Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fender HotRod Deville ML Schematic

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fender HotRod Deville ML Schematic

    Here is another schematic that I just could not find.
    There are a lot of schematics for the Hot Rod Deville, but I could not find any schematics for the Fender Hot Rod Deville ML (Michael Landau)
    Anyone have this one ?

  • #2
    Have you called Fender? They have always been good to me about giving me whatever schematics they have.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have seen it, I'll dig the hard drive

      Comment


      • #4
        Here they are
        Attached Files

        Comment


        • #5
          https://ampgarage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=28138&start=15
          Registration required
          Who does not know and knows that he does not know - teach him Confucius)
          Who knows and does not know that he knows - wake him Confucius)

          Comment


          • #6
            I thank you all very much. Absolutely great site, with kind help.
            Exactly what I was looking for.


            Interesting, I see they withhold a lot of component values on the schematic.
            Probably to prevent people from upgrading a Stock Deville to an ML.
            Last edited by zimbodel; 11-15-2019, 11:55 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Looks to me like they didn't add the values of all the deleted parts in the V2b circuit, the more drive, which isn't there. As I see it, the difficulty would be reverting the ML back to the stock. And if you wanted to do that, you could simply get the readily available schematic for the older version. No secret schemes here.

              Where do you see unlisted part values, other than in circuits not stuffed?
              Education is what you're left with after you have forgotten what you have learned.

              Comment


              • #8
                Ok I see whats going on there. Thank you very much for pointing it out.
                I interpreted the jargon Lingo of "stuff" to mean value.

                With "Do Not Stuff", they mean "Do Not Place" sheesh! ! and Wxx are jumpers.
                I hate this kind of Jargon english. Clearly there are more relevant words.

                I have no problem and wont revert back to the original Deville circuit.
                Do you own a Deville ??
                If you ever had a Deville you would agree it is one of the nicest Fender amps made, but that second drive channel is a disaster and "more drive" is even more of a disaster, totally unusable.

                The Devilles came with a few blatant errors (IMO) such as some of the versions trying to drive an inductive load of the reverb tank with a TL072. That is just not a good idea. You need an opamp that can at least supply the current to drive an inductive load properly and designed for reactive loads, or at least add a constant current source to the supply line of the opamp so it can react with sufficient inrush current as one of the many options. Just a TL072 is a misapplication in my opinion. The reverb with TL0s were either anemic or garbage harsh. They then moved to a better opamp and things are a bit better, but there still isnt a current source or an inductive driver. I replaced the TL0s on mine with better drivers years ago and it improved immensely.
                I think Fender must have realized the problem and moved to BA4560, which I am not sure is entirely going to solve the problem, but it is a very very good op-amp and surely way better than the TL0 for this purpose.
                Last edited by zimbodel; 11-16-2019, 06:15 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Clearly there are more relevant words.
                  Well, they are commonly used terms in the industry. And I bet now that you know them, you won't forget. W for wire. Some draftsmen use J for jumper. Oh yes, the Brits call them links. Usually clear from the context. They have to call things something. R and C for resistor and cap are intuitive. OP amps? SOme are drawn as IC101, IC102 etc. Others are drawn as U101, U102, etc. DIodes are usually drawn as D, but there are still a good portion drawn as CR, for Crystal Rectifier. In my lifetime I saw 1000 change from M to k, now M means meg. But you still see old Gibson or other ancient schematics and you see resistors like 100M, 47M, and what not. Those are not megs, those are todays 100k and 47k. Caps came in mf and mmf, then changed to uf and uuf. For microfarads and micro-microfarads. uuf? Now we call them picofarads. I now use picofarads and it feels normal to me finally, but I will never internalize nanofarads. SOme drawers use VR for a pot rather than P, or even just call it another resistor. K for relay? I have no idea why. But all of them are conventions, and hopefully it only takes once to become familiar with them.

                  If you want to buy a replacement circuit board for an amp, many companies only sell them stuffed. But some sell the bare board if you prefer, and you can stuff it yourself.

                  I do not own a DeVille, but I was an authorized Fender warranty shop for 30 years. I have certainly repaired my share of them. I agree that they sound good on clean, and buy pedals for overdrive. I thing the gain channels sound awful.
                  Education is what you're left with after you have forgotten what you have learned.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Enzo View Post
                    K for relay? I have no idea why.
                    From the German for contact (Kontakt) perhaps?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_designator

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I am owner of an electronics manufacturing company and I never heard stuffed...
                        To me it is a really slang lowbrow lingo to replace the standard "place" with.
                        There is no need for people to reinvent the wheel with a nonsensical equivalent.
                        It has been the standard for decades to call it "placement" or to "place" a component.

                        Technically and grammatically you stuff something which is hollow and you place something onto something which is a plane.
                        Completely absurd imo.

                        But lingo and fads picks up easy from generation to generation and you are right that this is the latest flavor even though, technically, historically and grammatically completely incorrect.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Should we argue about "tube" instead of "valve"? I have been in electronics for 65 years, and I never heard the term "place" until we got to automated board machines. Pick and place machines. No one "placed" parts on hand wired circuits. I have seen some drawings that use the verb "fit". As in "not fitted in 50w model", or "fitted only in reverb models".. I think MArshall perhaps. Sounds British to my ear. Is that lowbrow and absurd too?

                          If two lines on a schematic cross, one convention draws that with a bump in one line to show it goes over the crossing line without a junction. Other conventions draw crossing lines as plain lines, and show connection by adding a big dot at the joint. Neither way is "incorrect".
                          Education is what you're left with after you have forgotten what you have learned.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well, I "stuff" a turkey. I do not "place" it.
                            A turkey is hollow that is why it gets stuffed.
                            Pcbs are not hollow.
                            I guess some people can "place" their turkey as much as they want this season and then go to work and "stuff" the pcb's.

                            To me it certainly gives the impression of lowbrow.
                            Last edited by zimbodel; 11-23-2019, 06:58 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              OK, you win. I am lowbrow, and use nonsensical terminology. I am glad we could settle that.

                              Now please explain to me why we drive on the parkway and park on the driveway.
                              Education is what you're left with after you have forgotten what you have learned.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X