Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Overdrive Special, Steel String Singer, Dumbleland, Odyssey, Winterland, etc. -
Members Only

Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal

User avatar
greiswig
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: Oregon

Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by greiswig »

All,

I recently got a second amp to compliment my D'Lite build. I picked up a used Tone King Metropolitan...very nice! Very different. Bass almost to a fault.

My D'Lite has been modified so heavily it virtually isn't a D'Lite anymore. It is a low plate version, with switchable Skyliner (that usually stays on the classic setting) and running KT-88s. Also has one of Brandon's Twin OT's.

I've always thought that the bass was a little thin on the clean channel. Now compared to the Metro, it is anorexic. ;-) I don't want THAT much more bass, but I would like some. If you were to put some bass back into the clean channel while trying to not affect the OD channel, how would you go about that?
-g
User avatar
Bob-I
Posts: 3791
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Hillsborough NJ

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by Bob-I »

Because the clean side feeds the OD side, you'll need to make adjustments to both.

The Deep switch can be a big help and you could put it on a relay so it's footswitchable.

You could increase the value of the bypass caps on V1a and b.
wjdunham
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 6:57 pm

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by wjdunham »

I agree, good first place to start is the bypass caps, going from 5uF to 10uf will make a noticeable difference. V1B coupling cap would be the second option, although I've found this one to have a more subtle effect.

One thing I've learned is to take the amp out to a practice or gig before you decide if the change is working for you or not. I thought for sure after "fattening" up my clean channel that it was way too much bass just playing around in my small office where I build the amps, then took it to a rehearsal in a large room where it was much more balanced. Just a thought...
Bill
User avatar
greiswig
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by greiswig »

wjdunham wrote:I agree, good first place to start is the bypass caps, going from 5uF to 10uf will make a noticeable difference. V1B coupling cap would be the second option, although I've found this one to have a more subtle effect.

One thing I've learned is to take the amp out to a practice or gig before you decide if the change is working for you or not. I thought for sure after "fattening" up my clean channel that it was way too much bass just playing around in my small office where I build the amps, then took it to a rehearsal in a large room where it was much more balanced. Just a thought...
Bill
IIRC, I'm already at 22uF on both V1 bypass caps. ;-) And yes, I did have to play with the coupling cap going into the OD section because of it.

Thanks for the suggestions, guys. Keep 'em coming.
-g
Drumslinger
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:31 am
Location: USA

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by Drumslinger »

greiswig,

why not two 22uf in parallel? i believe there are subtle changes from 22uf to 30uf. perhaps the two 22uf in parallel might do the trick or some other combination. just a thought.
talbany
Posts: 4696
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:03 am
Location: Dumbleland

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by talbany »

If your running 22uf in V1 and it's still not producing the low end (especially with the classic stack) this is strange.. I get plenty of low end from my classics w 10uf Sounds like it could be a loading issue in the switchable tone stack or something in the stack in general..

Tony
" The psychics on my bench is the same as Dumble'"
User avatar
Bob-I
Posts: 3791
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Hillsborough NJ

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by Bob-I »

I'm with Tony on this, if you have 22uF on V1a/b something is wrong, that amp should have a huge bottom end.
User avatar
greiswig
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by greiswig »

Bob-I wrote:I'm with Tony on this, if you have 22uF on V1a/b something is wrong, that amp should have a huge bottom end.
Good. I'll double check this when I open up the amp. I may be misremembering something, and I didn't do a good job of documenting my changes.

Thanks again. Let me verify that and I'll get back to you.

Best,
-g
User avatar
dobbhill
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:04 am
Location: Louisiana

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by dobbhill »

Speaker????
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.......
User avatar
greiswig
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by greiswig »

dobbhill wrote:Speaker????
Nope, not the issue: Bob Burt 2x12 cab with a G12-65 and a Scumnico. The Metropolitan through that sounds just as huge as in the combo.
-g
fp2000
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: FL

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by fp2000 »

By Speaker I think they mean, is this speaker/cab combination the right one for your heavily modified amp. I had two cabs and two speakers. For some reason both speakers sounded good in one cab, but only one of the speakers sounded good in the second cab. At least with my 50 watter. Just try other cabinet/speaker configurations, also guitars. Just a thought.
Frank
**************************
Failure is not an option... it comes bundled with the kit.
fp2000
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: FL

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by fp2000 »

By Speaker I think they mean, is this speaker/cab combination the right one for your heavily modified amp. I had two cabs and two speakers. For some reason both speakers sounded good in one cab, but only one of the speakers sounded good in the second cab. At least with my 50 watter. Just try other cabinet/speaker configurations, also guitars. Just a thought.
Frank
**************************
Failure is not an option... it comes bundled with the kit.
User avatar
butwhatif
Posts: 544
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:27 am
Location: upmi

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by butwhatif »

10uf on C1 and 22uf on 2 did it for me. .05 V1b coupling cap. If the master byp is too big, or no treb bleed on the OD level, it can seem to have a lack of bass.
User avatar
greiswig
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by greiswig »

talbany wrote:If your running 22uf in V1 and it's still not producing the low end (especially with the classic stack) this is strange.. I get plenty of low end from my classics w 10uf Sounds like it could be a loading issue in the switchable tone stack or something in the stack in general..

Tony
Okay, I was able to verify the 22uF bypass on V1a and b. Some other pertinent facts:

1. The amp does have a variable treble bleed, and the cap across the master is 15pF. I know that an excess of treble can sound like a lack of bass, but I also think I know how to hear the difference, and that doesn't sound like what I'm hearing.
2. The amp has a similar amount of bass through each of my cabs: the 2x12 Bob Burt, a 12-10 custom cab I made, and a closed back 2x12. I don't think the speakers are the issue.

So...any suggestions as to where and how I can start looking for the loading issues Tony suggested?
-g
talbany
Posts: 4696
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:03 am
Location: Dumbleland

Re: Fattening the clean side of a non-HRM

Post by talbany »

G

Not really sure what you mean by this statement..
It is a low plate version, with switchable Skyliner (that usually stays on the classic setting)
Is this some sort of switchable stack you implemented or is classic setting a certain way you set the skyline.. If it's been modified perhaps you could post a schemo or layout on the switching system..

Tony
" The psychics on my bench is the same as Dumble'"
Post Reply