Point-to-Point wiring vs. PC Board . . .

Point to point wiring typically results in measurable variations from unit to unit due to variances in impedances. Obviously, not all the wires will be routed exactly the same, nor will they retain the exact placement and shapes that they are configured into when first built. Circuit boards have their advantages when properly built and designed, especially if one is looking for consistent repeatability on a mass production basis.

As far as a limited production guitar head "beating up on" a mass produced head, what did you expect? This is like comparing a Sony / Pioneer / Kenwood, etc... component to a "boutique" component. Once a manufacturer establishes themselves, like Marshall has, they become more concerned with maintaining that reputation while keeping production costs down / profit margins up. They have no need to refine their products / cater to a smaller market since they've already got a major portion of a far larger market due to commercial success.

Having said that, it is not uncommon for folks to take their mass produced units and have them "hot rodded" to better suit their playing styles and the sound that they desire. Personally, i don't think that Marshall has made anything that can stand up to a Peavey 5150 or Ultra 120, let alone an even smaller, more detail oriented manufacturer. Sean
>

It also depends on the model of the Marshall amp. There are a few models that have the Marshall sound that everyone knows and other models are more afordable.

Happy Jammin'

Blue Circle uses point to point wiring in everything it makes.

Hey, Sean, thanks. I totally agree with you re Marshall, and, believe me, the same can be said for Fender--probably even more so.

So what has been your experience with stereo gear? Any preferences? I have Rogue and VTL gear (pc board stuff), and I'm wondering if I can achieve the markedly better results in audio gear that I have with my guitar amp.

Thanks

C4B's: I can't say that i've seen every piece of gear on the market, but i can say that out of those that i've seen, every single one of them can be improved upon with relative ease. Cost cutting in parts, poor design lay-out, redundant circuitry, etc... are all to be expected when i "lift the hood". Some products are simply designed and implimented in a more uniform manner than others, but even the better ones show their short-comings.

As far as what you like and what you expect out of a piece of gear and / or system, i have no idea. Personally, i prefer shorter signal paths and point to point wiring will give you that BUT you can also run into other problems using that approach. As such, it is not so much the design or how that design is implimented, but the end result that counts. Both design and implimentation are VERY important, but i've seen lesser designs that worked quite well because they were implimented in a manner that was less detrimental than other gear that was better designed, but laid out like garbage. Sean
>