Why the bad Fender sound?

[ReadyTeddy]

To many people, Fender amps are the holy grail. I had 2 close-up experiences with Fenders. About 25 years ago, I was gigging with a Rhodes, and I had taken my own amp, which was a SS 200-watt home built, temporarily out of service to redesign the preamp. A friend lent me an old Bassman head to use until I got my amp back up. I hated the sound, and I can't tell you why. I could set the tone knobs for good tonal balance, there was no obvious distortion or other artifacts, but there was just something about the sound that grated on me.

Now, fast forward to about 10 years ago. I had just finished a new amp build, and took it to a friend's house who is a professional jazz guitarist to do a comparison to his amps. He had a Roland cube 60, a Fender 40-watt with dual 10" speakers (a Vibrolux, perhaps), and a Polytone with a single 12" speaker. We both decided that my amp sounded best, followed closely by the Roland, and the Fender sounded worst. Once again, there was something about the Fender sound that I really hated, but I couldn't put my finger on it. By comparison, one time I arrived at a gig, and the guitarist had a Ampeg Portaflex with a single 12" speaker with him. We ended up trading amps for the night, and I absolutely loved the sound of the Ampeg--if they were not so expensive, I would have bought one the next day.

So what gives? Millions of guitarists can't be wrong. Was it old tubes? Poor bias match on the output tubes? I'm at a loss to explain what I experienced.

[Jazz P Bass]

Old Fender amps certainly had there quirks.

From the 'too large bypass cap value' on the first stage to power sucking tone controls.

And they where forever messing with the circuit values.

It's no wonder that it is a popular mod platform.

[Chuck H]

Consider the limitations of your experiences. One was "an old Bassman head" that was already considered a second choice for some reason. That leaves a lot of questions. Was it in good repair and bias adjusted properly with good tubes? Was it being used with the correct speakers? WRT vintage tube guitar amps proper guitar speakers are part of the sound. The other amp was "a 40 watt with dual 10" speakers (a Vibrolux, perhaps)". Also a rouge amp just tossed into the mix and of questionable known quantities. Not that anyone you associate with would have an amp in ill repair, BUT, IMHE most vintage fender amps that are just kicking around are in very poor useful condition. How about an analogy...

If you had only ever tried fried eggs twice at dive diners where they're cooked in oil and go PFZKKSSSSST when they hit the too hot griddle, the edges turn into plasticene blisters and the white is still runny around the yolk (YUCK) you might decide you don't like fried eggs! The point here is that it's too common to get eggs like that and also too common to encounter Fender amps in poor representation.

Just listen to clips of good sounding examples of Fender amps. They're around It should become obvious that they're worth looking into. Find respectable examples of the right model for your style and known provenance to try before forming a permanent opinion.

[J M Fahey]

Not forgetting that the OP is a keyboard player, and is comparing a 200W SS amplifier to 40W tube amps ... which to boot may be poorly maintained, but even if not ....

Out of the small amps at his friend's home,he liked best an SS 60W roland ... not surprising.

Now if he had been playing Rock guitar, he probably would have found the large SS amp "cold and sterile" , akin to plugging straight in the PA, while the smallest ones, the Bassman and the Vibrolux would have been perfect.

[Chuck H]

Good point! Even back in the day everyone (including keyboard players) knew the whole Fender combo line were "guitar amps". Some were marketed for general band use but not many were used that way after about 1968. Just to add... Guitar amps are somewhat considered as signal processors for guitars and that's why some amps, especially those that impress their specific color onto the tone of whatever is plugged in, are considered "classics". So I wouldn't expect a Fender combo (or Bassman head) to be good for ANYTHING but guitar.

[g1]

Agree with above, and further, I don't think vintage Fender tube amps are the amp of choice for keyboards or jazz guitar.
You have heard them only outside their natural environment.
On the other hand, with only a sample of 2, it's possible both of them had some defect.

[überfuzz]

I don't know much about synthesizers/keyboards or how to make em' rock. Although slightly off topic: In recent years I started to double on electric organ in my band. It sounds sterile plug into everything BUT a guitar amplifier. Only situation I happily use a clean amplifier is when I play (über)fuzz guitar.

[Chuck H]

I will say this (try and stop me ). A Rhodes through something like a Fender Dual Showman can be a beautiful thing if you play Motown!

[J M Fahey]

Nobody will disagree

In fact, a Rhodes through a Twin just at the edge of breakup is also a classic sound.

Very grungy in a good way.

[Leo_Gnardo]

Agree with above, and further, I don't think vintage Fender tube amps are the amp of choice for keyboards or jazz guitar.

Got a bunch of jazzbo customers that love their Princetons, Deluxes, Vibroluxes, Pros, Twins. But I can see where a keyboard player would appreciate some extra power plus a clearer low end from closed-back cabinet. You need plenty of clean power & full range cab with tweeter/horn for a decent sounding piano, also if you're fond of punchy Moog bass tones.

And a Wurlitzer electric piano with just a bit of crunch from a guitar amp is another wonderful thing, right Ray Charles fans?

Feel free to send all your lousy sounding old Fender amps right here!

[g1]

I don't disagree they can sound great. I was speaking about the original statement "To many people, Fender amps are the holy grail", which I think is most applicable to a blues or rock guitar context.

[Enzo]

Sorry, but I absolutely hate the sound of a Rhodes. That BONK sound they make when you strike a key drives me nuts. SOunds like a piano overdriving a cheap mic. If you love them, more power to you, but now me.


As to what's wrong with the Fender, let us suppose it was in perfect condition and sounded exactly like a good fender ought to. We are still left with this:

Some folks love clam chowder, I hate clams. Some folks hate liver, I love liver. Not everyone has the same taste, in food or in amplifiers. SO if a very popular amp sounds bad to you, that is perfectly legit, as it is a matter of your taste.

[loudthud]

Have you ever stuck a pot in a Fender tone stack to tweek the so called Slope Resistor? It exposes how nasal the Fender tone stack really sounds. You just don't hear the nasal quality when it's at a fixed frequency. The Ampeg the OP liked probably had a James type tone stack. The Fender tone stack has a crevasse in the mid range where the phase shift from the bass and the phase shift from the treble combine to cancel the mids. Vox is even worse. Marshall avoids the problem to some degree with a low value slope resistor and high value treble cap. In the James you just get flat mids with phase shifts only at the extremes if you boost or cut treble and/or bass. A Twin T filter does the same thing as a Fender stack of you make it tunable. You need a three or four section pot to do that.

Edit: The Blackface and Silverface stacks are the worst. Tweek the 100K resistor. The 5F6a Bassman is not so bad.

[km6xz]

Not a good test of an amp intended for guitar, just as a clean flat amp would not be a good test of a keyboard. They have different functions and different demands placed on them. An open back guitar amp has the lousy bottom end that keeps the mids and upper harmonics clean and loud, and the bandpass of the guitar amp limits bottom that would only turn the guitar into mud. The fundamentals are stronger than needed so there is hf boost to enable the harmonics.
The keyboard amp and speakers have a different job to to, bottom is needed and it has to be clean. The mids don't need to be carved out abd HF does not need to be accentuated as in the guitar because the keyboard ois already generating the desired relationship of fundamental and harmonics, it is already the desired sound and just needs to be amplified and radiated without much alteration. It need a "reproduction" sound system. A guitar needs the guitar +amp+speaker to create the tone balance, as in a "production" sound system.

Plug in the keyboard into a nice full range low distortion PA system and you get what you expect. Plug a guitar into the same system and it sounds thin, weak, and lifeless, badly in need of some compression to project.. Reverse the system, plug a guitar into a high gain guitar amp and mid dominate light cone guitar speaker and get your tone. Then plug the keyboard into the same amp. It will sound like crap for the same reason vocals plugged into a guitar amp and guitar speak sounds horrible. The vocals and keyboard need a similar "reproduction system", not a "production system"
Are Fenders great or not? Depends, like everything in music. If the style of music, play, and instrument need the Fender characteristics they will, as a system sound very appealing. But there is a lot more to go into the total playability of an amp/speaker/guitar combination that makes every system out there suitable for Something, but not most things.
I am with Enzo, the Rhodes make my ears unhappy. Don't remember many songs where it added to the total experience in a positive way....now a B3, well, now we are talking....
It is just me but I never really think of a digital synth as a lead instrument, whereas an organ or piano(even digital) are. A lot of my rock recordings used grand pianos in the studio(had the Steinway grand of Stevie Wonder's in the studio that was used on "Songs in the Key of Life", after which he gave it to us), plus two Yamaha 9' grands, one with shaved hammers, that got used on a lot of top records because it sounded better on tape than standard hammers, which in turn sounded better live). The only bad thing about pianos, particularly on the road or studio was tuning had to be done everyday. If tracks were already done, any OD or additional parts would sound different than the old parts so the piano tuner would have to tune to the tape, not to pitch references. When Kurzweil introduced the K250, the first digital piano that used sampled sounds, it cost twice what a new Corvette cost at the time but I bought one of the first just to avoid the thousands of dollars needed on every record in daily tuning. So I like some digital, but find most synth arrangements and tones just do not add to the song. We tried strange tones by using guitar amps for keyboards but never liked what it did to the song. This discussion about auditioning amps with keyboards brought all that memory back and reminded me of how bad a full range instrument sounds through a production (tone generator) system and so nice with a full range flat system with lots of headroom. Different jobs to do, different capabilities, every band needs some of both.
Yeah, Fenders are fine, so are just about every amp out there, for something and some style. Where the tone circuit is and whether it is lump constants or distributed through stages with different response plots makes a big difference, particularly if driving the front end hard enough to generate preamp distortion. Marshall has more of a consistency between models and technologies so sound more like alike regardless whether tube or solid state, primarily due to their philosophy of how to handle eq in the stages. Fender models have more individual sounds for the same reason, how they handle the response determining circuits which vary with generations and technology. I always like the tone circuits of Ampeg, with higher Q filters, using inductors.