If you’ve ever wandered through the racks of sparkling new “vintage” re-issue amps at your local guitar retailer, wondering exactly what you’ll get when you throw down your hard-earned cash on a piece of Fender faux-history, you might want to give this article over at Guitar Player a good read.
In true face-off fashion, the guys at GP have compared one of Fender’s recent Vintage Reissue ‘65 Fender Super Reverbs with the real thing––a thoroughly worn-in Super Reverb, circa 1964.
I won’t spoil the suspense by cluing you in on their findings, but suffice it to say the author went all out, even going so far as to plug that original ‘64 head into the reissue’s 4x10 Jensens––just to see how much of the ’64s mojo could be attributed to its rather war-torn speakers.
This one’s well worth a read if you’re in the market for a “new vintage” amp, particularly when you consider that an original mid-60s Super Reverb won’t cost you all that much more than one of Fender’s expensive reissues. Check it out.
- REVIEW: Fender’s ‘65 Twin Reverb Reissue
- Hear The Fender Super-Sonic 112 In Action!
- REVIEW: Fender’s Reissue Blues Deluxe
- Love At First Sight: Fender Introduces Super-Sonic 112 Combo
- What’ll It Be? Line 6 Flextone III Plus
- See The BOSS/Fender ‘65 Deluxe Reverb Pedal In Action
- Introducing The Verbrovibe: Headstrong’s ‘63 Brown Vibroverb Replica
- Guitar Player Reviews Marshall’s Handwired Super 100JH
- Big, Fat Fender Tone: The Classic Vibro-King Custom
- Ordered A New Toy Today: The ‘67 SG Special Reissue w/P-90’s
- Free Demo: AmpliTube Jimi Hendrix Is A Helluva’ Lot Of Fun
- Hear The Fender Princeton In Action!
May 16th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Re: Art Thompson’s GP article— Please allow me to retort.
The real question is— will the reissue PCB’s endure 43 years of use, like the original PTP design?? The answer lies in determining the grade of boards and traces Fender is implementing. THD’s Andy Marshall provides the necessary enlightenment on this subject in this article published at the Bogner website:
http://www.bogneramplification.com/Pcboard.htm
After reading that article, as well as a Steve Morse interview in which Morse comments about how much more rugged his Peavey 5150’s are than his Marshalls, I also gained a renewed respect for Peavey as I’m assuming their PCB’s must be a higher grade than those typically used in many guitar amps right now— though maybe not as high grade as THD’s.
So, it will also be interesting to see if the Fender made EVH 5150’s are gonna be as tough as the Peavey 5150’s.
As for the Super Reverb RI, a lot boils down to their boards, traces, and heat sink/shielding/shock mounting utilized.
I’m may be speculating, but if GP’s Art Thompson had been willing to roll up his sleeves and do a little dissecting, he could have provided us more long term predicted reliability data on the Super Reverb RI. As a long time amp “expert”, Art knows where to look, so why didn’t he?
If I was gonna buy a Fender RI amp, I’d research their PCB’s, and compare to Peavey’s boards.
BTW, my ‘68 Vibrolux still kicks butt with filter cap & speaker r & r’s, biasing and as needed tube replacements. This doesn’t represent any major upgrades or cost significant maintenance. Go with what you know!
May 17th, 2007 at 5:59 am
Good feedback JP. I don’t think most folks think about stuff like the PCBs used in an amp, and they certainly should if they’re interested in that kind of longevity. My beef with PCBs today in lots of amps is that they make them so that it is impossible to modify/fix components. But, oh well.
I just have to throw in a funny. Next time I’m looking at amps at the guitar store, I’m gonna ask the sales guy, “So, tell me about the PCBs in this baby here, what grade are they and can we open it up to check ‘em out?” They’ll be lilke, “huh?”
IG
May 17th, 2007 at 8:34 am
Sorry so long winded. Andy Marshall’s article really got me thinking.
Guys like Art Thompson get paid to check into that sort of stuff. Guys like us rely on mags like GP to review equipment. Manufacturers send equipment to these people for evaluation, which includes poking around under the hood if necessary. Vintage Guitar and the late great Guitar Shop magazine roll up their sleeves and dig into the details that most of us aren’t conveniently able to. Dealers shouldn’t have to deal with people walking in wanting to dissect gear, but ultimately the end user is the one who pays, and dealers are impacted when gear they sell turns out having quality issues.
What’s the current GP newsstand price? $6.50? What’s their rate for a four color advertising spread?
May 17th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
One other thing that people might consider is the growth of recreations that are not like the reissues, in that they are point to point hand wired like the old ones, but are all brand new. I see these for sale all the time. Sure, you pay more than a new one, but you kind of get the real best of both worlds?
May 18th, 2007 at 3:13 am
who, in this day and age, really puts much faith into a magazine review? even if they didn’t subsist on ad revenue you’re getting one perspective in the review, unlike say harmony central where a popular product will have hundreds of (admittedly poorly written often times) reviews, detailing the user’s preferred choice in other gear, bands they like, etc. instead of going with some studio musician in LA’s opinion of something, i can actually find someone who’s heard of the bands that i like, and see what they think of it. nothing is going to be as accurate as plugging a guitar, amp, whatever, into your own setup and trying firsthand, but the wonder of internet technology goes along way.
so when you say ‘guys like us rely on GP…’ well, no, i’d say that most people that aren’t teenagers have long moved on. i mean honestly, more than half the stuff i try i think basically sucks, ha. i don’t think i’ve ever seen GP, or any huge magazine, viciously trash a product…. even when it’s earned. i honestly couldn’t see them completely dissing a new Fender product of any kind. and also, you know, these magazines aren’t even good for finding out about new stuff anymore- usually their new products sections are like 6 months behind the forum chatter.
i have my issues with fender but i think their straight up vintage amp reissues are what they do best. or at least well.
May 18th, 2007 at 9:33 am
You said it! I stopped subscribing to Guitar rags when Guitar Shop folded.
Nowadays, I quickly flip thru the latest issues at the supermarket while wifey squeezes avocados. Then I glance at the newstand price, stick it back in the rack and go tell her “More avocados!!”.
Hey, Cary should be back soon! How’d we immigrant bloggers do? I’m feeling like a citizen.
May 18th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
I think Cary needs to do a wrap up post of his vacation trip, complete with photos and all, if he has any skin left…
That’s funny JP, I do the same thing at the grocery store. That’s kinda how I keep track of the guitar mags, while grocery shopping with my wife and kids. Except for the ones that get wrapped in plastic, that was not a good day when they started doing that, so, I have to hide from the store cameras and be bad shopper…
And I do, like Tremspeed suggests, feel totally old when I’m looking at the mags cuz most really do seem to focus solely on teenagers. Can’t seem to find one that’s just for all of us. And there’s a lot of different mags out there, wonder how they manage to stay in biz and compete with each other.
Anyway, here’s wishing Cary a great return back to the grind…
IG
May 18th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
i like vintage guitar. they can tend toward the obsessive. whenever they review something extremely marginal (say, Ovation Breadwinner) the values not so coincidentally shoot up. i’m not, nor do i have the money to be, a vintage purist, but they seem to cover alot of boutique type stuff as well. just because it’s smaller than the big ones doesn’t mean it’s any shorter on ads, but they’re usually from smaller folks, stores, online places— the kind of thing i’m actually interested in. it’s pretty much the only guitar magazine i can stomach.