Was I *WRONG* About Vintage Amps??

[@DarrellBraunGuitar]

Let me know which tones you liked the best! Enjoy :)

[@Jkirk1988]

software. vintage was way too muddy

[@Orville123]

Like the modern sound though the vintage will always have a place in recording classic sounds. The new Fender amps are awesome. You can get the best of both worlds for a decent price. Have a few hybrid amps. Half tube and half digital.

[@jerryhatrick5860]

I nailed each one over the internet. The digital was more pleasing that way with speakers I have. In poerson the amp would be more pleasing to me, trust me.. Thats why I won't go digital except for recording. And that noise in that amp is easily fixable with 3 shielded wires installed correctly where the old ones are. But those tubes the amp has? I've owned them and the amp and the tubes way before tube shortage era. Not a fan of akvyek tone. Btw date the transformers if original and you'd know what year the amp is.

[@hkguitar1984]

Great Video Darrell, Thank You These days it is difficult to justify owning and maintaining a room full of vintage amplifiers, digital is more than close enough sound-wise. It boils down to the type of person who is just interested in the old tube design/idea. I still own and play a Fender Twin Reverb I purchased new back in 1976! It is a great amp design that is easily maintainable and will last a lifetime. The reason I myself have a room full of tube amps is due in part to my age and the fact I grew up with them, its just an old-school thing. The new digital/software offerings are equally amazing, and I can certainly appreciate those as well. Apples and Oranges

[@JamesVytas]

You have a scammer with your photo offering prizes in the chat.

[@bmckee5430]

The tone on your intro was the best tone I've heard on your channel!

[@chrisggoodwin777]

I've been playing guitar and bass for over 30 years (mostly bass) and just got my first ever guitar tube amp earlier this year (Bad Cat Cub 40). What I notice to be the big difference in sound vs. solid state or software is harmonic overtone and picking sensitivity. Even playing without a pick, the string strike sensitivity is incredible. I'm also learning I don't need the amp to break up nearly as much as I thought I did to get a nice overdriven sound.

[@andhewonders]

I've been singing as well for over 40 years and believe everybody should try singing on an all valve PA, it's just beautiful.

[@rexgould]

The software is too prefect. It’s the random imperfections in the tube amp that make it identifiable. I’m not opposed to software or modelling, I just like the simplicity of a good tube amp, plug in, spin a few dials and play. I’ve always found every time I try to get into modelling/software, I get turned off by all the parameters you can adjust, it’s just not for me. Great video as usual

[@KoolMada]

I've been playing for years as well. To me, the biggest difference between solid state and tube is when you are playing out live, the tube amps will sustain quality tone at volume. Solid state, IMO changes tone at higher volumes. You can make adjustments, but the tube amps keep the tone solid from volume low levels all the way to 11.

[@narglefargle]

The difference was VERY noticeable. Confession time: I preferred the software over the real amp in those clips you played. That being said, hearing it in a mix might change my mind. Super Reverbs are pretty killer amps, though...

[@jeremywinnett6352]

A mix will take away your clarity As a tube amp lover, the tube amp will mostly be dead over the next 10-50 years. Once it's "can't tell in the mix", next gen players won't lug them around. They'll be limited to"purists" and studios.

[@cameronjack1095]

lol, me too. I thought the tube amp sounded awful in isolation.

[@cw-on-yt]

Re: "Confession time: I preferred the software over the real amp...." I'm right there with ya'. I preferred the software in every clip but one (the 3rd clip, I think). I felt that a mild re-EQ-ing of the two amps could make them roughly equivalent, though. The software had been set to be noticeably darker and rounder in tone. Perhaps Darrell set them to have identical knob positions, rather than trying to get them as close as possible in actual tone? Not sure, but the software seemed to have a slight low-mid EQ hump. Anyway, I'd love to hear the clip comparison again, but with the following changes: 1. start off by EQ-adjusting each side slightly in the direction of the other until they sound as close as possible 2. let each clip be played over a bass-line, a soft drum pattern, and a faintly-audible B3 to pad the chords a bit That would make it the optimal test, because it would allow both to sit in the mix, and prevent us from distinguishing between them merely on the basis of a low-mid EQ hump. In _theory_ one might then be able to notice one or the other sounding slightly "chimey-er" or "sweeter."

[@mikekennedy2965]

Keep in mind that the software is designed to model what a tube amp sounds like when it is cranked up loud. In this case it is being compared to a tube amp that is NOT cranked up loud. You need to get tubes HOT to get ALL the tones out of them. This is what makes modeling amps great in low volume settings. They have that tone even at low volumes. However, I own both and I can tell you, when you get to turn up a real tube amp, there is no comparison! Close but not the same...

[@GCKelloch]

@@mikekennedy2965 He had the power section "Amp Drive" down on S-Gear, so it's just the tube preamp gain character we are hearing. That was a mistake in my opinion. He also used the Celestion G12H30 speakers. Those are very different than the Fender/CTS 10's in the SR amp. The CTS 10s aren't mid-scooped, have a lower freq upper-mid peak, a flatter high end, and slower transients (smaller voice coil and ceramic magnet).

[@michaelgriffin5304]

I guessed them all correctly. The clarity, snap, and dimension from the tubes just sits differently. In a mix, it is going to work far better. On your own in a room, maybe you'd want tons of bass added to each note but for most actual music/band purposes, you need the guitar to sit in its own place in a mix. Tube amps just have something special about them. Not all of them but some of them.

[@GCKelloch]

Been using amp sims since 1996. I guarantee I can get at least as much "clarity, snap, and dimension" from S-Gear as from a comparable tube amp. It was the first amp sim to correctly incorporate the power tube/transformer/speaker Z interaction. Perhaps that's what you mean by your description? Granted, real mic'd speaker cabs add a dynamic element compared to static speaker cab IRs, but that can be covered with a good non-linear gain plugin.

[@1011skarn]

Some of them are amazing, but I agree with this other dude. A really good amp is just a really good amp. You find one that speaks to you, matches your style, you will be very happy.

[@andreaslupert9222]

I played the game in a different way: I chose always the clip that sounded better to me - and it was always the vintage amp! I was really surprised that 50 years old gear can sound like this! Great experience for me - thank you!

[@barbmelle3136]

From Leo: Good Demonstration. As a guy that hauled around an old Fender Twin Reverb all his life, there is something special about that era of tube amps. Other amps have come and gone, but that old twin always feels like home. I do have to admit the modeling technology has gotten much better in the last 5 or so years. At the high volume levels playing live, a tube amp still has the MOJO.

[@Mindermaniac]

I Love these amps - the 4 tens move that air so well with that huge, clean crispy super reverb sound.! I've always wanted one of these amps! Congrats Darrell, a great find!

[@googleboy7]

Got a 1963 Jaguar when I was a kid. I also have a "63 Bandmaster and Baseman amp. I have a 60s Concert amp w/4 10" speakers. Any time I play it with moderate vibrato, all I need do is hit an Em chord and it turns every head in the room. It's like E.F Hutton just spoke. Indescribable tone! This video brings back wonderful memories. ;-)) Thanks! Shalom/gw PS I need to ask a favor. One of my dear old guitar player buddies is in a hospital in SW PA tonight, after having a stroke. PLEASE, As a believer in the power of prayer, I humbly ask you and your viewers to PLEASE pray for George Barnes. Thank you so much.

[@IamMusicNerd]

Definitely a difference. I didn’t know which was which on the first sample, because I had no benchmark, but every clip after that I could pick it out quickly, once I knew what the amp sounded like.

[@jeffcookdotau]

I guessed wrong on the first clip, but I actually thought that the software sounded better. I correctly answered the last clip but still preferred the software, although I didn't really like either tone in clips 3 to 5. I can't remember which way I jumped with clip 2 but I preferred the vintage amp on that one. Sitting in the room with the amp is obviously different to me playing a KZbin video regardless of how good my speakers may be. I loved the amp and playing at the start of the video though.

[@raelik777]

I felt the same way. I skipped his explanations, and listened to each of the clips several times until I was sure I could pick out which ones were which (not that I could tell which was real amp or not, just which ones were the same "amp" between each clip, which was fairly easy: the software had a touch more bass) and what ended up being the software, I preferred. I didn't dislike the actual amp either, I just liked the overall tone of the amp sim better. Not just the bass frequencies, it just sounded more "open" to me.

[@Balin_James]

@@raelik777 amps are such a funny thing, and each is different. I’m a fender guy, so I really liked the real amp better. And I’ve also played a ‘77 Twin Reverb (before I really knew how to play or what I was really playing) and it’s still one of the best tones I’ve ever had. I also played an 80s Princeton and that was THE BEST tone I’ve ever had. Both were on stage, too. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve had some killer tones with modelers too (and prefer many of them to my Hotrod) and I don’t dislike them much like you with the real thing, but my own preferences are the real amps. Like Darrel said there’s just something about those old amps that a modeler can’t do, and I chase that and crave that. Sound is just funny like that!

[@nealixd.3011]

You can't go wrong with a Fender Super Reverb or its half size brother, the Vibrolux. I have the Fender "Custom" Vibrolux Reverb with the black panel and 1964 white transitional knobs. I got it new in the early 2000s. A little noisy for recording, but great for gigs. Probably the only amp I won't ever sell, unless someone gave me a sizable chunk of dough I could use for a Tone King Sky King. According to Psionic Audio, it is more of a Vibroverb than a Vibrolux. Whatever it is, it just sounds great.

[@cheycasters]

That intro was your best tone ever!! So warm n cuddly!! That amp just needs a little updating love done to it.....Caps, etc.....

[@bobberry1447]

You hit on an important point about the room sound. In a live setting you don't just hear the sound you feel the sound waves from the amp. That warm, special tube sound is highlighted by the feel of the air movement of the speakers. A recording of that same sound is never as good since it loses the direct analog speaker feel in the analog to digital conversion and then the sound change through the different speakers you hear that through. Not sure if that makes sense but it's a real thing to me after playing 35 years.

[@mauricio_luque]

That makes sense perfectly; it has even a name. That's the "final sound". You can't compare an amp vs digital sound in a room because (in this world we live in) you must to record the amp through a microphone to make it reach your audience (by PA, CD or online), so you should only compare the digital sound vs your amp's final sound, and there the software engineers are doing a great job.

[@WillieD7]

It’s really easy to sound close through headphones or on a recording. It’s usually night and day when you’re in the room with an un-mic’ed amp.

[@ProfVonW]

“re-VERB”? I always said “RE-verb”.

[@stevelogan1699]

Hi Darrell, great video with all your usual openness and skill in presentation. There were clear differencees of sound in the samples, but you referred repeatedly to the sound in the room. Most of the vintage amp enthusiasts I'm aware of are gigging musicians and session players (who often don't have to lug their own equipment). I think the real questions for gigging musicians who can't afford vintage amps are a) how does a vintage amp differ in sound and feel from a modern reissue and b) how far can the feel in the room of a vintage amp be reproduced by a high-quality sim played through an FRFR speaker with appropriate cab simulation. But it seems to me that few performing musicians are much concerned with reproducing the exact sound of vintage amps and will generally opt (if they want to use amps and not modellers) for a modern amp they like the sound of with pedals. You say in the video that this is what you do yourself. The exploration of these topics has huge value I think as a way of sharpening our attention to fine details of sound quality. Thank you as always.

[@DrewEdwardBacklas]

Fender tube amps tend to get a little overdriven/fluttery on the low end while the other frequencies are still clean. The software has much cleaner lows. That was the giveaway for me on all the clips.

[@jorgelanzas6159]

I feel Software sounds better recorded in every clip. The amps are usually great in the room but, you really have to know how to record it to make it sound good in the recording. Just like in your example right here! Thank you for doing this!

[@matthewmorrison1431]

You hit the nail on the head. I picked the correct amp for each position. You can definitely tell the difference, vintage amps are special for sure. But for general daily jams, the software checks the box

[@jeffsones6089]

I have that amp. A 1967 drip rail super reverb that I found at the Swap Shop in Ft Lauderdale. Nothing compares to it and I have a number of other amps. The few times that I have had the chance to crank it up (it is in my small music room) it really breaks up sweetly. A true find a one piece of gear that I am not ever selling.

[@danieltessier8036]

I used to use a black face super reverb , & it was great for guitar for all the reasons you stated.But as time went on ( & I'm an old boomer been playing for 50 years) I developed back& neck problems & just couldn't lug it around anymore. So now, I do rely on software & modeling amps to emulate the sound of a tube amp. I'm amazed at the technology that can do this(& it keeps getting better ! )But I'm also glad that a younger generation of guitarist can still appreciate what us old timers used to play thru.

[@allanflippin2453]

Darrell, Thanks so much! This is a great comparison! Even through KZbin's audio compression, there is a noticeable difference and yes the old amp was better (at least to my old ears). Other youtube guitar channels have a lot to learn from you when it comes to careful A/B comparisons.

[@nascargas]

I went 5 for 5. It was easier than I anticipated. I have owned a Musicman 112 amp. And you are right. Turning on a massive tube amp with vintage vibes does inhabit a space with goodness. As good as digital and transistor amps are at modeling tones today...there is nothing like the juicy goodness of old tube amps. Its been 25 years since I had that Musicman. This video makes me want another "Tube'r".

[@artprince9163]

I’ve had several vintage Fenders over the years from 60s- early 80s including a Vibroverb, Deluxe Reverb, Vibrolux Reverb. Still have a 67 Vibro Champ, 75 Princeton Reverb, and have a clone of a 57 Deluxe tweed (5E3 circuit). Yes I am partial to classic Fenders. There is no better clean sound than a Fender from vintage hand made years. I have used a Mesa Boogie, Blues Junior and Vox as well but they don’t float my boat. The only modern amp that has come close is a Goodsell Super 17. You can always use a pedal for some extra grit if you desire it.

[@Bluesky5553]

I would love to have that amp and take it to an amp tech that really knows the older Fenders well and have it recapped and set up. You would really hear it shine then. It did sound on a couple of the notes like it may have had a tube going microphonic. Ill take tube amps any day over software.

[@timothysullysullivan2571]

it def sounded a little crapped out to me. also, he doesn't understand how to optimize the pot settings- vital. it could be way better than it even was!

[@bkmeahan]

The Fender ToneMaster line does an incredible job modeling very specific reverb models but can never be exact because two tube amps of the same model and age are going to sound different.

[@Ottophil]

Also digital will never feel like analog. Sound? Sure , feel? Never

[@bkmeahan]

@@Ottophil what does that even mean? You aren't physically playing the amp. What feel are you talking about?

[@ekkuapo62]

@@OttophilOk you don’t use any pedals in front of youre amp? If you use those are pretty much Digital🤔 If you just plug in with a cable it is a different ball game.

[@archeryandstuffwithstevela3423]

Easily picked which was which in each clip. Not just vintage, but combos respond differently to heads and cabs. If you wanted something to capture vintage style tones and respond nicely to dynamics, you couldn’t go wrong with a Vox AC15 with a blue back speaker. Also a great pedal platform. And easy to get for not a fortune.

[@jackstrap82]

Preferences. #1: Different but no preference. #2:Software #3:Software #4:Tube Amp #5:Tube Amp I don't have an interest for vintage stuff in general. I love my Revv G20, it has a great clean and amazing distortion. I only wish the gain knob was active on the clean channel to give it a bit of pushed overdrive though, but that's what I use my Wampler Euphoria pedal for. I bought Neural DSP's Rabea Massaad plugin recently though and that thing is so much fun. I use it with headphones until I can get decent studio monitors, but it is unbelievably versatile and surprisingly dynamic. As it stands, I don't see myself owning more amps. Maybe one more for a stereo rig, but it won't be a vintage amp. And who knows how much better software will become? It's still relatively new and many amazing artists endorse and use them.

[@lucbelanger4951]

I am also a tech, but with no experience in tube amp. I own a few amps, Blues jr iii, DeLuxelll and my more than 40 years old Musicman RD112, this is a killer for a nice fat round jazz sound with my ES175D (1959, a monument!) :) 2 years ago, i decided that I wanted a somewhat cleaner, but still bluesy tone so I built myself a replica of a Fender Princeton reverb, from published schematics on the web, with a somewhat personal choice of spices and sauce ingredients, nothing drastically far from the original schematic, and I decided to go 2X10".... because! :) Hammond transformers and good old vintage tube I had around... Nothing remarkable really... THIS THING IS AMAZING!! I've never thought that an amp would make such a difference. I now record from this amp clean to track, then use plugins and I found I get all the mojo I need for a track. But this amp is really an ear popper! So yess! An old fender in good condition is truly a very good acquisition, in my case, the Princeton reverb or the DeLuxe reverb would be my armaments' of choice, but MAN! Do they sound good when clean, do they get pissed off when you're looking for troubles. They deliver, any which way you need!

[@robdavis8307]

The Reverb was my preference. It was also my first tube amp I ever owned, and I wish I could have kept it. I believe that younger people are conditioned to the software sound reproduction, because that is what they've always known-generally speaking. Vice versa for us old relics. That is not to say that software doesn't have its place and perks. I sure do love my Spark amp for convenience, but when I want to really let the hands do the talking, the tube amp gets the nod.

[@PeterDad60]

Darrell, I only got the first one correct! From then on I am not sure if I was going by what sounded better or by which had more distortion (distortion being from a tube amp) but I was always wrong. I feel that the clips you played made it very difficult. Yes in every clip I noticed a difference, but could not be sure why. Also my favorite amp was my hot rodded to a 120 watt Marshall JCM 900 Mk II Hi-Gain through a full stack of Marshall 1960A and 1960B speaker cabs. I only played it "dimed" and it was glorious. Like standing on the beach in Hawaii playing my Stratocaster during a hurricane glorious. The clips you played were mostly clean and not all that loud so perhaps that's what threw me off. They both sound very good and I would use either tone. I have a Fender '59 Bassman LTD tube amp and one day I noticed my Fender solid state/transistor amp a used 100 watt Fender Frontman FM212 sounded pretty much the same and just as good. My feelings were "hurt"! - Peter age 72

[@michaelgraves5320]

Big fan on the vintage gear, I think you described the vibe pretty well. Whatever gear gives a player the feels is the spice of life great video.

[@richardestabrook9809]

No amount of tech can quite mimic a vintage Fender. Great tone and a great video!

[@martinemesguitar]

I think it can, if you're recording. It can't mimic being in the room with one though, no.

[@a-nus]

​@@martinemesguitar stop being poor

[@gearViewmirror]

@@a-nusFirst prize on the internet today, for dumbass of the week...🙄

[@marcelvereycken]

Found the software sounding cleaner and in my opinion better. I use sometimes a twin reverb but mostly for nostalgic reason. But Fender, Marshall, Mesa a.s. are great amps for live performance.

[@Dug6666666]

I found myself liking the software in most cases. It could just be that it had a pleasant room sim. I suspect that cutting through in a live mix, things might be different.

[@mikecarreca7864]

Hello Darrell, I always wanted to own a super reverb. I have played on them at Capitol. I did own 2 Fender Bandmasters. They were awesome. I have talked with American Musical about the reissue super reverb and I am considering it. Great video today.

[@Tedoco50]

I have a 72 Twin, still blows all my other amps out of the water. Awesome review/comparison. Thanks Brett.

[@zazoomatt]

Could not tell until I heard all of the example then replayed, but without any bearing on sitting down with the Real Amp-up in the air for me. I bought a New Fender Twin 65 Reissue in 2009 Virtually 20 hours TOTAL on it. with the cover we sit in a stare down today. Thanks Darrel

[@vladimirputindreadlockrast812]

Definitely a difference. I'll break down my impressions. Comparison 1: The first clip was bright and in my face. Clip 2, the amp, sounded further away, like on a stage in a concert hall. A "sphere" of sound with a large diameter. Comparison 2: I was disappointed, because I liked the full rich, hollow sound of the software as compared to what seemed a more dulled confinement from the amp. Comparison 3: The Fender gives the higher range that concert hall distance again, and sounds more human than the software, which is surprisingly constrained. Comparison 4: I like the Fender for the same reasons, with more rounded, organic wave forms, deep richness, and the bigger "sphere" of sound around me. I began to understand better with Comparison 5: The Fender mellows out, flattens, and widens out the wave form, while the software slightly sharpens the peaks and slightly narrows the wave form.

[@Avalanche1368]

About 8 yeras ago, I purchased a 1968 Super Reverb Drip-Edge/Blackline amp. All orginal and in excellent shape. It was a local craigslist buy. The Super Reverb amps with the drip edge around the grill and blacklines on the silver faceplate left the factory with the blackface AB763 circuit. The circuit changed later that year! Amazing blues/ rock amps. That's why SRV and folks like Derek Trucks rocked them.

[@kostis6]

I recently bought a UAFX Woodrow 55 and it’s amazing. Sounds like an actual fender tweed. Technology is on our side :)

[@DaveKraft1]

I was shocked to get 5 out of 5 right. It really is a noticable difference. There a softer, more rounded edge to the Fender, while still being full. Thanks for this!

[@ivanwesley8182]

I’m not surprised by the awesome sound of the fender, but I am surprised how good the software sounded. The amp was definitely better but the software held its own pretty well

[@richardmorris363]

I could tell the difference. And, based on what I heard. I prefer the software. Funny thing is to read comments over the years of people complaining about a pedal or amp sounding “too compressed” not realizing compression is a large part of the tube amps nature and appeal.

[@haplozetetic9519]

*Nothing* beats the *real* thing. It's always a good idea to keep an eye on the capacitors in amps, especially the older ones as they degrade with age. If hum slowly increases over time, see a *good* tech. It also doesn't hurt to visually inspect them every year or so. If there is anything leaking out of them, they might as well be replaced before hum becomes obvious.

[@RokDAWG1]

I have an amp that was designed by Lee Jackson. The cleans are very sweet and comparable to a Bassman. The dirty tones are comparable to modded Marshall amps. I love that there’s amp hum. I feel like it makes it “real.” *EDIT* It was easy to hear what was the software but I also think it lacked a little something.

[@mikestroud9969]

Just like cassic cars. These amps were never go out of style. Good video DB. 😎👍👌✌️🎸🎸

[@EastEndBandit]

Hey bud u probably already know that someone is trying to be u and says “ make ur December better “ its happening on other guitar channels. Love ur channel it’s great to get an opinion before pulling the trigger on a guitar! Merry Christmas my Canadian brother!! All the best to u and urs !!! Happy new year from Toronto. The msg, it’s in the reply part of the comments section

[@jerrymcgeorge4117]

BTW, if it's humming it needs to be serviced. The hum isn't normal. Also, from the photos it looks like the rectifier tube (furthest left when viewed from the rear) needs a larger bear trap (the metal retainer clip) so that it can be fully seated in the tube socket. That tube isn't a true GZ34/5AR4, even though it will be marker as such. Those are true 5V4s, which drop the B+ (internal voltage) about 10 degrees. The Sovtek power tubes are kind of "meh", you can do better. In one shot the bottom speakers didn't look original but I may be wrong. Whatever, those are fee-nominal amps that are a gold standard for tone. You are probably running it at wall voltage near 125vac. Using a buck transformer to drop the voltage to around 117 gets it nearer to what the amp was designed around. It does make the amp a bit sweeter.

[@UNCLEBUFF]

Darrell, I listened to this one , thinking how can I pick up on tube amp's real sounds on this phone of mine, but since ,I grew up on the tube amps .... Them being vintage amos now they have a smell that is a memory of my life in the music world. Honestly ,I was able to pick the real tube amp every time .. I can hear the difference in a thinner sound of the processed imitation of what my ear grew up really hearing .. it was nice i could even smell the warm air around the heated tubes in my mind ..Thanks for the memories.. I love you brother.

[@nazmoking3171]

I guessed right on all but one of the audio recordings. Clearly there is something unique and special about the vantage of that just cannot be totally duplicated.

[@rasokolik1]

very cool- I’m from that “vintage” and could tell the diff on each example. It’s like going back in time.

[@m0j0b0ne]

That's 1970 or later. Transitional silverface models from '69-ish have an aluminum strip called a 'drip edge' surrounding the grille cloth. I had no trouble differentiating the amp from the software, but given a different mic, you can probably get a closer match, though probably minus some bloom and sustain. I own an original '69 and a blackface '65; I think you know what tones I liked the best.

[@zedxxx9]

Video quality and the beautiful colours in the background with all your guitars just looks terrific!!! I really like the eye candy together with all the useful guitar ideas and information you give us. Thanks!

[@an_rc_guy8256]

I don't know if it's considered vintage yet, but I just picked up a Fender Roc Pro 700 for $80 to replace the 10w frontman I started with. It has the visual blemishes of an amp with a story, works perfectly on the electronics side, and sound absolutely amazing. Quite possibly the best $80 I've ever spent.

[@betofigueredo978]

I had one myself. miss it greatly. such a well-equalized sound, so sweet yet powerful!

[@Impractical_Engineer]

50 year old amps are magic. Just need to make sure all the things are working as expected

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

The current '68 Custom Deluxe Reverb reissue is a fab amp. Trem on both channels, huge bass tone, all tube--even the rectifier!

[@tommykesterson416]

Great video Darrell! I love old gear, if nothing else they seem to hold up better and have their own flavor.

[@jerrymcgeorge4117]

I’ve had an AB763 ‘68 Super Reverb since ‘73. Despite many other amps being added to the fold alongside it none ever exceed its tone. Get one and love it.

[@sjsuismylife]

About 4 years ago, I walk into the local thrift shop and see a big and old Fender tube Amp. I immediately grab it. I ask how much they want for it, and immeidaltley buy it when they say $80. It was a blackface '65 Super Reverb. NOW. It was missing the 4 speakers, and a 15" was put in its place, and there was ugly brown fabric for the grille cloth. The electronics were original and sputterty. Took it to LA to an amp doctor, and got all of the electronics replaced as none of it was salvageable. I decided to keep with the 1 15", as it had a unique character. Probably put about $700 into it to bring it back, along with new grille cloth. It sounded amazing. However, I realized I had no use for it. I sold it to this kid who sounded amazing playing through it, and was happy to get about as much back as I put into it.

[@mikeoxley4458]

I had a Blackface Super Reverb in the mid-70’s that I got used for $250. Best amp I’ve ever owned! Wish I had kept it!

[@seanbaines]

Very distinct difference. Hard to describe what I was hearing, but I could tell the difference every time. Generally I preferred the Fender. Bit fatter and more warmth, and a bit more sizzle. The software sounded a bit more spacious and pristine and ringing clean. Perhaps a touch less "alive" in some of the clips, if that makes any sense. Both have very nice tone, I think, and in isolation from each other, they each sound fine. Put back to back like that, I found myself preferring the Fender tone. I noticed the difference right from the first clip, and noticed that I liked the 2nd rendering of that first clip more. I didn't know it was the Fender at that point, (I haven't heard enough vintage amps), but I guessed that it might be. Turned out to be true. Fun video.

[@thedondeluxe6941]

I guessed all of them correctly. The lack of headroom in the software clips really gives it away for me. That amp sounds great!

[@mkrj2576]

Both sounded great to my ears through my speakers. Both would get the job done in a smokey, loud bar, with a rowdy crowd singing the wrong words. Also, your playing is great and would make most rigs sound very good. While I'm particular with the tone of my rig I still feel after decades of lots guitar playing my fingers are still the limiting factor, not tube vs non-tube.

[@andyhightides]

Experimenting with bass amps this summer, trying to find lightweight alternatives has been enlightening. Using a Fender Bassman 100 and an Ampeg V4-B, (both mid/late '70's) trying them against several modern ss amps. I've found it takes very good 500w or better to keep up with the vintage 100 watters. I'm not talking about turning them up and hitting a few notes, but playing a rehearsal or gig, and fitting a room. The tube amps just seem to fill the place regardless of the venue size, with the ss amps getting very loud on stage, but not in the room. Now the fender and ampeg are drastically different sounding amplifiers, and you kind of just fine-tune them to sound like their best selves. The ss modern amps all do a flat modern sound, closer to the fender tone, and usually have a lower low-end that has to be carved out for live performance. All testing was done with a Crate 2x10 and a Traynor 4x10, with a 4 ohm total impedance. Sorry, as per your testing, the real amp some decent, but a good tech could get that thing nearly silent, and continue working for decades. Can't make that claim with most modern gear, no matter how good they sound now.

[@stufromoz8164]

One of your best vids for a while

[@jamesdiehl8690]

Fender amps were great. I don't have my Super Reverb anymore, but i recently purchased a new Fender Blues Junior tube amp. It reminds me of the Super, but with that Clapton Bluesbreaker sound.

[@Walks-With-Pride]

The Fender Super Reverb is a legend! Along with the Twin Reverb, it was perhaps the most iconic American amplifiers of all time. I prefer the Blackface models over the Silverface ones. But either way, they are extraordinary amps.

[@Wingman52]

What's hard for any software to mimic is what that Super Reverb will do when you're playing in a good size venue and the amp is on 7 or 8. People don't play that loud very often any more, but when that amp was new that was the name of the game. A Super really wasn't considered to be a very loud amp back in the late 60's / early 70's, and back then the band's sound and volume came directly off the stage. What came out of the amp was all there was. A Super was considered to be a small amp that you could turn up without being too loud and get some really nice distortion. Now we play at much lower stage volumes and run everything through the board.. It's much better for our ears, and it's easier to mix, but it doesn't sound the same at all. IMHO It just doesn't have the excitement factor, it doesn't give you goosebumps.

[@GordonSimmons]

This was a fun one, as usual. I was really surprised how much I liked the software; about as much as the Fender. Software sounded slightly sharper while the amp had a lot more rounded edge sound to my ears. I liked them both. If I had to choose only one, gotta go Fender, but that’s really just my personal bias. Both sounded great. Thanks for this one!

[@Gottaloveguitars427]

Loved it, what an amp so great to hear vintage tones and remember all the songs of the past

[@avocadoenjoyer8511]

I guessed everything 100% right from the first, and am pleased to say I liked the software better every time. Obviously the playing experience would be different, but I'm pretty happy I'm walking away without a craving for a vintage amp.

[@jde1780]

Grade: 100% Fender amp had the hum embedded within the sound and had a little different rounded distortion. The distortion seemed to be in the hum portion of the sound and was choppy. The software sounded cleaner, but had a little bit more compression. Still sounds like the amp could use a new set of filter caps.

[@johnwelch557]

I grew up in the 50's and 60's and had many of these amps. I still have two, but I gig, record and noodle on a modern, affordable Fender digital amp. I can't state enought how aggravating and expensive it was to repair them. Indeed it seemed like one repair caused new ones. It's better to run completely through one, replacing any component that measured out of spec. and learn what components were suspect overtime and replace those with something more robust. So my choice is keep a fresh one around for the memories and make new ones with current technology. Thanks Darrell!!

[@TBoyer]

I was 5/5 on the sound clips. Using studio monitors, the actual amp was warmer and you could hear a difference in the reverb. The software was "sterile" sounding, whereas the amp had some character. That electrical, tube "hum" kind of came through too.

[@drevil7vs13]

Gosh, at last someone wrote that there's a difference in the reverb. The tube amp had more of it, as I've heard, while the software had little or just didn't.

[@weldchip]

well that amp can do some things the software can't do but then the software can do lots of things the amp cant do. personally i love both and believe in using all the tools you have, lets face it if the guitar legends of old had the tech we have today they would have used it. At the time they were using the latest technology they could get their hands on to make the most amazing unique sounds they could, nothing has changed in that regard, its just a different music style now.

[@wesnormant5621]

All of my studio playing and recording is on tube amps-vintage , as there is an aura of sound that my solid state and software just will not produce. Hard to describe , but I like your old fender best! Thanks

[@j.christopherrecordingarti5720]

I bought 3 Blackface Super Reverbs in the late 1960's. I toured with them for decades. I would take in one or two, depending on the size of the venue. Each one had it's own sound. I still own all three. Two are completely original, including the two prong cord and the original caps. One has been re-capped and has had the three prong cord added and fresh tubes. It's right and tight and I still gig with it from time to time. One is a '66 and the other two are '67s (QH & PH) They all sound amazing.

[@himusharbash1]

⬆️🆙thanks for commenting❣ Message the above👆let talk

[@johnwarner4513]

I've had a Pro reverb since the early 70s. Together with a '68 telecaster. When the drummer in the band is impressed by the sound, then that tells you everything. So this is not news to me.👍...and anyway, its all subjective

[@carlor.s.4742]

I've had the same amp for years. It's a Fender Hot Rod DeVille(60 watts tube amp!) & it's hooked up to a Stomplab multieffects processor. Lots of fun!

[@jr0706]

I love vintage amplifiers. I have a 1960s harmony H303A. It’s just a cheap student amplifier that uses tiny radio tubes but into my vintage 30 it does sound quite wonderful. I have recently stepped into modern amplifiers with my boss katana, but I still use a more vintage sound, crunch channel with low gain.

[@THUNDERWORX]

I love the Super Lead with a Strat, and could have bought one pretty cheap a few years ago. But, they are so heavy, and that becomes an issue as you get older. The place I would use a Fender would be in studio or going out to a church or small event to play with some old pickers that I sometimes gather with for fun. That usually entails debating over what I'm going to take, which is usually the easiest stuff to move. Then I end up leaving half of that in the car. I often take a Fender Stage 160 (solid state, I think it is 160 watt) with built in effects and tuner. It is sort of a workhorse. It can be extremely loud if needed and worth a little of nothing if I drop it. On your comparison I realize the harmonic overtones were different, but the thing that stood out to me is that the software's treble seemed a lot higher. I think that one of the reasons I always liked the Super Reverb was that it was not as biting as a lot of Fenders. It has more of a mid/bass presence to it. It would be interesting to compare your vintage Super Reverb to a reissue to see if the treble was voiced higher with it.... which might explain the software being a bit treble heavy. I'd bet that the reason a compressor was so popular with country musicians had much to do with Fender being voiced a bit treble happy. Great video and sounds. Thanks for posting.

[@dburton7929]

The difference was very clear to me. No surprise here. Both sound good, and I’d be happy with either one.

[@guitarzan0515]

Hey Darrell, Super Great comparison!! That opening clip was the stuff!! I’m lucky enough to own an old Vibrolux and a few other amps. The Vibrolux is the best, but I don’t use it much, and it weighs a ton. Thx for this. Love your videos!

[@marcotello1168]

My first vintage amp was a 1968 fender super reverb. I still have it and use it. It was gone through by Gerald Weber in the late 90s. That’s the guy that started Kendrick amps. I have other vintage amps but that one is my go to. The trouble is now I’ve gotten interested in vintage new old stock tubes and that really runs in the money

[@michaelbarbour9827]

I guessed every clip correctly. I’ve been playing my MIJ Strat through a ‘73 Bandmaster Reverb for the last 31 years, so I probably shouldn’t be surprised. The funny thing is, when I bought my “vintage” head and 2x12 cab back in ‘91, it was considered old crap and I got it dirt cheap! Oh, and I think the compression really identifies the old tube amp.

[@ultimathulegame1629]

great review, thanks for going so in-depth. also first!

[@sickb2200]

When I was a kid I had a guitar teacher that played a '65 Super Reverb. Never thought that highly of it until he let me plug in my solid body Ibanez lawsuit LP copy. I didn't know how much gain and volume that thing had. He's about 80 years old and still gigs with it.

[@bruceboome]

I cranked my monitors, but at first I couldn't be sure- it quickly became obvious that the software was a touch harder on the treble side. I'm not sure how much difference there would be in a mix, What I'd like to know is what was used in the opening clip. That sounded awesome.

[@tonygonzalez958]

The strides software has taken is insane. The software in most cases sounded as good or better than the amp. I used to have that fender when i was probably 17 or 18 I traded it for an SG. about 2 years ago i sold all my amps and now totally modeler player cool video thank you. imho

[@falcongunner33]

Both sounded great! This in conjunction with Jim Lill’s amp video tell me software/modeling is closer than a lot of people think.

[@TheFRiNgEguitars]

Looks like a mid-70's SR to me, Darrell, and a fine example. The Mid set to 7 replicates "no mid control" or a more neutral mid setting, that should be closer to the digital algorithm. The character of the attack as you said, is more immediate on the digital platform, vs the vintage amp that produces overtones that digital can not replicate, exactly. The experience and subjective vibe of playing through the amp can not be replicated. It just feels awesome, and that can make us better players!

[@catzdollz9810]

While driving the back roads in upstate NY (Catskill mountains) my sister found 2 MARSHALL AMPS...in extremely dusty but perfect working condition

[@jay4vice]

In 1964 I got a FENDER Super Reverb for my Birthday. I wish I had the AMP today. I do still have my 1963 FENDER JAGUAR and I am the Original Owner.

[@rollingstockco8223]

Both sounded good, I could always determine the amp sound as it had more sag while the software was more direct. When playing a tube amp that's what always sounds and feels good to me. The note has some space to bloom.

[@rickjason215]

Tube technology has to eventually lose. I liked the software. Steve Vai claims he can hear a delay in software. I guess it is possible. I don’t hear it.

[@rollingstockco8223]

@@rickjason215 agreed. I recently purchased Amplitube 5 and I'm so inspired to play as there are so many sound options. The options for cabs, speakers, mics and room placment are unreal and so satisfying. I'm starting to understand the reason more players are using sims.

[@olimilo1402]

I could tell the fender amp in nearly all but in clip 4 i was very unsure. Another thought on that: I feel the software does a great job, however, if you play the same note twice on the software it sounds twice the same, on the Fender every note can sound a little bit different, with maybe some randomly inserted "smack", "buzz", or "brum"-tones in it, that's why we feel the real Amp has a soul, it has a life on it's own.

[@angshu08]

Hey Darrell, One request can you please compare the Reissue with Vintage? Its will really help us to understand where Reissue stand with the real thing! Thanks again for all the great insights you share with us day in and day out!

[@beyondthedead7677]

Friend of mine has one of those amps. Sounds glorious, even in his small studio at low volume

[@billkline4077]

Had one for years, unstoppable sound great amp

[@younkinjames8571]

I had one of those early 70's super reverb for a while. The clean was and is still unmatched. I got them all right except #4

[@kevinstill1069]

I enjoyed your demo. The software held up quite well. But I am an amp guy. Still it was nice to hear the comparison.