My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Work on your reading comprehension. I did not write "reasoning without argument," because that is backwards. Your argument, does not use reason. According to you, a general consensus is worthless. You proceed to use the general consensus of a limited sample size - one that can not possibly represent the opinion of a significant body of people - such as YouTube comments, as evidence to support your position. You're allowing that BS pass as evidence because it agrees with your preconceived opinion, but if a general consensus disagrees with your opinion, you retort to saying how worthless public opinion matters. That's extremely flawed logic. That's only one point against your whole argument in this thread. There's also the question-dodging because you know answering truthfully would hurt your argument. There's a flaw where you post a YouTube link as evidence without any real analysis - you're expecting readers/listeners to find the evidence and do the analysis themselves to support your argument. Doesn't work. There's the flaw where you call people out for not stating why they don't care for the amp (they don't have to, because they didn't start the conversation), but you yourself have failed to explain what's so great about the amp, with factual statements - not the flawed reasoning I just stated.

Sorry, you are just trying to cover your previous nonsense with this fresh one. Why your opinion is more valid than opinion of those people I'm referring too? A YouTube demo is a lot more convincing thing than your unsubstantiated statements. If I don't like an amp I know exactly why (no harmonics, too bright, too muddy, too saggy, too much compression, no compression, too raspy, unpleasing distortion, low touch sensitivity, poor response to playing dynamics, etc). Why nobody or almost nobody is saying things like these? Just saying sucks - sucks.

If you look around you will see that there are many people in other places who love or like the amp. Do you have access to any comprehensive statistics on Windsor customer satisfaction? This world is a much wider and complex place than this great, but limited, for obvious reasons, forum.
 
Last edited:
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Do you have any info or arguments that are your own? Ive watched you across the threads here and on Marshallforum repeat back at people things theyve said. You are repeating accusations that have been leveled against you yet you failed to respond to. Its literally like you are doing a school yard "well im rubber and you're glue" rendition.

But iam dead serious here, most of what you know about the Windsor you didnt know until I told you. You had no clue what a cathodyne PI was until I wrote it and now you preach it as gospel yet show at every turn that you dont understand it.

So now I ask again do you have any original input on anything? Can you make an argument that wasnt first levied against you?
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Also, how do you know how many people just didn't know how to dial a good sound? Many haters wanted the amp to be clean...
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Why your opinion is more valid than opinion of those people I'm referring too?

Because in all of his years posting on this forum Myaccount has given intelligent and thought out responses to questions about amps, pickups and guitars. We are comfortable with his comprehension of gear and the musicians that use that equipment. There really isn't any need to justify why we prefer to validate the opinions and information of one poster over another. However, in this case Myaccount has earned our respect and trust, his opinions are not only welcome here but encouraged.
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Sorry, you are just trying to cover your previous nonsense with this fresh one. Why your opinion is more valid than opinion of those people I'm referring too? A YouTube demo is a lot more convincing thing than your unsubstantiated statements. If I don't like an amp I know exactly why (no harmonics, too bright, too muddy, too saggy, too much compression, no compression, too raspy, unpleasing distortion, low touch sensitivity, poor response to playing dynamics, etc). Why nobody or almost nobody is saying things like these? Just saying sucks - sucks.

Again, work on the reading comprehension. Big time.

a) What is my opinion of the Windsor? I haven't taken any stance for it. I have only re-stated what people on this forum generally think of it. I did not say if I agree with it or not.
b) Most YouTube demos aren't convincing in any regard. It doesn't provide a reference point. The compression distorts the peaks. The video was recorded from a s***y camera phone and uploaded in 240p. Not the same as professional-recordings to represent what the amp actually sounds like in a room.
c) How is a YouTube demo more convincing than my "unsubstantiated statements", considering I've never made a personal claim/opinion to begin with?
d) Just saying "sucks" - sucks? You did with the DSL. I haven't said anything sucks in this thread (other than your argument and the way you're presenting it).

If you look around you will see that there are many people in other places who love or like the amp. Do you have access to any comprehensive statistics on Windsor customer satisfaction? This world is a much wider and complex place than this great, but limited, for obvious reasons, forum.

I'll say this again, hoping it'll stick.

The research is not my job. You're making the claim trying to convince others of your opinion. You provide the hard evidence as to why you're right. Why TF would I do the work for your point?

I'm not covering my tracks, I'm going into more detail as to how you're BS'ing everyone. We can all see it from a mile away.
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Do you have any info or arguments that are your own? Ive watched you across the threads here and on Marshallforum repeat back at people things theyve said. You are repeating accusations that have been leveled against you yet you failed to respond to. Its literally like you are doing a school yard "well im rubber and you're glue" rendition.

But iam dead serious here, most of what you know about the Windsor you didnt know until I told you. You had no clue what a cathodyne PI was until I wrote it and now you preach it as gospel yet show at every turn that you dont understand it.

So now I ask again do you have any original input on anything? Can you make an argument that wasnt first levied against you?

I might have learned a thing or two from you previously, I just don't remember, and I thank you if I did. Was anything I said about the cathodyne phase inverted wrong? That's all what counts.

There is no reason for the Windsor not to sound good - hot rodded JCM 800 preamp (well there are differences, but nothing that can affect unfavorably the way it sounds), identical to JCM 800 tone stack, almost identical to JCM 800 transformers, a correctly designed cathodyne PI, a four EL34 power amp, rock solid soldering, the same resistors and condensers as the ones used for most other modern production amps. Easy to mod or repair if needed. What not to like here? I remember a person who used a replacement JCM 800 output transformer for his Windsor and he reported that this didn't change the way the amp sounds. It would if the stock transformer sucked. Very much so. And in general that person was very happy with his Windsor. What not to like here?
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

And yet another great video of a rehearsal with the Peavey Windsor. Check it out at 1:23

 
Last edited:
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

There is no reason for the Windsor not to sound good - hot rodded JCM 800 preamp (well there are differences, but nothing that can affect unfavorably the way it sounds), identical to JCM 800 tone stack, almost identical to JCM 800 transformers, a correctly designed cathodyne PI, a four EL34 power amp, rock solid soldering, the same resistors and condensers as the ones used for most other modern production amps. Easy to mod or repair if needed. What not to like here? I remember a person who used a replacement JCM 800 output transformer for his Windsor and he reported that this didn't change the way the amp sounds. It would if the stock transformer sucked. Very much so. And in general that person was very happy with his Windsor. What not to like here?

Not even close.
- The transformers in affordable amps is where the manufacturers really cut costs. Take an original JCM800 with Drake transformers and compare it to the stock Windsor transformers. Not even close.
- What makes the cathodyne PI designed correctly? Or are you going to plagiarize Edgecrusher (again)?
- Tell me, how does having four EL34s affect the sound? You're listing specs, but I know you won't be able to correctly assert what these specs mean.
- Rock solid soldering? Not at this price point. You'll get cold solder joints/overheated traces/joints that weaken after being exposed to the heat from regular usage. Not recommended for the road.
- Same resistors and capacitors as the ones used for most other modern production amps? If you mean most other "affordable" production amps, then yes. They're all generally lower quality with a shorter life expectancy. Don't try and fool yourself though, they aren't using the same parts as mid-level or high-end amps. Modern or older amps. Just tell me the Windsor uses the same resistors/capacitors as Bogner. I dare you.
- Easy to mod or repair if needed? HELL NO. PCBs are horrible if you need to actually service the amp. Rugged PTP wiring you'll find in older Fenders/Marshalls/Voxs/etc. is easy to mod and service. On the Windsor, if a pot fails, you need to remove the whole chassis, remove the PCB (which requires you to remove all knobs/jacks/switches/lights), desolder the pot from the board, hope you didn't F-up any of the traces, which are really thin and sit on a similarly thin board, and then do everything in reverse to put it back together. On handwired amps, you unsolder about 3 wires, unscrew the nut, pull the pot out, new one in, solder 3 wires back, done. Screw replacing filter caps on the Windsor (if the amp even survived long enough for those to fail). Much bigger PITA/more fragile to work with than higher-quality amps.
- Another difference you missed is that the 2203 has a choke (an inductor). The Windsor doesn't - it uses a resistor instead. It makes a difference in filtering AC ripple in conjunction with the filter capacitors. This ripple causing fizzy/gritty/unpleasant distortion unless you filter it all out.

Putting a JCM800 output transformer in the Windsor and saying it sounds the same doesn't prove that the previous transformer was a quality unit. An amp with that many cost-cutting measures isn't going to benefit from upgrading the transformers. The amp is only as strong as its weakest links. Conversely, put the Windsor transformer in the JCM800. Something tells me that won't turn out so great.
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

Not even close.
- The transformers in affordable amps is where the manufacturers really cut costs. Take an original JCM800 with Drake transformers and compare it to the stock Windsor transformers. Not even close.

Where exactly manufactures cut cost in either case? Most of much more expensive modern production Marshalls come with cheap sh_ty Chinese transformers. Why there is such a big market for replacement Marshall transformers in the first place?

- What makes the cathodyne PI designed correctly? Or are you going to plagiarize Edgecrusher (again)?

Use a grid stopper to avoid frequency doubling and pinching which can actually be a problem with Marshal's LTP PI as well. Sometimes it is not a factor. I am not plagiarizing anyone. I am learning from open sources such as this:http://www.valvewizard.co.uk/cathodyne.html.

- Tell me, how does having four EL34s affect the sound? You're listing specs, but I know you won't be able to correctly assert what these specs mean.

EL34 will have more mids when driven. This is if compared to 6L6. Emphasized mids is a characteristic Marshall feature.

- Rock solid soldering? Not at this price point. You'll get cold solder joints/overheated traces/joints that weaken after being exposed to the heat from regular usage. Not recommended for the road.

Check out all modern production Marshalls (apart from hand wired). They all have very flimsy PCBs which you don't want to touch. Much more so than what Peavey used for the Windsor. I know what I am saying, because I moded them.

- Same resistors and capacitors as the ones used for most other modern production amps? If you mean most other "affordable" production amps, then yes. They're all generally lower quality with a shorter life expectancy. Don't try and fool yourself though, they aren't using the same parts as mid-level or high-end amps. Modern or older amps. Just tell me the Windsor uses the same resistors/capacitors as Bogner. I dare you.

No, Peavey used the same Chinese resistors and capacitors which Marshall uses for all of their modern production amps which cost 3 to 5 times more. The only exception are reissues where Marshall tries to use at least some more or less authentic components.


- Easy to mod or repair if needed? HELL NO. PCBs are horrible if you need to actually service the amp. Rugged PTP wiring you'll find in older Fenders/Marshalls/Voxs/etc. is easy to mod and service. On the Windsor, if a pot fails, you need to remove the whole chassis, remove the PCB (which requires you to remove all knobs/jacks/switches/lights), desolder the pot from the board, hope you didn't F-up any of the traces, which are really thin and sit on a similarly thin board, and then do everything in reverse to put it back together. On handwired amps, you unsolder about 3 wires, unscrew the nut, pull the pot out, new one in, solder 3 wires back, done. Screw replacing filter caps on the Windsor (if the amp even survived long enough for those to fail). Much bigger PITA/more fragile to work with than higher-quality amps.

All modern production Marshalls feature sh_ty PCBs with tiny components. I worked on them, and I know what I am saying. http://www.marshallforum.com/showthread.php?t=53683 Peavey used large PCBs with easy to reach components.


- Another difference you missed is that the 2203 has a choke (an inductor). The Windsor doesn't - it uses a resistor instead. It makes a difference in filtering AC ripple in conjunction with the filter capacitors. This ripple causing fizzy/gritty/unpleasant distortion unless you filter it all out.

It does make a difference but not that much. Lots of great sounding, iconic amps don't have it. Besides it is extremely easy to incorporate one in place of that resistor.


Putting a JCM800 output transformer in the Windsor and saying it sounds the same doesn't prove that the previous transformer was a quality unit. An amp with that many cost-cutting measures isn't going to benefit from upgrading the transformers. The amp is only as strong as its weakest links. Conversely, put the Windsor transformer in the JCM800. Something tells me that won't turn out so great.

Disagree. A good aftermarket transformer should have made a difference.

.
 
Last edited:
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

you guys should really argue in private

ya'll both enjoy this

Totally agree with this. I just realized that I didn't play today. I am not reading this thread any longer. I am really sorry if what I said previously rubbed anyone up the wrong way. I readily admit that some of the statements I have made in this thread might be wrong. I am sure that all people who post here are great musicians, not a__ssh_oles. So, please don't pore sh_t on me when I am gone. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

a correctly designed cathodyne PI

A long tail PI should sound and/or overdrive more like a JCM800 and is one reason to change it out. Polyester film / foil caps would also help on the sound

I remember a person who used a replacement JCM800 output transformer for his Windsor and he reported that this didn't change the way the amp sounds.

This is why I don’t recommend changing the trannies.

Another thing that bugs me a little is the texture control. Turned all the way counter clockwise and it shunts to ground the inverted signal side going to two of the EL34s. I think a dedicated A to AB switch would be more accurate and have less of a chance to mess with the sound. Something is not letting the Windsor sound as good as it can IMHO. I have a new Butcher, TSL100 and Crate stealth and they all have a more open sound than my Windsor. Maybe I have a dud but, I feel a few upgrades can't hurt. :headbang:
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

One more thing. I usually prototype in private and then use and/or sell a piece of gear. This is new for me and just wanted to get some opinions before making a prototype board which would lead to ordering one or more boards. Replacing the PI and caps might not make any major difference to the sound and will just be a personal learning experience that I will gladly share. Please keep this in mind when responding.

Thanx, Burster
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

OK - I DIDN'T want to go to this place, but you leave me no choice.

For the record, my love of Peavey is well documented on these pages.

Peavey discontinued the Windsor, because, well….maybe you had better sit down.











































They discontinued it because YOU liked it. Their decision was based on the logic, and reasoning, if you will, that once the rest of the world found out it was your personal favorite amp, that it was doomed. Word of your "love" for it would spread like a bad canker sore throughout the intarwebz, and no one would ever want it again. Happy now?

And now that we have this thread - it is obvious that they were right.
 
Re: My take on the Peavey Windsor head...

I readily admit that some of the statements I have made in this thread might be wrong.

Some?

raiseeyebrow.gif
 
Back
Top