Traynor YGM-3 design issues?

[Chuck H]

I don't want to get too far into it, but the idea that Pete built this as a 'DR clone' is ridiculous and somewhat offensive.
It's one of the most popular vintage Traynor amps bone stock. If you don't like it, go ahead and mod away. But please don't imply design flaws.

Indeed! It's VERY common for these forums to refer to a given Traynor model as a clone of some coveted Marshall or Fender amp. And none of them were. Far less so in fact than many other manufacturers amps. Looking at the schem I can't imagine relating it to a Deluxe Reverb. No more than I would call a Bassmaster a Marshall clone.

[66 Kicks]

I wonder how many attachments will fly in one post.

[66 Kicks]

Three more.

[g1]

nobody seems to care/notice that they're totally missing the 3rd gain stage after the reverb recovery?

When looking at the schematic you can see the plate resistors in the preamp have very high values. I assume trying to sqeeze out more volume/gain from the preamp, to compensate for that missing stage.

Then you make a DR clone and paralyze it by removing a gain stage. Oh well..

If we go back to the elephant in the room with this amp, being the completely missing 3rd gain stage (versus a Deluxe Reverb). How terrible was that idea on a scale of 1 to 10? You build a huge plywood box, all PTP, big Hammond transformers, clone a famous circuit, then at 99% of the way, sabotage it...

How terrible would it be if someone totally blew their circuit analysis by assuming 6BQ5's are the same as 6V6's?
The 6BQ5 will not make as much power, and needs about half the drive signal to hit clipping. (17Vpk for the YGM vs 35Vpk for the DR)
If anybody ever wanted to clone a DR, the last thing you would do would be to try it with 6BQ5s.

[The Dude]

I'm curious as to where this whole "DR clone" thing came from??? I'm not sure why anyone would make that comparison. I don't see it as at all similar...... I guess it does have tubes, capacitors, resistors, and transformers.

[Chuck H]

I'm curious as to where this whole "DR clone" thing came from??? I'm not sure why anyone would make that comparison. I don't see it as at all similar...... I guess it does have tubes, capacitors, resistors, and transformers.

That's exactly it. Two small bottles, 12" speaker, reverb, tremolo, no mid control and built on an eyelet board. It must be a DR clone. Just like the Bassmaster used the two word name with the first starting in B and the second starting with M. It used EL34 tubes like Marshall amps and the early Marshalls are said to be clones of the Bassman. So the Bassmaster must be a Marshall clone.

[The Dude]

I sort of get it, but not really. It's like saying everything that uses a 1K resistor is a clock radio. IMO, the two amps are more different than they are the same.

[Chuck H]

Or that a tennis ball is just a copy of a baseball because they're both used in a sport where the ball is hit, they both have a similar pattern and are about the same size.

Ever hit a baseball with tennis racket? Don't bother. Very little joy. Take it from me.

[Iplayloud]

Yeah.. the circuit looks so much more similar to a Plexi.. what was I thinking. Ok yes a different EQ design and PI differences but the final sound is in the same ballpark. That amp was designed to compete against Princetons and Deluxes and did just that since day one. Ask any sellers in music stores, even the reissues are competing with same Fender reissues as 50 years ago.

[galaxiex]

I have a 1970 YGM III that I "Fenderized" as the poor thing had so many mods and problems when I got it.

I would never have done this if the amp had been pristine.

Schem of my Fenderized Traynor...



Here's a thread with some details...

https://music-electronics-forum.com/...ad.php?t=46546

[Chuck H]

I have a 1970 YGM III that I "Fenderized" as the poor thing had so many mods and problems when I got it.

I would never have done this if the amp had been pristine.

Schem of my Fenderized Traynor...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58079[/ATTACH]

Here's a thread with some details...

https://music-electronics-forum.com/...ad.php?t=46546

That's smart. Just let it be a bit lower in gain for the cleaner tones and then virtually lift the tone stack when you want more clipping

[Bloomfield]

I have a 1970 YGM III that I "Fenderized" as the poor thing had so many mods and problems when I got it.

I would never have done this if the amp had been pristine.

Schem of my Fenderized Traynor...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58079[/ATTACH]

Here's a thread with some details...

https://music-electronics-forum.com/...ad.php?t=46546

Hi Galaxex, what program is that schematic drawn with? It looks much better to my eye than most CAD drawings of tube circuits.

[galaxiex]

Hi Galaxex, what program is that schematic drawn with? It looks much better to my eye than most CAD drawings of tube circuits.

That is Express SCH, free program.

Comes with Express PCB as a bundle,
you don't have to use their PCB service to use the program.

https://www.expresspcb.com/

[galaxiex]

That's smart. Just let it be a bit lower in gain for the cleaner tones and then virtually lift the tone stack when you want more clipping

Thanks!
Yes it works very well...
didja notice the feedback lift?

[Chuck H]

didja notice the feedback lift?

Yep. And also that you removed the permanent "presence on ten" cap. Flip that switch much? Or does it just pretty much live in the no NFB position