"I did a whole AB test of output transformers and Hammond ended up at the bottom of the list. Didn't test the particular transformer you mentioned, but from my results I wouldn't even bother with them."
Eh? Well you seem to be a fair and reasonable guy on so many levels. Too, I remember reading in your book - written 14 years ago now - your very strong preference to the modern Thunderfunk OT. In fact, in your book, you stressed the benefit of no interleavings and mylar over paper as an insulator. Man, where was Mercury when you needed a good interleaved, paper insulated OT, you know?
As to your apparent disdain for Hammond OTs? Dave, you do not need to be told that Ken could build a amp using Hammond iron that would make Billy G pee his little panties.
Most people stall out when fixing a mistake that they've made. Why?
funkmeblue - This is a MP3 clip of my Hammond OT equipped express clone. No efx, no compression, straight into a handheld Edirol R-1 from 7 ft.
I have never posted a sound clip here before and I have to say cutting the thing down to 5mbs was difficult. The clip is cut from the front and the back, BTW, no cutting and splicing inbetween.
Not a demo guy here, but you should get an idea. Frankly, I can't believe Dave Funk here on this subject. Man, he must have quite an ear.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Most people stall out when fixing a mistake that they've made. Why?
sounds f'n good to me, enjoyed the playing as well. I'm going to have to figure out how to put sound clips on here so you guys can hear a 6sl7 express. Was that the 1650G?
Thanks. Er, no, not the 1650G, but the 1650F. This is 25 watts and set up for 6V6s. I run the J/Js in this one. Yeah, now that I have jumped into this web sample/performance shite, I would love to hear what the octal Express sounds like - with you playing gtr, of course!
Most people stall out when fixing a mistake that they've made. Why?
"I did a whole AB test of output transformers and Hammond ended up at the bottom of the list. Didn't test the particular transformer you mentioned, but from my results I wouldn't even bother with them."
Eh? Well you seem to be a fair and reasonable guy on so many levels. Too, I remember reading in your book - written 14 years ago now - your very strong preference to the modern Thunderfunk OT. In fact, in your book, you stressed the benefit of no interleavings and mylar over paper as an insulator. Man, where was Mercury when you needed a good interleaved, paper insulated OT, you know?
As to your apparent disdain for Hammond OTs? Dave, you do not need to be told that Ken could build a amp using Hammond iron that would make Billy G pee his little panties.
You ask... I answer... you doubt.
Ken could build an amp around a Hammond and make Billy G pee his panties. So what? Did I say we built amps around Hammonds? I said we did an A/B test. One amp. Many transformers. You complain, yet you don't take any time to think about what I say. We weren't tweaking anything. Sorry. Hammond was at the bottom. Do your own AB and get back to me.
Everyone knows Billy G only plays Kendrick amps with special core material, many interleavings, and secret paper insulators. My point in my book is Fender transformers have two windings. They work fine. My Thunderfunk OT has two windings, with mylar insulator. Here's some samples. ALL guitar and bass tracks played through the same amp. Dirt, clean chime, and note separation. Hmmmmm????? Plus bass tracks??? No secret Mojo Iron? I didn't have to pay extra?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
rooster wrote:Man, where was Mercury when you needed a good interleaved, paper insulated OT, you know?
Mercury has been making transformers for a long time. I opened up a 1985 A.M.P. BH420 recently and a Mercury Transformer sticker fell out. Shoot Less.... Google More. Try to get some information from sources outside this website.
Dave - Well, kudos to you for responding to this subject. Let me change it for a minute?
I have learned your writing style, having read your book more than a few times. Also one time we talked on the phone, which was insightful, as well. In both forms, book or on the phone, you have been helpful, no worries. The fact that you are opinionated is what I like about anybody, so we are still good. I also know that you have a temper, augmented by your visits here with me I suppose? And others, too. I have a temper, too, so we are still good. When you vent at GW, I applaud you because I share your opinion of him. It really was painful to hear that he took advantage of Ken, everybody knows that that's not right. I know it is a negative subject, but I admire you and appreciate you filling me/us in on the details - I for one would rather know this than be blind to it.
Anyway, as to your venting at me? OK, I'm a big boy, I can deal. Frankly, I get your quick reaction to things and people. And probably because of your dealings with GW and people like him. But I would still tell you or anybody who would listen that your reactions to me were overblown. I am not your enemy. I think that everybody who would ever look to another human being for help or enlightenment would also hope that the teacher/mentor was fair minded. ..And you said that you don't get me? Which is probably our biggest problem. Well, its easy to explain me and my time on this forum: I am a fan of Ken Fischer. Really that's all I need to say to you and you should get it. Its not complicated. What this should say to you is that in our conversations here, the ones you reacted to in a defensive way, all I was trying to do was keep my eyes on Ken, and figure out if and how you had difused something he had shared with you. So please understand that when you speak Dave Funk, I am looking at Dave Funk. But when you speak Ken Fischer, and that would be Ken Fischer with a Dave Funk voice, I am going to ask questions. Now you may see this as fighting behavior, but I assure you it is not. Your reaction did make me mad when you got into the name calling, but right up until then I thought you were pretty fair minded and pretty much who I found in your book and on the phone.
Anyway, I'll end this with a question Dave. In regards to the wire comments you made, with you recalling a personal conversation with KF? Do you think it possible that he said what he said to you because he didn't want to share the info? Or because you were making PC board amps and using stranded wire at the time that he didn't want to seem like an amp snob or a smarty pants? Burn me down again if you like, and right now Dave, but I assure you this is a serious question. I realize that you may think that you have answered this question already, but believe me, until right now, I have not asked it. Yes, it is hard to let go of the wire subject but only because he spent some energy talking about it. Did you read the Dave Hunter book, BTW? More words on wire, yes. Take care.
rooster
Most people stall out when fixing a mistake that they've made. Why?
fmb - Cool, I am a big Jimi fan. ................I will still have to add that using an OD pedal with your demo doesn't really help me figure out the octal thing vs. 9pin? (I understand volume is an issue for most households, so no worries - but then you need to crank that TW to get into the spirit of Jimi, don't forget!!)
Anyway, I enjoyed the clip but I expect a no OD pedal, cranked version sometime in the future. My clip found the volume control @ 11 o'clock, BTW. For your next clip, shoot for this number, OK??
Most people stall out when fixing a mistake that they've made. Why?
