vintage fender question

[Alex Piazza]

Im in the market for an older pro reverb. I played a blackface and fell in love. However, im a little worried that its going to breakup to much on a long gig. Ive played a late 70's model with the master volume and didnt like it that much. Ive heard that the late 60's early 70's silverface models are pretty cool. Do they breakup at all? I like breakup, but not too much or too little. Does anyone play one of these? How do they sound? What are the exact dates to look for? Whats a good price to pay?

thanks

[Brian LeBlanc]

I've got a 66 Pro & it needs a rehab!
I'm intermediate & play old honkytonk classic/swing stuff
I like it for intermediate volume
...between a Deluxe & a Twin
Like a Twin but breaks up earlier
I'm thinkin Blacks are $1000 - $2000
& Silvers between $800 & $1500

[Bob Carlucci]

Alex.. If you use a Pro for steel, it WILL break up, take my word for it...Of course a lot depends on how hard it is pushed..

If you do quiet gigs it will be fine, but at bar band levels once she heats up, you be overdriving..

I have been fighting for years trying to get small and mid size Fender amps to behave.. They sound gorgeous, but will distort when you have to keep up with a bashing drummer, loud guitarist,400 watt bass guy etc,etc.... I even sweat at times with Showman or Twin Reverb amps distorting too much...

The Super Twin at 180 watts was the only Fender all tube amp that always had enough clean headroom on ALL stages...Any Fender amp under 50 watts is a crap shoot on any given night,with any given band... but they sure do sound good UNTIL they break up.. bob

[Jim Sliff]

Ive played a late 70's model with the master volume and didnt like it that much. Ive heard that the late 60's early 70's silverface models are pretty cool. Do they breakup at all?

Most of the MV models are very similar to earlier models if you turn the master all the way up. Usually a bad sounding Fender SF amp is just not serviced or adjusted properly.

You can dial in a Pro Reverb for almost NO breakup by using the right tubes (I like JJ's and NOS Sylvanias), biasing the amp a tad on the cold side, and making sure it has good, fresh filter and bias caps. Changing the speakers out to Weber Californias also tightens it up a huge amount. Also, changing the second preamp tube to a 5751 will lower the gain, improving headroom. A favorite trick is replacing the output transformer with a Bassman type...the difference is dramatic.

There are many tricks to turning Fender tube amps into clean machines, and a Pro Reverb set up right will be almost as loud as a Twin, have just slightly more breakup and a much warmer sound. I don't disagree that it might be a little short with a loud drummer and bass duo, but if that's the case the issue isn't the amp, it's the band's control of dynamics. If I hit situations like that I just use the Pro AND a Vibroverb...no problem being heard.

[Kyle Everson]

I play mostly through a 74 SF Twin with the master volume. On those, turn the master all the way up, and don't pull out the knob. Keep the bright switch turned off as well. I run mine on 7-8 with very little distortion.

Don't pay a whole lot for a SF. You'll come across one for a good price if you're patient. I got mine a year ago for $500 and it had no issues.

[David Doggett]

I'm not sure I would recommend a Pro Reverb for pedal steel. I have a late silverface one with master volume. Like any Fender tube amp, the tone is higly variable depending on how it is capped, tubed, biased, etc., and they are great guitar amps. But no matter how you set it up, it is the same size as a Twin, almost as heavy, but half the clean headroom for pedal steel. Mine mostly sits at home as a practice amp. Even if I know a gig will have miked amps, it sometimes does not have enough clean headroom to keep up with the stage volume of a loud band. And for really quiet gigs, it is just too big and heavy. Somehow it is just an intermediate sized amp that does not usually fit my needs.

[Jim Sliff]

As I mentioned, I can, with the right tubes and bias, set up my '69 Pro for a tremendous amount of headroom with my GFI Ultra. Usually a lower-gain preamp tube (don't use a 12AT7 - it's a lousy sounding tube for audio), strong output tubes and careful biasing are most critical - but it all hinges on whether or not a cap job has been done...and correctly.

but half the clean headroom for pedal steel.

That's an oft-quoted misconception. Half the power does NOT mean half the headroom (nor does it mean half the volume - more like a 3db reduction, hardly even perceptible to the human ear). Headroom is a function of many variables - output power is one of the least important.

Kyle - around here at least, Pro Reverbs sell for at least 30% more than Twins. Few steel players around LA, and Twins are not considered good guitar amps unless you want squeaky-clean tones all the time at high volume (which most players DON'T want). A Twin turned up to "3" just isn't driven hard enough to sound good.

I haven't seen a $500 Pro Reverb around these parts for 7 or 8 years. BF's go for $1200-$2k, SF's $800 - $1500 with the drip edge models in original shape (but freshly serviced) on the higher end of the scale.

[Brian LeBlanc]

ShoBud Pro I out of a Pro Reverb...

[David Doggett]

Yeah, I realize "half the volume" is not technical terminology. But for me it captures the practical realities better than citing decibel levels. My impression is that my SF Pro Reverb with both volumes on 10 sounds about as loud as a same era SF Twin with the Master Volume on 10 and the channel volume on 5 or 6. So to me that means it has half the volume in a practical sense. Of course, those volume knobs don't operate linearly. But I'm just trying to give a rough approximation.

Jim is right that Pros sell for higher prices than Twins - another reason to prefer a Twin for pedal steel. All those guitar players out there like medium and low powered amps so they can dime them and have usable volume. Vibroluxes and Deluxes are selling even higher than Pros. Heck, even Princetons are jacked up into the stratosphere these days, and Champs are practically worth their weight in gold. The original prices are now stood on their head. The cheapest thing out there in old Fender tubers is the 180 watt Super Twin. A regular guitar could use one unmiked for a stadium gig. But nobody does those unmiked these days. For pedal steel, a Super Twin will never run out of headroom, and they have the most versatile EQ of any Fender amp.

[Jim Sliff]

A Super Twin will also cost you about $250 to install new power tubes and have rebiased...and except for the fact they are clean machines (for those who like that sound), they're a tonal car wreck - brittle, cold, and lifeless. My opinion of course - but even for steel you want some warmth, and Super Twins have zero. Couple that with the maintenence cost and it's a nightmare amp.

but for me it captures the practical realities better than citing decibel levels.

Except it's totally misleading - it's not half the volume, it's not half the headroom...it's not half anything except the number of power tubes!

And is you read what Alex wanted, he wanted a little breakup. With the Twin, forget it unless you pull two power tubes, disconnect one speaker and turn it into a 1x12 Pro with too much iron.

I agree a Twin Reverb is great if you want a combination of clean and high volume - but subtract either of those conditions, and they're a heavy amp with a cold tone.

Most players...steelers included IMO...seem to opt for "too much amp", thinking a high-powered amp will sound good all the time. That's totally wrong. Even SS amps aren't made to provide optimum tone with the volume on "2" - and it's apparent from many threads that folks don't seem to know how to acheive improved headroom with tube amps. It's not hard, and the tonal improvement is well worth it.

BTW - from pics I received, looks like Alex got a "vertical blackline" Pro - probably a mid-'67, and likely a vanilla BF circuit. At $1000 he really scored - it's probably identical to a blackface '65 Pro Reverb except for the "clothing".

With the right tech and right setup, it'll keep up with almost any band except one that's unreasonably loud; that's not an amp issue, that's a band issue, as mentioned before. And one can always get a little boost by sticking an SM57 in front and using one PA channel for a little extra db push if the rhythm section is obnoxiously loud.

IMO it's always a better choice to have a great sounding amp and work with it than something that has conmpromised tone - but lots of headroom and volume.

You can alter headroom and volume of an amp with good tone. But it's much harder to tonally improve a bad sounding, loud/high headroom amp.

[Bill Hatcher]

I bought a non master SF Pro here in Atlanta for $200 a couple months ago. Guy in our musicians union was retiring and selling all his stuff. Needs cosmetic work but plays just fine.

The last blackface pro I bought was in 1970 for $35. Mint condition. Would not work even though everything lit up. Found that one of the wires going to the speaker output jack had broken off...only time I had ever seen that on a Fender. I used that amp for several years and traded it for a Twin.

The Pro reverb for modern PSG in todays volume situations would be risky if you are concerned with breakup. Best used as a standard guitar amp. The Pro Reverb was an ugly duckling for many years. They were cheap on the vintage market because not many liked them. Now that every old amp with Fender on it is bringing good money, the current crop of kids with money don't have the same thoughts that us more "seasoned" (old) players do.

I worked a gig with a jazz/blues guitar player the other night and he used a Pro Reverb. It had a good sound to it. Clean enough for the jazz stuff and then dirty enough for the louder blues.

[Dave Mudgett]

I concur with much of what's been said here, but I think everything depends on the context of use. I agree that a Pro Reverb tends to be more expensive than a comparable Twin Reverb, but as Bill said, bargains do sometimes show up. On the volume without breakup thing - I think it depends entirely on what volume level one wants to play at. The issue with old Fenders, to me, is to scale the amp to the volume/clean level one wants. I also agree that one can sometimes extract more headroom by cooling off the bias, tighten up the power supply, use really high-headroom power tubes, and so on.

To my tastes, a good and often less expensive solution to the problem is to take two power tubes out of a SF Twin Reverb and run it at 8 ohms. One can either just run one 8-ohm speaker, or if you're lucky, maybe find two 16-ohm speakers like in a Quad Reverb, which can be run in parallel at 8 ohms. Of course, this is heavier than a Pro Reverb, but not that much - a Pro isn't all that light either. One gains the bigger iron in the transformers, and also the ability to go back to 4 power tubes if 50 watts isn't enough.

To go down to 50 watts, pull either the two inner or two outer power tubes.

Another point - I don't find a Master Volume on a 100-watt Twin Reverb or a 50-watt Pro Reverb a significant issue. But the later ultralinear versions were 135 and 70 watts respectively, and have a significantly different, and cleaner sound. Depending on what you like, that could be good or bad. One good thing - they are generally cheaper. I just picked one up reasonable, and it sounds good.

The only other point is that old Fender amps from this period can be somewhat different. Tolerances in components, differences in transformer voltages and speakers, filter caps, and the way all these interact together, can produce significantly different-sounding amps. I really have to listen to an amp to tell whether or not I think it will work for me. Of course, it is possible to go in and mess around with components, bias, and so on. But unless you're competent to do that yourself, it can be a significant additional expense.

All my opinions, naturally YMMV.

[Kyle Everson]

I haven't seen a $500 Pro Reverb around these parts for 7 or 8 years. BF's go for $1200-$2k, SF's $800 - $1500 with the drip edge models in original shape (but freshly serviced) on the higher end of the scale.

Sorry I wasn't clear. The $500 amp I was speaking of is my 74 Twin. It's the 100 watt version. If the price difference is that significant, the smart thing would be to install a 4-ohm 15 yourself into a cheaper (and much cooler ) Twin.

[David Doggett]

Well, I don't want to hijack Alex's thread, but once again I disagree with almost everything you said, Jim S. Alex said he was worried about too much breakup, but wanted a little. You are not going to get much breakup from any SF Pro or Twin, unless it has been "blackfaced," or, as Alex said, is one of the very earliest SF years when there was still some overlap with BF circuitry. It's the headroom that may be a problem with a Pro. You don't want your volume pedal to be bumping and running out of sustain. Guitar players want to play near a tube amp's top volume to get the tube bloom. Most pedal steelers are less concerned about bloom than about bumping the volume pedal and running out of sustain. Many will even use very cold sterile 200-300 watt solid state amps to avoid running out of headroom. It is just a totally different world from regular guitar.

The pushed tube breakup that gives sweet guitar tone, gives muddy harmonically distorted steel tone. And the solid state amps really sound like crap when they are pushed at top volume. So for both tube and solid state amps, steelers want tons of headroom, and do not want to play with the amp pushed and the volume pedal running out of room. That's why it looks like steelers have way too much amp to guitar players. This is not ignorance on the part of steelers and wisdom on the part of guitar players. In fact, most of those huge solid state steel amps do sound about the same on 2 as they do on 8. Fender SF amps do loose some warmth at very low volume. But I don't recall ever playing a Fender tube amp at 2 with pedal steel. The more common situation of cutting the amp volume to 5 or 6 still leaves more good Fender tube warmth than you get from the solid state steel amps - just the right amount to make most steeler tube lovers very happy.

So, Jim, without resorting to decibel speak, what do you call it if you cut the amp back from 10 to 5? Or suppose you back your volume pedal off half way? Probably considering the nonlinearity of Fender volume controls, around 3.5 or 4 would be the real half-way mark on the volume knob. But ignoring that fine point, I think most players would consider that they were playing at "half volume" and had half the headroom at that point. What would you call that informally, without resorting to tech speak?

Finally I have to totally disagree with your assessment that Super Twins have cold ugly tone. Maybe for guitar (although Ted Nugent certainly didn't think so), but for steel they have plenty of tube warmth. These amps were designed in the Rivera era at Fender, when they had begun to recognize that clean and cold was not selling. My Super Twin and Super Twin Reverb, which I bought as used beaters and have never put in the shop for new caps or tubes (I know, I know, I need to do it some day soon), sound warmer to me than my SF ultralinear Twin or earlier SF Dual Showman Reverb. They sound like heaven compared to any 300 watt solid state amp that would be required to deliver the same headroom. For high volume steel gigs, for me they are the perfect fix for getting both tube warmth and clean headroom. Of course, even in a head cabinet, I would never lug a Super Twin to a gig where I had to put the volume on 2 (by the way, would that be 20% volume or what?), I have a sweet SF Princeton for those gigs.

Jim, it just seems to me you continue to espouse guitar player priorities. It is not better to have an amp with great tone and not enough headroom. If you have to push the amp to breakup, you have harsh muddy steel tone. And if you are swamped out, you have no tone. Period. Even what guitar players consider to be clean and cold tube tone can be considered to have good warmth and grit for steel, compared to the solid state steel amps out there. Maybe it is not ignorance on our part to stay away from modding low volume amps to be colder with more headroom, and to instead buy big clean tube amps like Twins and Super Twins.

And by the way, I always assume we are talking about country and country-rock pedal steel tone here on the Forum unless otherwise stated. Lap steel can use lower volume and dirtier tube amps - many lap steelers don't even use volume pedals. I also play pedal steel in a blues band, and for that I might use a medium or low volume dirty tube amp. If I need both clean and dirty, I use a Dual or Super Twin, and add a stomp box with good tube distortion, like the Seymour Duncan Twin Tube box. So I do know about good tube crunch, breakup, distortion and bloom.

I don't mean to be tediously contentious, but your condescending attitude to steelers trying to get good steel tone and adequate headroom rather than guitar crunch on a dimed out guitar amp continues to grate a little.

[Alex Piazza]

I guess I dont play in a "traditional style or tone". Whatever that means. Ive only been on the pedal steel for about 3 years, but ive been gigging and touring ever since the day I got one. I play with indie bands, singer songwriters, country bands. You name it. I guess what im trying to say is that im bringing the steel into joints that are really not used to seeing it. people are almost mezmorized by it. especially the bands im playing with. I tell everyone to turn down so that the crowd has to shut-up and listen. It seems to work well because everyone can hear each other on stage. To me listening to others is the best way to sound good as a unit. I think sounding really good and coherent draws peoples attention. Plus I like to having a little grit on my steel, and a little more on my 6 string. A twin is just too much, so maybee this pro will work perfect for me. im only 29 and my ears are starting to ring a bit too much.

[Papa Joe Pollick]

Alex, Here is the web-site of a man I know from the Eric Johnson forum that has a Super Reverb head and a speaker cab for sale. It might be worth a look see.The price is VERY right and he has a fine reputation.
http://www.valserrie.com PJ

[David Doggett]

Alex, if you've tried a Twin and it is a bit too much, then a Pro might be just the thing for you. The later model silver faces will be less expensive, and will be very good for steel. Don't worry about the master volume models. Just always dime the master volume and use the channel volume for all your volume adjustments. I've played places like you are talking about with a rockabilly/alt-country band. They were small rock clubs that did not mike the guitar amps. My band played very loud, and the crowds seemed to expect that. One Twin was not loud enough for me on steel, and two Twins were too much trouble. A Super Twin in a head cab with two 15s did the trick. These guys were vintage gearheads - they almost threw me out when I played a Nashville 400 cranked to harshness. They loved the tube tone I got on steel with the Super Twin - it matched their tweed and blackface guitar tones. If you can keep your group's volume down, maybe a Pro will work for you. Good luck.

[Dave Mudgett]

Alex - from your description of what you're doing, a Pro Reverb may well work fine - you may want to work on opening up a bit more headroom as suggested. I also work a lot with Americana, indie-rock, singer-songwriter and related sorts of people, and I often find an old Fender exactly the right thing.

I have a few sound files up. One set in particular may interest you here - listen to the Stone Poets tunes from 1999. These were live in a radio station for broadcast on a homegrown music type of show. I had been playing pedal steel less than a year, so please forgive the obvious issues. It's an early 80s Franklin D-10 with Lawrence 705 pickups into volume pedal, a Boss delay, then into a blackface Deluxe Reverb biased pretty cold with an old white-frame EV SRO speaker in it. Lots of the guys I play with love steel through an old Fender amp that most PSG players would probably find totally inadequate. The Kris Kehr tune was that same Franklin rig, but into a stock silverface Princeton Reverb. It's only good for low volume, and this was done as an overdub in Kris' living room. But I think the tone fits the situation OK.

On most live gigs, I found that Deluxe Reverb a bit lightweight. But a tweaked up Pro Reverb might well have worked. These days, If I need that sound live, I use a Nashville 112 with a Pod 2 to emulate the Deluxe Reverb sound because I haven't successfully convinced most of the guys I work with to turn down.

[Jim Sliff]

David Doggett - if you had read Alex's post carefully or had any other conversations with him, you'd know you're on a different plane of thought. I'm well aware of what's "normal" for steel tones, but he IS lookiing for something a little different.

I also totally disagree regarding headroom on Pros, having been an amp tech for 25+ years (Twins are another, irrelevant subject in this thread, as are the Super Twins - but I'll stand by my statements regarding both sound and expense. When you DO have yours serviced...which is way overdue, and an experienced tube amp user would have had it done about 10 years ago...you'll find out about the cost). Headroom is one of the most variable things you can have with these amps, and preamp tubes combined with bias setting can get you huge swings.

If you had your Fender amps down you'd know from the description that this is likely a late-'67 "first iteration" or "vertical blackline" Pro - a blackface Pro Reverb with a silverface control panel...made during an overlap period at Fender.

The pushed tube breakup that gives sweet guitar tone, gives muddy harmonically distorted steel tone.

Which is why you opt for changes in preamp tubes, power tubes, rebias the amp, perhaps sub a copper-top rectifier for more "snap" - but you can also find a good "middle ground" IF - as Alex has stated - you're looking for a little breakup, but not "woman tone". I can take my '69 Pro Reverb, and in about 5-10 minutes switch V2 between a 12AX7, 12AY7 or 5751, reset the bias with a Bias King, and have it set up for nice, warm, clean steel - or smooth, early-breakup blues...or somewhere in between. When someone brings me an amp, I voice it for how THEY want it to sound...not how I'd use it.

If a guy who started a thread on a Pro Reverb said "I'm looking at this amp for traditional clean steel in a pretty loud country band" I'd suggest it might not be choice #1.

Don't assume that just because I don't play traditional clean country does not mean I don't respect nor understand the equipment needs of those who do.

[David Doggett]

Jim, I think when I said “You are not going to get much breakup from any SF Pro or Twin, unless it has been "blackfaced," or, as Alex said, is one of the very earliest SF years when there was still some overlap with BF circuitry…” I showed the knowledge you accuse me of lacking about the early SF years. I guess you didn’t see that.

After Alex said a Twin was a little too much for his needs, we all agreed a Pro might work for him. So the rest of our quibbles aren’t so relevant to this thread.

But you didn’t respond to my question, “So, Jim, without resorting to decibel speak, what do you call it if you cut the amp back from 10 to 5? Or suppose you back your volume pedal off half way? Probably considering the nonlinearity of Fender volume controls, around 3.5 or 4 would be the real half-way mark on the volume knob. But ignoring that fine point, I think most players would consider that they were playing at "half volume" and had half the headroom at that point. What would you call that informally, without resorting to tech speak?”

There’s no question you can improve the headroom of a Pro to be almost as much as a Twin without those same type of mods. But that is an unfair comparison. Also, Twins go from 80 nominal watts to 135, depending on the era. And Pros go from 40 to 60. So lets level the playing field and take a 50 watt Pro, and a 100 watt Twin, with similar caps, tubes, etc. Most players would think the Pro had half the power and half the headroom. I realize humans have a nonlinear volume perception, and that on the decibel scale twice the power does not give you twice the volume. But most players are familiar with the difference between 50 watt and 100 watt amps. And they are familiar with turning the volume down from 10 to 5. And so informally they consider that going from a 100 watt amp to a 50 watt, or cutting the volume from 10 to 5 will cut the headroom about in half on the volume scales they normally operate with (i.e., amp wattage, and volume knob numbers). I’m not trying to split hairs or have a personal grudge match – I’m really just curious how you would describe that volume difference with resorting to decibels.

As for my philosophy on the old Fenders, I’m a player, not a tech, and I’ve tried many with pedal steel, from Tweeds to blackfaces to silverfaces to the Rivera era II series (which includes the Super Twin). I understand why guitar players prefer the Tweeds and blackfaces. But I always have found that the silverfaces (and Rivera eras) are the best amps ever made for steel. I realize this is a historical accident for steelers. By continuing to improve on high volume clean tube tone long after the 6-string world had begun its love affair with crunch, breakup and distortion, Fender almost went out of business, and forever lost the monopoly on tube amps they once had in the American market. It is just serendipity for steelers that all those great SF Fenders are out there at good prices. It was the ‘60s low headroom tube amps (Tweeds and blackfaces) that originally drove steelers to the big solid state steel amps starting in the ‘70s. Ironically, that’s when Fender was selling new SF amps with more clean headroom (ultralinear Twins, Super Twins). But I guess steelers still had memories of the older Fenders, and the new ultraclean (okay, sterile) SS amps won the market war for steelers. Now we can look back and try them all. To me, between the guitar friendly Fender Tweeds and blackfaces on the one hand, and the big SS steel amps on the other, the SF Fender tube amps are the perfect combination of a little tube warmth, grit and sparkle, with clean headroom to the top, and so are the perfect steel amps. Would you disagree with that? Just curious.

[Jim Sliff]

So, Jim, without resorting to decibel speak, what do you call it if you cut the amp back from 10 to 5? Or suppose you back your volume pedal off half way? Probably considering the nonlinearity of Fender volume controls, around 3.5 or 4 would be the real half-way mark on the volume knob. But ignoring that fine point, I think most players would consider that they were playing at "half volume" and had half the headroom at that point. What would you call that informally, without resorting to tech speak?”

Sorry for not answering, but it's such a nitpicky question it seems purely argumentative.

My answer, though is "turning it down". There is no "percentage" that can be used on such controls, and every player I knowm when they say something like "turn halfway down" is referring to volume rather than the numbers on the amp.

Jim, I think when I said “You are not going to get much breakup from any SF Pro or Twin, unless it has been "blackfaced,

I showed the knowledge you accuse me of lacking about the early SF years. I guess you didn’t see that.

No - I saw it. It's incorrect information. "blackfacing" a circuit and achieving breakup are sepearate issues. Please refer to my posts regarding preamp tubes, bias, rectifiers, etc - none of which relate to "blackfacing". "Blackface conversions do not correlate to more breakup - they may provide asmall..or medium...amount, but that's not what "blackfacing" is about. It's about harmonic richness and amp voicing. Far too many people have the misconception that blackface conversions are all about getting an amp to break up, and that's only part of it IF you set things a certain way when DOING the conversion. It's a possible side benefit, not the primary intent.

IMO for CLEAN steel (which is not what Alex asked about) An untralinear or Super Twin will certainly provide headroom, but at the expense of harmonic content. The entire Rivera-era line with the exception of the Super Champ is known for volume, headroom, preamp distortion (i.e. "buzzbombs") and being quite suitable for anchoring boats. If you just want clean, go for it - but if you want clean AND decent tone, in my opinion there are much better choices...especially with the service costs on a Super Twin, which could be more than the amp's value.

Blackface OR Silverface amps can be set up fine for steel, especially the "slight breakup" type of tone Alkex is asking for. They can also be voiced for tremendous headroom. You simply have to know what you are doing (which is simple, but not a common request, which is why there are so few techs that understand how to clean up a BF Fender).

Earlier you said you're not sure you would recommend a Pro Reverb for pedal steel - now you're saying

To me, between the guitar friendly Fender Tweeds and blackfaces on the one hand, and the big SS steel amps on the other, the SF Fender tube amps are the perfect combination of a little tube warmth, grit and sparkle, with clean headroom to the top, and so are the perfect steel amps.

So, are you saying you changed your mind, or what ARE you saying?

[David Doggett]

Jim, actually it was the part of my quote that you left out, “…or, as Alex said, is one of the very earliest SF years when there was still some overlap with BF circuitry…” that answered your accusation that I had not read Alex’s post carefully, and also your accusation that I did not have my Fender amps down.

And, yes, I changed my mind about Alex and the SF Pro. As soon as Alex said a Twin was a bit more than he needed, both Dave M. and I immediately came back and said that in that case, a Pro might be right for him. I love Pros in situations where they have adequate volume. I have used them in the studio and for practice. I am just wary of using one for a gig that might need more volume. In my SF Pro Reverb I put a 15” JBL D130 that had been reconed to 4 ohms – it’s now a poor man’s Vibroverb. I love the whole SF Fender family. What I would really like to fill the gap between a Twin and a Princeton would be a SF Vibrolux in a custom cabinet with a JBL D120. I think that would blow the NV112 out of the water.

For steel I simply don’t share your disdain for the ultralinears and Super Twins. I think the 135 watt Vibrosonic may be the best amp for steel ever made. And I love the sparkle of my Super Twin going into two JBL 15s, when I need that much headroom. But, see I’m comparing it to the solid state NV 1000, which is the main other option for a steeler who needs that much headroom. I once had the privilege to try a new Fender Bassman 300, which has 8 6L6s (tried it through a 4x12 cab and also a 1x15). I thought it might be a modern equivalent of a Super Twin, but I was wrong. It was too clean, and had no character. I much prefer the sparkle of a Super Twin to that.

So it all depends on your frame of reference. For regular guitar, BF Fenders are heaven sent, and the SF Fenders and Rivera era II series amps deserve the low regard they are held in. But for pedal steel, compared to the big solid state steel amps, the big SF and Rivera Fenders are a match made in heaven, and the BF Fenders just don’t have enough clean headroom.

But I am intrigued by your implication that say a BF Twin or Pro can be made to play clean to the top, like the SFs, but still have the rich harmonic tube tone of the BFs. If that is true, I would love to try such a thing for steel someday.

And speaking of old Pros, the Tweed Pro is one of my favorite amps of all time, for regular guitar, or for steel, where more headroom is not needed. But alas, the prices for those are into the stratosphere. I got a Peavey Delta Blues, which seems to be modeled after the Tweed Pro. But the stock tone of the DB is nowhere near that of a Tweed Pro. Do you think there are cap and tube replacements or mods that would get a DB close to a Tweed Pro tone? That would be something of great interest to blues players, regular guitar or steel.

[Jim Sliff]

David - having heard the same thing, I tried a few Delta Blues, thought they sounded nothing like a Pro (as you said) and never bothered to look at the circuit - to me it was a marketing deal - "let's make something look like an old Fender and people will think it sounds like one". I wouldn't even mess with it - I'd look to Ted Weber for one of the tweed Pro kits and just build one.

As far as trying to increase the headroom of an old amp AND keep the tone, the firat thing is a complete service - filter caps and resistors, bias cap, check bypass caps for leakage, make sure the phase inverter tube and resistors are absolutely dead-on matched (I've gone through a dozen tubes to find a 12AT7 with even decently balanced sides.) Then you need tubes that don't break up early, like Philips STR387's or similar. Use a 5751...or for even cleaner sounds, a 12AY7 or 12AU7 in the V2 slot...then bias at about 20ma to start, crank it up, and find the sweet spot that gives you clean right on the edge of breakup. It CAN be done. This DOES assume a non-stock speaker...a Weber California, a Neo, something with almost no breakup. And with a Pro, a Bassman OT helps. With a Vibrolux, bothe a bigger PT and OT are needed...you get into transformer saturation with that particular model. Bob Warford's Vibrolux is the only loud, clean one I've ever played through - and that's because of Red Rhodes' complete rebuild.

The SF's and BF's are amazing - they really can do the job if you just "massage" them a bit.

[David Doggett]

Okay, thanks for the tips. I have about 6 old Fenders that need to be serviced. I'll be taking them in one or two at a time. I'm sure my amp tech will have his own ideas, but your suggestions will be a place to start. As for the Weber Tweed Pro kit, I've got too many unfinished projects sitting around now. I barely have time to practice as it is. I'm thinking building my own amp is a project for a long way down the road. But my own brand new Tweed Pro? That's tempting.

[Mike Winter]

In this corner, weighing...