From PYLO–(at)–ZTEC.ASU.EDU Mon Jan 13 22:02:35 CST 1997
Article: 34284 of alt.guitar.amps
Path: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!nntp.dist.maricopa.edu!usenet
From: Dale VanZile
Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
Subject: SF Fender wiring changes–blame UL, not Fender
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:33:28 -0700
Organization: Maricopa Community Colleges
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <32DAC63E.2AD--(at)--ZTEC.ASU.EDU>
Reply-To: PYLO–(at)–ZTEC.ASU.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: mac43.stu-serv-2.sc.maricopa.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
I’ve been watching this newsgroup via Harmony-Central’s archive
page, but now I’ve finally gotten my news server to let me
in. Anyway, the topic of SF-BF conversion has led to a comment
by <
failed to follow their earlier wiring routing layouts, and
that that’s the reason for the parasitic osc. caps being
added to the circuits. I believe that the true reason they
moved that wiring was due to UL’s pressure to move away from
the cloth-covered wire and to a flame-resistant plastic
insulation. This plastic-covered wire sadly does not hold up
well when routed under the circuit board the way Fender ran the
cloth-covered wire. The wire’s insulation melts /very/ easily
when soldering the wire to an eyelet or pot lug, and wires run
under the board tend to short out all over when this happens.
A friend of mine tried running the plastic-insulated wire under
the board on a SF once, and ended up having to rewire the thing
all over again…….. So, since they couldn’t use their old
wiring scheme, they changed it, and found that the amps then
frequently had problems with parasitic oscillations. Progress.
Yay. 😉 It just happens that the switch to SF happened at
about the same time as the switch in circuitry (“to get rid of
all that nasty distortion”) and the UL pressure. I’ve seen some
early SF amps with the original BF circuitry and cloth wire.
They sound just like the BF units, and can usually be had a lot
cheaper than a similar BF unit.
Dutch
pylo–(at)–ztec.asu.edu
From Teleologis–(at)–orry.NoEmail Tue Jan 14 10:43:34 CST 1997
Article: 34368 of alt.guitar.amps
Path: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!not-for-mail
From: “Teleologist”
Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
Subject: Re: SF Fender wiring changes–blame UL, not Fender
Date: 14 Jan 1997 13:06:12 GMT
Organization: CT&T
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <01bc021c$2bcfcdb0$610258a--(at)--lsnt>
References: <32DAC63E.2AD--(at)--ZTEC.ASU.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ctt-ext.ctt.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Dale VanZile
<32DAC63E.2AD--(at)--ZTEC.ASU.EDU>…
> I’ve been watching this newsgroup via Harmony-Central’s archive
> page, but now I’ve finally gotten my news server to let me
> in. Anyway, the topic of SF-BF conversion has led to a comment
> by <
> failed to follow their earlier wiring routing layouts, and
> that that’s the reason for the parasitic osc. caps being
> added to the circuits. I believe that the true reason they
> moved that wiring was due to UL’s pressure to move away from
> the cloth-covered wire and to a flame-resistant plastic
> insulation.
>
Interesting post, however CBS/Fender’s ‘cost-saving’ measures are well
documented – they could have used a higher quality plastic wire to avoid
melting problems. 🙂
