Conference napalm::guitar

	I was told a long time ago that there is very little difference
between Pre-CBS and Post-CBS and I have also read that after CBS took over
that the changes they made to the Fender line hurt them so bad that they
changed everything back after 1 year.  For side by side comparisions in
components there are differences of black front to silver front Fenders. I
once saw a silver front Deluxe Reverb which had been built and had the same 
components/parts/design as a black front Deluxe. Plus the CBS takeover was
occuring when the Black face amps were being sold and produced(1965?) The silver
face was a CBS idea. So in a sense they are the same electrically. Speaker
differences were CTS,Jensens? and Utah as I remember.
	So why the difference in sound? Well there maybe circuitry differences
but without specific model's it's hard to track. If you can supply a model
maybe we can give this a try. The older tweed amps,brown and whites are really
the Pre-Cbs amps if we want to get real specific in my mind,but it could be done
with a Silver front to a black front. 


								Rick

    My Fender is a 1977/78 (not positive) silver-faced Twin Reverb.
    Is there an easy way to determine the date from the serial numbers
    or by opening the amp and looking at the inside of the chassis ?
    It has master volume with pull distortion (if that is what you want
    to call it, I call it automatic crummy sound generator), tremelo,
    and JBL D-120 speakers (speakers are painted with orange colored
    paint if that means anything). It has 10 tubes in all. 4 6l6GC's,
    4 7025's, 1 12AT7 for reverb, and one tube for Tremelo (or is it
    the phase invertor tube). All 10 tubes are positioned in-line,
    as apposed to other model years which had one or two tubes staggered.
    I would not be willing to hack this amp up (ie, disconnecting/bypassing
    pots, changing transformers, or other major changes), but if a few
    minor component changes will make the amp sound more like a pre-cbs
    Twin Reverb I would like to try it. I could always switch it back
    to the original value if it didn't work out.
     
    As for the master volume/pull distortion, I usually set the master
    on 10 and never use the distortion. I have no desire to sound like
    a cat in heat. I recently re-tubed this amp with Groove Tube H4's
    and while the amp needed tubes badly (the old ones were about 6
    years old) I didn't notice a huge difference in sound. I never did
    get my tube biasing checked but the amp has only seen about 2 hours
    of actual use since I replaced the tubes, and hasn't been cranked
    to speak of.
    
    As far as Marshall amps are concerned, I gathered from a previous note
    that the 1975-1982 JMP models were about the best/most versatile.
    I mentioned this to Jimmy at Mr. C's music. He "claims" that there
    is no difference in the JCM800 heads, and that the only difference
    between the JMP's and JCM800's was the speakers. I took a large
    grain of salt after returning from his store. What do you Marshall
    Guru's think about this. Is he BSing me, or does he have a valid
    argument here ? Keep in mind, he is a Marshall dealer, and has many
    JCM 800's in stock.
    
    Mark Jacques
    
    

    
    Well, I'm not gonna try to be an *expert* or anything but I do own a
    1961 cream Bassman head and a good friend of mine has a bunch of old
    Fender amps and they do have a nice sound... 
    
    ...to be specific, a tweed Champ, tweed Deluxe, a pair of black
    face Deluxes and a black-face Twin plus a cream reverb unit; he
    also had an old black-face Pro with no verb and a 15" (!!!) but
    he traded that for the Champ.
    
    My general opinion of these....
    
    1.  Nice tone, but not *lots* of tones.  A Tweed Champ has no tone
    controls, just a volume.  The tweed Deluxe only has a "tone" knob,
    no bass and treble.  
        
    2.  Noisy.  Without going in and modifying them, they are hummy
    =and with his Strat plugged in he gets CB radio like you wouldn't
    believe!!!!  Hum balance controls weren't added until the 70s.
    
    He has been experimenting with different combos, the two black
    Deluxes together, a black Deluxe plus the Champ, black Deluxe plus
    the Tweed Deluxe, etc. using a Morley A/B pedal to switch.  He also
    uses an Ibanez Tube Screamer for some extra edge (he doesn't play
    with thick distortion *ever*).
    
    Why do I think he likes them?  He plays primarily older
    rock/blues/country styles and those amps were what the artists he
    covers used, so he plugs in and gets "that" tone.  He doesn't like
    his Twin as much as it's too loud when set to get the tone he likes;
    he uses it when he is playing in big rooms and needs more stage
    volume.
    
    I also know he paid a lot of money on those amps....the tweed Deluxe
    is a 12 watt amp with no reverb and only a 10" speaker.....he paid
    over $300 for it.  And he doesn't gig with it, either.  The Champ
    was also worth about $300.  Not including maintenance costs, either...
    the black amps have all been in the shop at least once a year for
    work and I've blown up my Bassman twice.  I have never had to take 
    a transistor amp of mine in for service (knock on wood).
    
    We did some recording last year where he ran into a black Deluxe
    and his Champ at the same time, each miked and put on a separate
    track.  The Champ was flat out dirt, the Deluxe super clean.  The
    engineer was able to mix in the amount of distortion for each song
    during mixdown....that was nice.
    
    But for live work, modern amps with channel switching, effects
    loops and high power outputs seem to make more sense for the working
    Joe.....more bang for the buck. Besides in most live situations
    only the *player* can really pick up on the tone.  In the studio,
    it's different...which is where guys like Andy Brauer come in.
    
    This is starting to ramble and I don't know if there's much point
    to it except....if you want a simple, compact, powerful, reliable
    setup, most modern amps are what you want.  If you're looking for
    "that" tone and can live with a multi-amp rig and a spaghetti of
    cords, go for it.  Remember, the stars all have road crews, and
    most of us don't.
    
    

    I was wondering why guys like Eric Clapton,etc need to rent
    equipment and expertise from the likes of Andy Brauer in the
    first place. Considering the fact that Clapton has been around
    forever, and probably has one (or more) of every concievable
    amp ever made, why would he need to rent an amp for a recording
    session. Is it just that they don't want to lug equipment around
    and would rather give out the work, or does Brauer offer a unique
    value-added service to them, providing them with sounds they
    would not be able to get on their own ?
    
    On another note, Andy Brauer claims to owe much of his success to
    Howard Dumble. He claims to have turned both Larry Carlton and 
    Lee Ritenour on to Dumble amps during studio gigs.
    
    By the way, Andy Brauer will be writing a GP article monthly. His
    first article is in this months issue as well as the big writeup/
    interview/cover story. His first article is basically a history/
    amplifier basics lesson. I hope his articles become more informative
    as time goes by, and would like to see him get into some of his
    actual trade secrets, rather than telling us what we already know.
    
    Mark

    I have a 1977 Twin Reverb with 12 inch Altec's in it. When I bought
    it, it had been damaged (That's an understatement. I purchased it
    from a fellow who was lifing it up to put in the back of his pickup
    truck & hadn't set it on properly. When he let go, it fell over
    & landed on the top - the only thing holding it together was the
    vinal - this critter weighs in at 110 lbs), and I rebuilt the cabinet,
    as well as had to resolder all the joints & replace the tubes. When
    I went thru my SAMS book on schematics (it had a 1950's TWIN schematic
    in it), I found it to be almost identical to my 1977 model (I have
    a master volume, as well as some slightly different caps/resistors
    in the tone circuit - these are all different than the schematic).
    
    Why do I play a Twin? Love that sound! Why do I use a Tube Amp?
    Love that sound! Why buy a newer Amp when I already got what I want?
    I use bunches of stomp boxes that I use to swap tones (I built a
    few of these myself to give me some additional features that the
    Twin didn't have), so, I don't miss additional functionality that
    the new Amps have. It's 'hernia city' to move it up & down stairs,
    and I carry spare tubes at all times, but, alas, I love that sound.
    
    							Jens 

	Someone in this notesfile said something about the last digit of
the serial number as to year built. Also the chassis is sometimes stamped
on the inside near the power transformer. I owned a Twin that had a similiar
master volume knob/switch arrangement,but I found I could get a good singing
Boogie sound from it when I used an EQ to boost it with it's master set low.
	I recently replaced the tubes in my Vibrolux with H7's and plan to
do some more replacing. With H4's I'm surprised that you don't get a good
overdriven sound. I wonder if it would improve if you removed the 2 outside 
tubes on the left and right,I know this made a big difference in a friends 
Marshall? 
	I think you would be better off to buy another amp rather than modify
your twin and theres no guarrantee it will sound "pre-CBS". The best mod I've 
heard of is to install 5881 power tubes. Someone else could tell you more about
the tonality change.
	1962-75 Marshalls are my favorite,and with EL34 power tubes only,I hear
a big difference between then and now and also I know there were component/cir-
cuitry changes. The tonality of the new stuff doesn't suit my tastes.......
	I like the old Fenders too.........the early stuff was what
    was used by Marshall for there early designs....
							Rick

    
    	Sound is an incredibly accurate carrier of information. Those
    "little component changes" between vintage years could have a
    significant impact on "how it sounds". So do a zillion other factors...
    Combined, some will mask others, interact with others; a few may
    drop out as the "most significant". To find the most significant
    factor in a vintage amps sound would require a very structured
    experiment. Yet, the result would *still* likely be subjective -
    dependant more on the particular listener than anything else.
    
    	The HiFi folks, the *real* HiFi folks, will sit down with a
    number of capacitors of the same value, and pick out two that *sound
    best* for inclusion in a preamp circuit. These are special capacitors
    too, not the typical Sprague units found in most tube guitar amps.
    Caps' is caps! Right? Wrong...They have in addition to capacitance,
    a series and shunt resistance - and wha? You think the charging
    value is the *same* as the discharging value? - these all depend on 
    materials and construction. So, possibly even the brand of capacitor 
    used in a particular year's product build can effect the sound perceptably.
           
    	Tubes can be the same way, varying in "how they sound" simply
    due to manufacturing tolerances moving around within bounds. Random
    process variation I think it's called. GT takes advantage of this
    and markes their tubes with qualitative information: "Warm/Hot"!!! 
    
    	Speakers are the biggest filter, the last leg in how an amplifier
    sounds. Take a Fender bassman, play thru a 10" and then a 15...Betcha
    could notice the difference easily! And yes, those "Celestions"
    *do* have a sound all their own. But so does any other speaker.
    It's just a matter of choosing what you like, and, at the same time,
    one of good construction. Who is it that claims they can hear the
    difference between a speaker with a felt dust cap and one with a
    aluminum one? (Thought it was Alan Holdsworth...)
    
    	The actual circuitry, especially the tone controls, defines
    an amp's character. Personally, I think the standard Marshall "Bass
    Mid Treble" circuit is a joke - circuit wise. But, looking thru
    the schematics I have, they've used the same one over and over again
    in their tube designs. Most probably wouldnt like the "new" Marshall
    tone pots - if they changed that "tried 'n true" circuit at all!
    The whole sound of tube output circuitry is mostly due to the low
    damping factor inherent in the design. The speaker is less tightly
    coupled to the amplifier than in typical transistor emitter based
    outputs. One company (GK?) figured out how to make a complmentary
    transistor amplifier using the collectors as output - giving an
    output impedance of the same order as a tube amp has. Guess what
    *their* claim to fame was...
    
    	Finially, we come to the epitome of tube amps, the new GT all
    tube preamp - with -wow- a 6V6 output stage! Ya cant get that sound
    from preamp tubes! (12AX7s...Shit, I've know that for 10 years...Just
    look at the endorsements they've got *already*) "Real Tube" distortion
    - with a *real tube* - in a stomp box? My ass! Beware of tube_hoopla.
    
    	I notice no one broke down my door to buy my Eico 30 watt amp
    - for $25...(It's the one that'll "sing" any note on the fretboard
    from anywhere in the room) So, I think I'll up the price - $250.00
    now! "It's a *vintage*" :')
    
    	Joe Jas                                      
    
    	

    I looked into the Groove tube preamp. The $800-$900 pricetag makes
    it more than just pricey for a preamp. I know it's a pro unit, but
    for the money, you can get a lot of good tube amps with speakers.
    I was also concerned that the "Speaker Emmulator" may not cut it.
    I agree that tube preamps with 12AX7's don't produce the kind of
    distortion that I m looking for. To my ear they rattle, rather than
    produce a nice warm sound.
    
    I mentioned in my base note (.0) that I am "interested" in vintage
    amps. This doesn't mean that I intend to invest in one, but I 
    would like to know what makes them tick, and which amps are
    great and which ones are so-so.
    
    My plans for filling all my amplifier needs, as it stands today
    (what time is it?) is to keep my Silver-faced twin (it may not
    be pre-CBS but at least it is a real American-made Fender and has
    a great clean sound), and to buy a New Twin (a deal is already in
    the works for one that is virtually new), and I am considering
    eventually getting a Super Champ just to have a nice small, easy-
    to-carry tube amp with a hot sound. I also have a Pignose which
    I intend to keep for freedom from AC. Other than that if an
    irresistable deal presents itself for a Pre-CBS amp I might be
    inclined to grab it.
    
    More Later...
    
    Mark
                                
    

    A few more words around the Groove Tube preamp mentioned in the
    last few replies. This unit is specifically designed for studio
    use. It does not have an effects loop, and it does not allow
    you to channel switch. It has only one channel. I recently read
    a GP profile on this baby. They explained that it has "gain-sensitive"
    inputs. The output of the preamp remains constant regardless of
    input drive levels. What this translates to is that the volume
    controls on your guitar become distortion controls, rather than
    volume controls. Unless you turn the pot all the way down (off),
    the output of the preamp remains the same. Turn the volume on the
    guitar all the way up and you have the nastiest distortion imaginable,
    turn it way down, and you have the cleanest signal imaginable.
    
    	These "features/characteristics" may make it ideal for the pro-
    studio environment, where you can add effects during mixdown, and
    let the engineer worry about levels, but in a live application,
    this preamp would be useless (to me), unless you have a soundman
    that can read your mind and tweak your levels up and down every time
    you want a differant dynamic, and can work around the lack of an
    effects loop. In any event, you would still want to use an amp
    to hear yourself, unless you have a great PA, and can depend on
    the stage monitors to hear yourself.
    
    
    On a differant subject, I have read a few references to a Guy named
    Bob Bradshaw that build effects racks. Andy Brauer mentioned his
    racks in the GP interview. What makes his racks so special ? Couldn't
    you go out and assemble the same components that he uses and bolt
    them into an Anvil rack and end up with the same capabilities ? Is
    it that the pros can't be bothered breaking out the ole crescent
    wrench, or is there something unique about his racks that offers
    them some "value added" features, not available elsewhere ?
    I guess I should sift through back issues of GP, and find the
    interview with Bob Bradshaw to find the answer to this question.
    Maybe someone can save me the legwork !
    
    Mark Jacques

    What I gathered, from an article in one of the other guitar rags
    (Guitar World?), was that the real appeal of the Bradshaw rack systems
    was the custom designed and built switching systems which he uses in
    the systems.  It's not the effects or amps, since he just puts what the
    customer wants in there.  What they indicated was that he incorporates
    the amps and everything into the system with noise gates and what have
    you so that when you don't play, there is *no sound*, not even amp
    hiss.  They had a brief discussion on the switching system, not too
    much, can't give away his biggest selling point.  Sounded very nice. 
    
    I notice now that there are a couple of companies advertising switch
    systems which sound similar (at least they're billed that way...).
    
    Greg

    Considering that most of the new rack mount stuff is midi capatable
    and there is a pretty big selection of midi controllers available
    out there, I still can't see what sets his switching sytems apart.
    I guess I have more reading and fishing to do to get to the bottom
    of this.
    
    Thanks, Greg.
    
    Mark
    

    Just an idea, but I don't know of any MIDI controllable amps.  I
    think it's the special gating and overall quality of the work that's
    the main thing.  Another is that he'll put *anything* in there if
    requested, not just MIDI stuff.  Several of the racks they described
    in the article had stomp boxes of various types in there, and old
    analog things that the performers liked.  Not limited to new equipment.
    
    Greg

	I remember reading in Guitar World(I think) about "The
Racks of the Rich and Famous". Bradshaws racks if I remember correctly
are not just on and off footswitches but deal with directing signal
paths for maximum flexibility. There is an effects switcher out from
SRD which I believe will do some of this. The reasoning behind doing
this is to get away from affecting your tone/gain by going through
all these different effects. And do it quietly! The Pop of a switch
can get real annoying fast. Plus he also uses mixers to control the 
volume of each effect and to maintain a left right stereo setup
before going to a noise reduction unit and separate amps. One of
these setups I remeber to be pretty extensive where some one was 
using several different amps,it might have been Lukather. It might
have been the issue with Steve Vai or Y Malmsteen.....


							Rick

    
    	One reason the "stars" pay big $ to have it done is cause they're
    investing in equipment which makes their job easier. Although possible,
    DEC doesnt design and build their own 'scopes and logic analysers;
    we simply pay what it takes for Tektronix to build them for us.
    	
    	There are those of us who are not (yet) stars, but pay big bucks
    for pre-assembled equipment. Granted, some of this is beyond the
    scope of our capabilities to design and build, but certainly other
    kinds of things are not. I cannot understand the mindset of large
    amounts of cash *necessarily* equating to "goodness" or "value". I
    think $800 for a non channel switching, no_frills_at_all *Pre*amp
    is ridiculous and absurd. Especially when I can get 95% of whats
    there, just about any weekend, for $5 at a fleamarket or garage
    sale. Heck, I've *thrown out* push pull 6V6 amplifiers - they're
    not powerful enough...I would have had to do some *work* to get
    "good" tone pots into it...I have bigger and better amps already
    taking up space...
    
    	If anyone is interested in a "quest" for "vintage sound", why
    not list here some attributes of particular vintage amps you've
    liked, and had some experience with. Things like:
    
    	a. The kind of tone controls...
    	b. Pre/post or single volume control...
    	c. The particular tube compliment...
    	d. Useful features: "pull bright" - "low Z monitor out" - 
    	   "adjustable bias/power output control" - "Automix" -
    	   "Presence control" - "multiple inputs" - "F/S boost"
     	   (NOT channel switching) - "hum balance" - "Tremelo" - etc.
        e. Speaker type...
    
    	This could be sorted to render the necessary and best attributes
    of the vintage amplifiers. Once known, a schematic could be put
    together for the design of an amplifier which has the best of the
    best, so to speak. Or at least what *we* think is the best. If anyone
    has the guts (this is where we seperate the "real" men from the
    "quiche eaters"), a prototype could easily be assembled. I'd say
    even if every single part was purchased explicitly brand new, it
    still would not come anywhere *near* "$800". It may take a couple
    of weeks to assemble, an hour or two a day, but with the satisfaction
    coming from the fact that it's really what *we* believe is best,
    not from paying big $ for what someone else thinks/says is good.
    
    	Joe Jas                                            
                             
    	

    Re. .14 A coule questions:
    
    	What is automix ?
    
    	Could someone explain how the line out on my silver faced Twin
    Reverb is intended to be used? How do you connect into a PA with
    both Low and High inputs ? I seem to remember trying it once and
    couldn't get to it work properly. If don't expect to get a real
    great useable signal out of it, but I would like to understand
    how it is intended to work. Twins are so loud (especially with JBL's)
    that it is usually not necessary to mic them.
    
    Mark
     

    I personally don't think the older amps sound all that much better.
    They do sound a bit different, but that's primarily due to having
    less gain...when the first fender amps came out no one was using
    distortion and they had less preamp gain. Every sound you could
    possibly want/need is out there in today's modern equipment.
    
    As far as older guitars go, every manufacturer has had bad years
    and good years, I played a '57 tele that absolutely blew me away
    (I tried to trade several guitars for it...) however, I played a
    brand new Elite Tele that was every bit as nice in terms of sound
    (actually it was more flexable in sound than the '57) and playability.
    My only mistake was in not buying it...:-) I have a '73 strat that
    is very nice, I've had numerous offers to buy it, this thing is
    no where near vintage, it's just a real nice guitar.
    
    With regards to fender amps. Pre-CBS twins are identical
    (schematically) to post CBS twins, but the parts layout changed.
    Of course, later versions f the twin did change as they added features
    like master volume, effects loops, channel switching etc.
    
    dave

    
    	Automix is a Peavey feature. It saves you having to use a Y
    cord if you wish to drive both the "normal" and "reverb" channels
    from the same guitar.
    
    	My Yamaha bass amp has a Low Z line out. I can just connect it to
    a Low Z input on my board, with a Low Z mic cable. I imagine you
    could do the same thing with your Twin's line out, if, say you were
    playing the colleseum and wanted your guitar coming out the PA too.
    Miking the amp instead will include the speaker and final power
    amp stage effects on your sound. It seems to be the preferred way
    to go.
              
    	Joe Jas

    RE .17  Then I guess the new Twin reverb has the equivelant of
    Automix. The twin actually has Trimode operation (independant 2
    channel operation, channel switching, and parellel chaining which
    I see as the equivalent of Automix.
    
    The line out on the Twin is a 1/4" phone jack. I have tried
    connecting it into a PA, with no luck, just a bunch of garbled
    noise. I'm not planning to use it, but I'm just curious as to
    what Fender had in mind when they designed it.
    
    Mark
    

    
    When will the guitar amp designers come into the 20th century?
    
    FETs offer the same transfer characteristics as tubes WITHOUT the
    problems of heat, fragility, and deterioration in performance over
    time.  There are power FETs capable of delivering 100+ WRMS, using
    VMOS technology.  For input preamps, JFETS provide high gain, low
    noise, and superb distortion characteristics ... even better than
    (dare I say it) TUBES.  There I said it.  
    
    Many may consider this heretical, but, an all-transistor amplifier 
    can be built, with existing FET technology, that can deliver a wide 
    spectrum of distortion characteristics - including feedback - at any 
    volume level, without all that f&*%ing HISS-s-s-s-s.  In fact, a good 
    design would preclude noise gates, which I consider anathema.  They 
    just wouldn't be needed anymore.  All that confusing switching, and 
    gating ... GONE!  Along with these $800+ preamp/switching/gating
    scams.
    
    Why guitar amp designers insist on using either tubes, or, even worse,
    bipolar transistors in the gain path is weird.  Somebody indicated
    in an earlier reply that complementary common collector output is
    one of the newer approaches in guitar amps.  Audio engineers have
    used this technique for 20+ years!  Consider how much nicer that
    would sound with complementary common drain output (VMOSFET).
    
    The reasons I haven't designed one myself are as follows:
    
    	1.  Analog circuit design was my day gig for many years.  The
    	    last thing I wanted to do when I got home was more analog
    	    circuit design, though I did toy with the idea and have
    	    some preliminary sketches and calculations.
    
    	2.  When I got home at night, I wanted to PLAY!!  So, I bought
    	    guitar amps that sufficed.  I did, however, design a preamp/
    	    stompbox using FETs to give me a wide variety of distortion
    	    tones at all volume levels with much-lower-than-commercially-
    	    available noise and hiss.  All I've needed since then is 
   	    an amp that can faithfully reproduce the preamp/stompbox 
    	    output.

    Anyway, vintage amps are DANGEROUS.  Most of them dont have a
    ground prong on their AC connectors.  In fact, some of them just
    tie one end of the line right to the chassis!  This is electric
    shock waiting to happen.  Some of these guys, like Jim Marshall,
    didn't even put bleeder resistors across the B+ (plate voltage)
    filter caps!  I found that out the hard way when repairing one of
    those beasts for a friend.  Imagine beaucoup de coulombs arcing
    into your fingertips at 600 V ... ouch!! 
    
    Rant, rant ....
    
    	tc
            

    Perhaps most transistor amplifiers are rugged and reliable, but
    the Gallien Krueger amps have proven to have beaucoups de problemos.
    Many companies that manufacture transistor amps are going through
    the normal cost reduction methods common in the Consumer Electronics
    industry, and turning to plastic pc mounted pots, digital switching
    power supplies, etc, which sacrifice reliability. This may be fine
    for a stereo reciever which you will set up on a shelf and never
    move it, but an amplifier has to be roadworthy. My electronics
    teacher made a good point last semester. If you take a transistorized
    assembly, and place it on a hot surface, it is not going to function
    properly. The heat will cause the transistors to operate differently
    than they were intended. Do this with a tube amp, and the amp won't
    care, because it runs hot to begin with. If you are using a transistor
    amp, don't place it on or near a source of heat, or else problems
    will result. 
    
    Tube amps are heavey, but once the amp is set up somewhere, the
    weight can actually help it to crank out at loud volume without
    vibrating.
    
    My point ?? What was my point ?? Oh yeh, both transistor amps, and
    tube amps have their advantages and disadvantages. I find transistor
    amps are kinda like black licorice. You either love em, or you hate
    em, and there is no in between.
                           
    Mark Jacques
    
    

    
    	So, lets dream. I have. I have infinite resources at my command.
    Any technology is fair game. Price is whatever it comes to. *THE*
    killer guitar amp, effectively replacing all.
    
    	Where do we start? Ah - the DSP chip. Which one? Why, the best.
    Programming? This is a dream, remember! Yeah, a guitar amp with
    a 5 1/4" winnie!
    
    	Output? Hmmmm...Digital. Direct drive power DAC to the speaker.
    Sampling rate? Why, 100Khz outta do...speaker should be able to
    integrate *that* in real time.
    
    	What's the scam? Sounds like *any* guitar amp available. A set
    of pseudo controls are assigned to whatever automatically. Not enough?
    Well, then the personal settings of whatever configuration whichever
    "star" you wish to sound like can be loaded. Who does all that
    research, completely qualifying the transfer function of each star
    performers setup and programming it into the Emulator? Remember,
    this is a dream...
    
    	Wanna sound like Jerry G? Just punch it in on the alpha-num
    keyboard. How about Eric C? Alex L? John M? Frank Z? Hey! Whatever!
    It's part of the price, and, an option -
    
    	BTW, you gotta have the right guitar, as input. *That* part
    gets dreamt about tomorrow!
    
    	Joe Jas

    
    I wonder if anyone has ever tried Digitally Sampling the sound
    of tubes, store the pattern in a memory device, and then recall
    it like they do with Sampled Pianos, etc. Rather than try to 
    configure a transistor amp and make them sound like tubes, why
    not use transistors for what they do best, computing.
    
    A lot of people are of the opinion that JFETS act "Just like
    tubes". There is one element missing in a transistorized amp
    regardless what type of transistors are used. It is also missing
    in tube preamps as well. That is the effect of having all the tubes
    close together, and in close proximity to the speakers. All of these
    factors make the tubes vibrate. The vibration helps to give tubes
    that warm fuzzy sound. Many people hate that warm fuzzy sound.
    You could place a transistor on an ultrasonic plate, and the vibration
    would not effect it's signal carrying properties one iota, because
    it is by design "solid state". Tube have grids, and elements which
    "flap in the breeze" and cause them to distort. Rather than putting
    the cart in front of the horse, I would like to see someone try
    the digi sampling approach. There is no guarentee that even this
    approach will accurately emulate tubes, but I think it's worth
    a try. Even if this approach works to a tee, the old tube heads
    are still gonna be shopping for vintage amps, especially those
    interested in collecting them as apposed to buying them to use on
    stage, or in the studio. The same applies for guitars. Even if 
    Ibanez comes out with a new axe tomorow that blows everything else
    on the market off the stage, collectors are still gonna be looking
    for 1959 Les Paul Flametops.
    
    That was the whole idea of this note to begin with, but the
    general information about amplifiers is still of great interest
    to me. In fact, I just finished taking my Electronics Circuit II
    course at CNEC in which amplifier circuits were covered in great
    detail. I would eventually like to take a course in vaccuum tubes
    just for my own interest. It would sure be nice to be able to
    repair my own amplifiers.  A lot of music stores could use a
    repairmen with this experience, and it would make a great part 
    time job.
    
    The group I work in makes a practice of having lunchtime seminars
    on everything from work related topics, to personal interest. Some
    one recently talked about radio/tv transmition, and earlier, someone
    talked about civil aeronautics. If someone out there with a lot
    of tube knowledge would be willing to talk to a small group over
    lunch (In Marlboro, Ma) I would be more than happy to spring for
    lunch. Of course, we always welcome outsiders to join our little
    lunchtime pow-wows, as long as they are Digital employees.
    
    
    Mark Jacques
    
    

    Getting Back to some of the earlier replys, I have seen and am going
    to look at what is listed in the swap rag as a Fender/Harvard reverb
    II. (like new, 125.00). Anyone know about this amp before I head
    out there (it's a hike). What does the 'harvard' designation mean.
    I know I will see for myself in a couple of days, but 'for warned
    is 'for armed. 
    
    Dave Kinney

    
    	I think $125 for the Fender Harvard (reverb?) is a great price.
    (Who Me?) It's the push pull 6V6 output, replacing the "Princeton"
    model of previous years, I believe. Check the tube comp, if it is,
    buy it. Normal "used" asking price is about $250 for those things...
    
    	Joe Jas

    I say an ad in the Want Ads for a Champ for $25.oo. I would have
    bought it sight unseen, but the person selling was all the way
    in riverside, and I am in Worcester. The gas to drive out there
    would exceed the selling price of the amp. Even if the amp didn't
    work, I would still be willing to grab it for $25. Thats the
    equivelant of a chinese meal for 2.
    
    Mark
    

    Re: .24
    
    While there was a tube Harvard in the old days, Fender resurrected
    the name for a newer solid-state model a few years ago.
    
    I don't know if they were supposed to be any good or not.
    

    Personal opinion follows..
    
    I don't think that there is anything magical about most older amps, or
    guitars for that matter, that makes them vintage pieces.  I'll grant
    that sometimes a company cuts corners to save $$$ and the quality
    of an amp or guitar slips.  However, this doesn't mean that an amp
    or a guitar is any better just because it is older.
    
    At one time, I owned a 61 Les Paul Special.  Wicked collectors
    piece..used to make people drool in guitar stores.  Basically a
    mediocre guitar.  The neck was so flexible there was no need for
    a whammy.  Remember feedback?  Those o-so-cool black pickups used
    to howl if I turned the gain up too far.  The bridge was a joke;
    intonation was impossible.  I played Les Paul TV models with the
    same types of problems.
    
    I also used to play through old Fender Pro Reverbs, Bandmasters, Dual
    Showmans, etc because it was all I could get my hands on.   I never
    thought it was anything great and spent a small fortune on LPB-1s,
    CryBaby wah-wahs, and various fuzz boxes to overdrive them.  Didn't you
    guys do the same thing?  A friends Marshall Major did sound great
    when it was working.  Not exactly reliable gear.

    To be fair, when compared against the other amps of the early 70's and
    late 60's, the Fender stuff sounded pretty good.  The SVT was wicked
    loud but it was at nose-bleed level before it would distort. Those
    early Kustom padded vinal amps were also real loud but didn't know how
    to distort at any volume. 
    
    In comparison to today's modern amps, there is no comparison!  Master
    volume controls, channel switching, high power in little packages.
    There would have been a line a mile long to get a Boogie class amp
    in 1970.
    
    If someone likes to collect old gear for the fun of it, that's great.
    Buying old gear because it is supposed to have a sound that today's
    gear just can't match is a pipe dream.  Music stores charge big $$ for
    them because people are willing to pay it in search of some elusive
    vintage sound. 
    
    Kevin
    

    Re: .27
    
    While I agree that there is nothing magical about older amps, one
    thing about modern amps is that they are *voiced* differently.
    
    Remember, guitar amps are not flat response hi-fi amps, they have
    built-in response curves that are used to provide a (hopefully)
    pleasing tonality.

    Most modern amps are set up to provide crystalline clear tones (i.e.
    like a Roland JC) and/or flat-out overdrive ala Mesa Boogie.  Since
    these sounds were not in vogue in the "old days" it's no surprise
    that older amps don't have these "modern" sounds.
    
    On the other hand, some "vintage" sounds are hard to get on some
    newer amps....try to get your JC-120 to sound like a Twin sometime
    8^)  8^)  8^)
    
    This is what I mean by voicing....Last night I had an opportunity to
    play a Mesa Boogie bass amp with two channels....one was "tailored for
    active basses" and the other had a "traditional" sound (this from the
    instruction manual). 
    
    Channel one had that modern, super crisp sound just great for
    slap-n-pop playing and actually had a solid-state like sound!!! 

    Channel two sounded like an old Fender Bassman (only 250 watts louder
    8^)  8^) ) with that thick, fat *whomp* that most modern bass rigs
    I've tried just don't get.
    
    In fact, it's the first bass amp I've heard in about eight years
    that impressed me with its *tone*.
    
    (The above is just my opinion and not a flame on any amps)
    

    Let's speculate !
    
    What amplifiers that are being sold new today are destined to become
    vintage collectors pieces 10-20 years from now ?
    
    Off the top of my head, I would guess that Marshall Jubilees may
    be in demand someday, as they were made in limited quantities, and
    are no longer in production. They are supposed to have a wider range
    of tones than previous Marshall models although this is not necessarily
    the concensus opinion.
    
    I would also guess the new Twin Reverb may become a collectors piece
    if sales don't pick up and stay high. Some of the dealers are not
    selling very many of them. I predict Fender may not make them for
    too many more years. The optional finishes like snakeskin may also
    become a rarity in a few years.
    
    Anyone else care to speculate ?
    
    Mark
    
    

    What kills me is that some people will buy ANY amp with a vintage name
    on it.  Sorta shades of the "real strat" vs. copy debate.
    
    For example, I like "the Marshall Sound" but there are lots of
    Marshalls that don't have it despite the name.  And yet, you see lots
    of kids coming in and all they are interested in is Marshall.
    If they don't have enough money to get a Marshall with the sound,
    they'll get a cheap Marshall even though there may be other amps
    (with different name plates) that are cheaper and better.  It just
    HAS to be Marshall.
    
    One thing I really about Boogie as a company is that their entire
    line is good.  Every Boogie can produce the "Boogie sound" to
    a reasonable degree.  The price differences mostly reflect power
    and flexability.   Boogie doesn't make low cost toy amps that
    capitalize on the name.
    
    	db
    

    What gets considered "vintage" seems to be a black art.  Actual
    performance may have little to do with it.  In the early 70's,
    telecasters were out of fashion and could be had real cheap in the
    want ads.  Now, a '71 tele might be a hot item. 
    
    The Les Paul Special was made only two years (60, 61) and was not a big
    seller.  Now, it's "vintage" because there aren't many of them around. 
    It's still a so-so guitar.   SGs used to be guitars for people who
    couldn't afford a Les Paul.  Now, people pay huge $$$ for a beat
    SG.
    
    Where are the Fender Jaguars of the world?  The Jag was a hot guitar
    for a while.  Gretch White Falcons?  I used to see White Falcons in the
    want ads for $1500.  I don't think you could give one away today. 
    
    Pick gear because of the way it really sounds or feels, not because it
    has a magical name or heritage. 
    
    Kevin
    

    Re .30
    
    How about the little Son of a Boogie or the .22 Caliber boogie ?
    Do they really put out the Boogie sound ? How many watts do they
    put out ?
       
    Mark

    RE -1
     
    Just as an aside, the swap sheet has an ad fr a white falcon for
    1800.00 or best. 
    
    DK

    I have to confess to looking at the swap sheet or the penny saver
    once a week in the rare off chance that I will see a real valuable
    piece of gear on sale for next to nothing. eg. 1937 Martin Guitar,
    fair condition, 175.00 or best offer!
    
    I guess I can dream on, but I had a college professor who had three
    Martins, in cases under the bed in his guest room. He said no one
    has played them in 25 years. He and his wife used to play when they
    were "kids". He didn't think they were worth anything at all. He was
    just hanging on to them for sentimental reasons.

    I'd rather be a player than a collector but I'm not adverse to a
    good investment. Is this callous or wrong? Why does anyone have
    20 guitars and 15 amps? I don't because of financial limitations,
    thats why it has to be a real steal to catch my eye.
    
    DK

 
   Re -1 
  
         Must have been the person who paid $1500 trying
         to get his/her money back. 8-)  
     
         Kevin
    

    I also believe that it is OK to buy gear with the expectation to sell
    it at a profit.  I must also confess that I sold a lot of stuff
    as "vintage" gear.  I never robbed anyone, though.
        

    
        Some of what I bought and what I paid for it....
        
    
	Fender Mustang (In pieces when I got it)  $40

	61 Gibson Les Paul Special  $90!  

      	Mid 70's Les Paul Gold Top  $500 w/Fender Twin amp

	Mid 60's Gibson SG Deluxe $175

	Early 60's Gibson Melody Make (double cutaway, 1 PU) $125
        
        Early 70's Marshall 4-12 slant front cab. $150 or so
      
       
     When I sold the Marshall cab, the guy who bought it didn't even
    want to try it out to see if it worked.  It said Marshall on the
    front and that was good enough for him. 
    
    Kevin
    

    re: a few back
    
    I recently bought a .22 Caliber Boogie (the only thing I could
    afford from them). I haven't played through any other Boogie's,
    so I can't compare them for you, but I LOVE the one I have.
    It has a large range of possible sounds (especially with the EQ),
    and I get everything from clean, crisp tones to raunchy rock and
    roll, all at whatever volume I want.
    
    I don't play in a band, so I don't know how they well they work
    in a live situation. It won't give you the onstage volume a Mark
    III would, but I'm sure it would work well enough as long as it
    is properly miked.
    
    Alan S.

    I don't know what to say, My Twin Reverb is reliable (the only tube
    failure came when my wife ran into it with the Subaru, I had to
    replace the front bumper, as well as all of my 6L6GC's - this was
    2 years ago). It goes everywhere & I know how to make it work the
    way that I want. I have 2 1960's SG's (one is the Les Paul SG) &
    I admit that the necks are spongy & you have to get used to them.
    I'm not much for bolt on neck guitars & I find that after a very
    short while, you get the feel of your instrument. I play my vintage
    equipment all the time & plan on continuing. My philosohy is that
    my equipment has to eventually pay for itself, at the same time,
    I like the Vintage equipment (I also build my own guitars - oddly
    enough my scale lengths are all 24 3/4, just like the SG - not 
    like the 25 1/4 inch, as found on most guitars these days - ala
    Strat/Telecaster) & I use it. My musical instruments get to be
    close friends after a while & I prefer the personalities of my friends
    to playing whats currently hot. I even have a Danelectro (masonite
    body - that sustains like the dickens) that's quite ugly, but it
    gets used frequently. 
                                               Jens

    re: .32
    
    What you ask is the whole point of .30.  Even the smaller Boogies 
    are still Boogies, rather than cheapo amps with the Boogie name on 
    it.  They have the same overall design as the bigger Boogies, just 
    less frills and less power.
    
    It's hard to imagine Randall Smith ever coming out with a transister
    amp that said "Boogie" on it.  If he did, it would probably be well
    worth buying.
    
    Note though, that even those little Boogies are still pretty expensive.
    The point is that even if you buy it for the name, you're still
    getting the "sound" and qualities that you associate with the name.
    
    I have a friend who's a pro and who seems to get whatever he feels
    is best without regard to price.  He uses a Boogie .22 "whenever I
    can which is most of the time" because of its (comparatively)
    light weight and a Mark III the rest of the time.
    
    How many guys go into the studio with those "Marshall" 12 watt jobs?
    
    	db
    
    p.s.  Have to confess here that I'm planning to record a solo with
    	  my Dean Markeley 12 watter (heavily EQ admittedly).  I just 
    	  want something that sounds a little different, and since its
    	  my practice amp, I'm sorta very familiar with it.  It kicks
    	  in it's own way.

    Re. Small Boogies.
    
    Mesa is advertising "New small Caliber Boogie has arsenal of features for
    under $500". Thier ad has no mention of power.  My question remains.
    How many watts does this amp put out?
    
    I have a mind to use whatever I buy on stage, so it would have to
    have at least 50 watts to be heard. How about the Son-of-a-Boogie,
    How many watts are they ?
    
    Mark
    

    	The S.O.B. model boogie is probably around 40 to 50 watts and
    I think the Calibre is a 22 to 30 watt amp. Wheres DBI when you
    need him?

    I think the Boogie they are talking about is the .22 Caliber
    (22 watts). This sell for $499 without the EQ ($649 with EQ).
    
    Alan S.

    It's 22 watts, Mark.
    
    Note however, that the wattage has at best, a positive correlation to
    loudness.  Given the same design, an amp rated at n watts will go
    louder than an amp rated at n-x watts.
    
    However, you can't reliably use the rated output to compare two
    different amps, especially when you're talking about numbers like
    22 and 50.   I guarantee you that the 22 watt Boogie is gonna be
    a lot louder than a 50 watt solid-state amp.   (My 60 watt Boogie
    will definitely blow the doors off my 120 Watt JC-120. I guarantee you
    that a vented speaker enclosure is not going to be as loud (especially 
    for monitoring) as a combo with an enclosed cabinet.  An EV or JBL
    speaker will be louder than a "Joe's special" speaker in the same
    cabinet.
    
    Boogies are definitely loud amps if you lump amps together by power
    rating.
    
    Whether the .22 is gonna be loud enough for you is not a question
    any one can give a definitive answer.   I am sure that if all you
    ever need was an overdrive sound, a Boogie .22 would be plenty.
    The issue is not really just "can I hear it?", but "can it stay
    clean at the volume I need for to hear it?"
    
    I would also claim that you can't even answer that by going into a store
    and trying it out.  What sounds loud in store, may not seem
    so loud in front of a drum set, or in a big hall, or whatever.
    
    If I had to say something bad about Boogies though, it is that they
    have some properties that make them somewhat sub-par as monitors.
    
    Boogies seem to be very directional.  Standing about 4-5 feet away
    from the amp, if you take about 3 steps in either direction, the
    highs really drop off.  I've made this experiment with other combos
    (Peavey, Marshall, Fender, etc.) and they seem to have about 1 step
    more high end dispersion (hey, a new measurement of dispersion: steps)
    than the Boogie.
    
    Marshall cabs, seem to have really good dispersion but of course you
    can't compare cabs to combos.
    
    Obviously this isn't a very scientific method, but since it seems to be
    an issue with you I thought I would mention it.  I generally don't
    stray too far from in front of my Boogie (I'm not a very demonstrative
    player) and thus I get by without much problem.
    
    	db

    
    Re: SOB
    
    According to the latest Mesa literature, the Son Of Boogie is
    discontinued.
    
    It has been replaced by the .50 Caliber, a 50 watt version of the
    .22 Caliber.  It has channel switching (the SOB didn't) and is also
    available as a head-only.  
    
    A graphic EQ is an available option for the Calibers.
    
    The spec chart in the catalog BTW mentions a 38 watt model, but
    it's not in the price list!!!
    
    I think the .50 Caliber is $750 or so.
    
    

    
    	What's watts, and loudness? Remeber the basic rule:
    
    "To go *twice* as loud (apparently to a human listener using only
    their God given ears) you need a *10X* increase in power."
    
    	That means to go twice as loud as your little Sony portable,
    with 2.5 watts a channel, you'd need a 25 watt/channel amp/speaker
    setup. To go twice as loud as that, you'd need a 250 watt/channel
    amp/speaker combo. To go twice as loud as that, you'd need a 2500
    watt/channel....
    
    	Comparing loudness differences between "22" and "50" is nearly
    nonsensical -
    
    	Joe Jas
    

    re .46 (and others)
    
    Right on.  Much more crucial to the perceived loudness of an amplifier
    is the efficiency of the speaker(s) and enclosure.  I can blow your
    ears off with a Fender Champ driving a 4x12 cab.  Vintage Fenders
    often sound underpowered because the old blue Jensens, while they
    sound sweet, are very inefficient.
    
    /rick 

    
    	Yeah, I can literally slap your tympanic membranes against their
    stops (overdrive your ears) with my Peavey "Nashville 400" amp.
    It's 200 watts RMS into what looks like the most efficient 15" speaker
    possible, by it's magnet size, which is about 12" in diamater. (I'd
    guess 90db SPL with one watt input at 1 meter efficiency.) Peavey
    supplies all kinds of warnings with this amp, something about permanent
    hearing loss due to use of this instrument at high volume levels
    in enclosed spaces. But *everyone* wants to go as loud as physically
    possible, so that's the market demand, so that's what the vendors
    will provide...
    
    	Joe Jas
    

    I understand power and loudness, still when shopping for an amp,
    power is a specification that I compare model to model. Years ago
    if you wanted an amp that would distort at a low volume level, you
    had to buy a small amp with 50 watts or less. Many of todays amps
    have power selector switches that allow you to choose say 25 watt,
    or 100 watt operation. Some of the better ones put out the same
    sound at either level so you can use them in your apartment, or on
    stage. 100 watts with a pair of speakers (12" or 15" depending on
    the tone your after, with a relatively good efficiency rating) will 
    fill many good sized rooms without having to be miced. A 30 watt 
    amplifier with a single speaker (of equal high efficiency rating)
    might have to be miced to be heard in many large rooms. This means the 
    added expense and hassles of micing amps on stage, and ties up an
    additional channel on the pa system. If you have plenty of spare
    mikes and pa channels, I guess you don't have to worry about it
    as long as you can get the fat sound you want to come through the
    pa to your satisfaction. If you are trying to mic a tiny amp like
    a champ12 on stage, and you turn up the gain on the mic too high,
    other sounds are going to bleed through and corrupt the signal.
    Foot stomping and any other vibes present on stage are going to
    get picked up.
    
    (Warning, personal opinionating to follow)
    
    I think for stage work 50watts is about the lowest I would care
    to use (with fairly efficient speakers), 100watts is optimal.
    I like Mesa amplifiers but I don't think I would be happy with 
    a 22-30 watt model for stage work. Of course the only way to tell
    would be to buy one, try it on stage and see how it works out, but
    I would prefer to take a differant route. 
    
    (end of personal opinionating)
    
    Of course when it comes to vintage equipment, power is the least
    thing a collector would consider. Most older guitar amps are less
    than 50 watts, but put out a nice warm sweet sound. That is only
    one reason why people want them. They are nostalgic, merorablilia,
    a status symbol, a classic. One book that amply displays many 
    fine vintage instruments and accompanying amplifiers is the book
    American Guitars. This shows all the vintage Fender amps, and many
    other more obscure amps like Gibson, Rickenbacker, National, etc.
    I like the ones that were sold to accompany the National Dobros.
    The speaker plate was a resonator plate that matched the resonator
    on the Dobro.... It was really nifty !!!
    
    I believe a musician should have a fine-tuned road worthy system
    to drag around from gig to gig, that will accomidate most any
    situation easily. For this purpose new equipment is usually preferred
    over vintage equipment. What a person has at home in their little 
    studio/personal museum, is a differant story. I like to invest in
    both. As far as looking for vintage equipment, I find yard sales,
    church bazzars, salvation army, etc are a fun challenge and can
    occasionally yield a nice collectable piece at a bargain. Other
    than that pawn shops often offer some decent bargains, but music
    stores tend to prey on people the minute they say the word vintage.
    
    Mark
    
    
      
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    
    Another nifty vintage piece I got to hear this weekend....
    
    A Gibson GA-200 "Rhythm King", a tweed covered rig from the 50s.
    Two 12s and probably about 50 watts.  Two channels with volume,
    bass and treble but no verb or tremelo.  Apparently it was sold
    for use with basses, rhythm guitar, etc. which in those days were
    used without effects, of course.
    
    Anyway, there is one other nifty feature on it....a compressor !!!!!
    
    Pretty cool for 1955.  Just an on-off switch, and it affects both
    channels.  I guess it was intended for bass players to prevent speaker
    blowout.
    
    Anyway, the compressor is all tubes and for those who have never
    heard a nice snmooth tube compressor....yow!!!  
    
    The guy who owns this baby plays solo mostly and will often run
    a vocal mike into one channel and his guitar into the other, then
    use the compressor to keep things under control.
    
    GP ran a piece on a similar Gibson rig with compressor in one of
    their "Vintage Amp" columns a few years back.
    
    Cost of this baby???  My friend picked it up for $125 about five
    years ago.
    
    

                                                                  
    	I dont understand why the compressor "never caught on" then,
    if it was available in 1955 or whatever. I know the "Music man"
    amps have them and my Nashville 400 has one implimented to prevent
    distortion - you cant turn it off.
    
    	Personally, I think the compressor is the most useful type
    of signal processing device, next to tonal EQ. They can make a 50
    watt amp sound like 100 - stuff like that. Most people dont even
    understand what one does, let alone how to use it (crank it to 12!)
    - fortunate for those_of_us_who_do.
    
    	Joe Jas quote of the day "You cant successfully market a product
    which your intended customers do not understand" *Thats* why they're
    not as common as bass-treble controls! (Uhhh,...these knobs here
    make a difference, but this one doesnt seem to do anything - at
    least in the *instant gratificational* sense...it only works when
    I play really hard - must be somethin wrong with this thing...)
    
    EOB 

Last fall, I picked up an Ampeg Reverb-O-Rocket (could be fifties or
sixties, I dunno).  It had a couple problems, but the price was right.

First, neither the reverb or tremolo worked.  I tore it apart, and
found the 'sender' coil on the reverb spring had a broken wire.
It was a *TEENY* wire, but repairable.  Replacing the dead tremolo
tube was a simpler fix.

The second problem was a picture of Sid and Johnny glued *PERMANENTLY*
to the lower third of the grille cloth.  Didn't bother me, but a vintage
amp snob might begin to cry. :-)

Now it sounds great, especially the reverb (the knob calls it 'ECHO'
with 'DIMENSION' varying from 0 to 10) -- MUCH MUCH MUCH sweeter
reverb than I've heard on other amps, no SPROING.  The reverb box
is similar to others but longer (15" or so).  The springs seem to
have more 'turns per inch' and also seem more 'loosly' sprung.  The
springs and transducers are mounted on a plate which is in turn
spring-mounted to the reverb case.

There are some 'features' I don't like.  The volume control does most
of it's thing in the first quarter turn,  it occasionally picks-up CB
or FM radio (only with the reverb ON), and it's not loud enough to
compete with the rest of a band unless everyone else cooperates. :-)

I *assume* they use a log-taper volume pot, but plan to check next
time I borrow a Fluke VOM for the weekend.

I've had a bit of luck reducing the radio-sensitivity by lining the
amp chassis with aluminum foil and by coiling the reverb pedal cord
to reduce common-mode pick-up.  Any other hints?

I don't know what to do to make it 'louder'.  The output tubes are
a pair of 7868's.  Anybody know what that means RMS-wise?  The speaker
is an Ampeg 12".  Would a more efficient speaker help?  I don't want
to change the SOUND, just the VOLUME, but neither do I want to lug a
Fender Quad around to practices. :-)

Thanks,
Dave

    	I've had similiar problems with effects pedals and a Reel to
    reel which picked up radio signals. I essentially got rid of the
    equipment. Since you want to keep the amp I'd suggest you figure
    out what frequency you are picking up. I read somewhere you could
    design a passive filter? to eliminate this radio signal. Also you
    might want to check and see what part of the amp is working as the
    antenna.... I have an old ampeg catalog with that vintage amp in
    it and I'll look up Ampeg's rating tonight.
    
    							Rick
    

I'm pretty sure the FM comes through the reverb circuit somewhere.

There's no interference with reverb switched out.  At least part of
the problem is caused by the foot pedal reverb switch acting as an
antenna.  If I coil the cord and farkle with position of the cord or
coil, I can reduced the interference.

The signal from the preamp tube is routed THROUGH the cable and switch
to get to the reverb tank.  I'm guessing that a shielded cable or
perhaps a remote switch would help as well.

Have fun,
Dave

    
    If you are not using the foot switch, you might consider removing
    it and using a short patch cord to bypass the footswitch out/in
    jacks. My Twin Reverb is set up with RCA phono jacks for reverb
    footswitch out/in, and tremolo. The reverb cables are shielded,
    while the tremelo is not. I have been tempted to jump out the
    reverb f/s with a tiny patch cord. They did away with this on the new
    Twin which has a single 1/4" stereo jack for the footswitch (the
    new Twin does not have tremelo, but uses a dual footswitch for
    reverb and channel switching). God only knows why Fender kept
    including Tremelo into their amplifiers until the late 70's
    early 80's considering no-one used Tremelo after 1965 for the most
    part. Tremelo went out with the White socks. I had a Boss CE1
    chorus ensemble which also had a tremelo effect. I never used
    it. Why do companies market sound effects that people no longer
    want ? Is it just stubborness, or do they just miss the boat or
    what?
    
    Mark           
    
    
    

Wait a minute, *I* use tremolo.  WATCH IT :-)

The footswitch cable is soldered-in, not detachable with a 1/4 plug
or RCA jack.  I prefer to switch both reverb and tremolo in and out
depending on the tune.  If all else fails, I spose the reverb could
be jumpered premanently "IN".  Shielded cable appears the most sensible
place to start.

Dave (who's grandpa took him to many White Sox games)

    
    Just when you thought vintage-mania had peaked....
    
    
    Mesa Boogie has "reissued" the Mark I Boogie, complete with cream
    tolex....
    
    Geez, is the Acoustic 360 next?

    >       Geez, is the Acoustic 360 next?

    Yeah, along with the Acoustic 270 guitar head!
    
    Aack!
    Buck

    Well I entered the world of electric guitar last night and it didn't
    cost me a dime.  A friend of mine GAVE me the equipment below.  I'm not
    sure if they're vintage or not, but am curious as to what they're
    worth.  Anyone familiar with these goods?
    
    Fender Mustang guitar -           VOX Cambridge Reverb amp -
    serial # 117970,                  marking on the faceplate says
    2 single coil pickups,            "solid state";  couldn't find a
    markings on bridge say            serial #, but the VOX speaker has a
    "Dynamic Fender Vibrato"          tag with these numbers on it
    It's is a turquoise color            33-5079-6
    with a white pickguard.              17JB-1X
                                         465-720
                                      It has black grill cloth with red,
                                      white, and green lines on it.
    
    Mike

    
    Both of those are old items.  Probably mid-late sxities vintage.
        
    If the turquoise finish is original and in good shape, that's nice
    piece.  Mustangs aren't worth much, but custom colors like that (you
    have either "surf green" or "foam green") are a bit rare.  Maybe
    $300-400 if it's real clean?  $200 or less if it's beat. 
    
    Solid state Voxes (other than Super Beatles) are cool amps but not worth
    much.  If it's a small amp (i.e. single speaker, maybe only a 10" or
    less) maybe $100.  
    
    So for resale, neither is worth much but if they're in decent shape,
    they're worth keeping around.
    							Brian

    What a deal!  I never complain about free stuff...
    
    I'm starting to love that foam green color.  I used to hate it, but
    it's really starting to grow on me lately.  I may have to paint up one
    of my guitars that color...   *^)
    
    Greg

Yeah Greg, paint up that ugly Charvel of yours....

:)

    Re: .57
    
    Here's a review from USENET of the Mk I Boogie reissue.  
    
    						Brian
    
From: leff@sco.COM (Bill Leff)
Subject: Boogie Mark I Reissue
Date: 3 Mar 90 00:48:16 GMT
 
 
I recently purchased a new Mesa Boogie Mark I reissue (guitar) amp
and thought some of you might be interested in a review:
 
                   *** MESA BOOGIE MARK I REISSUE ***
 
The Mesa Boogie Mark I reissue is just what it's name implies, a
reissue of the original Mark I made famous by guitarists like
Carlos Santana and Larry Carlton during the '70's. The amp is
available as a standalone head or combo model. The story I hear
on it is that Carlos Santana wasn't happy with the newer Boogie's sound
so they created this model for him (I've seen him in ads for it).
 
The combo model (the one I bought) comes standard with one 12" 
Mesa/Celestion speaker and reverb. At full power, it is rated
at 100 watts RMS. Additionally, it has a 60 watt setting, and
a "Tweed" setting (more on that a little later). The power
section contains four 6L6 power tubes. There is no "Simulclass"
as in the Mark III models. 
 
The Mark I, unlike other Boogies, is not a channel switching
amp, although it contains two distinctive sounding channels.
Channel 1 is high gain, and channel 2 is "normal" (Fender
sound). When the instrument is plugged into channel 1, channel
2 acts as a second-stage preamp. Different setting combinations
produce very distinct sounds. I've found that higher settings
on channel 2 and low setting on 1 produce a nice, fat sustain 
(this is with the guitar plugged into channel 1). With the
guitar in channel 2, higher volumes get a really nice Fender
tone with in combination with my Strat (great for Chicago-style
blues).
 
Instead of having a footswitch to change from clean rhythm to
a more distorted lead tone, the tone is changed by volume settings
on the guitar. Turn up for lead, back down for clean. Though
not as easy and "clean" a solution as having lead/rhythm channels,
it works fine for the type of situations I play in (R&B mostly).
I could imagine the drawbacks in, say, a Top 40 situation where
one would need to have distinctly different clean and dirty tones
during a song. 
 
The front panel has channel 1 and 2 volumes, master volume, treble,
bass, and middle controls (no pull switches as with the Mark III), 
along with a 100/60 switch, on/standby
switch, and on/off/tweed switch. The tweed setting is a new Mesa
exclusive which lowers the voltage across the amplifier via a
specially tapped transformer (don't ask me what this means!).
The resulting sound is a bit dirtier and less punchy. The idea behind
the tweed setting is to recreate the "vintage" sound of old Fenders
and such. Additionally, with the tweed setting on, the 6L6's can be
replaced with EL34's or 6V6 power tubes, for a supposedly very different
sound (I haven't heard this but it sounds intriguing). With EL34's
in the 100 watt setting, the amp delivers 90 watts, approx half that
in the 60 watt setting, and with the 6V6's, 40 and 20 respectively.
I'm told that the tweed switch will be part of the Mark IV's.
 
The rear panel has presence, reverb, slave out, and effects loop controls,
along with effects in/out and slave out jacks. There is a courtesy 
outlet and 3-position ground switch as well. The effects loop knob
allows a variable setting of effects input to adjust for different
levels found on various effects. Additionally, a short cable can
be plugged into the in/out jacks to increase gain in the amp (I tried
this and it really works). 
 
My opinion: 
 
If you like the "Boogie sound" ala Robben Ford, Larry
Carlton, Santana, etc. this amp delivers. Also a great Fender sound. 
The amp sounds like a souped-up Fender, which it essentially is. I'm not
sure how it would be for "metal"-type sounds (not real familiar with
that stuff) but I imagine it could pass, considering that the amp
has a considerable amount of gain (though probably less than the
Mark III's). It's very easy to use, and though may not be the
most versatile amp around, it suits me fine, since I normally don't
want to be fiddling around with the amp during performance, but want
to set it up right and forget about it. It sounds fantastic with
my stock Gibson ES335 and Fender American Standard Strat. It's small,
appears to be very well built with attention to detail, and is louder
than hell, far louder than I would ever have use for (small clubs,
recording, casuals). It's not too heavy, either!
 
The catch: 
 
The price is $950 (ouch!). My rationale is that I probably will never
need to by another amplifier. I've been playing for over 20 years, many
of those professionally, have owned Fender Twins, Showmans, Peaveys, etc
(nope - never a Marshall - and I do love their sound!) and this is
the best sounding amp I've owned. 
 
Now, I wonder what this thing would sound like with EL-34's?
 
-Bill Leff

I had the extreme pleasure of test driving a Mk I Boogie combo reissue this
past weekend at Daddy's in Boston.  My experience with Boogies has been limited
to the Mk III and Caliber series amps; the Mk I is nothing like those.  I
finally understand what all the fuss has been about.  The previous note is dead
on in decribing it; this is a killer amp. 

Imagine the best vintage Fender you ever played.  At low volume settings, that
classic honking Fender clean tone, crisp and bright.  As you push the volume
knob upwards, the tone gets richer, fatter, with more and more sustain, till
the amp is wide open and screaming.  Now imagine that same amp, but instead of
stopping at 10, the volume knob keeps going to 20!  That about sums up what
this amp can do.  It sounds like a great vintage Fender, only better.  You can
get all the great Fender sounds and then push the amp past the classic
overdrive, adding even more crunch and sustain.  The distortion isn't buzzy (at
least if you work the knobs right), it's full, rich, and liquid.  And just like
a great vintage Fender, the amp is extremely sensitive to touch; every nuance
of attack and fingering comes through, allowing the individuality of the player
to shine. 

As previously described there are two channels, each with it's own input and
volume control; #2 is like a normal Fender channel, and #1 drives an extra gain
stage into #2.  Overdrive is controlled by the balance of these two volume
knobs; it's not quite as simple as "point and shoot", but I found it fairly
easy to dial up a sound I was happy with.  Note that you can achieve something
like channel switching with this amp by using an A/B box or pan pedal connected
to both inputs.  There is also a master volume.  Interestingly enough I got
great overdriven sounds at fairly low volume, indicating that it was primarily
pre-amp distortion that I was hearing; this sort of contradicts the idea that
great distortion comes from the power section.  The amp has a 60/100w switch to
disable half of the output section.  Another interesting thing I noticed was
that even at similar, low volume levels, 100w mode sounded a little fuller than
60w.  It reminded me of a discussion in guitarnotes a while back, where some
people claim to hear a bigger sound (not volume) in 100w vs 50w Marshalls;
doing the comparison on this amp seemed to lend some credence to that idea.
Of course, in 100w mode, even through just a single 12" Mesa Black Shadow
speaker, this amp can get insanely loud. 

The tone controls are simple bass, middle, treble (no presence), passive I
believe; they seem to have a little more effect and range than typical Fender
controls.  The tweed mode switch works as advertised; it alters the overall
tone of the amp to resemble more of the 50's tweed Fender sound.  It's kind of
hard to describe exactly; the tone sounds a bit thinner, with less high end,
and a little dirtier.  The solo on Jackson Brown's "Doctor My Eyes" is a good
example of an overdriven tweed Fender sound.  This would be a good sound for
traditional Chicago blues-style playing. 

In general, I don't think this amp is for everyone.  I don't believe you can
get a pop metal or screaming shred tone out of it as is.  Of course, effects
processing always sounds better through a good amp, and the Mk I would sound
great as a metal amp with the appropriate front end I'm sure.  But the amp
seems more geared toward blues, R&B, jazz/fusion, and players who are more
interested in creating their own individual tone than in copying someone elses.
Unfortunately, like many nice things today, it's expensive.  At about $1000
(and no discounts from Mesa), you can buy a couple of real vintage Fenders
instead.  On the other hand, it's built like a tank and seems to do everything
you could want from a Fender plus more, so perhaps it really would be the last
amp you'll ever need :-) 

One last thought.  The Hicks Fender Mender described in a recent GP review
allows you to take a typical two channel Fender amp and use one channel to
overdrive the other.  The concept and control scheme would seem to be very
similar to the Mk I.  From what I've read, the Mk I design is basically a
straight Fender pre-amp and power section with the addition of MV and the
overdrive feature.  If you've already got one of the older Fenders, this
device might be a way to get the Mk I sound at a fraction of the price. 

/rick

    Another beauty I got to hear last night...
    
    A Supro Thunderbolt bass amp.  Probably 35-50 watts, using 2 6L6s, has
    the chassis on the bottom of the cabinet, with all controls accessed
    from the rear.  One big, beautiful 15" Jensen (what *was* the "special
    design" anyway?).  Two inputs, one volume, one tone.  My guess is late
    50s, early 60s.  It's from the period where Valco owned Supro.  Biggest
    surprise was it was in near mint condition, marred only by a small 1"
    patch in the grille and some fungus on the control panel.
    
    This was being used for guitar (Gretsch Astro-Jet, a story in itself). 
    It was sitting on top of my bass amp when a barmaid came by to get some
    ice (crowded place we were in, eh?) during a guitar solo, and she
    knocked it off onto the floor, face first...luckily it was open backed,
    and the guitarist kept wailing.  The barmaid picked it up, put it back on
    top of my amp.  Obviously alittle worked up over this, the guitarist
    got directly behind it, stuck his Gretsch right into the back of the
    cab for some nice controlled feedback straight from rockabilly hell....
    
    As for the basic tone, very Fenderish, with some extra warmth from the
    15.  A real beaut.
    
    							Brian

    I'm not sure if this is vintage, but has anyone heard of Kelly Amps?
    
    Mike

    I think they were named for a guitarist named Jim Kelly. Jimmy at
    Mr. C's Music (Marlboro, Ma) claims that Jim Kelly plays in his
    band. Talk to someone at Mr. C's and they can tell you the history
    of Jim Kelly and the amp named after him.
    
    Mark

    >Jimmy at Mr. C's Music (Marlboro, Ma) claims that Jim Kelly plays in
    >his band. 
    
    Talk to Jimmy at Mr. C.'s and he'll tell you the world!  
    
    Buck, who got the 'hard sell' on Randy Rhoads guitar ("Randy owned this
    guitar, now I do")

    	Mark, Jim Kelly is a guitarist in the Boston area, however what 
    Mike is taking about is a Kelley Facs amp,designed by Jim Kelley,and
    used by people like Bonnie Raitt,David Lindley...... 
    

    Well, the amps are named after Jim Kelley alright, but not the one
    in Mr C's band.

    Jim Kelley amps were manufactured on the west coast by a company called
    AGE (Active Guitar Electronics) in the early eighties.  A fellow named
    Jim Kelley founded the company and designed the amps.  Jim didn't stay
    in the music biz too long, and last I heard he was a professor of physics
    at a west coast college.

    The amps were hand built and very high quality.  The only ones I've
    ever seen were 1x12 combos, but since AGE was essentially a custom shop
    they could've built anything.  A common option was the wood cabinet /
    wicker grill look popularized by Mesa.

    Key features of these amps:

    -  6V6 power tubes, preferred for their sweet sound
    -  active tone controls
    -  no master volume

    The cadillac of these was the FACS model (Foot Activated Channel
    Switching).  This amp featured two totally independent foot switchable
    channels, including separate reverb controls on each channel (about ten
    years before Marshall discovered this "great innovation").  Jim did not
    include master volume in his designs because he preferred the sound of
    the whole amp overdriving, not just the preamp.  His solution instead
    was to provide a footswitchable power attenuator (between the output
    and the speaker, i.e. a power soak); the attenuator would kick in only
    when the lead channel was selected, thus allowing you to crank it up and
    still balance volume against the clean channel.  Supposedly, reliability
    was not sacrificed because the Kelley amps were specifically designed to
    run with a power attenuator (e.g., overspecified output transformer).

    I've had the pleasure of playing through a Kelley, and they are a wonder
    to behold.  The clean channel really sparkles, and the overdrive sound,
    well... to say it sounds Fender-ish or Marshall-like wouldn't do it
    justice; it's really a unique sounding amp.  If you saw Bonnie Rait on
    tour last summer, both she and her other guitarist used Kelleys; Bonnie's
    supposedly had hers for years and swears by it.
    
    /rick

    I dug out an old Allies tape, and the guitarist in it uses them (Valley
    Arts guitars too).  They're from southern California so the info in -1
    makes sense.
    
    I had just never heard of them, but the tones on the tape are GREAT!
    
    Mike

    I found 2 Kustom heads at a pawn shop in Phoenix.  If you're
    interested, it is the same place mentioned in the Mosrite note. 
    Phone number is in there.
    
    Mike

        Actually it was 2 with tuck and roll and several later models.
        
        Bob

    Back in this note after a few years off...
    
    The new (August?) Musician magazine came out and had an article
    blasting retromania in the gear market.  Here are the author's main
    points:
    
    1.  Most guitar experts believe that playing a guitar for a long time
    makes it sound better.  There are examples of virtually unplayed
    vintage pieces which look awesome but sound average.  Therefore, a
    guitar that sounds good today will likely sound incredible in twenty
    years.
    
    2. The players of the past didn't use vintage gear because it was cool,
    it was all they had.  Jimi probably would have loved to have a Floyd
    and a TriAxis.  The author mentions that Leo Fender's later designs
    (Music Man guitars and amps, G&L) suggest he wasn't averse to using new
    technology, but players still swear by his earliest creations.
    
    3.  The idea that the secret to the old sound is in the gear is
    disrespectful to the players themselves, as if they could not have
    created that music on different tools.
    
    4.  The vintage bubble will burst once someone can come up with gear
    using modern technology that can fool expert players in a blindfold
    test (the author agrees this has not yet been done). 
    
    As someone who straddles both worlds, using both vintage gear and
    modern hi-tech stuff, I found this an intriguing viewpoint, and
    definitely in the minority as the rest of the music press drools over
    tweed reissues. Comments?
    
    							Brian

The vintage thing is to me, just another status thing

"Oh yeah man I got this early '50's broadcaster and nothing in the world 
sounds like it ya know?"

my response would be "Yeah right...sigh"

If playing an instrument is critical to getting a good sound then noone could
make a decent sounding instrument and sell it new...I tend to doubt to the
extreme that playing a strat (for example) improves it's sound. I do believe
that guitars break in, but that's mostly a fret thing (and finish :-) )

But I'm a big fan of newer technology...

dbii rack midiot

    
    As far as whether playing instrument improves the sounds it
    produces, there may be a basic distinction between different
    types of electric guitars. As I understand it, solid
    body guitars are designed to isolate only the sound of
    the string vibrating, which is then detected by the pickups. 
    The wood of the guitar in this case is not
    intended to resonate.
    
    However, as noted previously, any instrument where
    not only the string vibrates to create the sound does
    change in tone as it is played more.
    
    I can't explain the physics of this, though I've
    heard people talk about it in terms of molecules. 
    I think of it as the wood of the instrument learning that
    it is no longer a tree, but rather a guitar, violin, string bass,
    etc.
    
    I've also heard that to get the most out of breaking
    in an instrument, it helps to play it at the same tuning
    (A = 440 for example), since the wood learns to resonate
    better each time a specific note happens.
    
    So I'd say that in some cases the improvements 
    in tone from playing an instrument could add
    to its value.  I'd even believe that just older 
    wood might sound better than freshly cut, too.   
    
    But with solids, it doesn't seem like it would
    make a big difference, since the wood's not supposed
    to vibrate anyways.  Some of the vintage thing is 
    probably closer to furniture collecting than finding
    the best sounding instrument for the buck.     
    
    Dave 

	re .77:

	I think you are completely wrong about solid body guitars.
	Almost *everything* on the guitar has strong influence on the
	sound: type of wood, both body and neck, shape of guitar, type
	of frets, type of whammy, etc. The pickups don't have that
	great influence! F.ex. I have tried a lot of different strats,
	including several copies. They sound totally different, even
	when they are not plugged in. I have tried the same PUs on
	different strats, different result every time.

	If you play a strat, you can hear it has the 'strat sound' even
	when unplugged - the same goes for an LP - my LP Goldtop has
	'that' sound when I play it unplugged.

	High output PUs tend to overwhelm the sound characteristics of
	of the guitar itself - sometimes I've got a warmer sound from
	the guitar by lowering the PU's...

	A Floyd Rose whammy, f.ex. in fact tends to 'isolate' the
	strings form the guitar - I'm currently checking out a Valley
	Arts strat at home, equipped with this sort of whammy - the
	'coldest' guitar I've ever played (especially when played
	'clean') - but everything else on this guitar is almost 'per-
	fect' (but it leaves me cold..)..

	Just my opinion, of course

	Poul

    
    
      Thanx - but no thanx...
      
        I'll admit I'll look at a VOX AC-30 re-issue. BUT - Since it costs
      $2000 (about $1300 more than it's worth) and doesn't even come close
      to the versatility of my Hughes & Kettner ACCESS - I wouldn't
      even consider it. (Not enough LED's either B-}).
        I guess I'm just not into the retro craze after spending so much
      time and money making the rack sound good. What would I consider?
      Maybe the M/B 295 switchtrack power amp that has Coop salivating or
      the H & K VS-250 that matches the ACCESS. That would be a justified
      upgrade. Don't need it just yet, though. How much is that M/B Coop?
    
    							--B{}{}M--

    295's aren't switchtrack - 395's and Strategy 500's are.
    The one I really want isn't switchtrack either - thats the
    Simul 2:90.  It's 90 watts/channel, all-tube, and has different
    voicings, switchable from the tri-axis. 
    
    Baddddd to the boooonnnnee!
    jc

    While it's obviously true that vintage gear was all the pioneers
    had, I don't agree with the suggestion that they would have all loved
    Floyds, etc.  Hendrix is a bad example, he's dead.  There are plenty
    of those pioneers still alive, some still trying to make new music,
    and some still into their vintage gear.
    
    I mentioned my observations at the Boston Guitar Show; almost without
    exception, the pristine pieces were mediocre players.  I'm an admitted
    vintage gear enthusiast, but invariably the pieces that make me drool
    are great players that are almost always beat and trashed in some way.
    But is this cause or effect?  My guess is that the great players were
    great (or at least real good) from the outset; that's why they got
    played so much.
    
    I've owned and played one particular instrument for about 20 years;
    I personally haven't noticed it getting any better over time.  It was
    great when I first got it, and it's still great today.
    
    /rick

    I'm not going to argue the virtues of the *real* old stuff, but what
    about all these reissues?  It seems to me more like a marketing ploy. 
    Sales of rack systems are stiffing, so go sell some tweed amps.  Also
    it's no surprise that the sudden boom in retro gear corresponds with
    baby boomers buying all the toys they never had the cash for in high
    school.  
    
    With phenomenon like Sam Ash having special "over-30" jam/clinic nights
    in its suburban stores I can just smell that "lifestyle" word lurking
    around here somewhere.  Reminds me of that Dave Barry piece about
    going out to buy a sofa and coming home with a new Les Paul instead.
    
    							Brian

    Maybe, but as always it's dangerous to generalize.
    
    Case in point, the Fender tweed Bassman re-issue.  This is quickly
    replacing the blackface Super as the weapon of choice among local
    blues players, and they're constantly showing up onstage with national
    acts as well.  Why?  Well, the original tweed Bassman is a *great* amp,
    but when vintage mania drove up the prices on these (and black Supers
    now as well) you either couldn't find/afford one or if you did were
    afraid to take it on the gig.  The Fender re-issue is by all accounts
    a credible copy and sounds pretty close to the original.  Pro playerz
    are using these not because they have vintage mania or mid-life crisis,
    but because they like the sound; a testament to the notion that the
    original design was indeed something unique, extraordinary, and not
    readily available in any rackmount box.
    
    /George Fullatone

    yeahbut....
    
    The Bassman is a niche item.  You had a  whole squad of blues players
    who had been deserted by the amp companies.  What they needed was a
    good clean amp that would break up a bit when pushed hard, but the amp
    companies were all making high-gain singing distortion monsters
    instead.  I haven't seen tweed reissues becoming a real mainstream amp
    yet.  Heck, in the blues world if you get caught playing something
    without tubes in it, you're marked for death  8^)  8^)  
    
    Besides, retromania is selective.  In areas where improvement was
    warranted (bass amplification) noone seems to have a problem with
    modern gear (although all us bassists wanna keep a B-15 squirreled away
    jes' in case...agagagagagagaga).
    
    							Craig Andonandon

    I never lost money owning a B-15.  Bought the first new for $249.99 from
    Pampalone's Music in Reading, Mass., sold it 5 or 10 years later for
    $250.00; net profit = $.01.  Never did get around to sending the
    plexiglass thing in to have my name engraved...
    
    I bought another one (chained 'em together) for $100 with a garbage
    replacement speaker.  I sold it for $175 4 or 5 years later (found a
    live one, if ya know what I mean!!).  
    
    The bass player in one of my teen years bands had a B25N, which was a
    B15N with a 2 15 cab; what a beast!
    
    Later teen years brought a differen bass player with a V4B; can you say
    "hernia"?
    
    Early twenties, another bass player, SVT with TWO bottoms; can you say
    "double hernia"?
    
    Are these all gonna be vintage items?
    
    Carl

    Re: .85
    
    Actually, the various permutations of fliptop Ampegs are *already*
    collectibles.  I haven't seen a B15 go for less than $200 for awhile,
    most seem to be over $400!  Too bad they aren't very loud, because they
    have a great tone.  If only there was a 400 watt version  8^) 
    
    Actually, a buddy mine was using a B15 cab with an SVT head, that was
    what convinced me that you could have a huge sound in a compact package
    (I didn't say *light*, though).
    
    							Brian

    I know a bassist who was a dedicated SVT player for years, but
    now swears by an Orange 120.  Not that these are much lighter or
    cheaper.  Hey, does anyone know anything about "Green Matamp"?
    These are supposedly in production even as we speak.  Jay Tashjian,
    where are you???

    I'm psyched! Just picked up a Vox Cambridge Reverb amplifier yesterday!
    It's in immaculate condition; even came with the amp cover! 
    
    Last night, I pulled out the Epi, plugged it into the Vox, and played
    British Invasion music for a couple hours. Classic tone, nice unit.
    
    Bill Message

    I always though just guitar players were whacked out on vintage gear,
    but I guess retro mania is everywhere these days.  Witness this ad copy
    from a jazz magazine for the USA Horn company, a NJ-based horn dealer:
    
    "If anyone tells you that there is a saxophone being made today that
    matches the tonality and response of yesterday's classic saxes it's
    time for a REALITY CHECK!  Why is it that none of the players hired to
    endorse today's horns can equal the marvelous tones of the past masters
    such as Ben Webster, Lester Young, John Coltrane, Paul Desmond, etc.
    The finest in great playing almost-extinct vintage saxes in great
    shape and at great prices!"
    
    There were also two more vintage sax dealers advertising in the same
    magazine.  Now take the gushing ad copy and replace "sax" with
    "electric guitar" and trade those sax masters names for "Clapton,
    Peter Green, Wes Montgomery, Bloomfield, etc." and you'd have the
    generic vintage guitar ad!
    
    							Alto Reed

    Vintage sax mania is nothing new.  The Selmer MKVI has been the holy
    grail ever since they stopped making them (late 60's?); their previous
    top-of-the line model, the Balanced Action, also has it's following.
    This was already going on back in the 70's, when I dabbled with the
    big horn.
    
    /otto_link

    
    What's the deal? Is it cost of materials verses shrunken demand that is
    keeping horn makers from producing instruments of as high a quality?

    The mind boggles.
                                    \Wetyour Mouthpiece