Dunlop - JB95 Bonamassa Wah

Stratman69 · Post by **Stratman69** » 14 Nov 2012, 20:44

The Dunlop Joe Bonamassa JB95 Crybaby Wah is built like a dream..

However, it's a touch too far on the dark side. Many even consider it too muddy...

Is there any way to make it sound more like a traditional Italian Wah? You know, brighter with more quack?

This is decent photo I found on the net:

I haven't seen a photo that shows the trace-side. Maybe someone could take a snap of theirs and post?

I've had a love/hate relationship with this pedal and sold it. Decided to buy one again and it should arrive Friday.

Is there any modifications to make it brighter sounding?

I'm not sure of the potentiometer is 100K or 200K? If it's 200K, could this result in the darkness/muddiness? If so, changing it to the traditional 100K could fix that couldn't it? Plus it would be an extremely simple and quick fix.

Please help!

Stratman69 · Post by **Stratman69** » 14 Nov 2012, 22:36

Nobody knows how to brighten up a Wah?

sinner · Post by **sinner** » 14 Nov 2012, 22:58

Just post fat shoots of the guts when your arrive, and i do my best

Aharon · Post by **Aharon** » 14 Nov 2012, 23:40

Stratman69 wrote:Nobody knows how to brighten up a Wah?

Check the values of the caps in the wah and compare with your favourite flavour.Change as needed.
Check that the pot is on the sweet spot.
Aharon

Stratman69 · Post by **Stratman69** » 15 Nov 2012, 00:15

What's odd is that the pedal uses three 22uf capacitors instead of just two, as per traditional wah pedals.

The Bonamassa wah also uses one 103J 400V capacitor, and one 104J 400V capacitor. I'm not sure what exactly those numbers mean, but are they equivalent to .01uf capacitors?

sinner · Post by **sinner** » 15 Nov 2012, 01:41

0.01 and 0.1uf... It's part of output buffer circuity with the rest of the parts and third transistor. JB is an Fuzz Face user, and his wah needs to be buffered

CHEEZOR · Post by **CHEEZOR** » 15 Nov 2012, 21:01

Stratman69 wrote:I'm not sure of the potentiometer is 100K or 200K? If it's 200K, could this result in the darkness/muddiness? If so, changing it to the traditional 100K could fix that couldn't it? Plus it would be an extremely simple and quick fix.

I would try undoing the gear rack and turning the pot to the brighter side to make sure that the pot is turning all the way in the toe-down position. This is the first thing I would try. Its free and you don't even have to heat up the soldering iron.

Second, I would swap out the "sweep" cap for a lower value if turning the pot does not get you where you want.

However, please post some nice gut shots of this one. It would be greatly appreciated!

prehistoric · Post by **prehistoric** » 02 Jan 2013, 20:20

the pot is a 2 million cycle 100k sealed pot, and was factory adjusted to 44k thru 100k on the unit i have here. the pot does the full 0 thru 100k sweep when tested, they just adjusted it very bright from the fact. i measured the pot taper, but haven't entered the data into my wah pot excel file yet.

my unit also has a clever centering brass nut for the pot not present in the above photo.

420p (tant) to gd at potlugs 1 and 3, would cut treble at top a little and probably help reject radio.

lots of smd parts under the board, including a q4 which i assume is out buffer. the 3 trans on top of board i assume are the typical 3 trans input buffer of regular crybabies of the last 20 years or so.

kudos to dunlop and tripps. this design is extremely well thought out.
the attention to detail and the number of new and specific parts is impressive. even the shell is a new casting. very lightweight , + with a thick 16 ga. or so bottom plate. even the battery door is an improved design.

to my ears sounds excellent. treble is way more than enough, the lows have character and the mid has a distinctive entertaining warble/gargle that makes wahs really fun to play. it seems around 10% louder than the bypassed signal when switched.

* edit, the dunlop website says there is an output buffer. pretty sure that is what Q4 under the board is. they also say it has one of the widest sweeps available, i agree.

prehistoric · Post by **prehistoric** » 04 Jan 2013, 04:36

Big_Mike · Post by **Big_Mike** » 13 Oct 2013, 23:21

Time to give a little bit back to the community... Since we are talking about wah pedals... JB95 Joe Bonamassa Crybaby...
I could get my hands on one and took a little peek at its guts. Couldn't get the board out tho. If i happen to get my hands on it again at home, i will post additional pictures of the smd loaded underside.

Q1-3 MPSA18

C1 100uF, 25V
C4 4,7uF, 63V

Same as with prehystorics wah (reported in the "How to fix the darkness" thread) mine had a 100k pot adjusted to a 44k - 100k sweep.

Hope this is a little help for those interested in this wah. I have to add that i really like this one. For the usual funky-like wacka-wacka stuff i like my normal Crybaby better, but its vocal qualities inspire to play endless bluesy solos.

Big_Mike · Post by **Big_Mike** » 03 Nov 2013, 22:12

Well, got the Bonamassa Wah again and was allowed to take the board out. Here is the pcb back. Since it is hard to see the paths, i took several pictures.

R11 273 27k
R12 244 240k
R13 000
R16 104 100k
R17 105 1M
R18 225 2.2M
R19 103 10k
R20 105 1M

C5 was not equipped

U1 was labeled IG123 or LG123 or such?! I don't know much about smd parts so perhaps someone else can help with that.
Q4 label was not readable