High Voltages After Headfirst Origin 50 Mod

Well, mine does hum...
Maybe not worse than many other amps however.
The transformer is potted to stop the lamination from vibrating.
If the potting was not done properly, this could cause the transformer to make a loud vibration at 60 cycles (a loud low frequency hum).
I have seen this happen before with some transformers.
If the tranny hums, they should replace it when the amp is under warrantee.
 
Yes sir... :cheers:


Not at all. Mike Soldano is an amp God. But he also knows his own amps. I have confidence that Mike Soldano will know when to use an O-scope or when to use alternative choices. Ivan H's rebuttal on relying on O-scopes is not the first time I've heard of this. If I had the money, space, and knowledge, I would love to have an O-scope.

I have heard this before from other people who are so opposed to using a scope.
There are so many amp problems that you can spot easily...
like oscillation, bad power tubes, bad screen resistors...
Besides just testing the output power...
you can see this stuff in about 2 minutes.

You would be surprised what you can get for about $200-300 dollars.

You would be surprised that it's easy to learn, and how much it can help you when you work on amps.
 
Last edited:
This is what you can do with a scope, that you are not doing now:
Verify bias
Verify output tubes
Verify output power
Verify clean sine wave output
ALL at the same time.
It will cut your bench time by 60%.

Then you can verify with a meter last. (if you want to)
You will see why Mike Soldano, Amp Mad Scientist, Dudley (lord rest his beautiful soul), all use a scope.

Because it's faster and works just as well as other methods.

Students:
Learning to use a scope will broaden your tool kit.
Increase efficiency, decrease time, increase productivity.

You should really stop whining and moaning.
New techniques, new skills, make us better at our jobs.
Instead of fighting it all the time, rejecting other people's ideas, you can learn something new from it.

Instead of being angry, lighten up.
Mate,,, do you even read posts before you respond to them.
Did you miss where I said a "each to their own. If one want to use the scope method they are free to"???
Did you miss where I said that I had tried the 'scope method of biasing (back in the 80's) when Mr Aspen Pittman was touting it, & mentioned the resultant incorrect bias of the two amps I tried it on.

As to the statements of what I could do with a 'scope, that I am not doing now.

Verify bias.
Once again, biasing with a 'scope/cross-over notch method gives absolutely no indication whatsoever of plate current, therefore cannot show whether or not the valves are biased to within safe operating parameters.
Biasing with a meter most definitely can give us an exact plate current figure & accurately verify whether or not the tubes are biased to within safe operating parameters.

Verify output tubes.
As is, this statement has no real meaning.
With a meter however, before even plugging the valves in we can verify whether or not the tubes have any inter-electrode shorts & can also verify whether or not the inter-electrode capacitances are within datsheet specs. Can't be done with a 'scope.
With the tubes plugged into the amp, with a meter we can (aside from voltages), verify plate current, cathode current, screen grid current, that cannot be done with a scope.

Verify output power.
A meter is all that is needed in determining output power in watts. A digital RMS reading meter for RMS wattage, a peak to peak reading meter for true wattage output.
Yes, this can be done with a 'scope too, but it's definitely not the only way to determine output power.

Verify clean sine wave output.
If an amp is sounding as it should, why would I need to, or want to 'scope the output waveform.
If the amp "isn't" sounding as it should, I may hook the amp to a dummy load & function generator & 'scope the various stages, but it will not be my "go to" diagnostic tool. I'll go through it with a meter first.

It will cut my bench time by 60%, then I can check with a meter if I want.
Biasing with the scope/cross-over notch method DID NOT cut bench time, it lengthened it. I afterwards had to bias both amps the conventional, way with a meter.

On Mike Soldano;
If we look to the Soldano (SLO) FAQ page, on the subject of "should I bias output tubes when replacing them" Mike gives us "most often, no. If using 5881 or 6L6 tubes it's usually not necessary.
Take from that statement what you will, but while on the subject of Mike, I know that most think that the Soldano amps were his design work, but look a little deeper folks. The design team was headed up by Mike's right hand man & head tech of 25 years, Bill Sundt. There's the man behind the most enduring Soldano amps.

Did Dudley Craven recommend the scope/cross-over notch method of output tube biasing? I've not seen where he does, but would appreciate if you can point me to where he does.


Students.
Seriously? RAOTFLMAO.
Yes, an oscilloscope & function generator is a valuable tool, no doubt about it, & I am definitely not against the use of one "when it is called for."
But TTR folks, go ask any tech, from any field of audio electronics (any worth their salt), what is their single most often used & useful peice of diagnostic equipment. Ten to one that by far the greatest percentage will tell you it's the humble multimeter.
Seriously guys, get a quality multimeter & learn to use properly & to its full capabilities first of all. There is just so so much you can do & diagnos with it.

As to the baseless & uncalled for rest of your post, I ain't foregoing forum etiquette to answer in kind. Cheers
 
Nope, not at all. All I see is a spirited debate that brings out more useful info. Perhaps we could turn our attention to how much @Ramo loves Teles... :p

When we were racing, lots of guys would want to change the jets and run the car on a chassis dyno to verify the mixture was correct. We changed jets based on the car's lap times. Both methods produced an acceptable result.

RHRE Logo 1980  (1).JPG

325 Chevrolet Motor.JPG

Rocky Hill Speedway Porterville CA 1986.JPG

Closest to the Dial In (2).jpg

1998 Sears-Craftsman Event Champion..jpg
 
I set the bias the same way DR-Z does it with a VOM first then a Oscilloscope.
FF to 11:00 in the video

If I were to again use a scope, I would take this type approach, doing similar as I do to set the bias by ear,,, bias to a little under 60% & note the negative voltage at the junction of the bias splitter resistors, then bias to 70% & again note the negative voltage at the junction of the bias splitter resistors. The volt meter can then be left reading the negative voltages at the junction of the bias splitter resistors while the amp is played through at volume & the bias set by ear. So long as the negative voltage is between those two noted parameters, the tubes are within safe limits.

I would like to share something though, that may give some insight into whether or not the shape of the output waveform is of consequence to good amp tone.

Some time ago (Malcolm Young was still alive & well) I was reading what Terry Marshall said about him & the Marshall tech team being in Malcolm & Angus's Marshall storage facility in London, viewing & listening to their huge collection of old Marshalls. He mentioned re-tubing some that needed it (no mention of a scope), then went on to talk about Malcolm's best sounding amp, a bright sounding 100 watt super bass, saying that the amp sounded so damn good with rich harmonic overtones, that they decided to set it up on a 'scope the view output waveform, which,,,, wait for it,,, resembled a cough.
Just think about that for a few seconds, Malcolm was renowned for playing CLEAN, & this amp, Malcolm's best sounding out of literally 100's of their old Marshalls, blew Terry Marshall & the Marshall tech team away with how good it sounded,,, & the output waveform RESEMBLED A FREAKING COUGH.

Biasing by the scope method, the amp is driven to "just before" the onset of output stage clipping, then the cross-over notch is "just" dialled out. That's the method.
So then turn the amp up to where the output stage clips (which by the way is many people use the damn things) & the freaking cross-over notch returns.

So I ask, knowing what Terry Marshall said about the output waveform on Malcolm best sounding amp, & knowing that when the output stage is pushed into overdrive the cross-over notch is again present in the output waveform, do you really think that a 'scoped clean sine waveform before the onset of clipping is necessary for good amp tone?

Ok, rant over. Cheers
 
Last edited:
Wasn't Angus renowned for biasing at about 80 to 85 % and blowing tubes in every show?
Good tone yes, clean hmmm, and not what I'd consider a good role model for biasing...
That's why I laugh everytime someone says "Angus played clean just loud". Well you don't need much gain on the pot when your starting right up there do you?
 
Back
Top