Help me design my Dunwich amplifier

[AngryGoldfish]

Yeah, a top-mounted faceplate would increase the width of the amp and chassis by 2+ inches overall. This would bump up the weight and price so we've decided to keep it rear-mounted. There are quite a few options to change the tone so it will be a pain to reach round the back to switch things, but it'll be clean looking and less likely to be knocked during transit. It'll be recessed into the cabinet (I assume) and will be hidden from all the knocks and bumps of life.

Shannon, you have the idea. I'm not trying to copy a specific Carr design. I just dig their 'oddball look' as you call it. It's unique and very 'me'—classy but quirky. It feels akin to me as a person.

AxAxSxS, I LOVE designs like that.

[new05002]

Doing the reverse mounted chassis will dictate more on the depth of the cab. Chassis is 10" deep it self and it needs room behind it for the gap between the back panel and the baffle and some room in front so the controls could be below the lip line of the cab (at minimum) Your looking at something like 13-15 inches deep at that point including the shell wood. However in the top mounted design It can be shallower in depth since the chassis is hanging down now. So reverse mount will be more cubic and top mount will be more rectangular left to right

[Greenfuz]

[AngryGoldfish]

Doing the reverse mounted chassis will dictate more on the depth of the cab. Chassis is 10" deep it self and it needs room behind it for the gap between the back panel and the baffle and some room in front so the controls could be below the lip line of the cab (at minimum) Your looking at something like 13-15 inches deep at that point including the shell wood. However in the top mounted design It can be shallower in depth since the chassis is hanging down now. So reverse mount will be more cubic and top mount will be more rectangular left to right

Hmmm... this changes things slightly. It'll still be more expensive to go top-mounted though so I'll probably just stick with an extended ass instead of a wider breast.

[new05002]

In terms of weight and size it wont be a huge increase going to top mounted approach. It wont be optimally light IMO but it wont be that much heavier.

[friendship]

Some of the old Supro's and such look amazing too, more like its a piece of high end furnature than an amp. I love the really old 30's and earlier designs, especially where the grill opening is cut out in an inteseting shape.

Things like this-




I know Nick and co can pull this sort of thing off, and make it amazing.

not to hijack this thread but holy these things rule. Tell me more.

[AxAxSxS]

I just looked for some quick pics and dont know the specifics about these particular examples. Turn of the century stuff is always beautiful to me. People took PRIDE back then. Even farm tools were likely to have some ornate decorations in the castings. A lot of nicks stuff shows the same sort of massive attention to detail and with his woodworking and etching friends on board, I'm pretty sure they could come up with an amazing look. I've been thinking about how cool it would be do do an etched control panel for a long time. The pedals that get that treatment are some of my favorites visually and combined with some interesting woodwork, I think minds could be blown.

[friendship]

Yeah that shit is awesome. It's all in the details. Check out this old Epiphone Electar amp from the 30s. So cool.

[DarkAxel]

hmm, never dealt with rear-mounted combo, but why not if it serves the purpose...

I'm all for kind of Carr design and i'm ALL FOR stained stuff this could look bangin'!

Surprised to see Nick doing a combo, i thought Dunwich was about huge heads with huge tubes and huge output transformers I wonder what it will sound like...

cool nonetheless, glad to see versatility and Nick, you also seem awesome with communication too bad ordering something from overseas would be a total nonsense

[new05002]

ha well yea its just what everyone seems to order lately but I am open to build anything really. Whatever the customer is trying to do ya know. The circuit design is pretty simple 1 channel but solid # of tweaks to get a range of tones. The idea I put forward to Dan was that we could make the amp have a single channel which had 2 EQs in it, one a james/bax, one a FMV (bass and treble) where the james/bax is early in the circuit like Orange where as the FMV is later in the circuit like most Marshalls. EQs can be dropped in and out of the circuit so you could have something with no EQs, both EQs, or just 1 EQ. Output is 2 EL84s in cathode bias, kinda like the DoomTrain idea you could say. Dual master volumes, post and pre phase inverter. Its a really flexible 1 channel low watt amp. nothing too fancy ya know like verb or trem or fx loops

[DarkAxel]

... my kind of amp no need for trem or verb, I love simple amps that work as a clean canvas for all the pedals, so this sounds really great to me! Interested to see photos and hear demos later!

and the dual EQ... if by "most Marshalls" you don't mean "ineffective" then it's a great idea

[Jwar]

HAHAHAHA!

Perfect!!!!!!

[new05002]

... my kind of amp no need for trem or verb, I love simple amps that work as a clean canvas for all the pedals, so this sounds really great to me! Interested to see photos and hear demos later!

and the dual EQ... if by "most Marshalls" you don't mean "ineffective" then it's a great idea

yea well FMVs are always pretty limited but its part of the Marshall sound. It should be able to go from nice marshall or Orange type cleans to slightly hotter JCM800 and rodded OR/GT type distortion sounds.

[DarkAxel]

I guess you're right, I haven't played a lot of marshalls (i'm no fan nor an expert), but i've always had a feeling they have certain sound however you tweak the EQs... the EQs have never felt very responsive, the character was still circa the same

which is cool as far as it's what you're going for... combined with the other EQ, especially when you can choose either or both, it's a cool way how to give the player versatility but with a certain characteristics of the wanted tonality

looking forward to hearing more about this project! I still think stained wood would be killer

[AngryGoldfish]

I guess you're right, I haven't played a lot of marshalls (i'm no fan nor an expert), but i've always had a feeling they have certain sound however you tweak the EQs... the EQs have never felt very responsive, the character was still circa the same

which is cool as far as it's what you're going for... combined with the other EQ, especially when you can choose either or both, it's a cool way how to give the player versatility but with a certain characteristics of the wanted tonality

looking forward to hearing more about this project! I still think stained wood would be killer

The 'problem' I've found with Marshalls is pretty similar to what you're saying. No matter what guitar, cabinet or pedal you run with a Marshall, and no matter how you EQ them, you'll always sound like a Marshall. That's not a bad thing per say, but it means you'll never be able to truly break away from that grind and midrange growl—and if you don't like that, you're gonna have a bad time.