maz_master

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking My point was I took the info about PCB mounted tube sockets on the Herbert from your thread and your observations which were confirmed by other posters. After all, you're an EE - you would know. I think you owe Peter Diezel a big apology. Besides if the tube pins are sitting directly on the PCB how is that any better then if the sockets are mounted to the PCB? Shouldn't there be flying leads so that the PCB isn't flexed when a tube is inserted? I don't remember the Herbert I had having ceramic sockets - if it did then I was wrong. But ceramic is actually worse then plastic according to you - right? The socket pins will not move because the socket to which the pins are fastened is secured to an object (the chassis) which will not move. Having shorter lead lengths (with the pins connected directly to the PCB could be argued to be better than the flying leads due to lower probability of EMI and human error in the wiring process. I don't recall ever saying that Herbert used plastic sockets. YOU said that and I took it as Gospel because you owned one! I should have distrusted your observation and looked more closely at the Herbert pics to verify this before assuming you were correct. Lastly, *I* never said one socket style was necessarily better than the other. I only said that many *builders* prefer plastic and then gave *their* reasons. Since we don't design with tubes here at Kodak, I have never thoroughly researched the issue. However, based on the little reserach I did for this thread, it appears that both Peter and Andrew should check into it. Plastic may indeed be better than ceramic.

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1251194 So, what's the point? It looked like they were mounted to the PCB and I didn't even look closely enough to observe the ceramic sockets through the holes in the PCB. Also, you couldn't tell from the picture whether the tubes were mounted to the chassis or PCB because the mounting hardware was obstructed from view by the PCB itself. But, you were wrong on both counts. I just took what you said as fact instead of challenging you as I should have! You said Herbert had, "...PCB mounted plastic tube sockets and ribbon cable vs chassis mounted ceramic tube sockets [on the Mako]..." But, as Peter has clarified: 1.) Herbert uses cermic sockets, not plastic, 2.) Herbert power tube sockets are chassis mounted. Who's spreading rumors here? Shouldn't you be apologizing right about now for spreading falsehood?

Originally posted by Peter Diezel Hey Maz ! The power tube sockets on the Herbert are made of ceramik. They are chassis mounted and the pins are soldered into the PCB. Best, Peter Thanks for the info, Peter. Yes, the pic in the GP review shows that clearly! I was just going by what Rufus Leaking said. I should have looked. For the sake of argument, why did you choose cermic over some type of plastic?

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking It just bugs me that you (Maz Master) consistently jump into every Diezel thread and tell anyone who doesn't like the amp that they either have no ears or must be a 16 year old kid who likes fizz. No, I'm not going to go through threads and pull out quotes. That's been your attitude and you know it. BTW, the comments about 16 year olds liking fizz were tongue-in-cheek. If you could see my face and hear my voice, you could tell I was razzing. I'll be sure to use more often. But, nonetheless, I am still surprised that some people would prefer a dual rec over a Herbert. Doesn't mean they don't have ears. (I don't recall ever specifically saying that either.) They just have different concepts of what constitutes great tone. Once again, great tone is subjective. Lastly, if I get my $4100 Herbert and don't like it after a year of gigging it, as Steve Snider predicts, then you can kick me in the balls or something. ;)

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking Also, just to make it clear - I have no issue with Diezel. Even though it wasn't right for me, they do make a great amp. I also don't get into flame wars - check my posts on here and TGP if you want. It just bugs me that you (Maz Master) consistently jump into every Diezel thread and tell anyone who doesn't like the amp that they either have no ears or must be a 16 year old kid who likes fizz. No, I'm not going to go through threads and pull out quotes. That's been your attitude and you know it. There are plenty of people with great ears who don't like the amp, just as there are plenty of people who probably don't like the amps I do. No big deal. You should let people speak their mind about an amp without being so defensive. That just rubs me the wrong way, especially since you've never even played one. People say the Herbert lacks "full frequency response" and proclaim how they liked their Dual Recs better. That's an opinion. Why am I not allowed to voice mine?

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking You asked for evidence that there are amps out there that are better constructed then a Diezel earlier on in this thread. I gave it to you. WRONG. I asked for specific construction attributes on Diezels that would reduce their reliability compared to anything else out there. You gave me none. I don't think you know enough about the topic to give me any. So, all you did was point me to other companies and engage in hand waving. Showing me pictures of Mako guts does not tell me what you believe are deficiencies with Diezels! Can you not discern the difference? Originally posted by Rufus Leaking PCB mounted plastic tube sockets and ribbon cable vs chassis mounted ceramic tube sockets and mil spec hand soldering on a turrett board. Now suddenly Mako is overbuilt? Nice backpedal but you can't have it both ways. Once again, show me how anything mentioned in the above paragraph regarding Diezel affects reliability. FYI, a lot of amp builders and tube audiophiles don't use ceramic sockets because they have a higher dielectric constant than phenolic, polystyrene, teflon and other modern high tech plastic compounds, which means they have lower electrical insulating capability and allow a greater interaction between pins and with the tube circuit in general, thus causing undesirable audio affects. Do some searches and see for yourself. Many audiophiles will swear ceramic doesn't sound as good as other materials with lower dielectric constants. Secondly, ceramic is much more prone to transmitting mechanical vibrations, thus leading to microphonics. Thirdly, ceramic has been known to crack and cause arcing. Mike Zaite (Dr. Z) doesn't use ceramic sockets and I'm sure he has many good reasons (perhaps some given above) for choosing high tech plastic instead. Dr. Z has more amps in the field used by more pros than Diezel and certainly Mako...put together...and an outstanding reputation for reliability. As for ribbon cable, there's a huge difference between brands and types. I have circuits in satellites circling the earth as we speak that use ribbon cable on their PCBs and they've been working flawlessly for years, under incredibly harsh conditions. They use ribbon cable in automobiles and aircraft and many other products that need high reliability. It's the cheap, often hand-crimped, stuff used in mass-produced Fenders and Marshalls that can sometimes cause problems because if the crimp isn't perfect, they can slip and become intermittent over time. I can't precisely tell from the pictures I've seen of Herbert guts, but that one ribbon cable appears to not have any hand-crimps and looks to be molded/soldered directly into the housings in the PCB. Maybe Peter can fill us in on that one. Lastly, as much as I love the look and serviceability of PTP (all 3 amps I still own are PTP), they can have a higher rate of solder connection issues upon leaving the factory because it depends entirely on the skill of the people doing the soldering. With high quality, computer-controlled, PCB wave soldering (i.e. THD, Diezel, VHT, etc), that just doesn't happen nearly as frequently. Plus, every single board is exactly the same, unlike PTP. Bottom line is, you need to dig a little deeper into what really leads to electronic circuit reliability and audio quality and what doesn't. You've actually pointed out a few issues that could lead to lower reliability in the Mako, not higher! Originally posted by Rufus Leaking I can name at least a half dozen people off the top of my head that have received Makos - myself included. I've got another that will be arriving shortly. Cool. Maybe he's finally gotten his {censored} together and also stopped allowing Japanese customers to take cuts in line! Originally posted by Rufus Leaking His wait time is not a year, as you've stated (nice way to spread a false rumor). It's 6 months. He tells you that up front and he's been on time with his deliveries. How long is your Diezel taking? It's been a few months already and no sign yet so... 4 months, maybe? Big dif. Once again, cool. It sounds like he's finally on track and that's cool. I, and many others at the time, were quoted six months too, but many of them waited up to 18 months with no amp in sight. My comments were based on historical facts, not rumors. As for my Herbert, I was told three months (due to supplier issues) and, last I heard from Peter, it hasn't changed. Originally posted by Rufus Leaking I hope you get your Diezel soon and you love it (really). I'm sure the construction is perfectly fine for any situation. But it's not the end all amp for everyone. And since you've never owned played or even seen either amp in person... I don't think your opinion has much credibility on the matter. Thanks. Hope you love the new Mako too. But, I never once said the Herbert is the "end all" amp for everyone. You've misquoted me before and I asked you to find the quotes you were attributing to me and you couldn't. (Talk about starting rumors!) You're doing that once again. I only questioned your comments regarding Diezel quality, not your dislike for its tone. Regarding owning a Herbert and having a valid opinion on them, you're mistaken on several aspects. First, I am entitled to an opinion, as are you, on what I know and what I have heard. I never pretended to possess any knowledge beyond that. After all, did you go out to a local showroom and audition a Mako before deciding it had tones you would like and placing your order? In fact, I'd bet you had less to go on before getting in that 6 month line for a Mako than I did with the Herbert (given the scarcity of Mako amps in the field). Most of us who purchase this high-end stuff only have audio/video clips and personal testimony to go on. We gather the info we can and try to make informed decisions. How much info did you have to go on before getting in that long line for your first Mako? Lastly, how an amp records is very important and should not be discounted as totally unimportant when making a purchase. After all, it's primarily the recordings of our guitar heros that we use to judge their tone. If you like an amp's recorded tone, there's a very high probability it'll sound even better in person. In the many dozen amps I've purchased and/or auditioned, in only one case was I totally misled by an amp's recorded tone versus what I heard in person.

Originally posted by carlygtr56 How many years has this Mako horse{censored} been going? How many US owners/ Less than 5? He should swim with the sharks, IMO I dunno', Carl. Mako amps are brought up every now and then, but I can remember only 2-3 people, at least on this Forum, who ever received one. Most of the folks that I know of who were in line to get one eventually got tired of waiting and withdrew orders.

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking Oooooooookay..... good to know I passed your test :freak: Enjoy your Diezel. Hey, Rufus, I'm not trying to be a dick. But, you keep touting the Mako construction philosophy as if it's absolutely required for the utmost in reliability, but it's clearly not. You don't have to go to those extremes to have an amp survive extreme abuse. Plus, all it takes is a blow in just the right spot and any amp, regardless of construction technique, could be temporarily put out of commission...not to mention the fact that the tubes themselves are very sensitive to vibration. (BTW, do you even know anybody who ever received a Mako, aside from Mr. Snider? I've only known people, Americans anyways, who were waiting for one. Once again, if you can't get your hands on one within your lifetime, what good is MIL-SPEC PTP?) If you don't like the Diezel tone, then that's cool. It's subjective. But, construction techniques shouldn't be a concern when considering buying one. Yes, Peter mounts the power tubes to the PCB, but given Diezel's outstanding reputation for roadworthiness, I'm sure Peter has taken steps to ensure that the reliability of that approach is as good as chassis mounting. I'm sure Peter has also adequately addressed the things we cannot see, as was discussed previously.

Originally posted by JamesPeters For my designs, there's no discernable difference whether I use aluminum or steel for my chassis. I was relieved to discover this, since I'd used both types of material and had to decide on what to use for a new chassis. My options were open at that point. I've heard the same from others who've run that experiment. So, maybe aluminum for lightness?

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking Yes, right here; http://www.makoamplification.com/about_milspec.html You really should take a second and glance over Mako's build techniques and philosophy - you might get a whole new perspective on quality; http://www.makoamplification.com/about_philosophy.html I know all about Mako's philosophy. I was testing YOU. I had one on order and spoke at length with Andrew during that timeframe. I've been an EE myself for 24 years, so I have either done it myself or been very close to it. (I now basically write code which synthesizes into digital ASICs.) So, his philosophy is nothing new to me. Trouble is, if it takes over a year to get one, it's not worth it to me. He also pissed off a lot of American customers when he inserted a whole bunch of Japanese customers in line ahead of Americans who had already placed orders. He also started out with a fantastic pricing policy, and touted it quite vociferously, but quickly abandoned it after the Japanese ordeal. Also, based on the few clips available, it just doesn't sound all that great to me. Keep in mind that it's also possible to overengineer something to the point where it's totally impractical. Who need's a 6x power rating on a resistor when 3x will do? Who's willing to wait over a year for an amp because the builder is doing a bunch of things that aren't even necessary...or selling out to rich Japanese businessmen who probably can't even play?

Originally posted by JamesPeters Are you implying that the steel chassis of the VH4 is somehow allowing more noise to pass through than the steel chassis of the Dual Rectifier? Anyway, you should read up on the technical properties of aluminum and steel, and know what it means in the context of an amplifier (taking into account the specific layout of the amp) before you rush to judge an amp based on the material its chassis is made of. Don't be like so many others who would presume one metal is inherently superior in all cases. I've used both, and I've even done direct comparisons using the same circuit design in each. And, what were the results of your test, James?

Originally posted by carlygtr56 Different ears hear different things. I saw RF and LC in March. RF had the Twin, SR and a Zen Drive pedal an a Les Paul. It, IMO did not sound remotely like his Dumble, Fuchs, etc. It sounded like old Santana at the Fillmore Twin cranked tone. LC's Dumble was awesome and I walked out of that show wanting a Fuchs, which, IMO is as close as I would get to that sound. Plus, I cant stand the OD-100, since the thing came out in '92:D A friend of Larry Carlton's told me that both Larry and Carlos Santana are amazed by the Fuchs and each would own one and gig with one if their friend, Howard Dumble, wouldn't disown them and stop servicing their Dumbles in the process! Breaking that relationship is too important to them, so they refrain from buying Fuchs! So, when people ask Larry about his tone, he advises them to buy a Fuchs! When I was on the verge of pulling a trigger on a Fuchs, I also learned that Andy can hand tweak his production units to exactly cop Larry's Dumble tone OR Robben's Dumble tone (which is what I was going to get).

Originally posted by NITEFLY182 I would, the effects loop on my VH4 is much nopiser than my dual rec The muddiness of the DR covers up the noise.

Originally posted by Rufus Leaking FWIW; The Mako chassis is 3.2 mm (.125") thick hard anodized aluminum. Chassis mounted porcelain tube sockets. Mil-spec hand soldering etc... That aluminum chassis NEEDS to be 3.2mm versus Diezel's 2mm steel because aluminum is not as hard as steel! BTW, what is "MIL-SPEC hand soldering"? Can you show me the military document describing it?

Originally posted by Snider Well then I guess my bandmate is hearing this too as he has an Einstein and sold his Herbert as the Einstein killed it in the band setting.The Einstein is a better amp.The Einstein has a much fuller frequency range and is a bit more organic sounding but that said still not as good as the other stuff I have . The two -Two Rock amps I have are not Two Rocks, one is completely gutted by Bill from TR and the other was made from scratch. They are three channels with independent eq, Clean, Dumble (2nd channel) as well as a high gain Marshall style circuit for the high gain stuff(3rd Channel) which not one Two Rock ever made contains, not this circuit anyway. As far as Fuchs goes- a Zendrive pedal into any Fender is that that tone or close enough, lots of gain, rolled off highs with the proper mids is an easy emulation of the Fuchs. I have owned 5 fuchs including a 100 watt SLX modded amp so I am familiar with the tones. I can make either of my Krinards sound exactly like a fuchs but not vice versa. If the amps I have right now were not better than the Diezels, Mako CH100, VHTs and Two Rocks and Bogners and Fuchs etc, I would still have some of them but everything has been booted by the Suhr OD100SE with Whomp which is pretty damn cool, and the two Krinards which are amazing. I hope the Cauble shakes up the roost next. It is all subjective and I hope you like the Herbert but I can guarantee within a year you will not own it anymore because you have a good set of ears and are used to the HotCat and Z which share nothing with Herbie. As I have said , the Herbert sounds great in a room by itself. It sounds great at low volumes. It sounds good in power trios.It will not cut it in live situations and if you don't believe me then ask Neil Schon or James Hetfield or Buckethead or Adam Jones or a bunch of other guys who play live. I am back to thinking a VH4S is a good amp for me. I really enjoyed that amp and it sounded quite good in the band setting. That blended with my Krinard 100 running dry in the center and the VH4S stereo on each side would be a sweet thing. Thanks for the first-hand input, Steve. Well, it is very subjective. For example, I've heard many, many CAE OD100 clips and the dirt side always sounded kinda' harsh to me. Great cleans though. The Einstein sounds great, but not smooth enough for me...maybe that's why you guys feel it cuts better in a band mix. Of all the amps I have owned, an OCD into the Maz 18 has sounded best in a band mix...according to my band, my Eastman Music School trained opera singer girlfriend (who now does jazz) and many great players who've heard that rig in the house. It cuts, but still sounds big, fat, round and rich. Regarding the Zendrive-into-Fender comparison to Fuchs, once again, I've heard both and have trouble seeing how you can compare the two! The Fuchs is much ballsier and bigger. Listen to the Galo Rivera clips on the Fuchs site. There's no way a Zendrive into a Fender will give you those tones! Larry Carlton recommends Fuchs over Two-Rock too, BTW. Cannot reveal the source of that statement though. Anyways....I gotta' run....more to say later....thanks for the great conversation!!!!! Lotta' fun! :thu: Dave