Sozo caps on Vintage Modern

[Alabama Thunderpussy]

I've modded a few new GCB-95's recently that were surprisingly transparent with the buffer circuit still present. Fasel inductors also appear to be stock once again.

 

[Jonathan Wilder]

Try a Jim Dunlop wah. The bypass circuit sucks on those pedals and anyone can hear the difference with the pedal in the chain vs not. Its actually quite noticeable.

And rather than invest in a DPDT switch to true bypass it they instead buffer the input. So now you're not even loading the pickups the same way an original wah does when the wah is in circuit and this will affect things drastically.

 

[kanders1]

Yes, I've heard that it's obvious; I was referring more to the debated cork-sniffing stuff.

BTW, jcmjmp, do you have an opinion on what would be a good wah pedal that doesn't have a noticeable bypass sound difference, that uses a footswitch to engage it, and that lets you park the pedal in any semi-cocked position? I've been looking only at Crybaby models.

Thanks,
Kevin

 

[j_cizzo]

i'm always reading how "they don't make them like they used to..".. has anyone ever thought that maybe the reason why they don't sound like they did back in the day is not because of the circuitry, it's because of the tubes?

correct me if i'm wrong, but everyone bitches and complains about how todays tubes suck (although they seem to rave about the jj's). if the internals are all the same in every way (values, capacitance, etc...), they should theoretically sound exactly the same.. which leaves just the tubes as the culprit...

if i'm wrong, please correct me, but go easy.. LOL!!

 

[thetragichero]

a big part of amps sounding different than decades ago is that the components (resistors/capacitors/etc) are MUCH better now
while i don't know if they had them back then (give me a break, i'm in my twenties), i'd imagine that such precision components that could be had today for peanuts were prohibitively expensive, so they used ones that could vary greatly from piece to piece

tubes do play a part, though

 

[scat7s]

Yes, I've heard that it's obvious; I was referring more to the debated cork-sniffing stuff.

BTW, jcmjmp, do you have an opinion on what would be a good wah pedal that doesn't have a noticeable bypass sound difference, that uses a footswitch to engage it, and that lets you park the pedal in any semi-cocked position? I've been looking only at Crybaby models.

Thanks,
Kevin

if i understand you correctly, the old chromed out morley power/boost/wah will allow you to 'park' it, as the switch is located next to the expression pedal (not under it). it requires a little rework to make it true bypass, but its quite easy. basically you have to disable the 'volume pedal' feature and convert that part of the circuit into your bypass. it also has a pretty nasty 'boost' feature built in (via a second switch located on the opposite side of the exp. pedal) that is easily tweakable to suit your needs.

mine is the old chromed out one, AC powered, not sure if the newer versions function in the same way, but might be worth looking into as they can be had "used" pretty cheap. and mine was real easy to tweak and tune up to my desired preferences.

theyre not the 'best' out of the box imo, but with a little modding, theyre a nice and versatile pedal with a built-in boost to cut thru a mix for lead stuff. and one less stompbox you need to have on your board...

 

[Joey Voltage]

Oh I wasn't referring to HIS playing specifically. For the record that would be an unfair assessment as I've never heard any clips of the OP's playing. I was referring to the lack of playing skill that most cork sniffers seem to possess and think that tone is all in the amp and the component types.

so long as that is understood, but it seems to be a trend here lately that somebody's playing gets imediately put into question whenever stuff like this pops up, without knowing what the persons ability is. Yes it is unfair, and that was my point.

You seem to have twisted something in my logic. Changing component VALUES will definitely change the preamp voicing. We all know this. What I've been stating all along is that you're not going to completely revoice your amp with a night/day difference by swapping in caps of a different type with identical values. A good number of the people who preach this are in fact the people I mentioned above who need to worry more about their playing skill level more than they need to worry about component types.

I was referring to the logic that just because somebody is a good player, any amp they play through will sound like platinum, and what I was getting at is: if this is truley the case, then there should be no difference what-so-ever in even changing values then, because this amp is going to sound like platinum no matter what because Joe Cool guitar player is playing through it.

I generally find it false that the players hands/technique dictate EVERYTHING good or bad thats comming out of the speaker, a fair amount, but not EVERYTHING. I find it more-so of a co-dependant relationship, and there has been more than enough very talanted, burning guitar players with great technique that have had what most would consider shit guitar tone. the two don't always go hand in hand.

Case in point...people who claim that buffers "suck tone". Well most buffers are actually pretty transparent. What's REALLY going on is that they happen to like the sound of their pickups being loaded to a certain degree. Inserting the buffer into the signal path removes the source of the loading and hence changes the tone.

However, they go around telling people not to use buffers because they "suck tone". Well everyone's definition of "tone sucking" again differs from one person to another so this really gives no one a point of reference at all. You tell 10 people that a certain device "sucks tone" those 10 people are gonna each have a different idea about what kind of tonal change it will give them and this proves to be very misleading.

Never heard that complaint about buffers to be honest. The common complaints I have heard were in reference to volume pedals and wahs, and some other primarly 70's stompbox units like the old DOD's, and some MXR's that did indeed load the signal down and had a psuedo bypass. The tone sucking references I am aware of are the opposite, and were in reference to the extra loading lowering the Q of the resonance frequency, not the removal of loading via a buffer. if this is true I can only imagine, it is somewhat of a new trend being propagated, most likely by some who don't like the idea of sand in their signal chain when their sand is bypassed, however I have only heard the opposite complaint, and many new companies go out of their way to incorporate buffers to prevent the extra loading of wahs/volume pedals/long cable runs, because the loading was commonly a complaint/problem.

who knows though, I keep my nose out of the stompbox communities these days.

 

[demonufo]

Try a Jim Dunlop wah. The bypass circuit sucks on those pedals and anyone can hear the difference with the pedal in the chain vs not. Its actually quite noticeable.

My re-issue Vox wah was awful for this too. I was so pleased when I did a straight swap for a mint condition vintage AKG D12.

 

[Jonathan Wilder]

i'm always reading how "they don't make them like they used to..".. has anyone ever thought that maybe the reason why they don't sound like they did back in the day is not because of the circuitry, it's because of the tubes?

correct me if i'm wrong, but everyone bitches and complains about how todays tubes suck (although they seem to rave about the jj's). if the internals are all the same in every way (values, capacitance, etc...), they should theoretically sound exactly the same.. which leaves just the tubes as the culprit...

if i'm wrong, please correct me, but go easy.. LOL!!

The circuit design of today's amplifiers are FAR different from the basic designs of yesteryear.

This is the issue...most people think that all amps have the same exact circuit design/topology and that the only thing different between them is the component types/values used. Throw in the massive difference between the speakers of yesteryear compared to today's speakers...when you hear old speakers, the mechanical assembly has aged quite a bit so of course they're going to sound way different than speakers of today. Furthermore...vintage/aged speakers sound completely different than they did when they were brand new.

Moreover, who can honestly say that they've compared a brand spankin' new reissue speaker to a brand spankin' new "original" speaker? Pretty much no one! It's impossible!

I'll bet 30 years from now the reissue speakers will sound identical to what the original speakers from 30 years ago sound like today. But do to massive inconsistencies in the manufacturing process of yesteryear, which speaker would you compare it to?

So let's take the amp into consideration. When you compare a reissue Super Lead to an original Super Lead...again this is an apples to oranges comparison. The original Super Lead has aged components in it whereas the reissue one does not. Moreover, as inconsistent as Marshall has been known to be, which Super Lead would you compare it to!?

In modern manufacturing we've gained consistency between products. Our amplifiers of today are rolling off the assembly line with much more consistency between them than they were 30 years ago.

Way too many variables at work with all of this...and is why we consider it to be nothing more than mere cork sniffing at best.

 

[Jonathan Wilder]

My re-issue Vox wah was awful for this too. I was so pleased when I did a straight swap for a mint condition vintage AKG D12.

I actually ripped the circuit board out of my V847 RI and built a whole new one to Clyde McCoy spec using the reissue Fasel inductor and 2N5172 transistors in it (much lower hfe rating than the stock MPSA18s).

Had a guy who fronts a Jimi Hendrix tribute band use it for a show. When he did Hear My Train A' Comin' he did the Live in Berkeley version (the one on the Jimi Hendrix Blues CD) and NAILED the wah tones from that version! I was totally floored. He had it plugged in alongside his Dunlop Crybaby 535Q to compare them and needless to say he stayed on my Vox most of the night.

This all with Xicon carbon film 1 watt resistors and DME coupling caps. None of the "tropical fish" caps or carbon comp resistors that the cork sniffers all swear by.

 

[chuckharmonjr]

Hey Jon? You Cali boys aint far enough south....Jack is ok in the mid-south...you get to the ocean...we switch to spiced rum...grins

 

[Jonathan Wilder]

Hey Jon? You Cali boys aint far enough south....Jack is ok in the mid-south...you get to the ocean...we switch to spiced rum...grins

HA! I might not have been born/raised in the south but y'all better believe southern runs in my blood and is where 1/2 my family originated from.

 

[demonufo]

This all with Xicon carbon film 1 watt resistors and DME coupling caps. None of the "tropical fish" caps or carbon comp resistors that the cork sniffers all swear by.

Ha, funny you should mention that. The tropical fish are one of the vintage caps I definitely DON'T like.

 

[jcmjmp]

BTW, jcmjmp, do you have an opinion on what would be a good wah pedal that doesn't have a noticeable bypass sound difference, that uses a footswitch to engage it, and that lets you park the pedal in any semi-cocked position? I've been looking only at Crybaby models.

I've got a 15 year old CGB-95 Wah that I simply modded to remove the input buffer circuit and installed a DPDT switch. I never looked elsewhere for a Wah.

I have the instructions on how to do it. Let me know if you need it.

The stock bypass circuit on the CGB-95 leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[scat7s]

i did the same to my crybaby, it wasnt usable b4 the true baypass mod, yuck.

 

[Jonathan Wilder]

For my Vox a board change was required due to the fact that the boards that come in them now are all SMD and hence are not end user moddable. Radio Shack plated through perf board worked very well for it.

Eventually I will make a drop in kit available for the Vox V847 RI wahs.

 

[Joey Voltage]

.you get to the ocean...we switch to spiced rum...grins

I would take any type Rum any day over American Bourbon, Whiskey, or Rye... Although some of the real imported deal you have to be careful with like Oban, some of those can taste like ozone (the smell of burnt semiconductors)

 

[Ken]

When the majority of people regardless of whether they play or not can tell that the mods made a night/day difference. In order for any mods to even count and be heard in an on stage live environment you'd have to mod it in a way that makes a night/day difference that anyone would be able to hear.
!

I agree that only a huge difference will be heard in the back row...but as a player I like the subtle tonal enhancements I can hear that maybe no one else might, like new strings. It seems obvious to me new strings are better than even one month old strings, but my kids can't tell. And with the gain turned up few others would as well.

I have a narrower definition of 'cork sniffing' myself. It's when someone spends too much money on something and they think their tone is better based on the cost, even if the mod doesn't truly impact the tone.

Ken

 

[Ken]

I would take any type Rum any day over American Bourbon, Whiskey, or Rye... Although some of the real imported deal you have to be careful with like Oban, some of those can taste like ozone (the smell of burnt semiconductors)

Oh man, after last week in St. Thomas and St. Johns I am SO F'ING SICK of sweet drinks!!! They're nice for a party, but when all your alcohol is foo foo drinks it gets really old really fast. It was so nice to have a vodka again when I got home! Perhaps I should have just had the local rums straight up?

Ken

 

[Alabama Thunderpussy]

Sweet drinks give me a brutal hangover.