Fender Vibrosonic vs. Super Twin

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 27 Jan 2009 11:18 am

how is a '79 vibrosonic with 135watt into 15" ev in comparison to a super twin?

does it have the tight low end, volume and clean headroom of the super twin or does it loose?

which one is the better amp to go for having nice growl, rich tube sound and enough clean headroom??

cheers

guido

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 27 Jan 2009 1:27 pm

There's only about a 50 watt difference, but the added 5-band ACTIVE EQ in the Super Twin makes it the winner by a large margin, IMHO. The U/L Twin Reverb has the old passive tone-stack setup, so when the tones get turned down...so does the output.

I've heard the term "growl" many times, but no one's ever been able to describe exactly what it is? Some say an Emmons p/p's got it, while others say an old Rickenbacker's got it, and still others say a Stringmaster's got it. To me, it's about as meaningful a term as "tone to the bone". So when people use it, it sounds to me like all it means is..."Mine sounds great, and yours sounds like $#!&".

So if what you're saying now is that the amp is what does the "growling", I'm going to be really confused!

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 27 Jan 2009 3:03 pm

Well, the Vibrosonic has a good onboard 15" speaker, and if that's what you want, it is a great combo for steel, maybe the best ever made. It's a more conventional amp, and probably will have better resale value.

The Super Twin has a little more headroom, if you need it. And the 5-band active EQ gives it more versatility. It doesn't have tremolo. I think it is way too heavy for a combo, but makes a great head.

The tone of the two is similar.

Brad Sarno · Post by **Brad Sarno** » 27 Jan 2009 3:52 pm

The only Super-Twin I ever knew suffered far too often from unreliability and flat out failures. Also, it's way, way too heavy. And the tone of this one was never quite as clear, sweet and open as a normal Fender. It wasn't radically different, but just not quite as perty sounding.

I'd prefer a 135 Watt Ultralinear Twin or Vibrosonic by a long shot. Better tonally, and also for the simple fact that it is an amp that evolved for many years to become what it was with all the bugs worked out and and all the many subtle refinements that get worked in over the years. The Super-Twin didn't have all those years and mass production to get refined and truly developed and de-bugged. Personally I don't have faith in them to be a reliable and professional workhorse amp like the Twins and Vibrosonics clearly were.

But the extra high power of the Super-Twin is pretty nice for loud steel needs.

Brad

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 28 Jan 2009 12:24 am

donny, i know it's stupid to use words like "tone to the bone" or "bell like sounds"! but to write about tone and sound is always difficult!
what i mean with "growl" is the tight and mighty bass response on the low notes the super twin gives me with the active eq cranked on the low freqencies! i like that and was wondering, if the vibrosonic gets ther, too?!
i now just want to find the right amp for to stay with for the next decades! and that's quite difficult when you can't try them all at the same time!

so, i hope you guys out there share your experience with me to find whats best for me!

i've this super twin, that has to get restored and i got a vibrosonic offerd - so, what will i go for?

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 28 Jan 2009 4:19 am

...what i mean with "growl" is the tight and mighty bass response on the low notes the super twin gives me with the active eq cranked on the low freqencies! i like that and was wondering, if the vibrosonic gets ther, too?!

In a word, no. That's what active EQ does, and that's why I like it so much. You can get those fat, ballsy, bassy tones from an open cabinet...and, you can get them at low volumes.

One more thing, tonewise, this is a seriously complex amp. It took literally weeks for me to learn how to use the active section properly, and to find some good settings for my guitar. All those tone controls (8 of them) interact, and it's a real "juggling" process to find out what works well. If you want an amp that you can buy, plug in, take 30 seconds to set the tone, and start playing, this is not the amp for you.

I love this amp. It's unique. But I don't recommend it for most players. In fact, I'd be perfectly happy and content if no one else in the world used it.

Tore Blestrud · Post by **Tore Blestrud** » 28 Jan 2009 8:40 am

Hey Guido, did you buy that supernice Vibrosonic from ebay.de? That looked like a very clean amp.

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 28 Jan 2009 9:05 am

Well, Guido, if you just want one amp for all occasions, I agree with Donny, the Super Twin is the most flexible, and has enough head room for any situation.

However, you could take a page from the guitar tube amp players, and get amps of various sizes for different situations. Their goal is to always be able to play the amp up near maximum volume, where "the sweet spot" is. A blues or rock steeler who uses amp distortion could use the same reasoning. However, most steelers are more interested in clean-to-the-top headroom, and are resigned to getting grit and distortion with add-ons, such as the Seymour Duncan Twin Tube box.

But I like to have smaller amps just to keep from having to haul an anvil like the Super Twin to small, low volume gigs. I reserve the Super Twin for the few really loud gigs, especially in rock club dives that don't mike the amps. Mostly I use a 100 watt silver-face Dual Showman Reverb head. I also have a 60 watt SF Pro Reverb with a 4 ohm 15" JBL. And for quiet practices and acoustic jams, I have a 10 watt SF Princeton Reverb.

With the 180 watt ST and 100 watt Showman, I don't really need anything in-between like the 135 watt Vibrasonic. However, if I never needed the volume of the ST, a Vibrosonic would be my choice for my biggest amp.

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 28 Jan 2009 9:36 am

hi tore,

yes i'll pick it up tomorrow! and i hope it's as clean as it looks!

cheers from germany

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 29 Jan 2009 3:07 pm

vibrosonic did it! super twin has to leave!
it's as clean as could be (looks like new) and sounds like i imagined steel guitar sound!

ok, donny, as you told me it doesn't pump out that bass at low volumes but i don't care - the all over sound is great! just plug in and be happy!

i would like to thank everyone who helped me!!

and johan, you don't have to be afraid anymore that i tear down your walls!

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 1 Feb 2009 7:05 am

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 1 Feb 2009 9:39 pm

Hey Guido, I have your vibro's brother over here. Mine is a '79 135 watt amp, too. Mine has the JBL D 130F orange frame, but it's in storage, as I put mine into a head cabinet and use two extension cabs with a pair of JBL K 130s. i believe this to be the finest steel amp I have ever had. Enjoy yours!!

and in the head cab--much lighter and two speakers sounds fuller.

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 1 Feb 2009 11:50 pm

yeah, james! must be the brother!

i am thinking about a closed back extension cabinet with the size of the combo, but by now i won't need that extra volume!
head - cabinet looks really nice...!
cheers
guido

Brian McGaughey · Post by **Brian McGaughey** » 2 Feb 2009 7:35 am

Nice guys! Count me in the Vibrosonic club now. I just picked this up last week. It's not without a few issues but they can be remedied with a trip to the tech. Any chance to post pics of gear...right?

This is a ' 77 with the 100 watt circuit. Had an Altec 416 (?) reconed with a 418 kit. Sounded shrill. I put in my JBL K-130 and I'm smilin' now. Hoping the 4 ohm load won't do damage to the amp. I never push it hard.

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 2 Feb 2009 8:45 am

...must be a "vibro-family" out there!

so, lost sons, where are you??

Murnel Babineaux · Post by **Murnel Babineaux** » 4 Feb 2009 9:38 am

Guys,

I have a '73 Vibrosonic that's in mint condition. I'm restoring the amp's circuitry right now and it's sounding great! This unit has the Orange JBl, original and in excellent shape. Amazing amount of headroom. I will be changing the output transformer with a more efficient and better sounding one. One thing that I've run across with two Vibrosonic restorations is that Fender shipped these with a part that is wrong! Ultimately, the amp had no headroom when I got it in. That' all fixed now, so not an issue anymore.

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 4 Feb 2009 10:00 am

murnel, you said fender shipped them out with a wrong part??
what part are you talking about? what did you have fixed?
do you think there was a general "mistake" in the whole production line?
i really would apreciate, if you could send me the schematics with the part you've fixed!
best regards
guido

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 4 Feb 2009 10:36 am

Guido, unless you have a headroom problem, your amp is probably fine. My '79 Vibrosonic has so much headroom, I interfer with airlines!!

Guido Hausmann · Post by **Guido Hausmann** » 4 Feb 2009 11:44 am

james, i didn't try, yet!

but i will next week in my practise room!
for sure i got no experience with how much headroom this one has to have until it breaks up!?
can you give a reference with your settings on the amp and when it clips??
i tried with pedal all the way down and then i have to put in input 2, cause otherwise it get's too much grit!
maybe other vibro users can give me some reference, too?
like i said, got no experience and as a beginner still do not really know how to setup the amp right in combination with correct volume pedal use!

(by the way, i just can't imagine fender did a mistake in their production line and nobody noticed)

Murnel Babineaux · Post by **Murnel Babineaux** » 4 Feb 2009 12:47 pm

Guido,

The circuitry mistakes that I've discovered only apply apply to the silverface vibrosonics of the early seventies. At this particular time in Fender's history, mistakes were being made on a regular basis. Music stores were receiving amps with missing parts.

You use an L120 volume pedal from Goodrich? How are you wiring this pedal? Typically, if you are using a Fender amp that doesn't have a pedal patch to actually wire your volume pedal to, you are sacrificing your tone and I would highly recommend getting a volume pedal from Hilton, or you can get a matchbox model 7A from Goodrich, if they are still available. Never wire up a L120 passive pedal from guitar - to the pedal - to the amp. You are seriously degrading your sound!

Murnel

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 4 Feb 2009 3:37 pm

I'd say "degrading" is a matter of opinion. There is some reduction of high end, and a (pretty subtle) change in high end content through the pedal travel--but especially with a Fender amp, and (usually) no tone control on the steel, those are not necessarily bad things. There are some even today who prefer the sound of a passive pot pedal to the modern potless ones--and I believe most still hook up guitar->volume pedal->amp. A good many of the amps people use for steel don't have a dedicated pedal patch.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 4 Feb 2009 3:54 pm

Brint Hannay wrote:I'd say "degrading" is a matter of opinion. There is some reduction of high end, and a (pretty subtle) change in high end content through the pedal travel--but especially with a Fender amp, and (usually) no tone control on the steel, those are not necessarily bad things. There are some even today who prefer the sound of a passive pot pedal to the modern potless ones--and I believe most still hook up guitar->volume pedal->amp. A good many of the amps people use for steel don't have a dedicated pedal patch.

Exactly. I have always played a pot pedal with a 500K pot, right to the amp and it sound fabulous. I tried the Hilton and with all due respect, went back to my shobud pedal. Guitar to pedal straight to #1 input jack, and use amp reverb. I get compliments on my tone.

As for headroom, I can set my 135 watt on 10 on the volume and am squeaky clean, because of HOW I use my volume pedal--to feed signal to keep sustain. Normally, my gigs around here, I play with volume on 3 and I have enough. Bar gigs, set the volume on 6 and I can spank the lead guitar player if want.

I use a 15" JBL D 130F, or maybe two If I need a fuller sound.

Murnel Babineaux · Post by **Murnel Babineaux** » 4 Feb 2009 4:10 pm

My last post was for Guido. Not for you, James or you, Brint. The information I supplied does degrade your tone, it degrades your electrical signal, and it imposes an impedance mismatch. Guido needs to be informed, and i'm going to give him the information he needs.

Thanks and have a nice day™

Murnel

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 4 Feb 2009 8:35 pm

Murnel Babineaux wrote:My last post was for Guido. Not for you, James or you, Brint. The information I supplied does degrade your tone, it degrades your electrical signal, and it imposes an impedance mismatch. Guido needs to be informed, and i'm going to give him the information he needs.

Thanks and have a nice day™

Murnel

If it's only ment for Guido, you might try sending a PM. And you are dead right Murnel, in that Guido needs to be informed that there are other totally acceptable OTHER ways to do some things. Sorry you are offended, as that was not my intention, and I doubt Brints either. I apologise to you Murnel.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 4 Feb 2009 8:36 pm

Murnel Babineaux wrote:My last post was for Guido. Not for you, James or you, Brint. The information I supplied does degrade your tone, it degrades your electrical signal, and it imposes an impedance mismatch. Guido needs to be informed, and i'm going to give him the information he needs.

Thanks and have a nice day™

Murnel

If it's only ment for Guido, you might try sending a PM. And you are dead right Murnel, in that Guido needs to be informed that there are other totally acceptable OTHER ways to do some things. Sorry you are offended, as that was not my intention, and I doubt Brints either. I apologise to you Murnel.