I swear i'm done with the tweaking....

[daz]

That was a great day for me too. And...

I'm still tweaking that design Though I'm very careful about it so I can always put it back just exactly as it was.

I think experimenting with various loads following the .0047 cap is a good idea. Suppose you find that a 136k (or 150k or 120k, etc.) allow you to keep the harmonic balance you like and still give enough more gain. MMmmmm cake (have it and eat it too).

Maybe a 250k pot ! (edit: or actually since i'd have a 68k in series with the pot, butter a 100k pot) But for now i'm gonna see how that pedal works out. I feel there's possibly even better potential there and w/o having to risk the tone i'm getting now. I feel boosting it increases what i love about it now so that might not just be a easy way to get more gain, but potentially a easy way to get more gain and potentially even improve an already amazing tone when NOT using more gain. Seems like that tone gets even more rich at higher gain levels boosted at the input so that might be just the ticket doing that and as i said lowering the amp's gain knob. I realized that not only when hitting my boost i use for hot solos but also when i plugged in my LP special with P90s that has a hotter output than my teles that the signal at the input is now where the magic is happening.

If this amp turns out to sound as amazing in a band mix (will find out on the 29th) i will be tempted to build a whole new one with the same circuit from scratch, cabinet and all. (now i'm using an old gutted marshall 80's SS combo cab/chassis)

[35L6]

When you reduce the following grid resistance you not only reduce gain but change the corner frequency of the coupling cap . If you determine which ( or both ) is giving you the results your well on the way to optimization . If you don't want to do the math just go up or down one value . Also I must confess I have been thinking of changes to the amp I was " just going to leave alone ".

[daz]

When you reduce the following grid resistance you not only reduce gain but change the corner frequency of the coupling cap . If you determine which ( or both ) is giving you the results your well on the way to optimization . If you don't want to do the math just go up or down one value . Also I must confess I have been thinking of changes to the amp I was " just going to leave alone ".

Hmmm....so then my idea of a pot and resistor in series (maybe a 47k and 100k pot) might just be the ticket to optimizing the tone. By the way, one of the reasons i went to modeling a few years back and used them till i resurrected this old tube build recently is because of my inability to leave my tube builds alone ! But what i found is modeling is much the same due to the fact most have a mind boggling array of deep editing functions. So all i was doing was trading a soldering iron for a data wheel ! LOL I'm just a helpless perfectionist.

[daz]

I might try a larger coupling cap off the V1A plate if you're after a more centered gain pot.

I previously quoted this and said i had it at .0047uf to lose some mud in the lows. But since then i put it back to .022uf, not really to get more gain but because since i have the load at 70k it seemed a bit thin and i figured it may now be better with the .022uf. Sure enough it is plus as you suggested it added just a touch more gain. So all in all much better. Can't find anything to improve really so zipper her back up. Hopefully i will keep my grubby hands off it other then to play !
I am however debating rebuilding it if it turns out to pass the live band test. It's just such a slop fest it's jaw dropping. Been a test bed for mods and complete circuit and tube type changes for many years. So i wouldn't change the design at all but i'd like to get a nice clean new board and components and tube sockets and wire rebuild it so it's respectable and reliable. I love the new tag boards i have been seeing that weren't available when i was building and tweaking several years ago. Might even consider just abandoning it and building a completely new amp and nice combo cabinet. Fun stuff actually. Costly, but fun. But it will need to pass the band test with more then flying colors before i'd go that far. I could probably buy a boutique amp for what a new combo build would cost in parts today.

[The Dude]

Yes, but a new boutique amp wouldn't be dazified!

[daz]

Yes, but a new boutique amp wouldn't be dazified!

Well, truth is it's far more chuckified, dudeified, enzoified, helmholtzified, mickified, G1ified, PGFified, and all the others than dazified ! To which i am thankified.

[Chuck H]

I know that you had a very similar instance many years ago. You had built a Marshall type circuit and tweaked it for a long time. By the time you had it sounding to your liking you had already learned that you can lose the secret sauce with a full rebuild even duplicating the circuits. So you decided to build a second amp to that design. I think I would follow that logic here as well.

I've sold four amps built to my favorite personal design. My own amp is the prototype for this model and has a lot more lead dress and board layout anomalies than the final design. It also sounds just a tad better and has been reliable for the most part. I did have to hunt down a cold solder joint issue on it once. Which would be expected on an amp that's undergone as much tweaking as this one. Otherwise I have no problem trusting it and loving it. Regardless of what it looks like under the hood.

[daz]

Yeah, thats not something i forgot. It's the only reason i haven't decided to do it yet and may not. Cleaning it up would be tone lost for good if it doesn't work out, and a all new build would remove that risk but also cost a fortune.