flyfisher

What about the volts drop across the bolt?

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1392396383' post='2368233'] The problem is many people find it hard to believe until they've seen it happen. You don't have to be clairvoyant to realise that the elements on a fire can fail to a lower resistance that is high enough to draw a massive current. You just need to understand how the element is constructed and ohms law. [/quote] Interesting suggestion. What sort of massive current do you estimate would be required to cause an M8 steel bolt to become red hot?

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1392395226' post='2368214'] They way you write, implies knowledge of the subject, spouting pseudo tech talk. I don't appreciate having it implied I'm lying (twice) . Maybe you're not clairvoyant - but nor were you there - I was. [/quote] OK, you were there and I still find it hard to believe. Wanting to understand stuff is how curiosity works. [quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1392395226' post='2368214'] Sh*t happens sometimes that can't be explained, get over it. [/quote] Just because you can't explain it doesn't mean it can't be explained.

Thanks for that. It would be good if the OP (phatbass) could provide some more definitive information about the exact weight differences of the two 210 cabs that started this whole topic off.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1392385298' post='2368005'] Far more likely you're not the expert you think you are. [/quote] When did I claim to be an expert - I said I find it hard to believe, but at least I explained my reasoning. I can only go on the information you provided and "electric fire" is singular last time I checked and would not draw more than 13A would it? If the actual circumstances were different to what you described then all sorts of things are possible, but I'm not clairvoyant either.

Absolutely right. No legal problem with changing their stuff at all and pretty much all manufacturers will reserve the right to change specifications. But those specifications have to be fairly stated. Plus, the thought that no one is going to notice an increase in weight is fairly ludicrous . . . . . assuming it has increased of course, because even after five pages of discussion we don't seem to have any definitive figures either way.

True, but we're only talking about a length of about 20mm and probably a cross-sectional area of about 10x that of the copper supplying the current and maybe about the same as the actual pins on the plug. Maybe if it was a rusty bolt with a poor electrical connection, but even then . . . .? Anyway, an electric fire will only pull a max of about 13A . . . Maybe the guy had half a dozen of them plugged in?

I don't know about specific models but the basic choices are switched-mode types, which can be prone to high-frequency noise, or transformer types, which are generally bigger and heavier that an equivalent switched mode type and can be prone to lower frequency (mains frequency) noise depending on the design. The cheaper ones (both types) tend to skimp on smoothing capacitors, which can result in noise problems. FWIW, I'd be looking for a mid-priced transformer type PSU. Best to buy online really, so that there's no problem with sending them back if you don't like them - unless you can take your pedals into a shop and try everything out.

Yes, fuses are to prevent overloading of circuit components (mostly cables) and therefore overheating and therefore fires. No, they won't reduce the effect of a shock by any significant amount considering that 50mA can be fatal in some circumstances. Besides, the resistance of the human body is somewhere around 1400 ohms so even getting between the live and neutral conductors, you are only going to get about 160mA flowing through you, which isn't even going to trouble a 3A fuse never mind a 13A one. RCDs are the thing to help prevent electrical shock, not fuses. And even RCDs can't offer total protection.

Anyone who thinks a 13A fuse instead of a bolt is going to save them from a nasty shock is, er, in for a nasty shock. I also find it hard to believe that a metal bolt could be glowing red hot while the consumer unit fuse had not blown or even the house wiring cabling to the socket had not burned through first. But these sort of anecdotal stories abound.

Do we know that that PAT testing hadn't been carried out? [i]An investigation found a faulty four-way adapter on the ship was responsible for the shock.[/i] [left] [i]Mr Zyntek has called for improved health and safety checks to ensure something like this does not occur again.[/i][/left] [left] Fair enough. Such adapters take a lot of abuse so perhaps they should be PAT tested every month? Or every week? Or before every performance? [i]She said Mr Zyntek was informed it was safe to use the equipment, even though a separate incident had happened the previous night when his manager was taken to hospital as a precaution after suffering a shock on the same stage[/i].[/left] [left] I'd be interested to know what testing was done after that incident and why everything was deemed to be safe for the following night. [i]A spokesman said: "This accident happened in 2012 and resulted in an immediate investigation. Action was taken to prevent it happening again by the installation of an extra circuit breaker."[/i][/left] [left] An 'extra' circuit breaker? If there was already one in place and it didn't work, why would an extra one make any difference. Anyway, wasn't the problem a faulty 4-way adapter?[/left] [left][color=#000000]The report begs more questions than it answers, but it seems like a good example of how you can't rely on PAT testing to ensure everything is safe.[/color][/left]

[quote name='xgsjx' timestamp='1392220259' post='2366106'] As he's your friend, I think the best course of action would be to have a member of the audience shoot him in the nads with a taser every time he fluffs up. [/quote] Now you mention fluffing . . . . [quote name='Skybone' timestamp='1392214430' post='2366020'] Maybe have a quiet chat with him and ask if he does get nervous playing gigs. If he does, maybe try and do something pre-gig that'll help relax him a bit. Just a thought. [/quote]

[quote name='yorks5stringer' timestamp='1392230989' post='2366276'] Think the cost would rule it out. They use plastic for PC speakers and PA's however. Second thoughts, cf may be too light! [/quote] Maybe it would, but I was thinking more about ultimate performance really. Imagine a paper thin lightweight material with infinite stiffness. A cab built of such material could have identical internal dimensions as any design you choose and infinite stiffness so no colouration of the sound due to vibration/resonance of the material itself, only due to reflection/resonance [u]within[/u] the cab itself, which is part of the cab design anyway. Would such a material produce a better cab than is possible today?

[quote name='EddyGlee' timestamp='1392211882' post='2365975'] MDF is not less durable that Ply. Are you thinking of particle board? When it comes to speaker building.. The only advantages Ply has over Fibreboard is less weight. In every other aspect Ply is inferior. Ply is lighter (less dense) so more resonant than MDF so sonically inferior. Ply requires much more bracing to achieve same rigidity. Ply is also less durable than MDF. You can make finger nail marks in the surface of ply. It’s very difficult to do that with MDF. Ply is also less consistant than MDF due to the nature of woods. It’s way easier to cut thru Ply with a jigsaw. MDF is difficult to cut as the jigsaw blade gets vey hot and burns because it so dense. MDF is 30/40% heavier because of its density, which makes it fantastic for speaker cabs. But as I said before it’s only down side is weight. [/quote] What's the critical characteristic for of a material used to build a cab? Is density/weight intrinsically important or is that just a typical by-product of using wood and the need for good bracing for rigidity. I'm wondering if rigidity is the really important characteristic, in which case I wonder if anyone has considered using carbon fibre or other more exotic lightweight materials?

Might be worth thinking about the actual risk. I only take my stuff out of the house for gigs and it is never really out of my sight so I don't worry about tit being stolen, which is presumably the main risk. I also never leave it in the car and my wife is always with the car while I'm loading and unloading. So, short of some sort of violent robbery, which doesn't really seem very likely, I can't really see my gear being at any particular risk. On that basis, I don't bother with any insurance other than my home policy and must have saved quite a bit over the years. I'm certainly not suggesting no one should buy insurance, because others may have very different circumstances, but just that it shouldn't be an automatic decision.

Things have indeed changed since the 70s - almost unimaginatively. In fact, I'm not really sure why people are surprised why the cost of music has plummeted. Back then, there was pretty much no way that an unsigned band could get their music out there except by gigging and even playing pubs every day would only reach an audience measure in a few thousand over a year. The internet and associated technology changed all that and now there are thousands of bands who can make great recordings at home and put them on YouTube for the entire world to hear. Except of course the entire world doesn't hear because there are too many great bands online to work through. Music is probably being made faster than anyone can listen to it and that's without the advent of streaming services. In the 70s I had a paper round and earned just over £1 per week (cut the violins!) and I would buy one single every saturday for 7/6d (that's 37.5p to you youngsters!) or just over 1/3rd of my 'pocket money' spent on music. How many teenagers today spend 1/3rd of whatever money they get hold of on music? And I had a whole 'Top 40' of records to choose from but could only afford one of them and some of them I wouldn't even have heard if I hadn't caught them on the radio, so in the record shop I'd listen to two or three of them in the listening booth before finally deciding which one to buy. I even sounds strange to even write about it now, but that's how serious music was taken back then. Today, we've all got more music at our fingertips than we can listen to in a lifetime and enough of it is freely available that we'll hardly have to buy the stuff ever again. That's the world we live in today - right or wrong, for better or worse, but that's the reality.

Check their profile to see if they've logged in since you sent the PM.

That raises a thought . . . . if you're a gigging musician but never make any money, so effective are running at a loss if you consider gear costs etc, can you claim that loss against the tax you pay on your other job? After all, if you were, say, a builder and did one job at a profit and another one at a loss, you'd only pay tax on the net profit of both jobs wouldn't you? I bet HMRC have already thought of that one though.

Fair point that it probably wouldn't be as cheap as a Far East operation but surely somewhat cheaper? Plus their marketing could make the point that nothing was built by 12 year olds.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1392134280' post='2365147'] I getting sick of this happening. By and large, I would much rather pay more for the authentic domestically-produced product than buy an inferior product made in a new manufacturing location to keep costs down . Ampeg is/was another example of this, as was SWR. Of course, every manufacturer that does this protests that they have done so in a unique way , and so careful and meticulous is their training and quality control in the Far East that the product is easily the equal of what they made before, if not better. They will have to forgive my cynicism if I don't readily accept such claims. People buying relatively expensive goods from prestige brands want the peace of mind of knowing that what they are buying has real substance behind the name, and offshore manufacturing can only undermine that prestige. It's cynical short-termism on the part of the companies involved, and will harm them in the longer term. [/quote] I suppose the reason is market forces blah, blah, blah, but I know what you mean. I wonder what their failure rate is for the stuff re-tested in Italy? There need not be any problems with Asian manufacturers so double testing would seem to just be an additional cost. Oh well, I'm sure their bean-counters have it all figured out. I wonder if EU countries like Romania and Bulgaria are not missing a trick here. Couldn't they set up a suitable factory for this sort of thing and compete with the Asian countries for low labour cost stuff? Maybe not as low, who knows, but it would save on import duties by keeping everything within the EU. But despite all the discussion and MB feedback there's still no clarification about the weight issue. Is it really so difficult for them to find a set of scales and just weigh the damn things?

Ah, gotcha. That basic for some, that is.

[quote name='paul_5' timestamp='1392139685' post='2365243'] Don't practice till you get it right, practice till you don't get it wrong - there is a BIG difference. [/quote] That's what I keep telling one of the bands I play in, but I'm the only one saying it. They want to rush into a studio to record stuff but we rarely manage a song without some small glitch. Not such a big deal in a gig because the moment passes very quickly or doesn't get noticed, but if we're aiming for a perfect recording for posterity then it could cost us a small fortunes in a studio at the moment. I think I'm fighting a losing battle and it probably won't end well . . . .

[quote name='lojo' timestamp='1392121698' post='2364892'] anyone who is on bass chat at 12:27 during a weekday has got the balance wrong [/quote] AM or PM?

Trouble is, how many musicians go to music college?

Mercenary