software

Do you agree or disagree and why?

quot;PCB boards are better than point to point.quot; quot;Point to point handwired is good for marketing.quot;

Both are good, as long as they are designed andbuilt well.

It all comes down to standards. As long as the joints are sound, I don't think it matters too much. I personally like the look of hand wired.

To a point, yes, I do agree. Electrically, the PCB is doing the same duty that the wires in P2P do. PCB manufacturing is cheaper than 1 or 2 people doing the P2P wiring (especially at the salary rates these days). Imagine if a Dual Rectifier was P2P, you just doubled the cost.

HOWEVER, (and this is where I disagree), I think it's better to wire the tube sockets separate from the PCB, meaning no PCB mounted tube sockets. It takes a really thick and high quality PCB material to withstand the heat from the tubes. Mesa got it right with theirs. Their PCB's are top notch but I've also heard from many techs that they are a nightmare to work on.

PCB allows many more options to be available, such as more than 1, even 2 channels, multiple EQ sections, things like that. With P2P, the chasis would be practically double what they are now, and nobody would be able to afford the amp. Plus, I don't know of anyone who would want to make a P2P triple channel amp with separate EQ's for each.

For single channel amps whose sole purpose is to rock out, and do it well, sure P2P is perfect for that. Small parts count, can be done in a reasonable amount of time. But for the dual channel, triple channel monsters we see now, gotta use PCB's to keep the costs down.

for cost, yeh

for working on, no - they're a pain in the ass, on the other hand PTP is a joy to work on

This is one of those questions where someone reading builds on the answer, but it isn't a black/white answer.

For the most part...

PTP is more reliable.
PTP is more expensive to manufacture.

Now..

Barring manufacturing error....

PCB's can hold up well if the board is thick and the traces are thick.

Is PCB or PTB better?

When answering the question you really have to see the whole package, how it was manufactured. PTP and PCB construction can be put together badly, and they can be done well.

PCB is the future and the present.

I prefer well-designed and well-constructed PTP over PCB, but then I prefer vintage-style amps. With a few notable exceptions (e.g., Bogner), most of the PCB amps I've tried had higher levels of background noise than comparable PTP amps -- may not matter for gigging, but could be an issue for recording. However, a poorly constructed PTP amp can be noisy as well. If I wanted a channel switching amp with effects loop and all the bells and whistles, then I'd appreciate the weight and space reduction afforded by PCB construction.

Like most said, PCB is only good if the board is thick, the tracers are wide, and the components are the same quality as you'd see in a P to P amp. Most aren't though.

There's nothing like the sound of a well designed P to P amp like a Matchless, Plexi, Tweed, or Blackface. On the other hand, if a full featured amp like a Mesa or Bogner were built P to P, the inside would look like a bowl of spaghetti. I got to see the inside of a Matchless Independence multi channel point to point amp. It looked like a tangled maze of wires, but sounds out of this world. It's also $3500.

Like Kelsey said, point to point amps tend to be quieter when idling. When I turn off the standby on my Matchless Chieftain, you can't even hear the amp turn on. It's dead silent, because not only is it P to P, they also cover every bare wire in the amp with teflon tubing. The Bogner is really an amazing circuit board amp, because he designed it so well. Bogner uses nothing but the highest grade components and boards, and even with the gain high, it's a lot quieter than any other highgain amp I've heard. It's details like that that warrant the high prices.

If you are wandering where this quote came from I read it in a article written by Mike Soldano. He mentioned the above quote like it was a completely concrete law.

Randall Smith has a great article on this exact subject on the Mesa website:
from : localhost/www.mesaboogie.com/US/Smith/point-to-point.html

I love how you guys will just about snap your cervix' in half for high-end cables to have at you but go wishy-washy on PTP versus PCB.

Hey...it's just signal!

I don't hear a sonic difference myself. I perfer P2P because it's easy to
work on. My only problem with PCB's is when they mount jacks , pots and
tubes on the board. IMO this cause's stress on the mounted componets
that seem to lead to failure. (i.e.) Fender's PCB mounted Input jacks.
The 1st time the jacks in my HRD start acting up... I'll be hardwiring in
switchcrafts.

PTP I can imagine would be easier to work on, though i've never actually worked on one.

All the PCB board amps i've worked on have been pretty difficult to work with...had to do a resistor change in the bias circut of my buddy's JCM800, could barely get under the board cause all the wires connected to the PCB were holding it in there real tight.

Honestly, if an amp is designed and built well, I can't imagine that one would be better than the other. It seems P2P is reserved for the real expensive high-quality amps, whereas PCB is pretty commonly used in everthing from botique to budget amps, so its relatively easy to see how PCB can be thought of as being quot;not as goodquot;.

Though, I'm by no means an authority on the subject, this is all just based on conjecture . If any of you feel the need to put me in my place, feel free to do so .


Originally Posted by ErikH
HOWEVER, (and this is where I disagree), I think it's better to wire the tube sockets separate from the PCB, meaning no PCB mounted tube sockets. .Originally Posted by kmcguitarsMy only problem with PCB's is when they mount jacks , pots and
tubes on the board. IMO this cause's stress on the mounted componets
that seem to lead to failure. (i.e.) Fender's PCB mounted Input jacks.
The 1st time the jacks in my HRD start acting up... I'll be hardwiring in
switchcrafts.

It only makes sense...

This may not be correct, but I believe that if a company spends the money to make a point to point amp, then they will be less likely to cut corners on other parts of the amp. This counts for new amps only, of course.

There are many examples of both types and quite a few that disprove any conclusive theory regarding any type of manufacture being superior.

We will examine a few:

Blackface Fender - Using quot;turretquot; board construction (PTP), these amps are considered as the pinnacle of Fender design's. They have a very low failure rate, rather they are reaching the age of simply needing a quot;restorationquot; having served many useful years. 40 yrs is a pretty impressive quot;first lifequot;, and it really doesn't require much to get another 50 yrs out of these.

Silverface Fender's (later ones)- Using almost exactly the same circuit's as the BF Fender, and the same quality or better components (still PTP). Many of these rapidly failed or malfunctioned at an alarming rate and are prone to quot;ghosts, oscillations, etc.quot; even when every single component checks out perfect!
Why?.... it is well known the quot;wire dressquot; in these are so inferior to the BF's, Fender adopted the policy of wrapping single wires around bundles and grounding one end of it to prevent problems. What is quot;wire dressquot;?? Very simply how the wires are run inside the amp from one point to another. Since many of these wire's are carrying the greatly amplified signal in excess of 380v, even in the preamp!, how close they are to other wires, the chassis and even transformers can cause problems and a compromise of tone. This coupled with the bias circuit change in these left many new buyers disappointed. The simpler circuits like the Champ were less prone to problems than the complex Twin circuits, but then again who gigs with a Champ.?
I had a SF Twin in the shop two weeks ago with a quot;chirpingquot; tremolo, all components checked out fine, but the problem persisted until I moved one wire 1/8quot; away from another wire running right underneath it!...(no joke!)

So even the exact same method of construction can work flawlessly or can be prone to problems... Another PTP amp we'll look at is a Hiwatt!...

If you have ever wanted to see the quot;ultimatequot; in construction, look no further than these bad boy's, the inside is spotless!.....However, in order to maintain this perfect quot;appearancequot;, some wire's were unnecesarily run much longer than needed, creating a quot;veryquot; slight additional noise..... of course Hiwatt's were never really played soft enough for anyone to even notice!!...

These, and older Traynors, remain as the finest examples of quot;cleanquot; PTP layout...very few will disagree..

PCB based amps that excel are much simpler to find, but even they are prone to being categorized into quot;PCB onlyquot;, which is not true...

First, PCB is very simply quot;Printed Circuit Boardquot;, whereas PTP is quot;Point to Pointquot;.... just in case you didn't know! Unlike PTP, which is pretty straight forward in construction, (components and wires to connect them)
PCB, which has quot;tracesquot; or quot;pathsquot; embedded into a fiber board, either on one side or both. These quot;tracesquot; cannot move and are consistent from one to another, thus ensuring any quot;problemsquot; will be exclusive to all, while quot;provenquot; successes are equally guaranteed from amp to amp. This ensures consistency, but that's not always ideal! PCB's come in differing forms...

1. PCB with quot;flyingquot; leads to connect the board to external components..
2. PCB with quot;flyingquot; leads to connect some components, while having some directly mounted to the PCB itself.
3. PCB with all components directly connected to the PCB, only using wires to connect external components or even other PCB's together, and even variations to some extent of all of these.

4. quot;Double sidedquot; PCB is one that has quot;tracesquot; or quot;pathsquot; printed on both sides of the PCB.

(more coming..) hold on...

The order listed above poses a quot;double edged swordquot;, although #1 is the least expensive to design and easiest to make, it still requires substaintally more labor to assemble a final product. It's success rate is the highest among the PCB amps when it comes to quot;potentialquot; problems...

Best Example: Marshall Super Lead (not the RI's)

#2 above represents probably the most common PCB designs in the last 30 yr's with the possibility of more quot;potentialquot; problems than #1, but at less cost to produce...

Best Examples: Marhsall JCM800's..which have controls solder mounted to the PCB with the tube sockets using wires to connect them. Mesa/Boogies which have tube sockets solder mounted and using wires to connect the controls. Variations are easily found even within these camps!

#3 above reperesents most current production amps, and while the least expensive to produce, they are the most likely to have problems....

Best Example: Marshall TSL/DSL line, since all external controls, jacks and tube sockets are solder connected directly to individual PCB's. Plus the fact that cheaper and smaller components are being used during manufacture.

#4 is actually a quot;variablequot; and examples can be easily found covering the whole range of the previous three spectrums. These cost the most to design and prototype, but when done right are found in even the most expensive amps...

How an amp is quot;madequot; is not an indication of how well it performs, Diezel Herberts are one huge PCB, but Peter Diezel simply designed them to quot;stay builtquot; and they are killer amps... Matchless is a great example of PTP construction, but they won't overdrive like a Diezel!

My personal favorite and most trusted amp is my 1989 Marshall 2210, which is PCB.....However, my own hand made amps are PTP and can easily accomodate quot;changesquot; based upon the customer's request. Since no two people usually share an opinion on the quot;best ampquot;, I've found it best to be flexible.... which PCB isn't....

So draw your own conclusions......

....as always more info than was probably required....

Jeff Seal

Great info, Jeff. Thanks for sharing.

BTW, how'd your shop fare in the hurricane? Everything's ok I'm hoping.

i suppose the marketing quip is much like the whole quot;class Aquot; thing, sounding like quot;first classquot;, sounding like quot;the bestquot; sounding like quot;you're worth itquot; sounding like advertising companies....

Another consideration is production volume. For designs where mass production isn't in the cards, it's not worth the effort to design a PCB, especially since PCB layout is a somewhat different skill set than lead dress.

Unfortunately, automated PCB layout doesn't do such a great job on tube amps because the programs are designed to optimize layout and can create some funky capacitance and/or inductance issues in high voltage audio circuits.