Hi.
My view about the subject is that there's two different approaches, which don't necessarily go hand in hand.
One is the athetics side, making the wiring with right angles, precise component placements, precise component orientations etc.
Then there is the hum/interference.
No-one exept the designer of that amp in the example knows how much time went in designing a layout that combines both of the above mentioned aspects. Often You'll see transformers seemingly scattered across the chassis, at odd angles, weird orientations. That's a result of minimizing hum and interference. If the space is at premium, it's hard to avoid interference without careful planning and testing.
Regards
Sam
I think the aesthetics are purely coincidental in the example I posted. Its not about making the amp pretty, its about functionality. The basis for that layout utilizes a military specification wiring standard. Well, pseudo mil-spec anyway; true mil-spec would have a redundancy of circuits and probably specify a 10 gauge chassis and heavier transformer mountings.
The idea is to enhance reliability, facilitate ease of repair and maintenance, AND not compromise the integrity of the circuit through transient interference, outside RF sources, etc.
In this respect, your two schools of thought
must go hand in hand. Surely you arent suggesting that all of those old Dave Reeves era Hiwatts and current Reeves amps sacrifice tonal integrity for the sake of aesthetics? Quite the contrary IMO, I believe the #1 design goal was likely the uncompromised application the circuit was designed for i.e; Musical instrument amplification for professional musician use.
I think secondary would be a bullet proof construction, able to handle the rigors of a touring band without moulting vital amplifier components along the way. Although this is a very labor intensive process requiring employees with above average soldering skills to accomplish properly, cost would not compromise this objective.
Thirdly, an amp built (and priced) for the professional touring musician would need to be able to be quickly diagnosed and repaired by any competent tech with a schematic. I personally believe the Reeves/Hiwatt wiring to be
infinitely more practical than rats nest wiring schemes from this aspect.
I cant imagine that appearance was even a design consideration other than physical size constraints.
All of the above is of course my opinion, derived from personal research and experience over the years. I sincerely would love to see examples of alternate amp construction methods with explanations why they may be superior to mil-spec turret board for a non-PCB, hand crafted, gigable bass guitar amp. Im all about expanding my viewpoints.
Also, sorry for straying from your original subject, black_labb. Kudos on your project, I would imagine that there are at best only a handful of posters on these forums that have your ability to actually design and build a functional amp, particularly around a static parameter like your trannies. Very impressive, a skill that is hopefully enjoying resurgence after near extermination at the hands of cheaply made, mass produced, cookie cutter transistor amps.
Do you anticipate posting samples in the near future?
.
