Cornford RK100 porn.

All general Cornford Amplification discussion goes in here, plus photos, videos, sound clips and artist news...

Moderator: Gadget

SabbadiusUSA
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:11 pm

Cornford RK100 porn.

Post by SabbadiusUSA » Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:20 am

Here are some updated pics of my RK100 refit.

Here are a few stock RK100 pics. :wtf:
Image
[URL=http://s1250.photobucket.com/user/solda ... c.png.html]Image
Image[/url]
Image
Image
Image

Here is the RK100 as it is now. All components are 100% stock in both values and composition, as designed by Martin Kidd. :thumbup:
Image
Image
Image
Last edited by SabbadiusUSA on Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:52 pm, edited 18 times in total.

RichM
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:29 am

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by RichM » Sun Jun 02, 2013 6:53 am

Looks like a quality job there .... May I ask, when you say the components are all MK spec, do you mean these are the parts he used initially with the RK? Or just that you are using all the right values and sourcing your own view of the 'best' components based on the spec?

Makes it sound as if the RK you had was a fair way short of what MK would have liked!

d1dsj
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by d1dsj » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:17 am

Awesome job, and you have the satisfaction of knowing no corners have been cut. You clearly know your onions :thumbup:
Cornford owner again!

Mk50 Black chassis/ white headbox
R.K 4 x 12
Hurricane "wide body" combo
Cornford MK 2 x 12

SabbadiusUSA
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:11 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by SabbadiusUSA » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:02 pm

RichM wrote:Looks like a quality job there .... May I ask, when you say the components are all MK spec, do you mean these are the parts he used initially with the RK? Or just that you are using all the right values and sourcing your own view of the 'best' components based on the spec?

Makes it sound as if the RK you had was a fair way short of what MK would have liked!
First, this is (was) a SE built Cornford. The types and values used are stock to Martin Kidd's original technical design. I chose to rebuild the amplifier using proven high-quality components of the same construction type. The Philips MKT caps are what was used in the early era Cornford builds. I experimented with alternate component values at the input, tone-stack, and PI couplers... Did it sound 'better'? That would be best judged by the user. I prefer a Cornford to sound like a Cornford, a Marshall to sound like a Marshall, etc.
Last edited by SabbadiusUSA on Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

lienffur
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:10 pm
Location: Dorking, UK

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by lienffur » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:12 pm

Sabbadius - forgive me if I got the wrong end of the stick before, but looking at your excellent rebuild photos here, and reading the explanation for why you took it on, a couple of things occurred to me:-

On a previous thread, the topic of whether people should consider their SE-built Cornfords as 'genuine' cropped up, and I recall there was some defence of SE & the quality of their builds?
Would I be right in assuming that your discovery of incorrect component values & your opinion of the workmanship is no longer standing in SE's favour?

Reason I ask is that I have neither the skill or the knowledge to tell good workmanship from bad, or 'correct' components from 'close but no cigar' versions...and the difference between the two goes back to that question of whether a particular era of Cornford manufacture (ie Whitstable vs SE) could be deemed as worth more (or worth seeking out).

The other thought that came to mind was that (at least as far as I know) no official schematics were ever released to the public. Were you able to get hold of a spec sheet for the MK in order to tell what MK's original design called for, and to help identify those incorrect vs correct values?

SabbadiusUSA
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:11 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by SabbadiusUSA » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:31 pm

lienffur wrote:Sabbadius - forgive me if I got the wrong end of the stick before, but looking at your excellent rebuild photos here, and reading the explanation for why you took it on, a couple of things occurred to me:-

On a previous thread, the topic of whether people should consider their SE-built Cornfords as 'genuine' cropped up, and I recall there was some defence of SE & the quality of their builds?
Would I be right in assuming that your discovery of incorrect component values & your opinion of the workmanship is no longer standing in SE's favour?

Reason I ask is that I have neither the skill or the knowledge to tell good workmanship from bad, or 'correct' components from 'close but no cigar' versions...and the difference between the two goes back to that question of whether a particular era of Cornford manufacture (ie Whitstable vs SE) could be deemed as worth more (or worth seeking out).

The other thought that came to mind was that (at least as far as I know) no official schematics were ever released to the public. Were you able to get hold of a spec sheet for the MK in order to tell what MK's original design called for, and to help identify those incorrect vs correct values?
It's all about WHO actually built the amp. The parts are the same, so technically there is no difference between them. I've only run into one Martin Kidd built amp (MK50H II) that required attention. I could not secure a complete set of Philips capacitors at that time, so I used MIJ era Panasonic capacitors. I also had to come up with a modification to rid the amp of a channel popping issue.

My last amp was an MK50H II built by Martin Kidd. I owned that amp for over 1 year, and never once did I consider doing anything to it. If anyone thinks I wanted to spend 36.5 hours inhaling lead-infused smoke refitting this amp, they would be incorrect. I have no intention of selling it, so I rebuilt in a manner that I feel is more befitting of a $3600.00 amplifier. :thumbup:
Last edited by SabbadiusUSA on Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

SabbadiusUSA
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:11 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn!

Post by SabbadiusUSA » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:52 pm

Continued....
Last edited by SabbadiusUSA on Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

SabbadiusUSA
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:11 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn.

Post by SabbadiusUSA » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:57 am

Rollin, rollin, rollin... :cool:
Last edited by SabbadiusUSA on Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

kell
Master Volume
Master Volume
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:42 pm

Re: Cornford RK100 porn.

Post by kell » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:05 am

Hi,

what about contributing your Cornford factory RK100 schematics to our schematic library we are collecting? :idea:

Cheers, Kell

User avatar
D28boy
Mid Range
Mid Range
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:13 pm
Location: HAMPSHIRE,ENGLAND

Re: Cornford RK100 porn.

Post by D28boy » Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:14 am

SabbadiusUSA wrote:My RK100 is back to stock! The Dale resistors were too hi-fi sounding... I rebuilt this using Cornford factory RK100 schematics. Still needs a good cleaning.
Which bit ?????????????

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest