Someone help me out with this one here...

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

I'm really interested in learning more about this beast called the "tube amplifier" -- perhaps some of you have heard of or even seen one -- so somebody recommended a book to me: "A Desktop Reference of Hip Vintage Guitar Amps" by Gerald Weber.

The introduction itself was eye-opening but then got me thinking in a different direction. In this introduction Weber writes, "Have you ever wondered why a vintage amp sounds the way it sounds? Or why modern amplifiers don't get the raw tone a vintage amp used to get?" He goes on to say that "in a modern style tube amplifier...the signal (guitar sound) goes through the first gain stage, then is sent to a gain control. From there it goes to the next gain stage, then to the volume control, then to an effects loop send stage, then to a return gain stage, then to an E.Q. stage..." You get the idea. Weber ends by asking "How do these modern 'Swiss Army knife' amps exact these tonal losses?"

Here's my question: If, as I'm inferring from the introduction, modern amps lack quality tone, why are there so many modern professional guitarists out there who use modern amps? This is not a rhetorical question; I'm truly wondering, assuming Weber's assertion is true, why any professional musician -- or any musician, for that matter -- who has the financial means would choose modern over vintage. I understand the allure of vintage equipment and vintage tone, and I fully realize that "they don't make 'em like they used to," but nonetheless reputable musicians are using them quite regularly. Are they highly modified to compensate? Do any of the great sounds we hear today come from stock or only slightly modified amplifiers?

Help me out here, people.

- Keith

[taphappy]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

Strange, I've been thinking lately how todays tones dont have that rawness and grit of yesterdays. I always thought it was an Eq'ing or recording issue because I get a pretty raw sound out of my 5150.

[ErikH]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

Aside from the effects loop, most vintage amps have the same building blocks, or stages, as modern ones do. Pre-amp with gain control, secondary gain stage, maybe a third, tone stack (EQ), FX loop (optional), master volume (or not), phase inverter, power amp.

With dual channels, a clean channel is sometimes nothing more than the first gain stage through a separate tone stack (bigger amps) or straight through (smaller amps) to the phase inverter. The overdrive channels have the additional gain stages in line with a tone stack and then onwards towards the power amp.

The building blocks are the same, how it's done and the results are just different.

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

Aside from the effects loop, most vintage amps have the same building blocks, or stages, as modern ones do. Pre-amp with gain control, secondary gain stage, maybe a third, tone stack (EQ), FX loop (optional), master volume (or not), phase inverter, power amp.

With dual channels, a clean channel is sometimes nothing more than the first gain stage through a separate tone stack (bigger amps) or straight through (smaller amps) to the phase inverter. The overdrive channels have the additional gain stages in line with a tone stack and then onwards towards the power amp.

The building blocks are the same, how it's done and the results are just different.

But that's not what it sounds like Weber is trying to say. I'm inferring that he feels the architecture -- or, as you say, the building blocks -- of vintage amps differs greatly from that of modern amps. This is what he attributes to the tonal differences, the tonal superiority of vintage design over modern design.

[ErikH]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

But that's not what it sounds like Weber is trying to say. I'm inferring that he feels the architecture -- or, as you say, the building blocks -- of vintage amps differs greatly from that of modern amps. This is what he attributes to the tonal differences, the tonal superiority of vintage design over modern design.

There are modern amps that are definitely much more complex and have WAY more parts. The now vintage amps were done with point-to-point (PTP) architecture, some early ones starting in the early to mid 70's had some PCB stuff. Virtually everything today, aside from expensive reissues and some boutique amps, are done with all PCB architecture.

When comparing, it's like apples and oranges but we do it anyway. Why? Because we can. What we forget is things change and evolve. Tone tastes change, and most importantly, part tolerances change over time. That resistor that once measured 100k back in 1969 may measure 65-70k today, the same goes for capacitors. Those little fluctuations can account for what makes one of those vintage amps sound like a gem or a dud.

Yes, some PCB designs plain out suck. I owned an amp where everything was on the PCB and it fried 3 times. Some get it right, some don't. There's also some PTP designs that plain out suck too. The thing is, those vintage amps that sound so wonderful now are the gems of their lot. I bet a gem of the lot from modern designs has the potential to sound just as good.

I'm no amp builder or designer, just using a little common sense with the knowledge I do have and what my ears have told me.

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

There are modern amps that are definitely much more complex and have WAY more parts. The now vintage amps were done with point-to-point (PTP) architecture, some early ones starting in the early to mid 70's had some PCB stuff. Virtually everything today, aside from expensive reissues and some boutique amps, are done with all PCB architecture.

When comparing, it's like apples and oranges but we do it anyway. Why? Because we can. What we forget is things change and evolve. Tone tastes change, and most importantly, part tolerances change over time. That resistor that once measured 100k back in 1969 may measure 65-70k today, the same goes for capacitors. Those little fluctuations can account for what makes one of those vintage amps sound like a gem or a dud.

Yes, some PCB designs plain out suck. I owned an amp where everything was on the PCB and it fried 3 times. Some get it right, some don't. There's also some PTP designs that plain out suck too. The thing is, those vintage amps that sound so wonderful now are the gems of their lot. I bet a gem of the lot from modern designs has the potential to sound just as good.

I'm no amp builder or designer, just using a little common sense with the knowledge I do have and what my ears have told me.

I understand and am aware of everything you're said here but that still doesn't answer my question. There are vintage gems and duds, and there are modern gems and duds, and that's all relative. I want to know why Weber would make a blanket statement that modern amps aren't nearly the caliber vintage amps are while there are plenty of professional musicians out there using modern amps. If these professionals have lots of money and connections at their disposal, why go with something that's supposedly of lesser quality?

[ErikH]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

Simple, that's his opinion, IMO.

At the same time though, those vintage gems may have the most Godly tone you ever heard, but would you take them on the road? Probably not. Newer stuff just holds up better on the road. Get those same pros in the studio and if they have it, they'll use it.

[Rich_S]

Re: Someone help me out with this one here...

Yeah, but you can get pretty godly tone from clones of vintage amps.

I think the difference IS the architecture. A lot of people think simpler sounds better. Modern amps tend to have more gain stages, more effective (and therefore versatile EQ), effects loops, etc. All this provides more flexibility, but it puts more "stuff" in the signal chain. A lot of people (GW included, apparently) think that old, simple amps with very little "stuff" give a better tone, more dynamic response, etc. They do their particular tone really well, but then the modern types will turn that around and call them one-trick ponies.

My 18 Watter clone is a perfect example - 1 volume, 1 tone. The tone control doesn't provide shaping, just lets you adjust the amp's natural tone for the sound of the room. The volume control doesn't do much either - just controls the amount of dirt in the sound. I had to add a MiniMASS to actually control the volume. Simple amp, one-trick pony; but also the best-soundng amp I've ever owned. Lots on people would say the same for their old Champs, Deluxes, Bassmen, JTM45s, etc.