This is how Cornford PTP wiring looks under the skin

[Rock Fella]

This is how the Hellcat looks from within
http://pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL80/2084384/4487245/96511252.jpg

everything bolted to the chassis and it all looks good to me , i had a look under the skin of my old DSL50 and oh dear what a mess :( , didnt know if it was an amp or a computer i was looking at:confused:

just thought some might be interested in a look at the excellence that truly is Cornford :dude :dude :dude

YOU ROCK CORNFORD !!!!!!

jimmy

[riffmeister]

Nice to see that the innards match the tone! :)

[hendrix2430]

Hm, nice. I never thought I could get aroused by looking at cabling, pots and solder...:p

[Matt Gordon]

PCB based amps like the DSL's are for all intents, beyond the average users' ability to service if that ever becomes necessary IMHO, outside a simple tube replacement and bias. Anythime you have to lift something off those PCB's, things become iffy at best. Even with a huge dollar desoldering station, once you lift those pads, its all over. IMO, it is best just to replace the complete PCB. These amp makers should be able to supply replacement PCB's at reasonable costs (provided the owner has registered his/her amp with the warranty card/serial #) and thereby negating a lot of the problems with computer-based amps! :D

[Rock Fella]

nice though aint it :)

[Matt Gordon]

Definitely a nice looking chassis. Very clean. ;)

[RichSZ]

Very nice....:dude

[John Phillips]

It does look nicely made, but why does it have to be so big? You could get that lot into about a quarter of the chassis space.

Not trying to be negative, just puzzled...

(Although, for me, unnecessary size is always a negative, I have to say.)

[LSchefman]

>>Although, for me, unnecessary size is always a negative, I have to say.<<

Oh. man, here is a great opportunity for some really lame jokes. Such as:

"Gee, that's not what your girlfriend/wife says."

I could think of more. But you get the idea. ;)

[doctord02]

Originally posted by John Phillips
It does look nicely made, but why does it have to be so big? You could get that lot into about a quarter of the chassis space.

Not trying to be negative, just puzzled...

(Although, for me, unnecessary size is always a negative, I have to say.)

Looks to me that when you factor the spacing of transformers, caps and tubes on the other side of the chassis, it makes perfect sense...

[John Phillips]

Only if you space them out. You could easily get everything much closer together... Mesa could fit a 100W, four-channel, tube rectified, switchable power-stage amp with Graphic EQ and reverb into that size of box ;).

Just wondering. I wouldn't rule out that the greater spacing is intentional, and limits crosstalk between components, and so improves the tone.

I just hate carrying around more wood and metal than I need to when it holds nothing more than empty space. I wonder if it's more of an image thing... :confused:

I've always loved tiny, compact, powerful amps. I have no desire at all for a 'big amp' image on stage, when a small one will do the same job. Size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it that counts ;).

[big hair]

Naw, little amps look odd, esp when sat ontop of 4x12s - kind of like a big person with a small head :)

BTW - what is written on the chassis in the pic??

[Rock Fella]

Originally posted by John Phillips
Mesa could fit a 100W, four-channel, tube rectified, switchable power-stage amp with Graphic EQ and reverb into that size of box ;).



no offense John buddy and I really do hope you dont take any by me saying this ..............but you listen to the ,in my opinion , buzz box rectfiers compared to the stunning tone of cornford.

ill take the cornford EVERY time over ANY mesa, ive spoken to martin kidd, dude knows his stuff and has a real pride in what cornford are about , and it shows john, it truly does. i belive that design layout to be devised to make the hellcat the best that it can be, that is what cornford has in the heart of all they make.

if martin kidd designed it, the layout will optimise everything.

peace to ya dude

:dude
jimmy

[Rock Fella]

Originally posted by big hair
Naw, little amps look odd, esp when sat ontop of 4x12s - kind of like a big person with a small head :)

BTW - what is written on the chassis in the pic??


hair, i think im right in saying that THD have put the flexi into a bigger box because buyers werent so hot on a tiny box sitting on top of their 4x12 cab, i can understand that line of thinking.

[MikeyG]

I'll take any amp in the mesa line over the Cornford MK50. That amp did nada for me ... yes, I'm serious.

[tralfax19645]

Hi,
You want small, some of the old silvertines were TOO small. they had the PT right up against the exposed preamp pots, so much hum because of the layout, they had to use a hum canceling choke in the OT to get the noise out,and darn near impossible to get replacements now.
Rob

[Jon Silberman]

Originally posted by Matt Gordon
PCB based amps like the DSL's are for all intents, beyond the average users' ability to service if that ever becomes necessary IMHO, outside a simple tube replacement and bias. Anythime you have to lift something off those PCB's, things become iffy at best. Even with a huge dollar desoldering station, once you lift those pads, its all over. IMO, it is best just to replace the complete PCB. These amp makers should be able to supply replacement PCB's at reasonable costs (provided the owner has registered his/her amp with the warranty card/serial #) and thereby negating a lot of the problems with computer-based amps! :D

I am going to question some of your response, Matt. No, you're absolutely right, the average amp tech is lost when it comes to working on a PCB. However, there are some who excel at it. Example: Pete Cage. That's because unlike the "old salty dog techs" we all know and love, Pete and others like him have extensive experience repairing PCBs for computers and similar equipment.

When I brought my Reverend Hellhound to him for various mods, removing components and working on the PCB for that amp was, for Pete, child's play.

http://www.audiocage.com/

[Rock Fella]

john

dsl100...........major pcb failure in 3 months

dsl50.........major failure after 11 hours

sorry mate ;)

[tele_disease]

Wiring looks good, but ...............

If you could see the inside of one of my Matchless or Bad Cat's chassis then, we could talk.

The wiring stuff gives me a fat, then I turn them on and the sound doubles the fat.

Pretenders welcome, but when it comes to this, Sampson has the ground covered from a poser and aural perspective.

:) :) :) :)

ps, peace and love to you all, just watched the Concert For George.........AWESOME

[tele_disease]

John

My comments were directly related to the Sampson designed amps.

Yes there might be one or two 'related' amps that are untidy, but really, when you are faced with the build, setout and wiring quality of a real Sampson amp from the last 16 -17 years, why draw an extreme? (and admit it in your opening stament).

Its like comparing a Marshall Valvestate with a '67 Plexi, both Marshalls right - therefore they are all PCB, transistor, cheap, particle board etc ..........untidy, inconsistent ..........................

[Rock Fella]

john i saw matchless innards that were very untidy indeed and nothing special to observe.............presumed untypical of matchless ?

jimmy

[Blueser]

One thing to remember about Matchless amps, is that many if not all of their models are true PTP amps. The shots of them that I have seen, have no boards that the components are handwired to, so in a true PTP amp (no board) it would appear less uniform, thus "untidy" compared to an amp using a board or terminal strips to mount their components.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

[kannibul]

Waaah. DSL's have PCB's - and those are BAD!!!

Does anyone seriously think that a DSL could be made with a turret board, and retain all the functions?

[kannibul]

Originally posted by John Phillips
That's nothing whatever to do with the fact that those amps are PCB - it's to do with the quality of design and construction, not the method. I said high quality ;). Marshall DSLs don't count - they're a good example of a down-to-cost engineered product that gets the method a bad name. There's no telling that it was actually the PCB that failed anyway.

The best reliability in true cost-no-object electronics (aircraft control systems, for example) has been found to be achieved with PCB construction. Really.

Component choice has a lot more to do with failures than construction method...

Just elaborating on what you have said...

[tfire]

Interested to hear what you all make of a comparison with the interior of an early Harlequin (http://tfire.fotopic.net/c361659.html)

[Mike Hansen]

Originally posted by tfire
Interested to hear what you all make of a comparison with the interior of an early Harlequin (http://tfire.fotopic.net/c361659.html)

When was yours made?


Here's some shots of my Hurricane from July 02:

http://photobucket.com/albums/v79/mikehansen/Hurricane%20Guts/

[aeolian]

Originally posted by Matt Gordon
, once you lift those pads, its all over. IMO, it is best just to replace the complete PCB.
http://www.circuittechctr.com/products/products.shtml
Were not in Kansas (or the 50's) anymore.

Sorry for the sarcasm, but I get so tired of this head in the sand attitude towards electronic construction. The PCB's in guitar amps are so simple compared to modern electronics it's laughable. If you can't desolder a half watt resistor from a two sided plated though hole 1/16" thick PC board, you'd be in real trouble in the electronics industry with an 8 mil wide lead on a memory device on a 15 mil thick PCMCIA or cell phone board, or the same device on a 1/4" thick, 24 layer internet router board.

As John points out, a lot of thought has gone into making roadworthy electronics. We put our lives into the hands of folks who have figured this out everytime we get on an airliner or drive our cars down the hiway. Underhood electronics is an environment of heat/cold and vibration that would destroy an guitar amplifier in a heartbeat. But we expect the ECMs and other modules in there to work for years.

[Matt Gordon]

Originally posted by aeolian
http://www.circuittechctr.com/products/products.shtml
Were not in Kansas (or the 50's) anymore.

Sorry for the sarcasm, but I get so tired of this head in the sand attitude towards electronic construction. The PCB's in guitar amps are so simple compared to modern electronics it's laughable. If you can't desolder a half watt resistor from a two sided plated though hole 1/16" thick PC board, you'd be in real trouble in the electronics industry with an 8 mil wide lead on a memory device on a 15 mil thick PCMCIA or cell phone board, or the same device on a 1/4" thick, 24 layer internet router board.

As John points out, a lot of thought has gone into making roadworthy electronics. We put our lives into the hands of folks who have figured this out everytime we get on an airliner or drive our cars down the hiway. Underhood electronics is an environment of heat/cold and vibration that would destroy an guitar amplifier in a heartbeat. But we expect the ECMs and other modules in there to work for years. Sorry, But I have no idea what that link has to do with the Conford pic. You're right, I'll drop $800 on a pcb repair kit, when the pcb itself cost a few dollars. I'm glad you're not my finacial advisor. ;)

[Matt Gordon]

Does Cornford use Rubycon filter caps?

[riverastoasters]

Originally posted by John Phillips
It does look nicely made, but why does it have to be so big? You could get that lot into about a quarter of the chassis space.

Heat? I don't entirely buy this because the MK50H I have has wire grill front and back for good ventilation. Other than that, I would think that keeping leads short would be the name of the game.

[aeolian]

Originally posted by Matt Gordon
Sorry, But I have no idea what that link has to do with the Conford pic. You're right, I'll drop $800 on a pcb repair kit, when the pcb itself cost a few dollars. I'm glad you're not my finacial advisor. ;)
If you were a professional tech, working on lots of gear, you would. You'd be money ahead in repairing PC boards that other "techs" messed up. You can actually get the replacement pads and a tip for a regular iron to re-laminate them back on for less that $100.

I was just pointing out the folly in the other statement that once you lifted a pad on a board, the board was toast. Especially a great big pad like on guitar amps. I've taught several folks how to replace tiny little 25 mil diameter BGA pads (And yes, I can do it myself. Sometimes have to, to convince someone they can do it, the challange thing you know. If the engineer can do it, the rework specialist sure can)

[loverocker]

The only minor gripe I have about Cornford construction is the use of radial filter caps without any extra support for the body of the cap. Axial caps are more reliably supported - one contact at each end means less stress on the solder joint with each and every drop of the amp.

Axial caps now cost quite a bit more than radials, so I can see why it's done. And maybe the issue is less of a worry thanks to today's smaller and lighter weight radial caps?

[tfire]

Originally posted by Mike Hansen
When was yours made? I bought it in November '99. I think it's serial number 11.