Does 50 Years Make A Difference? || Vintage Fender Deluxe vs Reissue

Does 50 years really make a difference? In this video I shootout an original 1967 blackface Fender Deluxe Reverb vs a modern 2017 reissue Deluxe to see what difference 50 years has made.
------------
MY VIDEO COURSES:
The Complete Nashville Number System video course
rhettshullguitarcourses.com/p...
Check Out My Guitar Tone Course Here!
rhettshullguitarcourses.com/p...
------------
MY PRESETS & PROFILES:
Line 6 HX Stomp Presets
www.rhettshull.com/helix/hx-s...
Line 6 Helix & Helix LT Presets
www.rhettshull.com/helix
Kemper Profiles
www.rhettshull.com/kemperprof...
Impulse Responses (Helix, Kemper, Iridium & AxeFx)
www.rhettshull.com/helix/rhet...
------------
MY SECOND CHANNEL:
Rhett Shull Studio
/ @rhettshulltwo
MY DISCORD SERVER:
/ discord
DEACON KNIGHT (my band):
/ @deaconknight1939
------------
THE BACKSTAGE JOURNAL PODCAST:
(apple) podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
(spotify) open.spotify.com/show/1q8Rrv4...
------------
SHIPPING ADDRESS:
5805 State Bridge Road
Suite G90
Johns Creek Ga
30097
------------
My Video Rig (affiliate links)
CAMERA:
-Sony A7III
amzn.to/2NDqJW2
LENSES:
-Sony 24-105mm f4
amzn.to/3svZuLZ
-Sigma 35mm f1.4
amzn.to/37M01S6
-Sigma 50mm f1.4
amzn.to/3dM4FDm
LIGHTS:
-Neewer LED Panel Bi Color
amzn.to/3kzkb73
SOUND:
-Sennheiser MKH 416 Shotgun Mic
imp.i114863.net/c/2330848/937...
-Universal Audio Apollo X4
imp.i114863.net/c/2330848/937...
-Zoom H6 Handy Recorder
imp.i114863.net/c/2330848/937...

[@RhettShull]

My first video course, The Tone Course, is available now. Check it out below! flatfiv.co/collections/rhett-shull/products/the-tone-course

[@nitroexpress6294]

Hey just found your video because I was gifted what appears to be an original deluxe reverb. It needs tubes and a fuse. Any advice would be much appreciated

[@physiciansassist1]

this is why I love my 65 pre cbs twin reverb.. What's crazy though is. I have 2 greenbacks in it🙃🙃

[@lauratanner8475]

There's some tweeks that can be done to them reissue to improve it. For example the reverb drive circuit is way too hot and hits the tank too hard causing a mushy reverb that loses articulation after about two on the dial. It's an easy fix and there are several others. There's a fellow here on yt who's channel is called psionic, I think 🤔. Anyway he's worked on a bunch of them and is gracious enough to share some of his knowledge about them. He also See's alot of hot rods and blues DeVilles and gives loads of tips and tricks on those. Check him out!

[@Mooncalf2012]

Will you come back in 50 years and compare the 2017 with the 2067 Re-Issue?

[@Ben59910]

😂

[@sergiogallardo9832]

😂

[@Dustyfingers]

Or in 2069 and compare the 1969 👽

[@spacelordmuthamutha3603]

We’re all dead in 10... at least that’s what I heard.

[@surfneptune]

the 2017 will be toast by then... the 1967 will still be going...

[@Dartheomus]

On the intro, the amount of reverb and volume were so different that they were not comparable. In the subsequent section, I'd side with the vintage based on settings, particularly for the driven tones. However, I don't really see the point in setting the two amps to their numerical equivalents for this type of comparison. Even though they are "airquotes" the same, we all know they aren't. Just dial one in to the best sound you can get, and then make adjustments to the other to match as closely as possible. Most people don't care if the two amps are the same if everything is set to 5. They want to know if they can get the vintage sound out of a new amp.

[@ferdelazerda836]

Dartheomus totally agree With you! I realized that the 2017 was lacking highs and had Too much bass in the overdriven sounds compared to the 67’... and thats something you can fix by adjusting the eq a bit... I have a 2012 deluxe... and recorded with it with great oberdriven-not mushy tones...

[@nephetula]

You said exactly what I was thinking. Comparisons are totally pointless unless you set the knobs by ear, and not by a number.

[@kennethkennethson4991]

Would setting the nunbers the same be the perfect comparison? Because that really shows the differences between the amps? It would make a better comparison than getting the exact same tone on both of them, then its the same.

[@stonefly69]

Totally agree. The second amp is louder and that affects the sound greatly. Back of the second amp to the same volume level as the first and then run again.

[@stiffrichard2816]

Certainly no comparison with overdrive, the '67 wins hands down.

[@franciscocedenolanza]

I prefer the '67 for overdrives and the '17 for clean sounds

[@lotuscorpse]

I was completely the opposite. To me the vintage 67 sounds better for cleans.

[@chillpillology]

I agree. But the 2017 was louder and not as chimey. I suspect the pots have aged? and scooping mids from the 2017 would reveal the true difference.

[@steve7onfire]

I agree. The 2017 has a great warm clean tone. But the ‘67 has a great overdriven tone.

[@VectorCoCinema]

Same

[@edsantilli9442]

I was gonna say the same thing!

[@vhollund]

1:24 It is tricky because one is louder and louder usually sounds "better" to the ears

[@o.b.v.i.u.s]

yes, yes, YES!!! (thank-you)

[@jysmtl]

No

[@theccarbiter]

Yeah other than the volume they sound the same

[@TheJudy79]

Other then the volume they sound the same

[@gidgetgrimaldo8865]

Yeah, I thought the same thing... I preferred "amp B" (the reissue), but was thinking, do I only like it because it's louder??

[@drewbarries]

I really love that you mentioned the speaker being largely responsible for the difference. I want the same exact comparison but use the same speaker and tubes and same biasing then we’ll really know how much can be attributed to other components.

[@_leivo]

I would have tried both amps with the 67' speaker, then you would know if the amps are really different or not.

[@martinbarnes5704]

Correct

[@aviyashurp]

Yep

[@davidjoseph7142]

Saw a video where they swapped the speaker from the modern hand wired to this one with the Jensen and probably most of the difference was the speaker. So therefore the higher end ceramic speaker alone was a really nice upgrade to sound better and more like the 67. I wonder what the 67 would sound like with the ceramic speaker

[@halstead3962]

It’s such a pleasure to hear you play Rhett. You make those guitars and amps sound killer.

[@JungiOlympia]

Since the reverb on amp B is so much stronger it is very difficult to hear the actual sonic differences.

[@juanvalencia6538]

Really annoyed me

[@salopro86]

30 seconds in. I want to say amp A is the '67

[@Max-dr6rz]

Same.

[@zhangyiyang8975]

Nicholas Pro same here

[@KYyid]

Same. As soon as Amp B came in I felt it sounded brighter and more modern.

[@Barabyk]

20% tolerance components, and pot tapers... they could be as different as two amps built on the same day. Also, the speaker is a crucially important element.

[@jakevoss7885]

See I think a lot of the perceived roundness of the vintage amp is because of a well worn in speaker

[@zwz.zdenek]

Let me tell you something about that 20%. Those old machines were full of trimpots that would be calibrated at the factory. In practice, few resistors were ever over 10%. And even if one was off, they would have found out. Positions where values were critical had beefed-up solderable lugs and putting in different parts would be part of the setup. I remember a service manual calling for accuracy better than 0.1% in a particular thyristor welder and due to vibrations, you had to calibrate it by soldering on several fixed resistors. No trimpot allowed. Did you know that the tolerance of capacitors actually got worse over the years essentially swapping places with the resistors?

[@southboundsuarez9832]

@@zwz.zdenek Where are the trimpots located in a vintage Fender BlackFace Deluxe Reverb? Do you mean the bias pot? Yes that compensates the tubes static dissipation. Silverface amps changed the bias pot into a balance pot to balance both sides of the output transformers waveform. I dont believe your statement about trimpots is valid ....

[@Mardello]

Nerd

[@southboundsuarez9832]

@@Mardello Well, as a matter of course, this is absolutely a nerdy type of tone geek thing. That is what this all about. Do you think that the average Jon Q Public , Lay audience member is going to notice that the performer playing guitar in the band up there on stage in a crowded nightclub is going to perceive enough of a tonal significance to actually say to himself "ah... that vintage Fender tone is superb!" ? No, but it does matter very much to those of us who make up the community of folk that participate in or take stake that make or break current trends that support or favor our best and favorite own agendas. Fortunately their exist a large nerd based community of fan boys that have enough of a esoteric taste for the quality nuances and ability to perceive a definitive of subjectivity for proper tone. The exclusivity of this community supercedes even that of the "Audiophile" people despite many crossover fellows that occupy both, Tone Chasers, Geeks and Nerds are certainly Members Only! Are you in "the know" ? Can you perform the secret handshake? No? Well then piss off!

[@jamesmolloy5267]

Great video, thanks! A few points to consider before shelling out big bucks: 1. This '67 amp is "museum quality." It's easy to spend a lot of money on a vintage amp and then a lot more on repairs to make it reliable for gigging. 2. An attenuator will let you comfortably crank the reissue to a level that gives comparable break-up. I've had good luck with the small and inexpensive Bugera PS-1 Power Soak. 3. Turning the bass knob down and tweaking an EQ pedal helps with the over-bass issue. 4. Musicianship trumps tone. The extra grand can buy 40 lessons with a master, which may radically improve your sound and approachable repertoire. Happy picking!

[@timperry8961]

Wow, that overdriven sound is so bad on the 2017, compared to the vintage one

[@poiiiiiiiiiii3049]

Tim Perry but the clean sound sounds better one 2017 right?

[@RidzuanYahya]

@@poiiiiiiiiiii3049 Honestly, my ears are telling me, even the cleans sound better on the 1967

[@africanriftvalleyfish8287]

Theres a huge difference in sound quality, the vintage sounds so much better.

[@devinjones9614]

I beg to differ. The 2017 sounded much much cleaner.

[@CarlosDiaz-mf9uw]

@@poiiiiiiiiiii3049 Yes

[@canaanlawrence7351]

Honestly I really like the 2017 for cleans, but definitely preferred the 67’ for edge of breakup/overdriven tones. Of course my opinion is subject to change if I was sitting in the room with both the amps playing them. Great video as always Rhett. 👍

[@biffrov]

Canaan Lawrence This exactly!

[@timpenfield5]

I am no expert but if u turned the vintage amp up, its a diiferent story, great vid but u gotta crank that shit to see the real difference,

[@m1l268]

Dont be shy.... the distortion on the RI is a freaking train wreck. Unlistenable. Fire the designer

[@deut3168]

I'd go for the modern because of the better clean. It's more open. Then I'd run pedals on the clean channel. I played a Fender Deluxe at my church for a while. Loved the tone but the distortion was limited. Pedals over the clean is the answer.

[@Ve8g]

Exactly, same reflection

[@Ratter2E]

I think a real test would have used an external speaker so that aging of the speaker didn't come into the mix. BTW the 1967 is definitely worth it.

[@allrequiredfields]

Nah, aging has exactly zilch to do with it. If that were the case, my vintage amps (I own a studio filled with gear all from the 40s to the 60s) wouldn't sound exactly the way they did 50, 50+ years ago - modern recordings make this abundantly clear.

[@Ratter2E]

@@allrequiredfields hahaha, . ok . i'm not putting the farm on that opinion .

[@NoOne-sn2si]

There's a reason why the AB763 circuit is the one most people want. Its cleans are great yet when you turn it up the breakup is wonderful. The Fender SF amps can be converted easily to the AB763 circuit

[@MellowJelly]

I think having that vintage amp would be worth double the price of that new one, the vintage one is just sweeeeeet! And not only is it a great commodity and great equipment, it's a valuable collectible and vintage decor piece all in one

[@DarthPreamp]

good video. the real difference shows when you turn it up. the distortion on the 67’ is a lot better than on the modern

[@BellTunnel]

I prefer A but I think you could get B very close by turning the reverb, treble, and volume down.

[@mgtowmonk4274]

As a owner of a '63 delux reverb I knew which one it was as soon as it was played. My uncle gave me his first guitar (a fender music master)and the delux reverb amp when I was 10. I'm so fortunate and blessed he did. It gave me the opportunity to express myself through music. After 30 years of playing that amp, the sound was unmistakable to me.

[@std882]

Wow, in the beginning I thought Amp B was the vintage amp. Quite impressed with the new one. The distortion does sound nicer in the vintage though.

[@paulj0557tonehead]

B was louder.

[@spydiggerous]

I guessed correctly in the first minute, but my guess was mainly based on the modern amp being noticeably louder...during that part of the video, the modern amp held its own. I don't know if the later section of the video was recorded differently or the amps were mic'd any differently, but man, the 67 just blew the modern amp away. Not even close. The 67 had SO much more clarity and definition. The guy who bought that thing got himself a sweet amp. But to your point, I would never want to gig with that thing for fear of it getting knocked around. It is really pristine.

[@OldManJeremy]

Yup, that was the tell for sure.

[@michaelkay611]

Agreed. The 2017 would work for me - I like a lot of headroom, use pedals for overdrive, and would just turn the bass down almost completely. But the '67 was leagues better in the latter parts of the video. You get used to your gear if its decent and you spend time with it. You learn how to EQ it, play dynamically with it, it breaks in more, etc., and you and the gear just kind of mold to each other. So I could see getting the 2017 to sound great after some time, closer to the '67. Will it ever quite reach it? Maybe not. Or maybe it will - in 2067.

[@Alnico6l6]

Having experience with vintage amps, the answer seemed obvious to me. I like the organic sound of vintage. Plus, the vintage amps are so much easier to repair. Great for do-it-yourselfers, i don't hesitate to gig with vintage amps. Life is too short not to sound your best!

[@SyncopatedFin]

My guess here is that a big difference is how broken in the speakers are. Put a couple hundred hours into the reissue and I'd bet that they sound MUCH closer.

[@musicnphotos1]

I believe the bigger difference is in the speakers. I have a reissue twin and when I replaced the speakers, it was a huge difference.

[@DingDongDaddyFromDumas]

Is changing a speaker easy to do on your own? Or is paying someone necessary?

[@joshuahaley4367]

What speakers come in the twin and what did you put in that sounded better?

[@9uidin9li9ht2]

Which speakers do you recommend?

[@southboundsuarez9832]

@@9uidin9li9ht2 Man! On a Fender Twin, If you can afford it..... I would score a pair of the 90watt Alnico Celestion Creamback speakers. They sound incredible but whoa, they cost alot. Probably going to spend $600 or more on a pair!

[@9uidin9li9ht2]

@@southboundsuarez9832 Thanks for that tip! What do you think is making the overdriven sound better on the '67?

[@jessi4894]

The amp from 1967 was A. I know this because my grandpa has that exact vintage amp, that he has played his 1959 stratocaster on for my whole life. I would know that sound anywhere.

[@jpgo5]

Question, how recently were the power tubes replaced on the vintage and when was the last time it was re-biased?

[@BellTunnel]

In the intro, it sounds like the reverb was turned up significantly more on B.

[@jimivr]

Brighter tone so the decay on a reverb would be perceived as longer.

[@JamesSpeiser]

DONT USE ANY REVERB WHEN YOU TEST AN AMP!!!

[@garystackhouse5787]

The reverb is a part of the amp...

[@keytar7317]

3rd knob from the right is the reverb knob. It can be turned up or down. It was turned up on Amp B to sweeten the sound and trick casual listeners. Doing so also discerns the real players from gear snobs.

[@jrjohnson2747]

Yes

[@HeyLiem]

I choose amp B as being the superior sounding tube amp, it sounded like it was cleaner with more headroom compared to amp A.

[@justsumguy2u]

I agree. Amp B sounded brighter and more lively

[@davidarana791]

@@justsumguy2u Lol I also like B better but I think that the amp A was more twangy and with less depth also less reverb.

[@deewing6439]

@@davidarana791 thats why country guys used to love fender amps ;) sooooo much twang for days lol

[@yasink21]

I think it might have something to do with the old amp not being in a great condition internal electronics wise, lots of gain, reverb and volume difference between the two amps, I preferred the amp B as well.

[@dbo4506]

Yeh B ate it for breakfast.

[@chrisdiceart]

All of Andy's PRO GUITAR SHOP Demo's made the modern DRRI the gold standard for a pedal platform. Thanks for the demo's Rhett! :)

[@hetrickaj]

Amp b had a lot of resonance in the high mid/Treble area which I wasn’t a fan of. Amp A seemed to have a nice kind of “piezo” clean that I’ve always loved.

[@RhettShull]

Ok... The amps are set up IDENTICALLY in this comparison. This was done intentionally to show the differences between the vintage and modern tone. The differences you’re hearing are the actual differences in the amps themselves, giving you a clear picture of how the two amps compare side by side. One is louder than the other, one has more reverb than the other, and trying to dial them in so they sound the same is not a good comparison, nor is it the point of this video. -Rhett

[@zfelps]

So, I think I have an interesting question...which amp did you set first? If you set the dials on both exactly the same, I'm guessing you stated by dialing in a nice sound on one and just copying the settings to the other.

[@Septimius]

Why isn't it a good comparison? Studies show that people will inherently believe a louder signal is better than a lower one, so we're already off to an unfair comparison. An amps themselves vary, for the tubes and the pots. 1MOhm resistor with 5% tolerance is quite a bit variation. It's not that all the time needs to be spent to make up for one amps deficiency, but rather to go "OK, that's way too much reverb, let's tone that down", and to match the levels so that the comparison isn't just "well, one is louder and one has more reverb", because that means nothing when you're trying to buy either of these amps. It's not like you can't turn the volume down if you get one of them. I can't think of any justification to do this comparison in this manner. I have no idea what it's supposed to show.

[@Emcfree2084]

Should still have been volume and FX matched

[@marshalsea000]

Rhett explains in the video at 6:30ish - he set both Amps to 5 across the eq - this gives an apples for apples comparison. Trying to dial it in otherwise becomes completely subjective and adds a huge amount of human bias into it. This is the correct engineering way to do a comparison for amps - without all this whining about "he should of" (have darlings, have). There's a couple of things that would be better for next video: if doing w/ Trem on one then the following comparison should compare with it. Anyway, really enjoyed it, lovely licks, and both sound good in their different way - I'd totally go for the 67 has a lovely warmth to the tone if cash is no question, but how often is that the case?

[@Emcfree2084]

Benjamin Marshalsea no what is subjective is expecting basic components like tone knobs to be exactly the same after 50 years. Amp manufacturers don’t design their amps to be consistent at particular printed markings over half a century, that’s just silly. An Apples to Apples “engineering” comparison would have been to measure the amplitude of the outputs and the timing of the reverb and match them as closely as possible ideally using measuring equipment.

[@gabe2869]

Regardless of which one is vintage, I prefer Amp B

[@JohnnyArtPavlou]

Gabe Elias, me, too.

[@run4buck]

Me too, seems fatter and clearer, though my ears may be fooled as it has a bit more reverb and gain in the clip

[@CharlieAllenGuitar]

Likewise

[@nathansturgess92]

Me too.

[@franklehouillier8865]

I thought reverb on the reissue was much thicker. On the 67, you could barely notice it.

[@drakewithers3347]

I like what folks are suggesting about plugging these into the same speaker cab. But that was some lovely playing. You really made that Tele sing.

[@anotherOneMore7]

For the test, I would suggest either having them both consistently with reverb either switched on or off, but not mixed up for the comparison.

[@stopdead1]

The ‘67 has such a beautiful warm tone.

[@thecoastalcircuit5771]

They both sounded good, but the new one definitely sounded brighter and louder. Despite what others have said in the comments, I think you did the right thing by setting the two amps identically. The goal of this video was to see how they differ in sound, not to see how you can tweak one amp to sound like the other. This video has me wondering, though. How much can we attribute the difference to age? How much do inconsistencies in things like resistors, capacitors, tubes, cabinet wood, and the manufacturing processes factor in? For example, if you line up 10 amps built in the same model year, or even the same production batch, how different will they sound from each other? I'm sure things were a lot less consistent in 1967, but these being tube amps, I'm sure there's a fair bit of variation in the 2017 models as well.

[@req777]

Thank you for this video! also for the Princeton one. They are so useful cuz they such a good tone reference. Helped me squeeze a much nicer tone of my PCB Deluxe Reverb with a little help of few pedals such as MXR eq that I had on hand.

[@judewessel5713]

What an awesome video. Great playing was awesome to listen to.

[@probono9341]

I have the ‘65 DRRI. Hands down, one of the best amps I’ve ever played. Several longtime guitar friends agree that it stands toe-to-toe with the ‘65 originals that they had at one point in their careers. Fender did a nice job with these Reissues.

[@ludwigvistilite]

2017 SEEMS brighter in tone. The 67 seems warmer/fatter. I am sure they could sound exactly the same with some mild knob turning.

[@raykdreisatzgehtanders7239]

@@lobstermendez "Foam" surround??

[@raykdreisatzgehtanders7239]

@@lobstermendez Did Fender really use foam and rubber surrounds? What was their reason for doing that? I've only seen bare or coated paper surround speakers (Eminence, Celestion, CTS... etc.) in aguitar amps.

[@oldtimetinfoilhatwearer]

Kearney Dillon it’s the speaker. I’m guessing they’d sound exactly the same with the same one.

[@psymon3823]

67 much brighter and clearer

[@ashscott6068]

​@@lobstermendez There's way more to it than just the speaker wearing out. Most of the caps and resistors in there have probably drifted 20% off spec by now

[@NebulaStudioPoland]

Hey Rhett, I love your colour grading. In which picture profile you shoot, and what LUTs youre using? Keep up the good work!

[@sydneyhunter3441]

Subscribed late but going through them all until I started watching you in 2019

[@michaelszczys8316]

When I was in jr. high a friend had one with four tens ( I think ) and if you turned it up to 10 you could set things on fire with it. Then there was the amp that Wayne Kramer was using back in the late 70s with the bands he had in Detroit. A Fender twin with two tens or two twelves and he was playing it real hard and heavy one night and one of the two went up in flames and burnt the front up on that side. The problem was it was not his, it was borrowed. It still worked and he still used it. It was the most intimidating amp you ever saw

[@leo.y.comprendo]

At low volumes I really digged the modern one. When you cranked it to 7 the vintage one was far superior though

[@glenndarcy1459]

I thought the same thing..

[@davidisenberg125]

when was the last time or last gig you got to crank one like that ??? I got an 87 silver jubilee that has never seen 3 at a gig ...

[@heartsquaremusic2953]

david isenberg Did it as my main rig for a few years with an attenuator 🍻

[@southboundsuarez9832]

@@davidisenberg125 That is the beauty of a smaller 2x 6v6 based tube amp and a where the Deluxe shines in decent all around size as compared to a 4x EL34 or 6550 based arena styled monster amp. Many opportunities to play in the Deluxe sweet spot without pissing off the FOH

[@millikeith]

I wonder if the 67 is handwired and changes the compression and break up

[@JoshChristiane]

Both sound great clean, but I've found the vintage "tone" is warmer and thicker. I also noticed the gain/distortion on the older is far far better sounding. The 2017 is a great newer amp for the money though, really good reissue.

[@Fugettaboutit]

I've had a lot of experience between the reissues and original Deluxe Reverbs, as well as hand-wired recreations. The differences really come into play when you turn up past 5 on volume and the amps start to drive. That's where the original compresses and blooms more, and the reissue is a bit harder and 'splattier', if you will. Stiffer. I think you can hear it here as well. But the speakers also make a big difference. If the reissue has that newer Jensen C12K with the huge magnet, it's a very woofy speaker. Nice bottom end and rolled-off highs for cleans, but doesn't really come alive when driven like the older/original Jensen C12's or even the Oxfords. Best way to really compare would be to play both amp sections through the same speaker.

[@giulioluzzardi7632]

Yes, let's get him to play both amps through the same speaker(at different times) so we van see if a simple treble adjust or vol adjust makez em sound similar.

[@mitsanut5869]

That's called nit picking. Total nonsense. If you can hear these things on actual records, I will congratulate you. Most of the time this sound is manipulated by various pedals, compressors, EQs and what have you, so this miniscule difference between the two is actually not difference. Even the two same vintage amps will sound different from each other. Videos like these and subsequent wanna be expert comments are totally ridiculous. Instead of being happy there actually is a reissue of a great piece of equipment that we get a chance to own because the original is financially out of reach and so rare, we are looking for defects on the honest piece of work. What a bunch of bullshit.

[@nsc217]

There’s much more reverb on Amp B. How can you compare?

[@starttherebellion9146]

Hey Rhett... Thanks for the shoot-out, but maybe the sweet-spot for the 2017 was not all controls set @ noon as where the 57's maybe was. Do you think the 2017 could have fared better in this contest against the 57' if both amps were dialed-in to their sweet-spots? -- Also, with a few mods... speaker change, circuit component upgrades by a pro, etc... do you think the 2017 could be sweetened up enough to be closer to the vintage 57'? I know that on many cheaper mics modding can go a long way toward sweetening them and increasing dynamic range.

[@RhettShull]

In this case I did tweak the 17 to try and match the 67, and I couldn’t really get it close. The 67 has a sweetness and balance to it that the 17 couldn’t keep up with, I think a major part of that is the original speaker from 67. I think modding a DRRI can go a long ways but in this case the 67 won hands down.

[@starttherebellion9146]

Yeah, it definitely did.

[@deut3168]

I thought I had chosen my desert island amp after watching this. However, I played the Fender profile through my modeler and you're totally right about the bass. It's way overpowering. I'm sure there is a place for it, but it's not my taste. However, I tried the AC30 for kicks and it is near perfect. Great clean tone, not too much of anything. The brightness of it is great for running pedals through. It's a blank canvas amp for my taste. I'm getting back into gigging after many years. I have learned a lot from your channel. Much thanks!

[@philipatoz]

Well, I'm SO glad that I bought my '67 Blackface - back in the mid-80s and when I didn't really know much about them, except that it was sought after and was a really warm and clean amp. I ALMOST traded it in the early 90s for some other vintage gear, but thankfully, I realized what a dumb move that would have been. It's a bit of beast for playing at home, but you can work around that - and I'm thinking about getting an attenuator. Every year, the amp's value makes it tempting to sell - as one considers all they gear they could get for it. But I KNOW I would immediately have seller's remorse!

[@southboundsuarez9832]

Yeah, I wish I had a pocket full of cash back in say 79-80 or so, and could have bought up all those old Fender BF combos that the progressive new age guitarists were passing down the backline.

[@StevenMartinez]

The cleans make them sound much more comparable. But the vintage breaks up WAY nicer than the 2017.

[@The_YouTube_Critic]

Interesting vid! Without headphones on, B sounded louder, a bit more full, but also a bit more brash. A sounded a bit thinner but had a softer quality. Could be the difference in speakers more than anything.

[@mister-LA]

In the introduction I preferred the 2017 Deluxe, but throughout the rest of the video I preferred the 1967. Also, just watched Zak talk about his Deluxe on "Ask Zak" and was impressed with his review and upgrades. I just bought a Princeton Reverb, which is also a great amp, but had I seen this video before I might have chose differently. Thanks Rhett.

[@edsantilli9442]

Wire the 17 into the 67's speaker. Is it just the old speaker? I'd love to know.

[@Sr.Rakthai]

DO THIS!

[@R3TR0R4V3]

Tubes too.. If that old deluxe has RCA tubes, that makes a difference too. New tubes don't sound quite as good.

[@stefanerceg89]

Yes is it, I tried it. Tone is in the speaker.

[@southboundsuarez9832]

@@R3TR0R4V3 Definately a plus on a decent set of RCA Blackplates if ya can find 'em. The whole caveat here being in finding "decent" blackplates, I dont beleive it when a vendor says the RCA's are actually really "NOS" ! Many hundreds of RCA vintage used tubes but a greater and greater majority of those tubes are coming up pretty much hammered and well used up. But ahhhhh yeah, a vintage blackplate in a vintage Blackface is a beautiful thing. For total tonal perfection try vintage Telefunkens for the preamp tubes, a vintage Mullard for the rectifier and a vintage Amperex Bugle Boy on the Reverb, a modern TungSol reissue in the P.I. and some early 50's vintage RCA Blackplates or late 50's TungSol 6V6's! I have rolled many many tubes thru many Deluxe Reverbs, also including modified reissue amps too. Overall for production tubes, I am liking the Reissue Tung Sol. I dont know what Reflektor is doing different in the production, but they are very consistient. I use them exclusively in the P.I. of most all amps, where they are very robustful!

[@R3TR0R4V3]

Of course you have to be very selective in what you buy.. I won't just blindly buy any old "NOS" tubes without data & proof. I gotta see some numbers to back it up. On the reissues though, I absolutely agree on the new Tung Sols.. They sound great and the price is certainly right! 😎 Cheers

[@utai4571]

i'm gonna get flammed for this, but the reissue sound so much better to my ears! i miss this amp everyday i should have never sold it haha

[@Sooby007]

Funny the first part of the vid the reissue sounded "better" to me. Then after that with the closeup shots, the 67 sounded way better. I wonder if you could get the sounds more similar by EQing them differently. If the reissue has too much lows, turn them down. I love my DRRI. I payed $650 for it used and it sounds great until you juice it a bit and push the low end. They can't quite keep it together. That's where the boutique amps take it to the next level.

[@RhettShull]

You’re so right about the boutique amps.

[@yaki_font]

I think the same

[@Kenrox77]

I think the reason the amp sounded better initially was because the reissue was actually coming through louder than the original. Unfortunately, we percieve louder as better... when the volume was better adjusted you could better notice the character in the '67.

[@bryansmith6865]

New transformers would help tame the low-end flub that plague the smaller fenders. Worked well on my 70’s Princeton reverb

[@SuperGoodlovin]

I like B

[@clifflee7461]

Hi Gigged my Deluxe RRI for over 15 years with NOS tubes never missed a beat and the putters loved it there great gigging tone machines

[@davidisenberg125]

I will throw my 2 cents in because i'm old as dirt and remember the old stuff.....you can get a used deluxe for 500 to 700 bucks which makes the old one 4 times more …. but here's the kicker with all old stuff, could you take it to a gig and not worry about it ????? I've had friends lose valuable gear thru the years to the point where they take cheap stuff to gigs so they need not worry about losing valuable equipment....that's a big deal

[@Whiteyy191]

By lose you mean people just steal your stuff?

[@davidisenberg125]

@@Whiteyy191 had a great player and dear friend lose a ES 335 at a gig... guy grabbed it and took off running and he never saw it again

[@musicguypodcast6825]

Thissss is tru. Some guys rock the "dad rig" and bring out the vintage stuff or overkill expensive gear. Like you don't need a 4x12, in ear monitors and a wireless system if you're playing a small bar with an even smaller stage. If anything It might even make the gig more difficult. I feel like an amp like this is special and needs to be for the studio, a special gig or a really good gig with good sound. If you're trying to do it for a career at least. If you're just having fun on the weekends with the boys/not playing often then completely ignore my crusty musician nonsense.

[@Hendrix67297]

A large part of this argument is: Chasing tones that are vintage or belong to another player. Or. Having the strength to develop your own sounds.

[@shawnglass108]

Another part of this is why don’t they or can’t they make the modern reissue that matches the tone of the older amps they made. Sometimes they make something that is great or even perfect and perhaps it should never have been changed at all.

[@DavidMorales008]

@@shawnglass108 I really do think they copied the ingredients but you just can't get that sugar anymore. What Rhett is calling cheaper parts are not so much to cut costs so much as it's what's easily available. Making it cheaper for the customer isn't the end goal considering you can follow the schematics and build one yourself cheaper without having the buying power for parts they have at fender. Anyways sorry for this long book that I'm writing but my main point is that difference in materials that were accessible today compared to the ones accessible in the 60s. The copper wiring the tubes the power plug etc.

[@tonechaserstl4089]

I am 1:25 into the video. So far I like B, so expect it to be the Vintage issue

[@tonechaserstl4089]

Now an 5:07 into the video, was surprised to see that I initially preferred amp B which turned out to be the RI. But once the demo continued and the tones got dirtier after volume turned up amp A, the 67, was my preference. It will be interesting to see how this ends up.

[@nsc217]

What? Who are you to tell someone what they think sounds better? Maybe they like how the 67 sounds. The sound is the sound. You can’t make it sound a certain way. Your fingers don’t create tone. They shape tone

[@splashesin8]

Well I couldn't know when the indicators were A or B, 😎 but I lived with fender amp that sounded similar. My dad bought it in 66 or 67, but it may have been a couple of years older. I wish my brother hadn't pawned my dad's red Guild with the western cutouts that he purchased around the same time as that amp.

[@DavidDennis68]

Sounds like the speaker is the biggest difference. Changing the speaker in the new one might be the best thing.

[@9uidin9li9ht2]

What speaker would you recommend?

[@caiusmadison2996]

Throw a Jensen in it. Thatd chill it out, like the older one.

[@thefail1999]

Caius Madison didnt the old ones come with jensens?

[@caiusmadison2996]

@@thefail1999 yes, for a while and then Eminence. Jensen is the magical key to the old Fender sound, in large part.

[@jimmy5634]

@@caiusmadison2996 a agree. Those old Jensens are warm. I own a 1951 Valco National 12 watts with a 12 “ field coil Jensen in it. You should hear that baby purr!

[@sreberni]

I've built my own re-issue of a Deluxe Reverb as a modding platform to get my unique tone, using vintage correct premium parts. When trying to get towards a nice vintage-inspired tone I identified the speaker as being the single most important thing to experiment with. Modern Jensen's don't sound at all like their ancestors, but you can get nice speakers from companies such as Eminence or Weber which do a good job. Beyond that, the tubes make a huge difference. I spent some money for some nice NOS in V1 & V2. Using an RCA 5751 in V2 really makes the Vibrato channel shine. Now, playing it for quite some time, whenever I want to refine my sound I just open it up and mod it as necessary. This gives me my own Blackface inspired Custom amp which for me beats everything else around, probably including an all original mid-60s DR. And it's fun work to do ;-)

[@Cheezeeeee]

Nobody: Guitar: Rhett: (talking or vlogging) Fender amp: eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee....

[@evmanbutts]

All fenders I've used are the same... when you aren't playing there's just that bzzzzz to remind you to play a riff or two to get it to screw off hahaha

[@Cheezeeeee]

@@evmanbutts hahahahahahaha!

[@MisterNiles]

If he had the tremolo on, it would have been the beginning of Talk Talk's Laughingstock to perfection... except for his talking.

[@koalanectar9382]

That's not unique to fender amps nor guitar amps in general. High end studio monitors do the same thing. You *can* get rid of it, but it also effects the high frequency response of the system, so it's generally not an issue since you only hear it when you're.. not playing anything. So, who cares.

[@anthonyhitchings1051]

How many coponents such as capacitors have been replaced in the old amp?

[@bongnp]

Adding this to playlist "that being said" drinking game. Rock on

[@randyc5650]

At the beginning, B/2017 sounded like more reverb was dialed in. 67 overdrive sounded clean while 2017 overdrive sounded muddy and muted. In my experience, you can always take clean and muddy it up and mute it but you cant clean up a sound that starts out muddy or muted.

[@rafaels.5503]

The 67 sound smoother, as I expected. Now, both sound great to me.

[@russellhltn1396]

Different speakers make a huge difference. Just about everyone can hear the difference between different model speakers (although determining which is "better" is harder). But I'd also be curious about the tubes. I'd imagine the '67 had older tubes that were not as "hot" as they used to be, while the '17 had different tubes that were fresh from the factory. That may account for the difference in volume. Someone else pointed out about the caps - older cap that are starting to fail are likely to have less crispness.

[@SavageDarkness]

It is for this exact reason that I believe that the older one is not worth DOUBLE the price for people who are not collectors. If you are a player, I would elect the reissue and buy new speakers.

[@turunturun]

Same thing I thought... “talk to me about the tubes in both amps...those alone will make a significant difference.” I hand built a ‘65 BF clone and the difference between NOS GE Reverb Driver and modern tube was HUGE on the amount and lushness of the Reverb.

[@MRod1079]

I happened to own a 94" DRRI and it cranks. I did put new caps in it & added a Weber Signature Speaker. RE: Your Comparisons, I prefer the '67 for overdrives and the '17 for clean sounds

[@1960fusion]

they both sound great but with subtle differences. i have a modern 2018 65 reissue and love it. leo fender was budget driven in his day as well, if there was printed circuit boards then, he would have used them. i agree that the 50 year old amp probably mellowed with age and the speakers make such a difference, i have friends that constantly experiment with changing components and it is amazing the how different it sounds when they change brand or spec speakers. thanks for the comparison, i look forward to the next one!

[@bachiano1]

If you don't volume match then it is not a proper test. Psychology has proven most ppl will prefer loudness over softness. Even if softer is higher quality.

[@Jeronimo.67]

Most people are not very experienced listeners. Listening actually requires you to turn the volume down to a comfortable level and then really relax your mind to the point of stillness... maybe even turn the mind off completely? I haven't got there yet...

[@spentfromnz]

The question wasn't which one sounds better.

[@Radical_Middle]

Im a sound engineer long time and I was about writing same comment, but I spotted Batchiano's. people don't see the sound so we can talk to them like to the wall. there is no possible comparison of two sounds if volume is not matched. louder always sounds better and because of it we have shitty compressed and limited to the bone pseudo music this days without any dynamics left. so called war on loudness.

[@jimbo4311]

@@Radical_Middle Please go on about the today's psuedo music. Your writing intrigued me. War on loudness, dynamics, etc.

[@Radical_Middle]

@@jimbo4311 computers took over most of recording studios (except most expensive ones). When digital audio processing max loudness level is measured with binary code, so whatever precision on measurement is (number of bits - 16bits for CD, 24 to 32 todays home studios) the result of this measurement can not cross number 1(16 ones or 24 ones, doesn't matter) in other words there is a limit of 1 for loudness of a digital music file. It was discovered as well, that humans tend to change a song they listen to on radio rather than raise up volume level of the song. It correlates with concept of loudness matching for comparison of two audio files (pieces). Therefore since 90's producers want sound engineers to make a song as loud as possible (whole dynamic range of the song has to be compressed and limited to fit 6dB range down from max level which is a fixed one - all ones in binary code - it is called war on loudness). Result of this process is an audio file with flat dynamics and high loudness - quiet bits volume is raised, loud bits volume is lowered. In addition - today's music is based on samples and computer plugins like melodyne, pitch correctors, all of this eliminates those human mistakes so called 'air' in music. digital processing is slicing a waveform and measuring that slice with bits, it reduces odd harmonics (which are part of the sound responsible for warmth, color and travel of sound wave) in noticeable way. So prepared wave file is compressed further for less weight (trade) to mp3 format. we use bad quality audio equipment today - in ear headphones, cheap Audio/Digital converters, preamplifiers, (all built into our toys) so people are not able to hear difference because it is not possible without comparison - for that you need proper acoustically treated room and analog audio equipment, or at least good cans, converters, preamps and proper wave file before compression to mp3.

[@brucer261]

the 67 came alive when you turned the volume up. Before that I was leaning towards the new amp

[@robschaller9061]

The tone is just amazing in the vintage amp. I have a 1987 3203 Marshall Artist. I absolutely love the sound of these vintage amps. Its really tough to get a better sounding amp than these great vintage amps

[@robertogomesmusic]

The Tele sounds amazing as well!!

[@herrfriberger5]

How much has the old amp been served? Less bass could be due to aged capacitors.

[@jman1428]

It is the speaker, the c12k is a better speaker

[@OldWhitebelly]

His complaint about the 67 seems to suggest old dead filter caps. And because of the idiotic prioritis of the collector market, people leave that old shit in a lot of old amps. But whatever the state of the parts inside, the comparison loses any meaning when it's overlooked. This video is sadly useless.

[@jessemontano6399]

Your channel is gonna BLOW up, exponentially. Keep it up bro. Best regards from southern California

[@gfmgma]

3:35 this is gonna haunt me forever, that sounds really really bad in comparison

[@etoirelav]

Lol, I knew exactly the section before I listened, it was the moment I regretted having the Reissue.

[@gfmgma]

@@etoirelav i feel you, bro

[@sherman_enz]

The sweetness of the 67' it's incomparable

[@keithrinehart809]

I think some of the tone difference can be contributed to the speaker ages. The '67 speakers are probably more broken in. Both sound great.

[@madsmadsen2780]

I really thought the difference would be smaller

[@jessd1952]

The vintage is definitely worth twice the price. Also I would have liked to hear with the speakers swapped to hear the difference.

[@TheSonicfrog]

I've owned a Deluxe Reissue for several years now, with the Fender Special speaker, and it has great projection on stage. Front end it with a Boss ME-80 to get whatever crunch I may need. It sounds awesome with my Rickenbacker 360/12 on "Byrds" compressor settings, and I can get a decent Edge tone with my FrankenCaster thru the ME-80. Coupled with a decent effects setup, you can't beat it for overall quality in my book, and it doesn't weigh a ton!

[@helio1055]

Reissue sounds “fuller” but the breakup on the 67 sounds much sweeter

[@hereigoagain5050]

The musician matters more than the equipment IMHO. I enjoyed' Rhett's playing on both.

[@bluesslider76]

As soon as I heard the hair on the amp A compared to the glassy sound of B. “A” was definitely my choice for the vintage.

[@g4guitarschoolsoxnardventu805]

I have a Wilder half stack that I got from a friend who’s grandfather had it in storage for decades. I think it was made in 1970. It has a rotating horn in it. It still works! Any thoughts about Wilder amps? I tried to find info about it, and there is hardly anything out there. Do I have a rare gem? Or is it nothing really special?

[@real_fjcalabrese]

The vintage amp is amazing. It's just too nice to gig with. I'm looking for a used reissue.

[@jesseolivares2269]

The 67 is the original sound and generation of Fender. Thumbs up!

[@chrisbarba5295]

It's fair to set all to 5 for initial comparison, but it would also be interesting to (albeit subjectively) try to match volume, tone and verb. I thought the 2017 held it's own pretty well in the single note section at the beginning, but when getting into chords at 3 mins 30 sec, that flipped to 100% vintage for me. They both sound great; it comes down to the individual plugging in and dialing in.

[@Foot-N-Mouth]

No it's not. What would be fair would be to record each amp with the same levels and the same vintage speaker/tubes/biasing. OR maybe run them through an Ox Box straight into an interface sans speaker.

[@treecavecreative1581]

Love this video Rhett, thanks as always. Got a '65 Pro Reverb that is just so sweet. A little quieter than the Deluxe and breaks up a little earlier, but essentially the same thing. Check them out if you ever have the chance!

[@ignatiusjk]

Both sound nice ,but I think I like the 67 sound better. The 67 has a more fuller mellower sound where the 2017 has a brighter sound.

[@daw162]

no matter how they sound relatively, if the 2017 sounds different than the 1967, people will explain it away as not being good. If it's tighter and more focused, people will say "oh, it sounds boxy, not open - new amps aren't made with the open sound that they used to have". if it's more open, people will say "it sounds artificially open compared to vintage - they overdid it". As long as the vintage is more expensive and exclusive, people adjust their opinion to match what it does.

[@johnstone7697]

Does the '67 amp still have its original output tubes? Beyond the likely very different speaker designs, that can really account for a lot the differences (lower volume, less bass punch) if those tubes are heavily worn.

[@jasonism123]

Great video man! Can you also upload a few videos of your guitar licks? Or maybe free short lessons? Thanks and more power to you!

[@cristobaldiaz9610]

The vintage one sounds muuuuuuuuch better.

[@longotown]

The 67 kills the re-issue, not even close.

[@paulcowart3174]

Yeah I guessed after the first riff Hand wired no comp

[@jebpleb1803]

i agree. I have a new one my other guitarist has an old 1 and his sounds way better when its driven.

[@jebpleb1803]

also he's way better lol

[@gustavofring9013]

As a former owner of a blackface amp, it was pretty easy to determine. Age gives it that more vintage tone, but also makes it a little less powerful, which is why B sounded a little louder

[@allrequiredfields]

Age doesn't do shit. That 67 sounded exactly the way it did in 67. Gear tone has nothing to do with aging.

[@AndrewAmado]

Great video! If you ever revisit this comparison you should do one comparing the vintage ‘67 amp to an Alessandro High-End Products Hand-Wired Deluxe Reverb Reissue.

[@Turboy65]

It's not even right for Fender to call these reissues when "Inspired by vintage amps" would be more fair. To me, a true reissue is as close to the original design and construction as is humanly, technically, and legally possible. That means that they should have used the fiber boards and point to point hand wired construction and the original circuits and not a circuit board to be seen. A reissue should be so exact that its existence also means that now replacement parts are available to restore old original amps, FINALLY, after so long. There's a pretty decent market for those restoration parts alone.

[@yargnad]

If that were the case they would have to sell them for nearly the same price, if not more, and most player couldn't afford it and would rather have the vintage option anyways. The main difference is the speakers and you can get a pair of vintage Oxfords, which aren't made anymore, for less than $200 on Reverb. People seem to forget that Fender is the original budget brand, making affordable amps and guitars that fit almost any income bracket. I scoff at vintage purists and for those prices, I'll take a handwired modern amp from nearly any boutique builder (Swart, Magnatone) rather than a 67 which likely needs new caps, per my ears.

[@2beJT]

Been to a lot of concerts where the guitarist was playing the reissue Deluxe Reverb so Fender did some things right. I do like the 1967 more in this comparison.

[@jacobl6572]

@JM Coulon The speaker is perhaps half the tone. Hand wiring can also means better caps, higher rated resistors, (1/2 watt vintage carbon comp verse 1/4 watt silicon ) better pots, switches, tube sockets, plugs, jacks, quality transformers....I have worked on both and owned a few DRRI's. So you can end up with a more robust amp that sounds better being hand wired,,, but not necessarily as quiet when turned down, the one possible drawback.

[@westelaudio943]

@@jacobl6572 Hand wired is definately more reliable.

[@amidthefight6915]

Wow, I was convinced the vintage one would be Amp B. The newer one sounded way better in this vid!

[@AlanDavid]

i used a 66 vibrolux for concert venues....4 years on the road, it never failed me.three boss pedals and a volume pedal only.I also own a 62 brown vibrolux that sounds awesome.Totally different than the 66.

[@SCELLICK]

I have a 67, bought it when I was in high school (that tells you how old I am). Never has been out gigging has been in my house the whole time. I loved your comparison, and just said yes, yes, yes. I had it gone through a few years ago. The guys in the shop wanted o buy it. I told them I had told my daughter she could have it ( and my 1969 ES175) upon my death. I took their card and said I would give it to my daughter and she would stop down after my funeral and sell it ( she doesn't play).