Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 26, 2024, 04:10:23 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Ceriatone Forums are up and running!!!
 
Guests please register
Note: If you want to help you can donate to keep the forums alive.



Do you want to advertise on this forum ? Send me a private message.



Amplified Parts
+  Ceriatone Forum
|-+  Ceriatone
| |-+  Overtone
| | |-+  Rack Mount Kleinulator Build
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Rack Mount Kleinulator Build  (Read 28610 times)
JohnE
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 145



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2009, 10:14:13 PM »

Hmmm, very interesting. It seems as though we have come to similar conclusions on the sonic maximizer. Depending in on the room, and guitar (SC vs HB) I set low contour between 12 and 3. Process on anything above 10 adds too much hi freq under any circumstance with the OTS in OD mode. (I just checked my BBE settings from my Friday gig which was in a smallish, carpeted, wood paneled room, it was set as: LoC 12.5, process 10 [as you said], I was playing my strat or tele for all sets).

I usually keep the G Sharp at 12 and adjust it up if I start getting covered by the instruments, which seems to happen as the night goes on. I notice a loss of tone below 12.

Is the K'lator last in the chain?

I've been on the fence about this kleinulator. I don't want a box sitting top of my amp. Your rack version seems to be the ticket, if I was going to have one. Can you describe what it does, say in comparison to the BBE which I am familiar with.

Bottom line: do you think it is a worthwhile addition to one's rig? and why? Thanks 
Logged
hywelg
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 896


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2009, 11:18:44 PM »

I usually keep the G Sharp at 12 and adjust it up if I start getting covered by the instruments, which seems to happen as the night goes on. I notice a loss of tone below 12.


Now I've not really had chance to try this out at rehearsal/gig yet. I not losing any tone at all set as it is and I will try lowering it, but the red input lights only come on very rarely set at 3:00 . If you're not using a Klein or similar you will lose tone due to the volume loss caused by the G#. I tried it previously before I built the Klein and it sucked tone badly. When I coupled it with a BBE Max X2 (a crossover from my PA, outputs recombined) using the gain of the MaxX2 helped a lot, but it still lost something.


Is the K'lator last in the chain?

I've been on the fence about this kleinulator. I don't want a box sitting top of my amp. Your rack version seems to be the ticket, if I was going to have one. Can you describe what it does, say in comparison to the BBE which I am familiar with.

Bottom line: do you think it is a worthwhile addition to one's rig? and why? Thanks 

The Klein is the first in the 'chain', though its not really a chain as the Klein provides a sub-loop to the amps loop. I suppose you could put it in the line with other effects but thats not the way it was intended. Imagine the Klein as a replacement for  a 12at7 plus send and return controls on a more modern amp.

The effect of the Klein is very subtle, transparent, and it might be less so if I crank it, I'm not sure yet, but it certainly does the tone no harm and I have tried it with nothing at all in the Kleins FX loop. The BBe is much less subtle, you can hear it immediately you push the bypass button, and with the settings I have I get a clearer enhanced bass and a little more in the top end, but like you if I take it over 10:00 the highs get to be too much.

In as much as it makes the G# work as it should, yes the Klein does its job well. At the moment I'm not sure whether the BBE will stay, we'll see after I've gigged it. The G# I am struggling with, the lack of feedback from the display to tell you what each patch has applied is the biggest negative for me, I'm going to need a laminated card with my presets printed on!!!. Just not good enough in this day and age I'm afraid. I can see me having to u/g to another unit or only use 2 or 3 presets. The FX are good though its just deficient in the usability stakes,

The main reason I wanted the rack unit was simplicity of operation,  tidyness and I wanted to be able to hardbypass to get back to raw amp tone if needed. I also didn't want a box on top of the amp, along with the G# balanced precariously somewhere, plus a 9v supply, and 4 cables, etc etc. Having since tried the TC Nova reverb as demoed by John Edmonds I think if I had tried this first I might not have bothered with the rack unit, but now I've got it I'm going to use it, plus I can have a whole range of good delays and reverbs and a decent chorus.

As soon as I get the layout drawing modded I'll post it here so if you want to build one its pretty straight forward. Indeed the most difficult bit was cutting out for the IEC sockets, I really need a nibbler of some sort. Also when i finish building the 2x12 to match the OTS I'll get a pic of the whole rig aswell.
Logged
JohnE
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 145



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 09, 2009, 12:17:15 AM »

Thanks for that thorough answer.

So, if I understand correctly you put your effects looped through K'lator and the K'lator looped the the amp's effects loop?

I think that the BBE could go if the K'lator is in use. I don't hear a lot of difference with it at gig volumes with the band. The reasons that I use the rack mount G-Sharp are the same as yours, apparently. I don't use presets so that doesn't bother me. The G FX are not anything special IMO, but they do the job. I recently acquired an AKAI E2 Headrush Delay/Looper which has been a hoot to play around with and I am hoping to find a way to incorporate it into my live rig.

I can see what you mean about the needing nippers by the deformation (visible in your pics) of your metal where you cut the slot. I am wondering if you gave a sketch and the material to a sheet metal shop if the could punch it out cleanly relatively cheap.
Logged
hywelg
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 896


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 09, 2009, 09:48:55 AM »

So, if I understand correctly you put your effects looped through K'lator and the K'lator looped the the amp's effects loop?

Yes.

I think that the BBE could go if the K'lator is in use. I don't hear a lot of difference with it at gig volumes with the band.

I think the BBE will do something very different to the K. It does seem (the BBE) to do more than just add lows and highs.

The reasons that I use the rack mount G-Sharp are the same as yours, apparently. I don't use presets so that doesn't bother me.

I think I'll adopt the same policy, forget the presets.


I can see what you mean about the needing nippers by the deformation (visible in your pics) of your metal where you cut the slot. I am wondering if you gave a sketch and the material to a sheet metal shop if the could punch it out cleanly relatively cheap.

That was where the original DPDT switch was to go, it was too tall to get it into the rack so I had to make a cut out and my jigsaw just pulled it all over the place. The new bypass switch is much smaller and I wouldn't need to make this cut out. I guess a machine shop would be able to make the IEC cutouts quickly and neatly, but I was in a hurry to get it made!! I did mean a nibbler not a nipper btw, a nibbler is a (usually compressed air powered) tool that does pretty much what it says, it nibbles away at thin metal, allows you to make complicated cut out shapes.
Logged
erwin_ve
Guest
« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2009, 11:14:43 AM »

Hi Hywel,

Congrats on your build, it looks nice! You did have a lot of patience when designing and actually doing it. I like the way you did your relais thing , good thinking!

The IEC inlet isn't too difficult: drilling 4 holes in the corners, I left some space for fine filing(A smaller square for jigsaw).  Then use a jigsaw. The last part is filing till the IEC inlet matches.
Logged
hywelg
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 896


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2009, 08:34:08 PM »

Thanks Erwin.

Yes thats how I did my IEC holes but because the rack chassis was Aluminium my jigsaw bent it around a bit. I was using the finest blade I had with no pendulum action to the cutting.
Logged
hywelg
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 896


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2009, 08:48:07 PM »

New layout attached. Hope its self explanatory. Most awkward bit is maintaining the continuity of the shielding earth back to the star ground terminal.

If I was doing one again I think I'd put the bypass on the front panel and maybe the footswitch socket aswell. No need to lean over the back then when using it without the footswitch and it would allow you to put the rack unit under the OTS. Initially I didn't want to do this because it would mean that the bypass condition would have had another foot or more of cable in the loop. In retrospect this was probably being over cautious and it would most likely be fine.


* RackMountKleinulatorLayout02.pdf (2358.97 KB - downloaded 545 times.)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.12 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!

CeriaTone Forum is not afiliated with Ceriatone Amplifications. The CeriaTone and name, logo and related trademarks and service marks, owned by CeriaTone. , are registered and/or used in the U.S. and many foreign countries. All other trademarks, service marks, and trade names referenced in this site are the property of their respective owners.