JHS - Treble Booster ( Hornby-Skewes )
- Professor SourTone
- Solder Soldier
- analogguru
- Old Solderhand
Information
That´s a "fake" - the real thing didn´t have 10µF coupling caps:
with 10µF it would be a booster, but not a treble booster.
analogguru
with 10µF it would be a booster, but not a treble booster.
analogguru
There´s a sucker born every minute - and too many of them end up in the bootweak pedal biz.
- Professor SourTone
- Solder Soldier
To be fair he does decribe it as having a more full range effect than just a treble boost. I've never seen one before.
- analogguru
- Old Solderhand
Information
Here are full size pictures of the first unit (owner is/was "Cozzigreen"):
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... s/JHS5.jpg
Here you can see the original capacitor in blue:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... TBGuts.jpg
then replaced:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... SGuts3.jpg
The funniest thing can be found in this article too:
http://www.geofex.com/Article_Folders/z ... onkbst.pdf
where the treble booster is based on this - totally wrong - schematic:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/pedals/schems/HS/HS.gif which was traced from this picture:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/pedals/schems/HS/HS2.jpg without ANY coupling caps because somebody took them out.
The result is/was wild speculations about the function of this circuit instead of a little bit critical thinking. Sorry, but no technician would bias a FET with 62k/10k.
Ammscray who traced the circuit even misread the 2N 4061 which can be seen here:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... sistor.jpg and here:
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... tranny.jpg as 2N 4861 and for this reason assumed that it would be a FET.
Anyway, here is a schematic which is closer, even when I doubt the 1n at the input - maybe it is 10nF
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 2N4061.gif
analogguru
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... s/JHS5.jpg
Here you can see the original capacitor in blue:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... TBGuts.jpg
then replaced:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... SGuts3.jpg
The funniest thing can be found in this article too:
http://www.geofex.com/Article_Folders/z ... onkbst.pdf
where the treble booster is based on this - totally wrong - schematic:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/pedals/schems/HS/HS.gif which was traced from this picture:
https://www.diystompboxes.com/pedals/schems/HS/HS2.jpg without ANY coupling caps because somebody took them out.
The result is/was wild speculations about the function of this circuit instead of a little bit critical thinking. Sorry, but no technician would bias a FET with 62k/10k.
Ammscray who traced the circuit even misread the 2N 4061 which can be seen here:
https://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... sistor.jpg and here:
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... tranny.jpg as 2N 4861 and for this reason assumed that it would be a FET.
Anyway, here is a schematic which is closer, even when I doubt the 1n at the input - maybe it is 10nF
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 2N4061.gif
analogguru
There´s a sucker born every minute - and too many of them end up in the bootweak pedal biz.
JHS built at least 2 different versions of this Booster, one for the use with the Zonk-Machine and the other as a standalone TB. The standalone version has an output cap, the other doesn't.
As far as I know the first bunch JHS TBs have PNP Ge-trannies and are similar to a RM.
JHS
As far as I know the first bunch JHS TBs have PNP Ge-trannies and are similar to a RM.
JHS
- analogguru
- Old Solderhand
Information
This are rumours and it is pure nonsense.JHS wrote:JHS built at least 2 different versions of this Booster, one for the use with the Zonk-Machine and the other as a standalone TB. The standalone version has an output cap, the other doesn't.
As you can see here:
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 571d_1.jpg
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 54f4_1.jpg
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 50ac_1.jpg
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... sb_2_a.jpg
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... sb_2_b.jpg
was the Treble Booster also part of the SHATTERBOX but not of the Zonk-Machine. Even in the Shatterbox were the coupling caps as you can see.
The only unit rumoured to have ge-pnp and supposed to be the blackmore-boost looked like this:As far as I know the first bunch JHS TBs have PNP Ge-trannies and are similar to a RM.
https://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c162 ... 1186_2.jpg
analogguru
There´s a sucker born every minute - and too many of them end up in the bootweak pedal biz.
- MoreCowbell
- Transistor Tuner
Information
10n would make more sense given the description of the "sound" of the HS. 1n would be incredibly bright, like the Electro Harmonix Screaming Birdanalogguru wrote:
Anyway, here is a schematic which is closer, even when I doubt the 1n at the input - maybe it is 10nF
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 2N4061.gif
analogguru
Theres almost as much disinformation about this circuit as the CJOD.
So is this a working schematic for the "original" Hornby Skewes TB?
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 2N4061.gif
Anybody know the "mods" to the Blackmore HS?
https://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q31 ... 2N4061.gif
Anybody know the "mods" to the Blackmore HS?
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
Solidhex wrote:Yo
Has anyone confirmed the input/output cap values for this? It drives me crazy how every picture you see is always at the wrong angle!
--Brad
22n in, 1000p out, if the HS Treble Booster is identical to the Highfield unit pictured in this thread: http://www.vintageamps.com/plexiboard/v ... =6&t=80259 (he got it wrong in the schematic..)
the shatterbox we traced over at the D*A*M forum has a 10n at the booster's input: http://stompboxes.co.uk/forum/viewtopic ... 1&start=40
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
when it uses the same enclosure and circuit board it's more than just a "clone".
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
there's another one with a .001 at the output on this thread: http://dawkmods.proboards34.com/index.c ... 696&page=1
the input cap is harder to read..
the input cap is harder to read..
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
what makes you think the highfield unit is a fake?biffa wrote:Same enclosure and circuit board means it's right?
So,if I took a ferrari shaped body,and a ferrari shape chassis,and built it up from what people who had never seen one told me,I'd have a ferrari?
The enclosure is just a bloody box,man
"and same circuit board",how do you know?
Some guy builds it,and says,"built from the original circuit",and you then say to me,"it must be right,it's the original circuit" (sic)
it's only a small part in the puzzle, but I think it fits right in.
and please stop quoting me wrong.
I KNOW that part numbers have been read wrong in the past. And I also KNOW that some part values varied. that's exactly why I gather information from photos and don't want to rely on schematics.biffa wrote: There are many views on the correct circuit,so logically,most must be wrong
Also looking at photos taken at stange angles,to ascertain component values,seems to me an exercise in futility
AG said the fet had been read wrong,it was really a 2N4061. How often do you think this happens?
In the British pedal industry of the 60's&70's, they used whatever components would work that were at hand,other countrys i don't know
- PurplePeopleEater
- Resistor Ronker
Here is a composite of boards from pictures linked in this thread to help suss things out. Clicking on the attachment will show it full size.biffa wrote:Same enclosure and circuit board means it's right?
So,if I took a ferrari shaped body,and a ferrari shape chassis,and built it up from what people who had never seen one told me,I'd have a ferrari?
The enclosure is just a bloody box,man
"and same circuit board",how do you know?
Some guy builds it,and says,"built from the original circuit",and you then say to me,"it must be right,it's the original circuit"
There are many views on the correct circuit,so logically,most must be wrong
Also looking at photos taken at stange angles,to ascertain component values,seems to me an exercise in futility
AG said the fet had been read wrong,it was really a 2N4061. How often do you think this happens?
In the British pedal industry of the 60's&70's, they used whatever components would work that were at hand,other countrys i don't know
Much better is to start with a pedal 'everyone' is ok with,like a rangemaster,and tweak it till your ears are happy with the result
Build others of course,but getting hung up over a cap,when you don't have a mint example to check from,is anorak behaviour
Like train-spotting
Compare to this picture of the Highfield : http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3076/311 ... 44.jpg?v=0
You can find an enlargement of that photo here: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2008-12/1329951/hf.JPG
Keep in mind that the Highfield is less likely a clone of the HS than it is a "rebranded" unit actually manufactured by HS, as was common practice during the era. See Vox, Colorsound, Arbiter, etc for other companies that built units and sold them for rebranding.
- Attachments
-
- HS pcb composite.JPG (132.07 KiB) Viewed 7654 times
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
another clue for a .022 input cap: https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/ ... #msg338505
I suspect somebody misidentified the in- and output caps again...
that would make the output cap a 1000pf - again. so it seems to have been very consistent. it's also in the highfield, the vero board shatterbox, a pcb shatterbox I've got a picture of and the hornby skewes treble booster with the small, grey caps.
I suspect somebody misidentified the in- and output caps again...
that would make the output cap a 1000pf - again. so it seems to have been very consistent. it's also in the highfield, the vero board shatterbox, a pcb shatterbox I've got a picture of and the hornby skewes treble booster with the small, grey caps.
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
the picture that analogguru posted is from the very same auction, btwElectric Warrior wrote:another clue for a .022 input cap: https://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/ ... #msg338505
- Electric Warrior
- Diode Debunker
- Solidhex
- Resistor Ronker
Yo
I just did some breadboarding with a TI 2n4061. Swapped .001uf and .022uf caps as the ins and outs. With the .001 as the input it just basically cuts the bass out. No real "boost" to speak of. Maybe some very slight distortion. The other way around with the .022 as the input you get more of a throaty cocked wah style treble boost as you would expect. The 100k pull down saps a fair amount of gain on the way out.
--Brad
I just did some breadboarding with a TI 2n4061. Swapped .001uf and .022uf caps as the ins and outs. With the .001 as the input it just basically cuts the bass out. No real "boost" to speak of. Maybe some very slight distortion. The other way around with the .022 as the input you get more of a throaty cocked wah style treble boost as you would expect. The 100k pull down saps a fair amount of gain on the way out.
--Brad
- PurplePeopleEater
- Resistor Ronker
I disagree. It certainly isn't an "exercise in futility" as you say. No manufacturer WANTS to use substitute parts, they always start with a "standard". The JHS Treble Booster certainly had a "standard version" that they started with, and occasionally had to make part subs depending on what was available. All people here are doing is trying to discern what the standard version is, from the available photos and information.biffa wrote: But really,british pedal builders would use whatever did the job,not what was 'correct'
Back then,components were not always available,which to me,makes researching an input caps value an exercise in futility
Best to worry about how to make it work the way you want
Start with what's accepted,then explore...
EH used lots of substitute parts throughout their early years, yet we still want to have a definitive triangle BM schematic. Different part values were used here and there, and even different transistors. However, EH certainly had a "standard" for the values, and that is what we are going for here. If people didn't look for information on the "standard version", then we wouldn't have accurate schematics for any of the early BMs, a lot of Colorsound products, etc. - we would simply have schematics that said "this is close enough".