1973 vs 1972 vs 1971 vs 1970 vs 1968 Celestion Greenbacks, how consistent were they? |

[@thenameless3271]

1968! Perfect! I know your channel leans more towards the tones of the 70s, but those few years right before are what I really love. Great to hear the comparison, thanks!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks, glad you like it!

[@studiorecords11]

Hi johan , great video! Ive got a large collection of many different vintage greenbacks. That 68 speaker indeed has a recone, this is a 1973 pulsonic 1777 recone. In 1973 there was this small period that Pulsonic cones had the 1777 mark on it. Most of the 1973 greenbacks are found with a large 3 on it, which is pulsonic as well. Keep on the good work! love it.

[@johnmartin5153]

I've been waiting 40 years for this video ! Thanks Johan

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks John! I’m glad to hear that

[@EL34Quartett]

Johan, Thank you so much for sharing all your findings on your permanent hunt for all parameters of great tone.

[@alanst.4417]

Thumbs up to Celestion for answering your question and helping with resources! I didn't really believe that would happen... As usually, your video is full of useful information about Pulsonic greenbacks, thanks Johan! Almost all of them sound great except for the 1970 IMO. For my tastes I probably preferred the 1968 and 1973 the most. My G12H from the same month as your 1973 (CF) also has a 1777 lead cone, but the other one from July 1973 only has the "3" on it as you said, so the 1777 stamp may have been used in the early 1973? Can't wait to see the follow-up videos, especially the H magnet comparison if you do that! Rock on!

[@5150forevermore]

That 1968 is literally perfect. Wow 😮

[@qua7771]

Something about what Marshall, and Celestion was offering that particular year. They got it right then.

[@peterlukach310]

Considering how old these all are and all the variable in how much they were played and the environments they were kept in I'd say the consistency is pretty amazing. I honestly thought there would be alot more difference. Great video

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Peter!

[@EzraTheChannel]

These more in depth videos are great. Always love to hear the tones and then see how they stack up against each other on the frequency chart

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks, it’s great to hear that!

[@Victinfien]

The 68 is exactly what I want, it’s god tier tone

[@bygone_tones6873]

That historical information about Mueller / Pulsonic that you and dr.decibel have found, is a great find. I haven't read through it all yet but it looks very interesting. Look forward to seeing what else you can discover.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks! And I really appreciate your valuable work to spread knowledge about these great speakers!

[@alanst.4417]

Kudos for all of your work for the community! Your page is a vault full of treasures, I used it a lot when looking for Pulsonic greenbacks.

[@bygone_tones6873]

@@JohanSegeborn Thanks mate. You are not doing a bad job yourself 😄

[@iamgodbringmecake]

This is such a great video. Great testing methods and awesome tones/jams as always! You rock 🤘🏼

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks, great to hear that!

[@eddieholmes3236]

Brilliant comparison Johan and great to hear that Celestion have been watching your videos! I liked the '68 best - the most open and expansive. Will be fascinating to see how close the modern clones come to that.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Eddie! Glad to hear that

[@Ontariosound]

I have a few cabs. Most with Celestions. My 1x 12 Neo Creamback sounds really really good. The best is my friend's 1968 Plexi Full Stack, bought by his brother in law from Manny's Music in 1969. Rumours are that Jimi played through it at the store.....

[@brianr76]

There was never a doubt in my mind in regards to the knowledge you have/have had.

[@rickya3877]

They all sound great and a little different from one another...cool that Celestion came back with that info (and we now know who NOT to believe 😉)..I'm really looking forward to the new speaker comparison!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Ricky!

[@brianr76]

I don’t think there was ever any doubt as to who was correct…. Least not with me. Johan, nicely done with class 👍🏻

[@stevencancel1727]

Glad we are using the graph to compare all the speakers able to use actual numbers to show us what we are hearing Let's go!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Steven!

[@davebird534]

Hey Johan! Great video! I know a great deal about vintage speakers but I always learn something new from watching your videos ! Hey I've got a couple of really Jenson c 12n's if your interested. Cones are perfect 😮

[@sg-ou4ql]

That's awesome! I also can't wait for the comparison with the new greenbacks.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks! Glad to hear that

[@Sonicaanimal]

Compare 68 and 73 with the new one's! Please

[@maryannmoran-smyth3453]

The 70 and 71 for me, They just seem to be a little more smoother and tighter to my ear… Cheers…. another great show and I have to say I love geekin out on gear with you John It’s one of my favorite pastimes next to cranking out my own musak on my Marshall stacks with my flying V…. Keep on rockin

[@JohanSegeborn]

Glad to hear that! Cheers Maryann!

[@bluesful]

In my limited experience with vintage Greenbacks, no 2 will sound the same, and this video is a good demonstration of that. The '71 was my favourite here.

[@riangarianga]

Thank you for the video, so packed in good data. I really enjoyed it! I missed it on the premiere day, busy as I was with my own amp experiments. 😆 It's great Dr Decibel answered to shed light on the topic. As I mentioned before, you and others carried out such empirical tests on Greenback speakers in the past, always pointing in this direction, and they just can't be matched or «debunked» by any newcomer to this model carrying out his first test. 😉

[@ahof1985]

Yeah..that '68 is the one for me. Another eye-opening vid. Thanks.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@mddorogi]

'68 and '73 for me. Great comparison. Just bought a set of '74 with presumably RIC cones, would be great to hear a RIC cone for comparison.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks! I compare RIC to Pulsonic here kzbin.info/www/bejne/mImZp2mcirCDmMU

[@picksalot1]

Fascinating to see the Frequency Charts compared to what we hear. Wow, some of those high frequencies sound like they could cut through Steel, let alone a Mix. I recently read an Article that showed Eric Johnson's Marshall Amp "Lead" tone settings for a live performance, and the Treble was on zero. Thanks

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks! Interesting

[@picksalot1]

@@JohanSegeborn The information and photos are in a fascinating Article online called "A Thorough Breakdown of Eric Johnson’s Lead Tone and Technique."

[@siegfriedwashburn3484]

Hi, Johan! Thank you for the interesting theme, it's give me a big resources for use. Greatest thanks! Have a nice weekend! See you! Siegfried

[@JohanSegeborn]

Have a great weekend Siegfried

[@ElmoSyr]

Great stuff! Thank you! It's rare to hear so many old ones side by side. As I speculated in the previous video, the tolerance seems to be around 2-5dB. That 6dB difference at the top end is huge! Also I'd say you have to look at the eq curve as a whole. eg. in the 70 speaker you start with a 1.73dB boost in the 50Hz area and end up with a -1.59dB cut in 700Hz. That's a total of 3.32dB difference in the low to low mid spectrum and can be clearly heard. So it's not only the top end, although in there the difference is greatest. But that said 1-3dB can be quite easily compensated for in post processing as you mentioned. I've recently compared similarly around 20 different V30 speakers. And the later ones made since the 2010s are the most consistent. Before that they vary a lot more than in your example here. The difference is as big or bigger than you'd expect from a pulsonic to a Kurt Müller. Also I once had to do a recone job to a modern Alnico Blue from the 2010's and the new 53H1777 cone measured within 0,5dB compared to the original. Can I ask how did you do the frequency chart? Did you do a sine sweep? If so, what did you use as the power amp?

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Elmo! Have you published anything from your V30 study, it sounds really interesting! To get the frequency response curves I actually used the first riff where I strum all strings equally hard and Cubase calculates the average over about 15s. I should probably compare that method to the standard method described at Jensens web site to see how accurate it is. Cheers

[@ElmoSyr]

​@@JohanSegeborn No, unfortunately I haven't had the time to make any public info about it, since it's pretty recent/ongoing work. Also since it's related to my job as an audio engineer, I have to be careful about the recordings because I'm doing a lot of that on client paid time, so I don't own all of the recordings. Most of what I've measured is confirming what Nolly Getgood has done and published. There seem to be at least 3-4 different "eras" in V30s. The early periods sound more like your marshall cabs and "most" like greenback-speakers (big midrange and nasality), early 2000s are the best sounding ones for modern metal, spanning up to around 2005. Then there seem to be a few really bad years and then the "modern" era after around 2010. But there's quite a bit of guesswork here still. Since I've only had snippets from here and there, through the years. Also as you've seen T75s have at least two separate sounding cones. The start from '87 to maybe '90. And after that, they sound totally different. I would guess that it's a similar story with all speakers from celestion. If you're going to do sine sweeps, be careful with the very low frequencies, they can destroy cones (that's what happened with the Alnico Blue). An "issue" with your measuring method might be that all frequencies are not equally represented and doesn't necessarily show all of the peaks and troughs of the cabinet, where they might differ more or less from each other. But I think it's quite a valid test none the less when AB comparing like this. Especially for home recordists. With the Jensen's measuring method (1m away) you have to remember that there's already quite a lot of room sound coming into the mic so that will skew the results somewhat. I think they're using an anechoic chamber in their measurements.

[@truereligion7752]

Awesome video, awesome info, awesome sound Also Go for the 68! Might never sell my 68’ loaded cabs but unloaded

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks man! And yeah your 68 cabs are benchmark stuff for sure

[@amoruzz]

Great work Johan! 👍👍

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@stevehughes1510]

Thanks Johan, very interesting indeed. I go '73, '70, '68.............cheers.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Steve! Cheers!

[@SteveOuimette]

That '68 just KILLS! Man, I'll take 4 please (no charge, lol).

[@JohanSegeborn]

😉 Cheers Steve

[@juliusmanno337]

I had several 70's Celestion speakers and blew several too, laughs,, I had the blown ones reconed in early 1974 and thought they sounded better than originals. I had a gr8 speaker guy at that time I guess he had the right paper? Thanks Johan for confirming that recones are also gr8!

[@Stefan-]

Its a bit funny that yout favorite is the one that looks in the worst condition, band aid and all, but it is how it sounds that matter of course ;-) . Its was quite a big difference in the sound of these speakers it also made me think about how big difference there could be if you bought 4 brand new greenbacks at the same time from the same dealer to try to get them as close to the same production date as possible. I dont know if you have tested this already, if not it may possibly be an interesting test to see how much a guitar speaker can vary from example to example when new.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Yeah that repeatability would be interesting to test. I assume they’re pretty consistent if coming from the same batch

[@anthonydratnal1870]

A true reference video Johan! Could you possibly get your hands on an early 90's early reissue G12M-25 and compare it to one of these originals?

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Anthony! Ragnar and I play vintage Greenbacks with 90s recones here kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqLCnqdna8lkeJY

[@anthonydratnal1870]

@@JohanSegeborn fantastic, I will check it out!

[@hgostos]

1973 was a great year!!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Cheers H G O!

[@shotgunrebels]

Agree!

[@chrisstevens4680]

So now I am confused, I agree that your demo of vintage Black Back vs Green Back sounded different to each other (I.e. Black back = early AC/DC etc) but the Celestion web site Dr Decibel FAQ’s states: “Although the standard colour for G12M rear covers was green (‘field green’ it was called originally), G12M and G12H speakers were also made with black, as well as grey, beige and cream rear covers at various times. This was probably due to a shortage of the correct colour plastic to make them from (e.g. late delivery of the raw material). The different colour covers were only a cosmetic change not affecting the acoustic performance of the speakers in any way. Black, grey, cream, beige or green, they’re all ‘Greenbacks’.” So is it purely down to date and type of cone as opposed to the colour of the cover? I think that we need to finally decide on which new speakers are the ‘standard’ replacement to achieve a great sound (is it still the Celestion Fullback???) and most importantly how many hours of loud use is needed to ‘burn them in/run them in’ to achieve the ultimate tone……..phew!! …..maybe you could annoy your neighbours and give us a comparison of ‘brand new out of the box’ speakers and then the same speakers after 24 hours of full volume use!! 😂

[@voxpathfinder15r]

I have a creamback from June ‘74, which should mean it has 98700 cone. But it looks like it was reconed or spider and dust cap replaced and redoped sloppily. But unfortunately no writing on the backside of the cone. But the speaker is bright sounding like a 98700 cone I have heard here

[@andreas5153]

Now the question is: What kind of speakers do use in your home stereo? And what amplifier? Do you prefer vinyl? I enjoy my Sansui AU-217 with Monitor Audio R252 speakers.

[@mgalbu]

Excellent comparison Johan! All great sounding and very consistent. My favourite was the 1972. Glad that Celestion cleared up that weird claim from the other channel. What a clown...lol

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks man, glad to hear it!

[@oceanchief2388]

I thank you sir. You are a professor.

[@HAL-zx1bw]

68, 71 and 73 were very balanced and smooth 70 and 72 had very harsh and ice picky highs. All vintage greenbacks are not created equal, very interesting!

[@peterschmidt9942]

They all vary slightly, some closer than others but they all have that celestion twangy sound to them. Although I'm sure with some tone control tweaks, you could get them all to sound roughly the same.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Peter, yeah most of them would definitely

[@shotgunrebels]

It might be interesting to compare greenbacks from the same year and maybe individually from the same cab.

[@JohanSegeborn]

I’ve actually done that and they vary a bit too

[@Schlumpf.Meister]

I have just bought 4 1973s, one pair with identical date and two with different dates, the jungest produced in June. The sound very similar. However, I had a coil issue with one of them, it got repaired reusing the paper cone, this one does now, after the repair, sound a bit darker. I was told it would still take some time to break in though.

[@zachariahwade8482]

I’ve got two 68 straight cabs. Both have t1221 Pulsonic Greenbacks(25 watt/75hz) One has July date codes while the other has August, and the two cabs sound noticeably different. The July cab is all midrange with an emphasis on the high mids and a lean bottom end. The August cab has much more bottoms and tops but somehow seems a little louder and crunchier. Definitely a warmer sound. For example my stock 71 1987 is perfect with the Aug cab but I struggle to dial it in with the July cab. On the other hand my stock 70 Super Bass absolutely loves the July cab but with the Aug cab can get a little boomy. Some of the variables that might explain these differences are the July cab has been poorly regrilled with a thin black cloth and is on casters, whereas the Aug cab has thick salt n pepper basketweave and is on the floor. But it’s probably mostly just that they were played differently over their 55 years. Best cabs I’ve ever played.

[@mohamedtlass3842]

I was amazed that the recone sounded that good! The 71-73 were very similar

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Mohamed!

[@mohamedtlass3842]

I commented too early, now it all makes sense since it is a period done recone

[@DMSProduktions]

Very nice! They ALL sounded good, but I liked '70 & '73 the best! \m/

[@qddk9545]

Really interesting video, and why not contact Kurt Müller too? They are still going strong with a factory in Germany making speaker cones. And I also found Pulsonic in the US, but I can´t find my notes right now. I would have contacted them, but you will have much more impact than I have. I can´t remember if I found Pulsonic indirectly via a take over announcement from another company.

[@Sonicaanimal]

68 and 73. This info is gold. That's the only acceptable years

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks, it’s a question of individual speakers rather than years though

[@pppaulie73]

The 1972 was my favorite. The 1971 was my least favorite. Great comparison!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@brianstebbins8208]

Hi Johan. Great video! I have an idea for a video. I recently upgraded my guitar cables to Mugami cables. I did this because I had some connection problems during a gig. Upon making the change, there was a significant improvement to my tone. The amp came alive with more sonic detail and dynamics. It would be interesting to see some comparisons between various cable brands and the sonic impact. Cheers!

[@brianstebbins8208]

I am using a Marshall JVM head.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Brian! I’ll keep it in mind. Cheers!

[@YeatzeeGuitar]

Super interesting!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Glad to hear that

[@semdallinga69]

Awesome, can’t wait till the comparison with the more “budget friendly” options! Might have to consider becoming a Patron tbh

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Sem! Glad to hear that

[@justinshaffer4521]

All great and usable, but here I'm really liking the '70. It sounds a little fresher and very technicolor in the mids Sometimes I enjoy the very chalky diffuse highs of very worn ones, and pre-68 untreated paper voice coil speakers, but with this guitar /amp the '70 is magic to me

[@justinshaffer4521]

PS Interestingly, I made this comment before looking at the frequency graphs. No doubt it's that push around 2kHz in the '70 that I'm hearing and I really dig that a lot.

[@justinshaffer4521]

PPS Hey and now I see that that one has the lighter doping! Sweet! Always fascinating when your ears pick up the things that are already your known favorites. Very cool. Thank you for doing this video, Johan!

[@charlesbukowski9836]

7:15 ACE!!!!

[@JohanSegeborn]

The greatest!

[@adamwatson6916]

The 70 and 71 are my favorites.

[@cosmic687]

68 was the van Halen speaker I believe

[@cesarcros]

Maybe you should look at solderless terminals when you swap up a lot of speakers to compare them like that, it will save you a lot of time for sure!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Indeed

[@MrWilly2204]

They all sounded great but that 68 sounded best to me. The mids where just chewy and perfect.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@ferranmelero7727]

Hey great video I really like the 72 version of that green bag it’s bright and awesome I don’t like speakers that are Dark and muffled sounding speakers aseverybody it’s looking for nowadays

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Ferran!

[@jordantee2383]

Thank you for making these videos johan! I've been in the market for some vintage greenbacks myself. Is there a specific year you recommend for zeppelin? Particularly the 1973 msg tone. I know page used h type speakers.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks! I think Page had a 69’Super bass with cabs, but the condition of the speaker is more important than the vintage

[@Pandamasque]

@@JohanSegeborn Not to mention that the amp was modified with KT88 tubes, likely for more heardoom.

[@vox1966]

Wow they are all different

[@davidgervasoni1486]

68 69 greenback are great, more bass and low mids so a more woody tone, 70 71 are drier less bass a little more of a flat tone. Had 69/70/71 cabs and keep the january 69 one for that reason

[@jeffallen3382]

We all knew Spectra Sound Studios was full of shit! Thanks for getting the correct word on this Johan!

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Jeff!

[@stevencancel1727]

That '72 would sit nice with my 1972 model 1959 100 watt head!

[@davebird534]

Yea I agree , the 68' sounds the best. And the 72' is 2nd best .

[@riffsnoleads]

The 68s are really great but the 73s are also top tier.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks, glad to hear it

[@adamwatson6916]

It's been a known fact that different cones were used thought-out the 70s . You have Puslsonic RIC and Kurt Mueller. Plus we have our ears that tell us the difference. . I get a kick out these I am right and the rest of the world is wrong types

[@ricardadn]

Has fet un gran treball, felicitats!!!

[@what1864]

70 , 72 were my fav , have the sizzle ....

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@davebird534]

Is the 68' 20 watts or 25 watts Johan?

[@brozio77]

68 70 and 73 for me are the best

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@EL34Quartett]

The simple truth is: There is no such thing like greenback tone.

[@SHIN2BAD]

68. Perfect for me.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@qua7771]

69 4:08 70 4:20 71 4:29 72 4:39 73 4:43

[@ricardadn]

M'encanta el so dels 1968!!!!!

[@Pandamasque]

Strangely enough I liked 1972 the least, by faaaar. There's a nasty top end sizzle. 1968 sounded the best to my ear. At least on this kind of gain.

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks!

[@ricardadn]

Com a guitarrista professional et vull demanar que facis palm mute a les cordes superiors i no toquis tan obert. El palm mute és molt necessari ver valorar certs registres dels altaveus i tu el fas servir molt poc. Moltes gràcies des de Catalunya!!

[@hemicuda572]

different wear and tear will make then sound totally different one to the other.....its always like that with vintage gear. No 2 sound alike.

[@JohanSegeborn]

We show in this video that the differences are concentrated to 4-6kHz and that the rest of the spectrum is consistent. And that all speakers in the test retain the same character, although in different degrees of presence

[@SpinandThrowDiscGolf]

I like how he makes the word speaker into two words. spee krrz

[@JohanSegeborn]

Feel free to elaborate

[@ricardadn]

Jo al meu equip tinc quatre Celestions Rola BlackBack!!

[@elgen0314]

'70 & '73 have the best midrange character for me. The others sound OK, but not as good.

[@samizdat113]

IMO the 71 sounds the best.

[@vazeg4008]

'68 & '72 for me

[@michaelquintana8533]

since i find myself getting worse as a guitar player am concentrating on making cool sounds and tones...

[@daniellandrum2736]

I like the 72

[@JohanSegeborn]

Thanks Daniel

[@daniellandrum2736]

@@JohanSegeborn love the videos

[@SpinandThrowDiscGolf]

1968 was by far the clearest and had the least fizz.

[@JohanSegeborn]

The 68 is re-coned with a 70s Pulsonic cone

[@Funkybassuk]

The ‘68 was the best - the ‘72 was the worst!

[@johntsakanikas886]

So not much difference 1970 was just slightly warner then all of them but only a good ear can notice any difference the 73 sound seemed not as good as the rest but its so slight

[@shredgd5]

68 and 73 were my favorite. 71 too dull. 72 too harsh.

[@JohanSegeborn]

My favs too

[@tomasvanecek8626]

72 and later - harsh, for lack of better word

[@JohanSegeborn]

They are all good enough for me. Feel free to introduce us to your world of tone

[@tomasvanecek8626]

@@JohanSegeborn I´m just going by my ears.. sorry to hurt you, Johan 😉 The all time best guitar speaker IMO is the Blue.. now if only they could make it 50W back then.. but the Gold is good enough, thank God.. I use it wherever I can, no substitute .. and I dont care about the paper 🤗

[@Turboy65]

I do hope a certain overweight Canadian loudmouth is watching these videos.

[@rikm2625]

68 was great... that 72 sounded like butt