Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Make it loud here.
User avatar
Scout
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 962
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 3:26 pm
Location: Phillyish

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by Scout » Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:27 pm

It's really not anti PCB rhetoric, point to point wiring in an amplifier circuit is an inherently better method . Yes , they have modified component placement to minimize heat related problems but amp techs will have responses ranging from groans to despair when sorting through a RI PCB problem. Can it be done? Sure. Is it on a par with PTP? I'd have to say no. The cost savings come in the original build labor .

User avatar
adamrobertt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 am
Contact:

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by adamrobertt » Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:10 pm

Scout wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:27 pm
It's really not anti PCB rhetoric, point to point wiring in an amplifier circuit is an inherently better method . Yes , they have modified component placement to minimize heat related problems but amp techs will have responses ranging from groans to despair when sorting through a RI PCB problem. Can it be done? Sure. Is it on a par with PTP? I'd have to say no. The cost savings come in the original build labor .
Just because a tech has an easier time working on a PTP amp doesn’t mean it’s an “inherently better design.” There is nothing electronically better about a PTP amp. Actually, I know a few people in the amp/music gear business and they have a lot to say about this very topic, almost always in favor of PCB designs.

Do you really think the absolute pinnacle of sonic design for guitar amps was in 1950? We’re talking 70 years ago. It’s literally antiquated.

I love Fender designs, new and old, but the intense fetishization of outdated electronics is very odd to me.

User avatar
marqueemoon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 7346
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by marqueemoon » Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:23 pm

It’s all antiquated technology, including making music with a guitar.

User avatar
sookwinder
Mods
Mods
Posts: 11179
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:47 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by sookwinder » Wed Jul 29, 2020 12:10 am

adamrobertt wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:10 pm
Just because a tech has an easier time working on a PTP amp doesn’t mean it’s an “inherently better design.” There is nothing electronically better about a PTP amp. Actually, I know a few people in the amp/music gear business and they have a lot to say about this very topic, almost always in favor of PCB designs.
Firstly, vintage Fender amps are not PTP, they are fibreboard with eyelets.
PTP designs do not have the boards, they are just components soldered to each other in the form of medusa's snakes..

In my opinion your statement is basically correct if the amps are stationary, are never moved, bumped, dropped, never run past 50% of their capacity. Everything is designed to a spec, designed to a "lifetime", be that lifetime 1 year , 10 years, 100 years. They are also (hopefully) designed to withstand a stipulated impact level, vibration level, thermal expansion that will be exhibited during normal operations.

There is a fundamental problem with tracks on a circuit board. They can crack and lift depending on the quality of the circuit-board, including how they are etched, the width, height of the tracks. Impact (dropping) & thermal (over heating) are two common causes that stuff up tracks on circuit boards in guitar amps. The example of my HRD failing had major failures of tracks lifting off the board, then cracking and intermittent failures also occurring due to the cracked tracks separating once the amp had been on for more than 30 minutes.

Yeah … if you are going to design a circuit board to military spec then I have no trouble using that board in a valve amp. But Fender do not design or validate their designs to last a 50 year "lifetime", I would be surprised if they truly validated their designs to last a 5 year "lifetime".

When I use the word "validate", this is as per standard auto industry systems where the part in question is put through intensive testing that reproduces the environment that would be expected to be seen by the part. To achieve a "never fail" scenario, you have to validate a part (ie not fail) to survive at least 2 "lifetimes". So if you want the part to last 10 years, it has to be designed and tested/validated so it will last at least 20 years. Car companies do it, I cannot see Fender doing it, especially at the price points they sell their amps at.

An amp designed/manufactured with fibre boards, eyelets, individual components, wire, will survive far better the thermal expansion issues and impact issues than a consumer style designed amp using circuit boards. (Obviously a military grade design is a different question).

Physics is physics.
relaxing alternative to doing actual work ...

User avatar
StevenO
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 17768
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by StevenO » Wed Jul 29, 2020 2:17 am

adamrobertt wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:10 pm
Scout wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:27 pm
It's really not anti PCB rhetoric, point to point wiring in an amplifier circuit is an inherently better method . Yes , they have modified component placement to minimize heat related problems but amp techs will have responses ranging from groans to despair when sorting through a RI PCB problem. Can it be done? Sure. Is it on a par with PTP? I'd have to say no. The cost savings come in the original build labor .
Just because a tech has an easier time working on a PTP amp doesn’t mean it’s an “inherently better design.” There is nothing electronically better about a PTP amp. Actually, I know a few people in the amp/music gear business and they have a lot to say about this very topic, almost always in favor of PCB designs.

Do you really think the absolute pinnacle of sonic design for guitar amps was in 1950? We’re talking 70 years ago. It’s literally antiquated.

I love Fender designs, new and old, but the intense fetishization of outdated electronics is very odd to me.
I thinks it's cool that you've had good experiences with the Fender PCB amps and think they sound great! I'm with you there. They sound wonderful, and if I have to plug into one at a gig or at a music store... Also fine with me, if they work.

However... There's absolutely nothing "better" about the PCB construction as found in a Hot Rod Deluxe/Deville. That's just demonstrable when the input jacks break or a tube arcs or a component blows and takes out everything around it, including the circuit board traces.

So yes, a vintage Fender's "antiquated" technology is better if catastrophic failures do not occur due to their design and if they are easier to access for repairs and maintain. PCB is fine, if implemented well. Fender does not implement it well, and they don't care to. They sell tons of HRD and Blues line amps to people every day. They are disposable amps, they are not life long workhorses like an even casually maintained vintage Fender amp will be. That's not a matter of opinion, it's demonstrable fact.

It IS better design, if the design calls for maintenance and repair, as all amps will need at some point in time, sooner or later. Why even argue to the contrary? That's not to say all PCB construction amps are difficult to work on, but the manner in which Fender has historically implemented that style of construction is certainly not in favour of regular or in-depth maintenance and repair.

User avatar
Scout
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 962
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 3:26 pm
Location: Phillyish

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by Scout » Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:35 am

By inherently better design I wasn’t referring to the component choices, just the ability to troubleshoot and repair. Electronics fail, the majority get tossed because nobody wants to deal with PCBs and associated assemblies. That’s just the way of it.

User avatar
øøøøøøø
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5984
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:26 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by øøøøøøø » Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:43 am

Technology does tend to progress, but it tends to progress in service of an objective(s).

Early tube gear (speaking in general) was often used in telecommunications, aerospace, and military applications. Reliability and serviceability were paramount, so technologies evolved that prioritized those concerns.

We have, for example, an old Dept. of Commerce limiter that was used by the FAA in air traffic control applications. With the twist of a latch, the front panel swings open like a door, revealing an orderly eyelet board inside. Anything that failed inside that unit could be repaired in under ten minutes. It's wonderful.

Musical instrument gear tended to borrow this ethos, to some extent, in the mid-20th century.

However, that's not the only set of priorities that can shape technology. Demand for expediency and value can also drive development.

To that end: Peavey and Fender recognized a void in the market in the 1990s... tube amps were expensive to manufacture and expensive to buy. Only semi-pros and up tended to have them. There was no "entry level" tube amp. So they set out to rectify that.

Enter the "Classic" series and the "Blues/Hot Rod" amps. How do you get pretty good tube amp sound at a price that competes with the larger solid-state amps that dominated the "intermediate" market in the early 1990s? You set out to design a tube amp that can be manufactured as expediently and cheaply as possible.

For the objective, those amps are just as successful as the FAA limiter. Those larger solid-state amps are almost extinct. Pretty much everyone can afford a decent-sounding tube amp if they want to. It wasn't always this way.

What this means--yes, the older technology is usually superior in terms of having a reliable, serviceable guitar amp. The newer technology is usually superior when it comes to having a lot of performance relative to price point.

User avatar
adamrobertt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 am
Contact:

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by adamrobertt » Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:11 am

StevenO wrote:
Wed Jul 29, 2020 2:17 am
adamrobertt wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:10 pm
Scout wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:27 pm
It's really not anti PCB rhetoric, point to point wiring in an amplifier circuit is an inherently better method . Yes , they have modified component placement to minimize heat related problems but amp techs will have responses ranging from groans to despair when sorting through a RI PCB problem. Can it be done? Sure. Is it on a par with PTP? I'd have to say no. The cost savings come in the original build labor .
Just because a tech has an easier time working on a PTP amp doesn’t mean it’s an “inherently better design.” There is nothing electronically better about a PTP amp. Actually, I know a few people in the amp/music gear business and they have a lot to say about this very topic, almost always in favor of PCB designs.

Do you really think the absolute pinnacle of sonic design for guitar amps was in 1950? We’re talking 70 years ago. It’s literally antiquated.

I love Fender designs, new and old, but the intense fetishization of outdated electronics is very odd to me.
I thinks it's cool that you've had good experiences with the Fender PCB amps and think they sound great! I'm with you there. They sound wonderful, and if I have to plug into one at a gig or at a music store... Also fine with me, if they work.

However... There's absolutely nothing "better" about the PCB construction as found in a Hot Rod Deluxe/Deville. That's just demonstrable when the input jacks break or a tube arcs or a component blows and takes out everything around it, including the circuit board traces.

So yes, a vintage Fender's "antiquated" technology is better if catastrophic failures do not occur due to their design and if they are easier to access for repairs and maintain. PCB is fine, if implemented well. Fender does not implement it well, and they don't care to. They sell tons of HRD and Blues line amps to people every day. They are disposable amps, they are not life long workhorses like an even casually maintained vintage Fender amp will be. That's not a matter of opinion, it's demonstrable fact.

It IS better design, if the design calls for maintenance and repair, as all amps will need at some point in time, sooner or later. Why even argue to the contrary? That's not to say all PCB construction amps are difficult to work on, but the manner in which Fender has historically implemented that style of construction is certainly not in favour of regular or in-depth maintenance and repair.
You guys keep talking about the Hot Rod Deluxe, and I don't understand why. I've already conceded that those particular are probably less reliable in general (though not my experience) due to their design, which is clearly done for economical value. Doesn't make them bad amps, but I can see how they might fail more easily than a DRRI.

But, this thread was supposed to be about reissue amps vs. vintage. Not "modern budget tube amp" vs. vintage. The HRD is not a reissue. It is a modern budget tube amp. They made obvious compromises for added consumer value when designing those amps. Which is why I keep bringing up the DRRI, which still uses a PCB, but is much more reliable and I would even say easier to work on (I've modded them and swapped components successfully and I am not an amp tech or a professional tech).

So my point is that a PCB does not automatically make an amp shitty. But of course they can be implemented poorly, just like anything else. The HRD is an example of a maybe less than desirable PCB design, but done for an obvious reason. People see this design and they go "hmm PCBs must be the devil because this particular amp is designed poorly." The DRRI on the other hand is a fantastic and reliable workhorse, despite having a PCB construction.

Also, I agree that repairability should be considered when designing something, but I don't think it is the hallmark of a "good product" vs a "bad product." I think it's more complicated than that. Also, maybe I'm just super lucky golden child when it comes to amps, but I have never really had to take an amp to a tech for any kind of failure, even in my heavy gigging days. My three main amps in this 15 year period were a HRD, a '65 Traynor YGM-3, and a DRRI. I never had an issue with the two modern amps. The only one I had trouble with was the vintage amp (speaker blew, and then the reverb stopped working). I swapped the speaker and lived with no reverb, although I'm sure it would have been easy to repair.

My second point being that I think maybe some in here are overblowing the need for the average person to even ever service their amp, especially modern ones. Of course it happens, but is it actually that common? Out of 1,000 DRRIs, how many actually ever need repair? Probably not a lot. Obviously if you have a 50 year old amp its way more likely that it's gonna need some work at some point, also.

User avatar
øøøøøøø
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5984
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:26 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by øøøøøøø » Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:14 am

DRRI reliability is generally fine all things considered, IME.

However, having maintained both, it strains the imagination to conceive of how it might be "easier to work on" than the old-style tag/eyelet board construction.

User avatar
StevenO
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 17768
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Vintage vs Reissue Amps - is it that hard to Hear?

Post by StevenO » Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:21 am

adamrobertt wrote:
Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:11 am
StevenO wrote:
Wed Jul 29, 2020 2:17 am
adamrobertt wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:10 pm


Just because a tech has an easier time working on a PTP amp doesn’t mean it’s an “inherently better design.” There is nothing electronically better about a PTP amp. Actually, I know a few people in the amp/music gear business and they have a lot to say about this very topic, almost always in favor of PCB designs.

Do you really think the absolute pinnacle of sonic design for guitar amps was in 1950? We’re talking 70 years ago. It’s literally antiquated.

I love Fender designs, new and old, but the intense fetishization of outdated electronics is very odd to me.
I thinks it's cool that you've had good experiences with the Fender PCB amps and think they sound great! I'm with you there. They sound wonderful, and if I have to plug into one at a gig or at a music store... Also fine with me, if they work.

However... There's absolutely nothing "better" about the PCB construction as found in a Hot Rod Deluxe/Deville. That's just demonstrable when the input jacks break or a tube arcs or a component blows and takes out everything around it, including the circuit board traces.

So yes, a vintage Fender's "antiquated" technology is better if catastrophic failures do not occur due to their design and if they are easier to access for repairs and maintain. PCB is fine, if implemented well. Fender does not implement it well, and they don't care to. They sell tons of HRD and Blues line amps to people every day. They are disposable amps, they are not life long workhorses like an even casually maintained vintage Fender amp will be. That's not a matter of opinion, it's demonstrable fact.

It IS better design, if the design calls for maintenance and repair, as all amps will need at some point in time, sooner or later. Why even argue to the contrary? That's not to say all PCB construction amps are difficult to work on, but the manner in which Fender has historically implemented that style of construction is certainly not in favour of regular or in-depth maintenance and repair.
You guys keep talking about the Hot Rod Deluxe, and I don't understand why. I've already conceded that those particular are probably less reliable in general (though not my experience) due to their design, which is clearly done for economical value. Doesn't make them bad amps, but I can see how they might fail more easily than a DRRI.

But, this thread was supposed to be about reissue amps vs. vintage. Not "modern budget tube amp" vs. vintage. The HRD is not a reissue. It is a modern budget tube amp. They made obvious compromises for added consumer value when designing those amps. Which is why I keep bringing up the DRRI, which still uses a PCB, but is much more reliable and I would even say easier to work on (I've modded them and swapped components successfully and I am not an amp tech or a professional tech).

So my point is that a PCB does not automatically make an amp shitty. But of course they can be implemented poorly, just like anything else. The HRD is an example of a maybe less than desirable PCB design, but done for an obvious reason. People see this design and they go "hmm PCBs must be the devil because this particular amp is designed poorly." The DRRI on the other hand is a fantastic and reliable workhorse, despite having a PCB construction.

Also, I agree that repairability should be considered when designing something, but I don't think it is the hallmark of a "good product" vs a "bad product." I think it's more complicated than that. Also, maybe I'm just super lucky golden child when it comes to amps, but I have never really had to take an amp to a tech for any kind of failure, even in my heavy gigging days. My three main amps in this 15 year period were a HRD, a '65 Traynor YGM-3, and a DRRI. I never had an issue with the two modern amps. The only one I had trouble with was the vintage amp (speaker blew, and then the reverb stopped working). I swapped the speaker and lived with no reverb, although I'm sure it would have been easy to repair.

My second point being that I think maybe some in here are overblowing the need for the average person to even ever service their amp, especially modern ones. Of course it happens, but is it actually that common? Out of 1,000 DRRIs, how many actually ever need repair? Probably not a lot. Obviously if you have a 50 year old amp its way more likely that it's gonna need some work at some point, also.
I mentioned the HRD and Blues series because uou mentioned having good experiences with them. That's perfectly fine. I was talking about how badly it can be implemented, which the HRD is an example of.

And yes, maintenance is necessary. Just because people don't maintain them, doesn't mean they don't need it. The difference is that. 50 year old Fender amp might only need maintenance once every 50 years, if done properly and with the right materials. Just about every used HRD or Blues line of amps I have come across has needed some sort of work, regardless of the owner or store knowing it or not. As far as the reissue amps, they are a bit better for sure. I still come across them with microphonic tubes or non-working reverbs. That's just the reality of newly made stuff, particularly newly made stuff that is not made like a vintage Fender amp.

Post Reply