What can we do now that the guys in the Golden Age would have done if they could?

[tedmich]

they would have signed even worse deals with predatory MBAs and be out of the industry on their asses in even shorter order?

[trem]

1. I guess I am the only guy that thinks the OP is asked in a confusing manner.?

2. I do not have any education...so all I can add is.....SB Switches.....if they had then, what we have now.....you would never see the 150 (annual) questions on Amp Forums about the correct use of a Stand-By Switch.....and then (you would Not Read) the corresponding 100 pages of arguing about whether or not they are necessary.

[R.G.]

1. I guess I am the only guy that thinks the OP is asked in a confusing manner.?

Probably not. Let me be less obtuse, at least about what I meant.

Engineers are products of their time. They use what is known and practical to use when they are doing their designs and in general are beaten upon by their bosses and accountants to do it economically. We have a lot of learning we have accumulated in the last half-century about what guitarists seem to like to play, and have a half-century worth of new ideas, parts and technologies to play with. The guy who did Fender's designs in 50s - what would he use if he had to do it over again? The guy from the 60s? 70s?

2. I do not have ANY education...so all I can add is.....SB Switches.....if they had then, what we have now.....you would never see the 150 (annual) questions on Amp Forums about the correct use of a Stand-By Switch.....and then (you would Not Read) the corresponding 100 pages of arguing about whether or not they are necessary.

And yet you produced a perfectly good response to the question, and one that I expected. Things like "don't put in standby switches" are right in the vein.

[trem]

Sorry RG, I did not even look at who authored that.....I might have spoken out of turn there.
I should have said...There is something about the wording used, that makes it hard For Me to understand the question. I took it to mean ..... "If I knew then what I know now"...kind of a thing.
Everybody, but me, seems to have understood.....

[GregS]

Engineers are products of their time. They use what is known and practical to use when they are doing their designs and in general are beaten upon by their bosses and accountants to do it economically. We have a lot of learning we have accumulated in the last half-century about what guitarists seem to like to play, and have a half-century worth of new ideas, parts and technologies to play with. The guy who did Fender's designs in 50s - what would he use if he had to do it over again? The guy from the 60s? 70s?

Interesting thread. I hope I've understood the question.

I think a lot of the equipment we have now is what an engineer or designer from the golden age would have come up with had they had the technology we have today. I get the impression the world was a lot less obsessed with tone back in the golden age than now - both musicians and engineers. Practicality was very important and it still is - at least amongst working musicians. For example I believe the idea behind the combo amp was that the player could carry his entire amp in one hand and his guitar in the other eliminating an extra trip. It seems nowadays a lot of working gigging musicians would prefer to compromise their tone to not have to lug massive amps and cabinets around. We now have power amps that can put out 500W or more that weigh only a few pounds and can be packed in a gig bag. We also have smaller cabinets that can produce more low end response (because of ported designs) and also light weight speakers. In ear monitor systems eliminate the need for stage amplifires and conventional monitor wedges completely (as well as give the players a much better mix) and these seem to be becoming increasingly popular with gigging musicians. So, these innovations would have been popular with golden age engineers as they address the practicality and convenience needs of musicians.

The other aspect of modern equipment I see being popular with golden age engineers/designers is its affordability to the masses. I believe this was also a design goal back in the golden age and now with modern manufacturing technology, methods, and equipment it's possible to make very high quality products at very low cost.

I'm sure they would have been favourable to digital modelling equipment as well which I think has come a very long way in recent times.

Those are my thoughts.

Greg

[J M Fahey]

Engineers are products of their time. They use what is known and practical to use when they are doing their designs

True, applies to everything, even to machines to fry potatoes or deliver cheap ice cream cones.
Just look into any McD, there's nothing done by hand or which even can be done by hand (except final sandwich assembly, which is exactly that, assembly of the lowest grade possible, trained monkeys can do the same).
Everything else is made by some specialized machine or another.

and in general are beaten upon by their bosses and accountants to do it economically.

True, but written that way it sounds/looks unfair.
To be more precise, the market is the tyrannical boss, and obeys no Law except its own.

Leo was the Boss, and probably, at least in the beginning, did not have an accountant and any manager had to follow him, and yet he had to be (and he was ) finely tuned to what the Market wanted and at what price.

He downgraded the quality of what up to that point was an electric guitar ("toilet seat with strings"), and that definitely for a cost reason, none else.

Selling a vaguely guitar body shaped piece of solid (cheap) wood with 10% the machining and forming operations needed by any real guitar must have seen as the utmost treason by established guitar makers (cough cough Gibson and such) but it could be used as a standard guitar to produce music, cost was very cheap, and sound was good.

I compare that to today's ultra cheap (to produce) Digital/DSP amp emulators, which replace far more expensive Tube (and even classic transistor) amps, with much more versatility.

90% (or 70% or 50%) of the service for 10% of the cost seems too good to many.

FWIW I'm still actively involved in live sound and at least once or twice a month visit different "rock caves" , both to chat and visit old friends and to remind everybody I still exist , so as to get sales.

What I see more and more is kids (16 to 26) which are the backbone of the Industry (just visit GC or MF any Saturday and see who fills the shop wall to wall) who now are split in 3 very different groups (very unscientific and quite biased market survey follows):

** 70% couldn't care less or don't know better, and use "whatever everybody else is using" , typically 1x12" 40/80W SS combos, think Valvestate, myriad Fender "whatever 112", and similar Laney, Crate, etc. products.

Meaning: still there's where the main market is.
By the way, maximum bang per buck and "you play anywhere".

** 20% show up with large do-it-all digital processors-effects-amp/cab emulators-tuners , claim "I brought all my sound here, already cooked and seasoned, just give me power and speakers" and plug into whatever "house amp" is in the backline.

Often with horrible results because the typical "Castle Donnington wall of Marshalls / Metallica 8 x MBDR driving 16 4x12"cabinets" sound they selected and listen to on their PC or through headphones does not exactly reproduce well through a small open backed cabinet

** 10% are the knowledgeable ones, who bring their own middle class tube amp (think Fender HRD, Peavey Classic, etc.) or the very few (no more than a couple %) diehards who bring their own clasic Marshall or custom made Tube head and hope to find a 4x12" or at least a decent 2x12" cabinet in the Club backline.

And I guess the Tube guys percentage will shrink (tube amps are not cheap and the cheap ones are unusable) and the Digital ones share grows step by step.

Personally I'm doing reasonably well as a side line by offering, besides the standard (SS) amps, guitar powered cabinets, line input only 100W SS amps driving 2 x 12"speakers in a very compact, light and loud package.

We have a lot of learning we have accumulated in the last half-century about what guitarists seem to like to play, and have a half-century worth of new ideas, parts and technologies to play with.

True .... and there's also the benefit of hindsight.

Many cool ideas were weeded out by the cruel Market, (think LAB/Pearce amps, never mass produced Pritchards, etc.) , so what stayed is, by Darwinian definition, "what works".

[Tony Bones]

I think some of you are not giving nearly enough credit to the giants of the golden era. The name Leo Fender keeps coming up. He's accused of making things as cheaply as possible, both guitars and amps. But l think those accusations are better aimed at all the manufacturers that are gone and forgotten, not the ones that made gear that is still loved and still working after 50 years. Leo wasn't interested in mass produced crap. You couldn't buy Fender gear at Woolworth's or from the Sears and Roebuck catalog. He made gear that professional or semiprofessional musicians would buy because they liked the sound and kept using because they were reliable. Yes, his customers cared about tone (they were musicians; some of them even smoked pot ) that meant that Leo cared about tone.

Of course there were manufacturers in the music industry that were directed by accountants, etc. There have always been and there always will be. But they aren't the ones that direct the industry as a whole (no musicians really care about them) and I don't think those are the manufacturers that R.G. was thinking of when he started this thread.

The big names got big because they did something right. Luck had little or nothing to do with it. What would those people that did things right be doing today? There are people doing things right today. Maybe those people would be doing the same thing as these people?

[Mick Bailey]

I think what we can now do with SS amps would have changed the direction of amp design if the techniques and understanding were around in 'The Golden Age'. In pretty much every strand of electronics tubes were abandoned as soon as reliable SS alternatives became available. What if the Roland JC-120 was available in 1950? Would this have changed the direction of guitar amps? I think it would have. There's a whole list of SS guitar amps that would astonish players back then.

[Chuck H]

Yo, Mick,

+100 on that point! I do want to say, though, that what we know now about tubes and their distortion advantages WAS known back in the day too. Not that any of the SS alternatives offered any competition, but I like to think that tubes would still have made their showing as the premium product. Of course there's Stan's eminent position on the matter. If players had good solid state distortion options THEY would have become the tone we want. When you consider all the good recordings that were likely made with a tube amp and a SS distortion pedal it does seem like a strong argument. I guess I'm glad then that it worked out the way it has.

It's worth considering that there has been a ton of good SS distortion pedals and processors on the market for decades. Yet when the digital emulation thing got started they chose to imitate tube amps anyway! It could be just as simple as it seems. Tubes make musically superior distortion in general and players like them for that reason. I like to think this is the case.

[Justin Thomas]

I guess we should qualify "Golden Age." While the distortion characteristics of tubes were known in the 50s, it was undesirable. Along comes Rock & Roll, some distortion was okay. Now, I know there was always someone or two who were extreme, but for the most part, it was, "a little bit of distortion is okay." By the late 60s (and in a way, ever since) it's been a hybrid of tube/SS. How many of us put a SS device between our amps and guitars? So ultimately, as much as I love tubes for everything and play amps that only have SS rectos and bias supplies, I often put some sort of SS ddevice in the signal chain. Usually a distortio pedal and a chorus. I personally generally can play a MusicMan/Peavey/whatever hybrid IF it's SS pre & tube power amp.

May I blather? Thanks all!

Ultimately, if I call the late 50s/early 60s the Golden Era for tubes, I'd say tubes would have been ditched in a heartbeat for SS/digital. And they were, basically EXCEPT for guitar players! I don't know about hifi, but I bet a whole lot larger percentage of serious guitar players use tube gear than serious HiFi guys use tube gear... but that's cuz we WANT distortion and SS just isn't "good enough," while SS IS good enough for most hifi guys.

I think if they had had the stuff we have today back then, we'd have a LOT more amps like MusicMan and even the little Fender Champ XD tyoe amps, w. digital front end & power tubes. I do think they're a heck of a lot better than the"hybrid" amps with a token 12AX7 or 2...

Chuck, re all the digital stuff modeling tube amps, I agree. But the difference is this: I cannot possibly carry enough amps with me to cover anywhere near the number of models even a simple modeling amp covers. Granted, I won't even get into the "quality" of the models... that's not my point. For most people, close enough is good enough. Myself, I buy weird or rare amps that are not modeled on ANY modeling amp - Guild Thunder 1, BF Bassman, Brown Concert, etc. I still manage to always sound like me, but I do usually carry two or three amps to a gig! But it' worth it. About 5 years ago, my friend and bandmate had the second-best Line6 modeling amp. He played in wedding and church bands, and so needed to cover a LOT of territory in one gig. But as we talked about gear and sound, he realized that he only ever used ONE sound out of the thousands samplable. It was the only one that didn't get lost in a live mix. Now, he owns three amps - a Bugera for his acoustic, because it's generic enough to not color it too much but is still 100 times than plugging into a PA, and a 67 Ampeg and a 6? Gretach SE Reverb combo for his archtop. And the variety he can get out of that humble gear just spanks the modeling amps, now that he's lewrned to "playbthe amp."

I know a guy who uses Fractal stuff. Yes, it' "really really really really close," and it sounds great in the stage monitors. I the house with live drummer and against a Matchless, it gets totally buried. I can hear it, but it's just not "there." You can turn it up in the mix, but it just hurts then. I miss his actual amps. Modeling is a great recording tool and for making unearthly gawdawful noises or completely offensive rude punk rock,but I just don't think they've made it yet. I will continue to fight for tube amps.

Sorrybif some of that seems contradictory; I'm trying to discuss several issues at once in my head. I get lost easily.

Justin

[Audiotexan]

The other aspect of modern equipment I see being popular with golden age engineers/designers is its affordability to the masses. I believe this was also a design goal back in the golden age and now with modern manufacturing technology, methods, and equipment it's possible to make very high quality products at very low cost.

Greg

Well, yes and no. The issue is (at least IMO) that most of those 'very high quality' products are of foreign origin (hence the low cost due to ongoing "child/slave" labor issues).

So I don't really feel that's a fair 'across the board' statement.
If you took that same idea and applied it to US only made items (ca. 1940's/50's/60's) even when we were at our 'peak' in manufacturing *very high quality* items, the cost was reflective of folks that earned decent wages.

EG: 1962 Pilot Catalog
Pilot_HiFi_Line_1962_Catalog.pdf

Model 240 was 134.50
Model 780 was 269.05 (want a walnut enclosure? additional 22.50)
PSV-4 (3-way bookshelf speaker) 119.50


DollarTimes.com | Inflation Calculator
$134.50 in 1962 had the same buying power as $1,044.84 in 2014.

So that whole "very high quality products at very low cost" gets lost in the mix, depending on your standards. What's more, those items lasted 50+ years and are STILL going.

Can't even say that for the majority of "very high quality" items from 20 years ago. :/

[Justin Thomas]

Audiotexan,

Very good points if you are coming at it from a certain viewpoint... I happen to agree, but I bet 99.9% of people (especially Americans) wouldn't! :P

Quality means something entirely different now than it did "then." Then, someone would buy a hifi (for example) with the intention of hopefully never buying another one. Now? But MY high quality gizmotron doesn't have the color changing LEDs and Obnoxious Bass switch. I better upgrade to the new higher quality one!

Quality now is added buttons, switches, lies, useless features that assume the owner is a total A. Robot, or B. Moron, and Udder Bullploppy. They know damn good and well they're gonna want the new one in 8 months anyway, because that's how they've successfully programmed many - even for the expensive "quality" items. So as I see it, quality is jyst another marketing hype buzzword with not much meaning. Just how I see it, anyway...

Justin

[Chuck H]

Indeed! I'm more a hard rock player with nods toward metal or blues on each end. But I'm AGING and so my sensibilities are changing I guess. I'm increasingly impressed by pop rock from different eras. So my next guitar/amp package might be something like a Gretsch arch top and an AC30!?! Some really great versatility and tones for so much pop music.

I think the idea with the modeling amps (and even guitars) is to be able to capture the basic tones from almost any genre and era. In that respect they are good tools. The listener is sure to be happy, but the player... There's definitely a difference between the feel and nuances when playing through the real deal as compared to the digitally modeled stuff. In our current digital technologies and modern, lightweight power amps I don't see that changing. But that might be something Leo would be solving for if he were in the game today.

[Mick Bailey]

When you look at the golden age, it's not just the tubes, but the total package of (mainly) durable components that could be serviced by a vast number of repair shops and 'Mom & Pop' radio stores. Simple layouts on eyelet or tag board, solid timber cabinets, and pots, switches and sockets that would last several lifetimes, plus leather handles, thick nickel and chrome plating. Tubes were produced in vast numbers, to a tighter spec and better quality control than nowadays.

All these qualities which modern manufactures such as Victoria seek to reproduce.

I'm thinking to myself that I've never seen a 'boutique' transistor amp - one built as though devices were sent back in time to the 50s. Maybe even tagboard construction preamp and separate output amp with flying leads to the output transistors. An amp built with durability, reliability and quality in mind. CTS pots, switchcraft jacks and finger-jointed pine cabinet.

It would also need to sound good.

[Chuck H]

How about a new style of hybrid amp? Maybe a digital modeling front end carefully designed to accept the guitar signal with similar input dynamics and preamp output impedance into a typical tube PI and power amp!?! Instead of modeled power tube clipping though, the amp would have power scaling for the power amp and the preamp would just emulate all the popular preamps. Could be the best of both worlds. Granted, one power amp couldn't emulate all the different power amps, but it might be better anyway. With VOX, Marshall, Fender BF, Fender tweed and even a couple of modern uber gain preamp models. I don't know much about how one might discretely adjust a power scaling circuit but it would be really cool to also have the capability of a library of preset patches.