Fender Amps

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 26 Mar 2009 8:07 pm

FWIW I prefer my '64 Vibroverb Custom - handwired, 40 watts (or 60 kicking in the SS rectifier an other "stock" mods), plenty of headroom when using a 5751 preamp tube and good output tubes biased right - much warmer than a Twin and no volume problems at all. Same with my '69 Pro Reverb...same power with 2x12's. If you dial them in right you have plenty of headroom, a clean but much warmer "Fender Tone", and the capability of also using them at much lower volume than a Twin without them dropping into the thin-zone.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 26 Mar 2009 9:19 pm

I found the tone controls on the Steel King I owned to be rather limited. It was either brite or extremely brite. I could not find a way to roll off the highs.

Yes, the Steel King has a lot of highs, especially with an Emmons push/pull! But the thundering lows are worth the trade off IMHO. Fender seems to have scooped out the midrange. The amp takes some getting used to. I turn the treble down to about "9 o'clock" or less on my Steel King.

Speaking of Fender amps, here's my "other one". It's '67 Vibrolux Rev. It's been with me a long time, and I still play it on guitar gigs, a couple of times a month.

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 27 Mar 2009 3:07 am

Doug, that's the most perfectly battered Blackface I've ever seen. Worn in all the right places, yet intact and unhurt. It could be a model for the inevitable onslaught of relic'ed amps.

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 27 Mar 2009 4:50 am

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 27 Mar 2009 8:25 am

Doug, that's the most perfectly battered Blackface I've ever seen. Worn in all the right places, yet intact and unhurt. It could be a model for the inevitable onslaught of relic'ed amps.

Yes, it's perfectly worn. I love that amp!

"relic'ed amps"... wow, I never thought of that! I'll bet Fender does that eventually.

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 27 Mar 2009 10:15 am

Bob Hoffnar wrote:Donny,

The S-K was designed specifically for pedal steel, and it has far more power and a far more versatile EQ setup than the old (and rather limited) tone-stack in the RI Twin.
Interesting. I found the tone controls on the Steel King I owned to be rather limited. It was either brite or extremely brite. I could not find a way to roll off the highs.

I still have my Steel King and use it on occasions when I need to be loud, but I can never get a tone I like with it either. I've tried all kinds of boosts and cuts of Mids at all kinds of frequency settings. I suspect it may be the speaker that gives what I'd call a "crispy" bright edge that can only be avoided by turning down the treble and/or Tilt so far that desirable highs get lost, and the sound gets muddy and won't cut through. Perhaps a speaker with less extreme treble range would correct this.

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 27 Mar 2009 10:33 am

Doug Beaumier wrote:
Doug, that's the most perfectly battered Blackface I've ever seen. Worn in all the right places, yet intact and unhurt. It could be a model for the inevitable onslaught of relic'ed amps.
Yes, it's perfectly worn. I love that amp!

"relic'ed amps"... wow, I never thought of that! I'll bet Fender does that eventually.

Not eventually Doug, they already did it.
They made relic'ed 59 bassmans complete with beer ring stain and cigarette burns exclusively for guitar center. They did not sell very well and eventually GC had to blow them out at $800. I saw one and had a good laugh, and then a little cry too because it was just so wrong.

edit: looks like they did some blues jr's too,
found a photo but it was too large.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 27 Mar 2009 11:03 am

They made relic'ed 59 bassmans complete with beer ring stain and cigarette burns exclusively for guitar center. They did not sell very well and eventually GC had to blow them out at $800. I saw one and had a good laugh, and then a little cry too because it was just so wrong.

I wonder if buyers and sellers 50 years from now will be able to tell the "relic" guitars and amps from the real vintage ones? I guess in 50 years they will All be vintage. $:\$

Keith Hilton · Post by **Keith Hilton** » 27 Mar 2009 4:11 pm

I am presently using my 1996 Tube Fender Vibrosonic. I have used solid state Peavey for so long it took me a while to get used to the old Fender sound. I am liking it more and more. The highs are like a sharp knife and I like that. I may go back to solid state Peavey, or I may use both. It has been interesting going back to a tube amp. It is a whole different animal.

Keith Murrow · Post by **Keith Murrow** » 28 Mar 2009 9:04 am

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 28 Mar 2009 12:40 pm

Ah - I'm not a fan of the relicing concept. But I don't think there's anything wrong with the good relic's guitars. I've had a few over the last 8 years or so, and they have been outstanding guitars. I bought them because they were such good guitars that I could overlook the annoying relicing - they were as good or better than any old Tele I've ever played. To my tastes, they lavish the best, lightest, and most resonant wood on these guitars. Of course, I'd prefer to just pick through a bunch of standard issues and find one that - by the luck of the draw - had the "good stuff" for a fraction of the price, and wasn't relic'd.

I think there is much, much less incentive to relic an amp. A lot of guitar players like the feel of a worn neck, even to the point where the lacquer is partly or even largely worn off. It's not just cosmetic. Beating up an amp would be purely cosmetic and I can't see any useful point to it whatsoever. Of course, that hasn't stopped anybody from doing pointless things in the past ...

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 28 Mar 2009 2:43 pm

We just got one of the Fender "Road Worn" Telecasters at the music store where I teach. I played this guitar for a couple of hours today, and I am Very impressed with it! It sounds and plays fantastic. Lightweight, with a very clean, strong, snappy tele tone. It feels and sounds like my '68... only better.
It's a new Mexican tele with tex/mex PUs, relic'ed by Fender. They sell for about $800. This is a great deal compared to Fender's Custom Shop relics which sell for 3K to 4K. I've played a few of the Custom Shop relics, and to be honest, I like this Mexican one better.

David Nugent · Post by **David Nugent** » 29 Mar 2009 4:44 am

I have tested both the "Steel King" and the "Jazz King" (which I understand is basically the same unit with the exception of the Eminence 8 ohm speaker.) The Jazz King seemed to have an overall smoother tone than the Steel King, so the speakers may be what is making the difference. Given a preference, I would choose the Jazz King.... Also, Musician's Friend currently has the Jazz King on clearance for $799.00 while the Steel King sells for roughly $1165.00.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 29 Mar 2009 7:36 am

I prefer the Fender Steel KIng because of its crispy bright edge. Great bass response also.

L. M. English · Post by **L. M. English** » 5 May 2009 4:08 pm

I will never buy another newer Fender. I have a SteelKing with a 1501 Neo 4 ohm speaker that has been in the shop twice with cold solder joints and loose connections It is very noisy and I don't even try to use it anymore. Fender should go back to the drawing board and have better quality control. My tech says it is probably all the bouncing around on the bus. I love the older Fenders and thought the new ones would be equally as good, but I was very disappointed with mine.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 5 May 2009 4:24 pm

I agree with the quality control issues. Chinese manufacturing again. Fender has a real problem. They are also over priced at this point for their design.

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 5 May 2009 4:38 pm

I think what gets most Fender fans is that feeling of being duped. Most of us found out the hard way that newer Fender amps are junky. Fender passes off these new amps as "reissues", when they are nothing close to the real deal. I think that the cosmetics are a real throw-off, leading the customer to believe they have something that's as good as a Fender amp of yesteryear. You would think a company would do something about this after receiving so much roasting online. Apparently they don't care. And now with the price jack, it's just beyond ridiculous. Almost $2,000 for a Fender Twin in my neck of the woods. Ha.

Funny side note: When I had problems with my Custom 15 a while back, I returned it to the store for repairs. When the store owner contacted Fender with the nature of my problem, the Fender rep mentioned the steel forum to the store owner in a way that was less than complimentary, implying that the folks here were giving the Custom 15 a bad name without any solid reason. He did admit to a bad batch being sent out, but said it was rectified. I got a replacement that did not break down, but I still brought it back because it didn't sound any good. I now use old Fender amps exclusively. Half the price and twice the reliability.

L. M. English · Post by **L. M. English** » 5 May 2009 5:10 pm

AMEN brother preach on. My sentiments exactly.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 5 May 2009 5:28 pm

Chris LeDrew wrote: Almost $2,000 for a Fender Twin in my neck of the woods. Ha.

......... the Fender rep mentioned the steel forum to the store owner in a way that was less than complimentary, implying that the folks here were giving the Custom 15 a bad name without any solid reason.

The trouble is, We are from the generation who played the REAL twins, so we KNOW the difference. That rep likely isn't as old as the twins and vibrosonics we cherish.

As far as the prices for the new stuff, I can take that same stack of cash, buy a used '70--'76 twin or vibrosonic, send it to our pal Ken Fox to tweek and maintenance(good for another 30 years now), and STILL have some lunch money and a month's rent left. And end up with a REAL amp. Seems logical to me.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 5 May 2009 8:33 pm

Who ever is running Fender needs to be fired. Obviously big time incompetence with both marketing and design. Chris's points above outline the sham exactly. The problems are so obvious a 12 year old could see it. Another incompetent upper management example. If they want to make matters worse let 'em try to disrespect the Forum. They'll only kill their own market. Peavey listens to its market. Nearly everyone I heard who bought a Custom Twin 15 had a problem.

David Nugent · Post by **David Nugent** » 6 May 2009 2:12 am

I was a bit surprised to see this post still active. Thanks to Chris LeDrew who in his previous reply reinforced exactly my thoughts which led to this topic. It just seems odd to me that a company who manufactures a product with this many quality control problems, their ultimate solution would be a hefty price increase without any apparent remedies. Fender (JMO) appears on its way to becoming the next Behringer (whose products I have noticed several major retailers do not carry). It is possible to purchase either brand and get a good reliable unit,but is that chance worth risking your hard earned money?

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 6 May 2009 6:05 am

Who ever is running Fender needs to be fired. Obviously big time incompetence with both marketing and design. Chris's points above outline the sham exactly. The problems are so obvious a 12 year old could see it. Another incompetent upper management example. If they want to make matters worse let 'em try to disrespect the Forum. They'll only kill their own market. Peavey listens to its market. Nearly everyone I heard who bought a Custom Twin 15 had a problem.

In defense of Fender (and I'll add that I am biased in both directions at once, being an endorsee but being an outspoken critic of some newer products), their management in both R&D and marketing/sales is neither incompetent nor ignorant. They KNOW they are competing essentially against themselves - that's why reissues are PCB amps; it's a matter of price point. They can't, for example, make a hand-wired Super Reverb (that also complies with today's domestic and international electrical codes, an added cost factor) and sell it for anything close to to the price of a BF or even a 70's SF. With demand high, they did their research and found that MOST of the guitar-playing market is NOT made up of internet forum regulars, vintage instrument "screw counters" who demand nothing but 100% original copies; most are players who are familiar with the old amps by name. Most also do not care (and many don't even realize there's a difference) if they buy a PCB amp instead of a hand-wired one. They just are not apt to pay a $2000 street price for an amp when they can get a SF for $1000.

Do I think the PCB "reissues" are exact copies? No. Do I think they sound the same? No. But they DO get "close" - a LOT closer than other commodity amps.

The Custom 15 has been a very successful amp, and the failure rate is no higher than any of the other PCB's - admittedly higher than a Custom-Shop, hand-wired amp or semi=production model like the '64 Vibroverb Custom, but surveys of techs who get amps in for warranty repair show ALL PCB's to have fairly consistent repair rates at each price point - no matter what brand; Fender, Peavey, Marshall, Ampeg etc etc.

So while many vintage freaks get ticked off and complain about incompetence and the fact they can't get a new hand-wired amp at used SF prices, those players don't understand the casts involved, nor some of the technical issues. And oddly, some vintage amp freaks will complain about PCB quality and the fact it's not close to hand-wired...and play their Marshall JCM800 Saturday night - a PCB amp.

It's a simple case of demand vs cost - there is a great demand for these types of amps, but a VERY limited market at he hand-wired price point. Fender and Marshall both offer "boutique"-type hand-wired amps for those who want them, but (I think this number is roughly correct) 80% of the buyers of amps don't know much about (or care about) PCB vs hand-wired. They just see $1000 vs $2200 or something similar, play both, and don't hear $1200 worth of tonal difference. They don't factor service into their buying decision, and the reliability rate differences are in single-digits.

Simply, Fender (and other reissue makers) try to get as close as they can to the original design/sound without pricing themselves out of the market.

I have more on this, but am out of time for the moment. One point re: the "Roadworn" series - I have a love/hate relationship with that line. I love the look, the feel, and the playing characteristics; but it bugs me that the wear patterns are essentially identical (with very minor differences, the wear patterns follow the exact same template within each model) AND the price for a MIM guitar. I know guys that will take your Standard Tele or Strat and do the same relic job for less.

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 6 May 2009 11:04 am

Doug Beaumier wrote:We just got one of the Fender "Road Worn" Telecasters at the music store where I teach. I played this guitar for a couple of hours today, and I am Very impressed with it! It sounds and plays fantastic. Lightweight, with a very clean, strong, snappy tele tone. It feels and sounds like my '68... only better.
It's a new Mexican tele with tex/mex PUs, relic'ed by Fender. They sell for about $800. This is a great deal compared to Fender's Custom Shop relics which sell for 3K to 4K. I've played a few of the Custom Shop relics, and to be honest, I like this Mexican one better.

Doug, I tried out some of these and really liked them too. Just as you said , lightwieght body, snappy, feels great....UNTIL I noticed the frets sticking way out from the bottom of the neck. I recently bought a $275 mexican tele for gigging that had the same problem and it has gotten worse over the year i have owned it(or I am imagining it has gotten worse). I have treid a couple other mexican teles and am noticing the same thing. I am now wondering if the necks they are using have been properly cured for shrinkage?

Tho I hate the idea of reliced guitars, i did REALLY like these except for those sticky frets. Run your hand aliong the side of a mexi telel neck next time you get the chance....see if you can feel those frets sticking way out. Maybe Im just pulling lemon after lemon?

Rhino · Post by **Rhino** » 6 May 2009 11:09 am

Hello everyone...

I am really surprised that the Fender Steel King circuit board hasn’t been modified yet? Possibly just replacing the TLO72 chips with the Burr-Brown OPA2604 or OPA2134 IC's would make a vast improvement on tonal quality.

As the Nashville 400 went under passive and active upgrades the Steel King is ready for such mods with its EQ section.

Rob...

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 6 May 2009 3:40 pm

Jim Sliff wrote:With demand high, they did their research and found that MOST of the guitar-playing market is NOT made up of internet forum regulars, vintage instrument "screw counters" who demand nothing but 100% original copies; most are players who are familiar with the old amps by name.

Therin lies the scam. The majority of people do not know that the newer Fenders are not as reliable mechanically or sound-wise as the BFs and SFs; until of course, they lay their money down and start the process of coaxing good sounds in vain and carrying it back and forth to the shop for repairs. As stated, all most players know is the name - and it once stood for quality. This borderlines on trickery, as far as I'm concerned. We're not talking about an amp here and there; we're talking probably thousands of tech-benched amps in a 10-year period.

The Steel Guitar Forum

Fender Amps

Steel King

Fender Amps XXXXXX

FenderAmps

Fender