Complexity

[László]

I figured I'd raise the topic of amplifier complexity of tone, because I think it's one of many important factors that distinguishes a great amp from an ordinary sounding amp. If you go on amp forums you often come across the concept, and it's rarely precisely defined.

But here's why it's important: if you run your guitar through a hi fi system, or a mixing console direct, you get only the pure sound of the guitar. While this can be useful, it's also not a very complex tone. It's not a very interesting tone either, IMHO.

What's missing are the overtones, harmonics, and other distortions of the signal that are inherent in a great amp. Not only that, these euphoric artifacts are there even with a clean signal, if you have a great amp.

Some amp designers do a better job than others with these colorations.

Then there is the question of whether the amp brings out that elusive "3D" image. Some amps seem to project a flatter image that kind of lays there, and is less exciting to the ear/brain.

What I love about my HXDA and DG30 are their ability to project a beautiful 3D tone with lots of harmonic color, clean or overdriven. This is what separates them from the also-rans. I haven't found very many amps I'd put in this category, except a few classic old amps, and a few expensive boutique amps.

For some reason, I think hand wiring helps, though I've played a few circuit board amps that also sound great.

Anyway, I thought it might be fun to throw the topic out there and let everyone comment.

 

[veinbuster]

100%, though I can't really comment on the hand wiring. That may just be what the really good builders happen to do rather than being essential to the result.

I've played all of my best guitars through a tolerable amp and while I can flavour the sound with my tiny pedal collection, I can't really get the real deal. I practice and create, but bring it home to my good amps for it to blossom.

background: I burned through a fair number of affordable amps from the early 70s until the late 80s when I bought a Mesa Boogie Mark III. I then played that exclusively for 20+ years. Then my wife built a Mark V for me and later grabbed one of a small run of MDT 4x10s. I had tested them both and declared them to be very good amps - and she liked how they sounded when I played. She very firmly has no interest in listening to what anything sounds like played by anyone else in the store (off topic, but probably important for other reasons, perhaps worthy of its own thread).

 

[László]

100%, though I can't really comment on the hand wiring. That may just be what the really good builders happen to do rather than being essential to the result.

You could be right, and I also think different builders might have different but equally valid methods of achieving their aims. I read an interview with Mesa's Randall Smith, where he says, yes, hand wired amps can sound better in some ways, but the trade-off is inconsistency, and so he opts for an amp where everyone who buys one gets the exact same sound.

I do remember back in the day that you could line up 4-5 Fenders or Marshalls of the same model, for example, and each one would sound a little different the way 4-5 guitars of the same model would sound a little different. And you'd pick the one that sounded best to you, and that would be your amp.

I had a few Two-Rocks of the same model, and each one had its own "personality," if you will. So Randall Smith makes a good point.

On the other hand, I tend to slightly prefer the "sauce" that you get with a great hand wired amp, if given the choice. Still, I have had some fantastically wonderful circuit board amps, among them several Mesas and a Bogner Metropolis, that sounded different -- but as good as -- hardwired amps. I think "different" isn't necessarily "worse," it's just...not the same.

Then my wife built a Mark V for me and later grabbed one of a small run of MDT 4x10s. I had tested them both and declared them to be very good amps - and she liked how they sounded when I played.

You probably will remember that I had a Mark V that I liked a lot, and posted about it. I have no criticism of the Mark V, in fact. It does what it's supposed to do extremely well, and I can't think of any drawbacks.

What I like about a great single channel amp is its very wide transition area between clean and overdrive. The so-called "sweet spot" is wide enough to drive a truck through.

I find this addicting, and you probably get that with your MDT all day long. It's what I love to death about my HXDA and DG30.

But I do like my Mesa Lone Star quite a bit - perhaps I've given the impression that I don't, because I think I might prefer the voicing of the PRS 2-channel amps - but the Lone Star is a superb amp in every way, and as is the case with the Mark V, it does what it was designed to do very, very well.

So mine's not going anywhere. It's a keeper, as are the HXDA and DG30.

In fact, I've already used it on a couple of ad projects where I've taken advantage of its unique take on Blackface tones. It also blends well when layered with my PRS amps. It does cool things. And I gotta say, it's a beautiful looking amp with that ostrich embossed leather and wicker grille (I don't see how I could resist ordering up that Mesa with the custom trim options if it's going to live in my studio where ad clients visit! ).

 

[László]

In other news no one cares about, I was thinking about this as I played through my 3 amps with the CU24 today.

The harmonic overtones and colorations of each amp are so different! I mean, amps are so simple in concept, based as they are on the old RCA Tube Manuals from a long bygone era. Yet change a few parts, a few wires, a few glass envelopes, and suddenly you have a myriad, a cornucopia, a crapload, a buncha, a lotta different tonez. Tonez. With a Z.

So I think everyone should jump into this discussion and post something, but it's evidently not a very popular topic. And that's why I, Lesteban, have decided to post these fleeting thoughts before the Collapse Of The Universe, which could maybe happen at any mo...

>>cracklezzzzppp<<

"Sir, I think the signal from this planet is breaking up."

"Yes, that's because their sector of the Universe is starting to collapse."

"Will that cause us a problem, sir?"

"Oh, hell no, son. Their sector is 5 billion light years from ours. We'll get to watch this from a distance and wait around for billions of orbits of our suns before it reaches us."

"Thank the great gods!"

"Yes. I thank them with all seven of my hearts."

 

[elvis]

Douglas Adams would be proud.

One of the cool things about some great tube amps is that they use a few gain stages, but attenuate in between stages. This adds gooey tube goodness without massively overdriving the stages. The "sparkle", if you will.

I read an interesting article a while back about tube Hi-Fi amps. There have always been claims that they are more linear than SS, which is demonstrably false. But the writer went a step further and did stability measurements on a popular Hi-Fi tube power amp. It was BARELY stable, and had multiple resonances, some with sustained oscillation. So there was no way it could faithfully reproduce the source. But it SOUNDED good.

I believe that many tube amps have this same characteristic. And hand-wiring exacerbates it. When you find that one "magic" amp out of a line of "identical" amps, I suspect it has just the right resonance for your taste and style.

Guitar amps are, in essence, dynamic filters. And IMO, 90% of the character is unintentional at first. But thanks to the tireless effort and trial-and-error of the designers, the coolest characteristics are sometimes reproduced in new models.

One of the most interesting things about this to me is that we are seeing amp designers copy particular amps of historical significance. But the players who made those amps famous often came by them entirely by accident or chance. So did the players choose the amps deliberately, or did they invent their styles based on how those amps responded, and we want whatever it is that they were doing?

 

[László]

But the players who made those amps famous often came by them entirely by accident or chance. So did the players choose the amps deliberately, or did they invent their styles based on how those amps responded, and we want whatever it is that they were doing?

There's no doubt that players chose their amps back in the day; it was never a matter of "whatever," any more than it is now. I have very distinct memories of players carefully choosing amps at stores in my hometown of Detroit in the early 60s. It was no different then than it is now, with one exception: we have much, much more choice of manufacturer, and many more styles of amp with all the permutations.

But there's equally no doubt that they discovered things along the way about the amps they chose.

By the early 50s, bluesmen were deliberately cranking their amps to distort, as lots of historical recordings show, and they didn't have any pedals or other electronic trickery. They just turned 'em up to get the grit they wanted, and used the volume controls on their guitars to adjust the gain.

As but one example, Hendrix would have known this trick well, having come up on the Chitlin' circuit. The fact that he could do the same thing with a 100 Watt Marshall stack that distorted easily like a Deluxe (as opposed to a Twin that didn't distort as much) certainly gave him a new sound, and the addition of pedals like his fuzz face helped, but the trick had been learned years before he got to England.

Clapton was distorting his amps trying to sound like Chicago blues heroes that he had, but he did it at first by cranking a Marshall "Bluesbreaker" as the amp is now known, instead of a Fender Deluxe. And in so doing got a different sound.

Et cetera, et cetera...and of course the Yardbirds had already done "Over Under Sideways Down" with the singing sustain of a Tone Bender through a cranked amp. Inventive? Sure thing. But most inventive was the Kinks' taking to their speakers with (reputedly) razor blades to get the amps to sound ratty for "You Really Got Me." That was absolutely an iconic sound and fuzz boxes followed on the scene to reproduce it afterward.

I think it was a combination of factors - the players, the music, the energy at the time, the tools, the solid body guitars that did different things than their fathers' hollow body guitars, etc.

New technologies beget new ways of thinking and working, new music results. Thus it has ever been.

When I was a boy the piano hadn't been invented yet. It wasn't invented until 1709, and took a long time to become popular. There was the organ and various takes on harpsichord things, and they only played at one volume; the pianoforte ("soft-loud") revolutionized keyboards and therefore, keyboard music, and no doubt led to the change in musical styles that developed from high Classical to Romantic music.

Same deal here. The tools matter.

 

[veinbuster]

The house was empty so I played some different guitars through the MDT.
It's complexities are interesting. I grew up using volume as volume, and still want to do that with it, but the response of this amp to volume form the pickup is pretty cool - it really develops a growl.
Other interesting things are the little mini switches Doug likes to add to shift the character. A prominent bright switch does what you would expect. I have vivid memories of DG saying don't use it while he was demoing PRS amps (before his own)...except. Though honestly I forget the details of the exception. Boogie might have been paying closer attention.
The real treat is the sneaky little gain boost on the back. I kind of wish this was handier, and was even thinking it might be nice to have foot switch access because it unleashes a monster. What I like about the gain on this amp is a bit hard to put into words. The best I can come up with at the moment is you get the distortion without it getting noisy. I find a lot of distortion just feels like noise. Some people like that, but not me - and it makes my wife walk out the door pretty fast.

 

[vchizzle]

I think it's difficult to define. Especially since everyone hears things differently. Add to that people trying describe the complexities and you can get into some crazy conversations(and arguments) since opinions are like a-holes, right? The 3D thing is commonly thrown out there. I agree with you on that part and know exactly what you mean. I pretty much know within a minute or 2 if the amp has that and if I like the amp. It's really almost a feeling I get when I hear it that makes me want to play through the amp.

The hand wired debate can get ugly. I remember a thread on TGP that got super heated. John Suhr even chimed in and said he could build a PCB and a hand wired of the same amp and said you would hear no difference....or something to that extent. Don't quote me cause I don't remember the exact details. I was pretty into the hand wired amp thing for a good amount of time, but care a little less about that now. I just want a great sounding amp(and reliable) that inspires me to play. There is a mental thing when I hear hand wired, where I think we as guitar players(maybe humans in general), that makes you want to assume it's better made...that more care was put into it... Sometimes true maybe, sometimes not. Funniest part, is I ran across a Texaplex II for sale at what seemed a great price. So I researched a little. I found there was some amount of PCB in it and I was less interested. Thought I could snag a hand wired PRS amp for a song and a dance! Which is probably sad, because it's likely a cool amp that I let slide for no good reason. I'd like a single channel amp in my room.

 

[László]

The hand wired debate can get ugly. I remember a thread on TGP that got super heated. John Suhr even chimed in and said he could build a PCB and a hand wired of the same amp and said you would hear no difference....or something to that extent.

I remember that. My own feeling is that playing through John Suhr's hand-wired SL67 and 68 and his circuit board amps, they do sound different (There's a big Suhr dealer near me). And of course, he does charge about a grand more for his hand-wired series.

Maybe he's changed his mind...I dunno.

For a long time Reinhold Bogner wouldn't admit that a hand wired amp sounded different, but now he's gotten on the bandwagon as well. Again, whether that's just because he can get more money for one or not, I can't say.

Still, there's no question in my mind that hand wired amps sound different from circuit board amps. Whether that is the same thing as "better" or "worse" is of course a matter of subjective taste. And I'm good with that.

 

[elvis]

Since nobody has ever made an identical circuit with identical components in both hand-wired and PCB, it's hard to say that a real comparison could be made. The cost of hand-wired is MUCH more, and some people are willing to pay for it, so I don't know why every designer wouldn't have one or two available.

PCB layout is a skill and an art, just as with anything else. I would bet that with equal levels of skill in hand-wired design and PCB design and equivalent circuits and components, nobody could tell the difference, and the PCB amp would be more reproducible.

To be clear, some things, like the connections between PCB and pots and jacks, are best hand-wired for reliability.

 

[László]

Since nobody has ever made an identical circuit with identical components in both hand-wired and PCB, it's hard to say that a real comparison could be made..

I've compared hand wired and PCB versions of the Dumble circuit, among others. Just my opinion, but I think that 3D sound I like is more difficult to achieve with a PCB.

That's not to say impossible. But I haven't heard a PCB amp that sounds quite like a hand wired version.

I can only judge based on what I've played. I did have a slight advantage growing up on hand wired amps in the 60s. They had a sound that I have yet to hear in PCB versions of the same amps today, but of course, there are other variables.

I've had a lot of both methods of construction, and currently do as well. I don't think I'm dumb or misguided enough to think I hear differences that don't exist, but of course, psychoacoustics is a study unto itself.

 

[vchizzle]

With the psychoacoustic end of all this, one would have to be unaware of which they were playing when, of course. Would certainly be a fun test! Then you have other variables such as different tubes, and such.

 

[Boogie]

To get totally schmaltzy...

There seems to be something about instruments - amps included - that human beings put their talent, blood, sweat, tears, and love into producing. Not saying that PC board amps aren't somewhat human assembled, but a point-to-point amp build is a labor of love. Lots of labor. Could that rub off on the end product? "Mojo"? Maybe.

As much as I love my Boogie, it pales in comparison to the Super Dallas in so many ways. Yes, I know mine is a CAD creation and had extra attention, but there's something else nebulous...can't quite put my finger on it but I notice when it's not there. Did Doug & Company sprinkle pixie dust?

PC boards are the logical step to mass production automation. Electronically and electrically, they can be equivalent but some things can't be readily measured, like transformer sag under load or temperature fluctuation. That's why the "good" Plexi's were so hard to find. Can they be reproduced? Sure, by hand with meticulous engineers behind the build. Mass produced? IMO, no. Depends on the volume, but converting the HXDA to a PC board model would be like urinating in the chassis: it would be messy and probably stink.

Complex? Yeah, I'd call the special characteristic complexity. It can probably be boiled down to technical attributes, but ultimately, it's those nuance flavors that you can't quite identify but know when they're missing. Is it because it was wave or UV soldered or with someone's hand? I think it's love and pride and ownership in what was created.

 

[aristotle]

Regarding "hand wired", here are my thoughts...

1. For the tinkerers amongst us, or for those who like to service and fix their own amps, "hand wired' is much preferred.

2. There isn't any rational reason (at audio frequencies) why a PCB would sound any different assuming that the layouts of traces on the board is similar to layout of the wires relative to radiating components.

3. I personally haven't been able to determine a difference in sound. In my experience, it all comes back to the designer. Something like the Marshall 2466 is as organic as any amp out there on a repeatable basis between identical amps and it is all PCB.

4. You guys are aware that the PRS CAD amps use PCBs with traces on the underside of the board, right? My understanding is that this was done to make the amps easier to work on. Unsoldering a component on the top side of the board won't cause wires underneath to come loose.

5. There are many flavors of "hand wired". The most "hand" of the hand wired is true point to point where you have a birds nest of components and wires just sort of stuffed into a box with random orientations like my old Gibson GA40. Tons of variability with these amps, and I suppose that because no two amps will ever be alike, the law of large numbers might suggest that you'll randomly stumble on one that sounds fantastic to you. Lots of flavors up from that, with some sort of board to act as a structure to hold posts and keep components and wires in some sort of organized and repeatable orientation. The PRS amps takes that concept but use a PCB as the main structure with wires on the underside replaced by copper traces.

All things equal, I prefer the main circuit to be some form of hand-wired, but not because of the tone that it produces.

Back to Les' original post... In my experience, I don't have any amp that loves every guitar that I have, and I don't have any guitar that loves every amp I have. The MDT and the Marshall Astoria Custom come closest in terms of amps that are universally good with guitars, and my DGT and DG stoptail are the closes guitars that are universally good with amps. My guess is that on the guitar side, I suspect it's the DGT pickups, but maybe it's construction as well. On the amp side, both the MDT and the Astoria Custom are great single channel amps that are designed to be particularly responsive to guitar control changes. More than that, I dunno...

 

[vchizzle]

4. You guys are aware that the PRS CAD amps use PCBs with traces on the underside of the board, right? My understanding is that this was done to make the amps easier to work on. Unsoldering a component on the top side of the board won't cause wires underneath to come loose.

Yessir. It's a combination that they use(at least on the Archon, that's the only I've opened up myself), with all the components soldered on the top side.
I think of this when I hear hand wired(borrowed this pic):

I still think there is something to it though. More often than not, it seems hand wired amps have some magic happening.

 

[aristotle]

Or this... Not my picture, but my GA40 looks similar.

 

[László]

2. There isn't any rational reason (at audio frequencies) why a PCB would sound any different assuming that the layouts of traces on the board is similar to layout of the wires relative to radiating components.

Randall Smith, a guy I consider a brilliant Paul Smith kind of guy, has some interesting things to say in this video.

Go to about 03:30 and go forward from there. "Every part is a tone control." Interesting to me that Paul Smith says "everything affects everything."

Randall Smith makes the point that even the wire affects the tone of the amp.

Then, go to 10:13. "I don't want to trash point to point. If you're only gonna build one or two of something, it's the way to do it."

This makes sense if "every part is a tone control" and if even the type of wire matters, as he states.

His issues with hand wiring are repeatability and cost. I get that.

If you look at the innards of my Lone Star, and the innards of my HXDA, whether circuit boards are present or not, whether some sort of hybrid construction is used, the amps are different. You've seen them, I don't need to belabor the point.

But of course there are other factors besides the type of wiring used; a two channel amp is a different kind of beast than a single channel amp. Add more features, more controls, more wiring, and of course you've got different stuff happening inside the amp that will affect the sound.

This isn't to trash the Lone Star. I like the amp a lot. It's a terrific amp. Does it have the transparency of whatever system they're using on the HXDA and DG30 amps? No. Even overdriven the HXDA and DG have a more open tone as far as I'm concerned. Nor does it have the 3D thing to the same degree. On the other hand, the Lone Star does a thing that is a good thing, and I use it in my studio along with my #1 and #2 PRS amps.

Admittedly my preference for hand wired amps is a personal thing. I make my living with my ears. I believe I know what to listen for. So I listen for the things I like and want to hear. I think we all do, however, each of us listens for different things.

Then again, I like opera.

 

[Deleted member 5962]

having built a couple small simple amps, I can first hand agree with the "repeatability" comment. There is a learned art to the wrapping and positioning of many of the wires inside a tube amp. The more of these "wires" that are on a circuit board, the less of them you have to worry about (if the board is designed well!). But I remember a number of users of one high end amp complaining about noise levels, and the fix was to move one particular bundle of wires less than half an inch, then anchor it with a tie wrap. Fixed every single one of them that had the issue. When I was wiring up my first one, I paid extra careful attention to the length of the wires so that you didn't have excess, but had room to move them just a bit if needed for noise reduction.

IMO (and that's worth very little. LOL) true point-to-point is the hardest method to get just right. And yes, it just looks like a birds nest in there. I couldn't begin to read a simple schematic on point to point. I like turret board. Looks uber cool, sounds great, easier to read...

 

[Kred]

I've designed and built hand-wired and PCB circuits, and think one difference is compactness. A hand-wired amp is more spread out, so the components interact less. A PCB designer is usually packing the components as tightly as possible for the smallest board area (cost). High voltage fields can travel several inches, and cause stray signal couplings from low impedance outputs to high impedance inputs. This can cause instability and varying tone sweetness across identical circuits in hand-wired and point-to-point amps. PCB amps provide more consistent builds, but the stray signal couplings of one amp model may be better isolated than another amp model.

Another tone problem is multiple ground loops due to high impedance ground returns and connecting circuit grounds to the closest chassis anchor. Good builders of hand-wired amps know to route the signal, power supply and earth grounds to a single chassis anchor to avoid ground loops, but many mass-produced amp layouts ignore this.

I think a blind test between hand-wired and PCB amps having identical circuits can hear differences, but it is the stray signal couplings, ground loops, or +/-20% component tolerances that you are hearing.

 

[CVS]

In my experience, I don't have any amp that loves every guitar that I have, and I don't have any guitar that loves every amp I have.

Amen...Amen...Amen - Add pedals into the "mix" and things get even more complicated