it was one of the least good amps i've owned. Now if you want a surprised from a pignose, tr4y and locate an old pignose crossmix. A 75 watt amp that came in either a 1-12 or 2-10 combo and sounded awesome. I gigged with one for a while back in the 80's and to this day it's one of those pieces of gear i kick myself for selling. That thing got some killer tones and supposedly had a preamp that was closely modeled after a RAT pedal. But the little battery amp.....i just didn't hear what you did. I think that circuit was just a basic simple public domain amplifier right out of the books that wasn't intended for or geared to guitar use. As many things were back then before guitar tone became a lucrative business.

[J M Fahey]

Hi overdrive. Although it has no preamp, it's sensitivity is enough to be driven by a guitar.
Transformer-driven transistor amps are inherently low damping, poor or no negative feedback keeps them that way. Very poor "Hi Fi" audio quality, interesting for rock guitar. As Teemu says, the big problem for DIY would be driver and output transformers; the excellent (for a 5") speaker would be a problem too.
Economic$$$ says you can't put a Mod 5 there and make a buck out of it.
That would not be a problem for any manufacturer (hey, even myself could make them if assured of 500 or 1000 unit sales) but then the *big* problem would be a legal one.
They would not sell based on their great sound (they don't have it) or technical novelty (*very* obsolete technology) but on the "Pignose magic/looks/history/whatever" and *that* belongs to the Pignose Corporation or whoever holds the legal rights.
Hi daz.
I understand what you say. Compared to practically *any* other small amp, "the other" would win, agree on that, specially if used as intended, as a primary amplifier sitting on a table or something like that.
But I'm sure any modern beginner's amp , say, an MG10 (or a 1000 others) would sound buzzy , that would show up in the recording, and the Pignose would not.
Sticking an SM58 (yes, a 58, not a 57) flush against the speaker cloth would cause a lot of wonderful things happen:
1) a "defect" called "proximity effect" would boost bass, and body in general, a lot.
2) being that close means the room doesn't matter, and bass cancellation almost dissapears, considering the front wave is at least 10dB (or more) louder than the back wave. You can open that crazy little cabinet and play with the resonance too.
3) don't take my word for it (you never should) , but try it at home: stick a '58 or similar into a small (or large) speaker and move it around: the sound will vary a lot with angle, position, distance, depth, etc.
If you have a Neumann, by all means use it , the cardioid setting also has proximity effect, if you set it so.
In short, what you hear is not what the microphone hears (well, you would, if you were 1 inch high and stuck your head into the speaker cone), and ...... , a good Recording Engineer can make miracles happen.
EDIT: I'd *love* to see a Pignose Crossmix or 30/60 schematic.
I remember they did sound very good.

[overdrive]

Crossed paths with the engineer from the other evening & he pretty much reiterated the points made by Mr. Fahey in his initial follow-up post along with his subsequent comments pertaining to the effective micing of these amps. He also added that 90% of those who use 7-100s 'recreationally' tend to run them too high volume-wise which usually results in an excessively inarticulate tone...suggested going no further than 3:30-4:00 on the old 'snout-knob' & then fine-tuning the sound via certain effects, console management, and/or optional extension speakers (he sometimes opts for a 2x12) + single-coil p/u also tend to work better than humbuckers with the 7-100.