ampage Tube Amps / Music Electronics	For current discussions, please visit Music Electronics Forum.

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

Re: Shopping for Dumble Clones: 2 Rock and Fuchs Audio

6/7/2000 11:30 AM
Carl F.	Re: Shopping for Dumble Clones: 2 Rock and Fuchs Audio Yup, twas me. I'm completely non-tech and lurk here, but I thought I pass on my experiences. My review is glowing and I stand by it.Tone was not a problem with my Two Rock. It's the "cork-sniffing" attitude of after blowing 4K, they come up with further mods, the "blow the old models away" I just don't like dealing with folks and owning people's products with that kind of attitude. It rubs me the wrong way. Not alot of things bug me, but something like that does. In any event, I enjoyed the TR while I had it. PS, for 2K I got me a mil-spec PTP, Partrige tranny Hiwatt RI with a Hiwatt 4X12 with Fanes. Half the price and with any pedal in front, it kills.

6/7/2000 11:30 AM

Carl F.

Re: Shopping for Dumble Clones: 2 Rock and Fuchs Audio

Yup, twas me. I'm completely non-tech
and lurk here, but I thought I pass on my experiences.
My review is glowing and I stand by it.Tone was not a problem with my Two Rock.
It's the "cork-sniffing" attitude
of after blowing 4K, they come up with further mods, the "blow the old models away"
I just don't like dealing with folks and owning people's products with that kind of attitude.
It rubs me the wrong way. Not alot of things bug me, but something like that does.
In any event, I enjoyed the TR while I had it.

PS, for 2K I got me a mil-spec PTP, Partrige tranny
Hiwatt RI with a Hiwatt 4X12 with Fanes.
Half the price and with any pedal in front, it kills.

6/8/2000 3:13 AM
Steve Ahola	Carl: Without revealing the secrets of their design, companies like TR should offer their existing customers step-by-step instructions on how to upgrade the amp to the current specs. Maybe have a fuzzy picture of the circuit board with the components to be changed highlighted, along with a list of the components to be used. If there are any voltage settings or other instructions to be used with the trim pots, they should be listed as well. That way the customer would not be forced to pay the company for the upgrade, and could do the work himself or pay a qualified local tech to avoid the shipping charges and delays. Of course with TR boards being potted with silicone (or epoxy?), that would probably not be feasible... And with the design changing on a weekly basis, how would they keep track of which amp had which version of the circuit? Seems to me that it would be a good idea to support the companies that don't encapsulate their circuit boards out of paranoia (or whatever!) You really have to respect someone like Ken Fischer who knows that nobody else can build a Trainwreck that sounds like one of his and does not feel threatened by someone who tries to copy his design... --Thanks! Steve Ahola

6/8/2000 3:13 AM

Steve Ahola

Carl:

    Without revealing the secrets of their design, companies like TR should offer their existing customers step-by-step instructions on how to upgrade the amp to the current specs. Maybe have a fuzzy picture of the circuit board with the components to be changed highlighted, along with a list of the components to be used. If there are any voltage settings or other instructions to be used with the trim pots, they should be listed as well. That way the customer would not be forced to pay the company for the upgrade, and could do the work himself or pay a qualified local tech to avoid the shipping charges and delays.

    Of course with TR boards being potted with silicone (or epoxy?), that would probably not be feasible... And with the design changing on a weekly basis, how would they keep track of which amp had which version of the circuit?

    Seems to me that it would be a good idea to support the companies that don't encapsulate their circuit boards out of paranoia (or whatever!) You really have to respect someone like Ken Fischer who knows that nobody else can build a Trainwreck that sounds like one of his and does not feel threatened by someone who tries to copy his design...

--Thanks!

Steve Ahola

6/8/2000 12:29 PM
andyfuchs	Steve" While I agree with you (somewhat), think about the manufacturers position: As a small independent builder (not speaking exclusively of myself, it applies to others equally), suppose you had designed, built, redesigned or refined a circuit you felt was unique. Without patents (which co$t alot and take time to get) or some kind of copyright protection, your technical "ass is out in the wind". A Two-Rock,a Bruno, or a Peavey, could easily reverse engineer a unique topology or power supply innovation,and you would be noplace. Now, as most of use have seen what makes a D*mble work, we all realize much of it is careful part selection, layout and tuning. Howard did not reinvent the wheel. Perhaps HAD took his paranoia to an extreme with the goop. An old Engineer who works with me from time-to-time once said potted circuits are either circuits you designed and are protecting, or circuits you "borrowed" and are protecting yourself. If you have intristic element(s) (besides your own hands and ears), I think an independent builder has every right to protect it. As long as a maker doesn't take advantage (like HAD was reputed to have done to SRV and others, when it came time to fix things), whats the problem ?

6/8/2000 12:29 PM

andyfuchs

Steve" While I agree with you (somewhat), think about the manufacturers position: As a small independent builder (not speaking exclusively of myself, it applies to others equally), suppose you had designed, built, redesigned or refined a circuit you felt was unique. Without patents (which co$t alot and take time to get) or some kind of copyright protection, your technical "ass is out in the wind". A Two-Rock,a Bruno, or a Peavey, could easily reverse engineer a unique topology or power supply innovation,and you would be noplace. Now, as most of use have seen what makes a D*mble work, we all realize much of it is careful part selection, layout and tuning. Howard did not reinvent the wheel. Perhaps HAD took his paranoia to an extreme with the goop.
An old Engineer who works with me from time-to-time once said potted circuits are either circuits you designed and are protecting, or circuits you "borrowed" and are protecting yourself.

If you have intristic element(s) (besides your own hands and ears), I think an independent builder has every right to protect it. As long as a maker doesn't take advantage (like HAD was reputed to have done to SRV and others, when it came time to fix things), whats the problem ?

6/8/2000 11:00 PM
Dr Rico	Andy, I think some of the problem is that folks think that for the asking price of a Two Rock, one shouldn't be Beta Testing the darn amp. Oftentimes, software developers ship product before its ready, or without testing under all the conditions customers will use it. These vendors often provide free updates, "patches", and suchlike. Likewise, autombolie manufacturers sometimes publish "service bulletins" that recommend free parts and labor to optimize systems that weren't quite right before they shipped the cars. Smaller vendors such as yourself and the Two Rock guys probably can't afford to do free retrofits on all your amps. It seems to me one solution would be to hold back on shipping product until its right (the Kevin O'Connor approach...though it doesn't seem to endear him with folks that wait a long time for amps). Of course you can't generate revenue on unshipped amps. Steve's suggestion to make the amps serviceable at home frees the company of the expense, allows product to ship earlier, and allows for those that wish to have the work done for them take it to a qualified tech or ship it back for service. By making the designs difficult to service, the onus of fixing the amp is squarely on the shoulders of the amp manufacturer/designer. In your case, you offer one free "revoicing" to satisfy the customer. That's a good idea, and I think Two Rock should consider this as well. I also suspect that you worked out most of the bugs and solidified the design before you started shipping (unlike Two Rock). That will save your customers needless expense and aggravation. So I reckon I'm saying, if you must goop, make sure the amp is right from the get-go. Two Rock dropped the ball here. Hasta -> Rico

6/8/2000 11:00 PM

Dr Rico

Andy, I think some of the problem is that folks think that for the asking price of a Two Rock, one shouldn't be Beta Testing the darn amp. Oftentimes, software developers ship product before its ready, or without testing under all the conditions customers will use it. These vendors often provide free updates, "patches", and suchlike. Likewise, autombolie manufacturers sometimes publish "service bulletins" that recommend free parts and labor to optimize systems that weren't quite right before they shipped the cars.

Smaller vendors such as yourself and the Two Rock guys probably can't afford to do free retrofits on all your amps. It seems to me one solution would be to hold back on shipping product until its right (the Kevin O'Connor approach...though it doesn't seem to endear him with folks that wait a long time for amps). Of course you can't generate revenue on unshipped amps.

Steve's suggestion to make the amps serviceable at home frees the company of the expense, allows product to ship earlier, and allows for those that wish to have the work done for them take it to a qualified tech or ship it back for service. By making the designs difficult to service, the onus of fixing the amp is squarely on the shoulders of the amp manufacturer/designer. In your case, you offer one free "revoicing" to satisfy the customer. That's a good idea, and I think Two Rock should consider this as well. I also suspect that you worked out most of the bugs and solidified the design before you started shipping (unlike Two Rock). That will save your customers needless expense and aggravation.

So I reckon I'm saying, if you must goop, make sure the amp is right from the get-go. Two Rock dropped the ball here.

Hasta -> Rico

6/9/2000 4:31 AM
Steve Ahola	Andy: Don't tell me that you are a "pothead", too! I guess I let the two subjects run together, but getting to the original point, if the amp builder really hasn't worked the bugs out yet and is changing the design every week I think that it is wrong to expect the customer to pay through the nose to be a "beta tester" ($4k for the amp plus $400 for each "update"). That doesn't necessarily apply if you are building "one-off" custom amps for select customers; in that case you wouldn't expect every amp to deliver the same performance. But for an amp with a model name you would expect some consistency from amp to amp; you hear one in a store or at a friend's house so you special order one and when it arrives you find that the amp sounds completely different... As for the potting issue, I think I read that you offer your customers one "free" revoicing... If your amps are potted, isn't it a real hassle to re-tweak one of your amps? Or do you have a big jar of "super-solvent" to unpot your boards? Even for doing routine maintenance items and voltage checks, doesn't the potting material get in the way? Back in the early 70's there were hippie communes in Northern California that would produce really trippy stomp boxes. A friend bought a Sea Moon Funk Machine, which was built in the body of a Foxx wah pedal (with the fuzzy velour-type coating!). This was a combination wah pedal/envelope follower and you could get some really strange things going with it. So I took the back off to see what the circuit looked like and it was all encapsulated in something like casting resin. In a case like this, if your Funk Machine was under warranty and a problem developed they would just take out the old "glob" and solder a new one in- right? Since the circuit was apparently very simple and probably used only a few bucks worth of parts they could afford to build disposable modules. So how do you plan to handle the warranty on your amps if they are potted, Andy? In a perfect world the people you were selling your amps to would be like your friends, and they would gladly agree to keep the amp you built away from prying eyes (and digital cameras!)— all with a handshake agreement instead of several pages of legal clauses. But only a perfect fool would expect the world to be perfect... To pot or not to pot... that is your call, but it seems like the top priority should be seeing that your paying customer doesn't get stuck with an amp that has to be shipped back to you for basic repairs... it would be like buying a car that has to be shipped back to Detroit (or Japan!) for a simple tune-up! --Thanks! Steve Ahola

6/9/2000 4:31 AM

Steve Ahola

Andy:

Don't tell me that you are a "pothead", too!

    I guess I let the two subjects run together, but getting to the original point, if the amp builder really hasn't worked the bugs out yet and is changing the design every week I think that it is wrong to expect the customer to pay through the nose to be a "beta tester" ($4k for the amp plus $400 for each "update").

    That doesn't necessarily apply if you are building "one-off" custom amps for select customers; in that case you wouldn't expect every amp to deliver the same performance. But for an amp with a model name you would expect some consistency from amp to amp; you hear one in a store or at a friend's house so you special order one and when it arrives you find that the amp sounds completely different...

    As for the potting issue, I think I read that you offer your customers one "free" revoicing... If your amps are potted, isn't it a real hassle to re-tweak one of your amps? Or do you have a big jar of "super-solvent" to unpot your boards? Even for doing routine maintenance items and voltage checks, doesn't the potting material get in the way?

    Back in the early 70's there were hippie communes in Northern California that would produce really trippy stomp boxes. A friend bought a Sea Moon Funk Machine, which was built in the body of a Foxx wah pedal (with the fuzzy velour-type coating!). This was a combination wah pedal/envelope follower and you could get some really strange things going with it. So I took the back off to see what the circuit looked like and it was all encapsulated in something like casting resin.

In a case like this, if your Funk Machine was under warranty and a problem developed they would just take out the old "glob" and solder a new one in- right? Since the circuit was apparently very simple and probably used only a few bucks worth of parts they could afford to build disposable modules. So how do you plan to handle the warranty on your amps if they are potted, Andy?

In a perfect world the people you were selling your amps to would be like your friends, and they would gladly agree to keep the amp you built away from prying eyes (and digital cameras!)— all with a handshake agreement instead of several pages of legal clauses. But only a perfect fool would expect the world to be perfect...

To pot or not to pot... that is your call, but it seems like the top priority should be seeing that your paying customer doesn't get stuck with an amp that has to be shipped back to you for basic repairs... it would be like buying a car that has to be shipped back to Detroit (or Japan!) for a simple tune-up!

--Thanks!

Steve Ahola

<<First Page

<Prev

Page 2 of 2