Fender 65 Deluxe Reverb Reissue video demo

[g1]

Ok, I get it.
I'm often oblivious to the section heading.

[bob p]

C'mon Enzo! You need to push the line up to at least '65 so your list can include all the BF Fender amps!!! They are very important I our genre. That's my line. Mesa products get a nod for being (sort of) the first boutiquy amps and introducing stacked gain stages that actually sounded good (no offense to the master vol JCM800/JMP guys, I love those amps too ). But the "vintage" era should really end with the culmination of defined electric guitar tone as it applies to the earliest influential examples IMHO. And that would be the BF Fender amps and any of the early Marshalls from the same era, JTM45, etc. After that we only got slightly altered or adapted versions of those same amps for the next fifteen years!!! Proof positive that '65 was just about the peak of design for tube guitar amps. Modern uber gain things, while very cool, not withstanding.

I like the way you think about this, Chuck. But IMHO the "vintage" classification is easier to define: vintage amps are amps that were designed during the Golden Era of vacuum tubes, the era when all consumer electronics were based on tube designs. Nothing newer than that should qualify.

There was a time, before people even started assigning the word "Vintage" to guitars and amps, when things like Bursts and Tweed Bassmen were just old used gear that appealed to some people. Back in the late 60s/early 70s tube gear was still being actively designed for consumer electronics and transistors were the new high-tech. Back then there were no "vintage amps," there were just "amps."

Then transistors became very popular, and consumer electronics stopped using tubes altogether. IMO that period of time constituted the Great Divide in history between the Golden Age of Tubes and the age of the transistor. There was a vast period of time when tubes were forgotten in consumer electronics and almost completely forgotten in the HiFi world, and guitar amps were the last bastion of thermionic emission. Thankfully things have improved since then, but IMO the Great Divide should be what marks the difference between Vintage and non-Vintage. To me, to qualify as Vintage something had to have been designed during the Golden Era of Tubes. Anything newer cannot be "vintage", though I think it could be considered a "classic" design. The idea of applying the word "vintage" to describe anything that is 20 years old is nothing more than an intentional bastardization of the term by merchants like Guitar Center who want to drive up price on anything just because it is old. I think the 20-year-rule is just stupid.

According to my definition, any of Leo's designs could be considered "vintage", as they were all designed during the Golden Era. My definition would include both the BF amps and the SF amps, too, as well as Jim Marshall's amps of that era. But I think I'd draw the line before including anything designed by Randall Smith or Peavey, or any of the cascaded gain designs. Those designs are latecomers. Classic? Maybe. Vintage? No way.

I shudder at the thought of Crate amps someday being sold as vintage gear. When we get to that point, the word "Vintage" will have lost it's meaning.

Is it time for SGM to appear with a Crate-Peg rant?!?

[Chuck H]

Great that you distinguish between vintage and classic. A very important distinction for such a discussion. In that light I can amicably qualify Enzo's position and place the BF amps and JTM45 in the classic category. Is a 442 a vintage car? No. Classic? Yep. So that's my new "opinion" on the matter (and it will ALWAYS be left to individual opinion). Thank you for the vintage/classic distinction. But IMO it sort of defeats the era you support. See? Opinion.

Along the same line... Love in an Elevator by Aerosmith is NOT "classic rock". Nor is anything by Def Leopard or Billy Squire. And yet the "classic rock" stations play pretty much every hit up to 1998!?! But this is DEFINITELY off topic, if marginally related.

[Enzo]

Well, let me see then. I am born of the era, so am I a vintage classic, or classically vintage? Or maybe just clinical.

[bob p]

I can't disagree with Enzo's criteria. To give him credit, it was the Olds 442 reference, which is obviously a classic car, that led to my distinction between classic and vintage. So I have to share credit for the "classic" idea with Enzo.

When I think of vintage cars, I think of cars with bug headlights; I still think of a 57 chevy as a classic and I'm inclined to view a 34 Ford or an Auburn Speedster as vintage. But for amps, I definitely agree that there's no way not to classify Tweed amps as vintage. I think Tweed / BF is a wider dividing line than BF/SF, but that's just me. Like you said, lots of personal opinion goes into drawing the lines. That's why I try to keep it simple and use the "Great Divide" criterion. If an amp was designed in the Golden Era, how can it not be vintage?

Wait a minute ... according to that definition, I've hacked up an awful lot of Vintage SF amps. I feel bad now.

[Enzo]

There is probably a lot of wiggle room. I'd imagine concepts like classic and vintage have different meanings in different industries.

A consensus seems to be building here for vintage as only amps from the tube era. Well that date doesn;t move. But cars didn;t really go through a major upheaval like the tube/transistor change. We had the cars of the 30s with the fenders out the sides and headlights sticking out, and we have the current blob of snot shaped cars that all look alike. But they didn;t transition one year. SO they have ideas of age. My dad;s 1954 Chevy was new in 1954, but today it would be 62 years old and clearly an antique.

And I agree that even a piece of crap throw away amp from 1949 is still a vintage amp.

[Dave H]

Well, let me see then. I am born of the era, so am I a vintage classic, or classically vintage? Or maybe just clinical.

As you are as old as rock you'd be a veteran. For a car to be called 'veteran' it has to be made before the first world war, after that it's either 'vintage' or 'classic' (or a rusting pile of junk). That won't work for amps but we could call amps made before the second world war veteran.

[spinal]

Ahahah, sorry guys, it looks like I chose the wrong forum category for this post
But the real question is "does it sound good or not"? How different is a vintage one sounding? D

It sounded really good to me when we were recording this video, I can't imagine how better would a vintage one sound!

[Steve A.]

Ahahah, sorry guys, it looks like I chose the wrong forum category for this post

And I was wondering why everybody here was talking about vintage amps...

I'm going to move this to the regular Guitar Amps forum.

Steve Ahola, super moderator

[loudthud]

I remember the first time I saw one of those fancy Mesas with the stained wood cab and the woven cane grille. I still think those are pretty.

The first time I saw one of those was when I worked stage crew for a Santana concert. (~72?) It looked like something kludged together with labels from a Dymo label maker. I laughed when I saw they used the same labels in production (~84).

Vintage amp? Something before 1976.

Rock and Roll, anything before the Beatles. Anything after is Rock.

[Steve A.]

Rock and Roll, anything before the Beatles. Anything after is Rock.

I draw the line at Jeff Beck with the Yardbirds. "Heart Full of Soul" was released in June 1965, right between "Ticket to Ride" and "Help" from The Beatles. "Having a Rave Up with the Yardbirds" came out in November 1965 with the solos on "Mister, You're a Better Man Than I" and "Train Kept A Rollin'" IMO single-handedly inventing rock guitar. (The Beatles came out with "We Can Work It Out" and "Day Tripper" in December 1965.)

Watch "The Yardbirds - Train Kept A Rollin'"...

https://youtu.be/Cd1gRHk28IE


"Over Under Sideways Down" was released in May 1966 which is when Jeff recorded "Beck's Bolero" which was first released as a single in March 1967. To put all of this into context "Purple Haze" was not released until March 1967 and Sgt. Pepper's came out after that in June.

FWIW I think that The Beatles pretty much re-invented popular music, no smal feat...

Steve Ahola

[loudthud]

FWIW I think that The Beatles pretty much re-invented popular music, no smal feat...

First Band I ever saw live. August 22, 1965.

[bob p]

I'm a good 10 years behind you.

My first? Rick Derringer / Jeff Beck + Jan Hammer / Aerosmith at Comiskey Park in Chicago, 07-10-1976.

This concert became famous because a fire broke out that resulted in many of the 62,000 fans trying to get out of the ballpark all at once. There was a lot of panic, but Jeff Beck just kept on playing...

There's a bit of revisionist history regarding how the fire got started. People are now claiming that rowdy fans with fireworks started the fire, but there's no truth in that. During Jeff Beck's set we had decided to get away from the rowdies in center field, and we were sitting in the upper decks along the left field foul line when a grease fire broke out in one of the concession stands right behind us. The wooden shack was quickly devoured in the fire. People panicked, and when the exits became jammed people started climbing down the gutters and jumping from the left field upper deck. We were so mellowed out (this was the mid-1970s) that we just sat in the stands, thinking that there's no reason to be part of the stampede because we didn't think the whole park could ever catch fire. When people fled for the exits some left everything behind. Someone in the group seated next to us left his lid behind, which made the guy was sitting next to him quite happy. The band played on ... while people in the infield were using blankets to throw naked people into the air... what an experience that was!

As it turns out, last.fm has the concert online:

Aerosmith at Comiskey Park (Chicago) on 10 Jul 1976 ? Last.fm

[Enzo]

I'll see your Train Kept a Rollin, and raise you Stroll On.