Vintage Twin vs TRRI

[cratz2]

Here are two quick clips I made the other day at a forum members house. Please forgive the playing AND the sound quality as I had just got the recorder the day before.

 

Two amps. One is a Silverface Twin with a Master Volume. It has stock Utah speakers and is loaded with slightly used (~2 hours) JJ preamp and power tubes.

 

The other amp is a modern Twin Reverb Reissue. It has two Alnico Weber California speakers and has JJ power tubes, NOS RCA and NOS JAN preamp tubes.

 

Both use the amps stock reverb tank, I was playing a partscaster with a warmoth body, MIA Fender neck and Fralin pickups (Vintage Hots, I think) on the neck+middle position.

 

Again, far from scientific, but just a fun attempt at comparing vintage vs modern.

 

Clip 1: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=1010088&songID=8497408

 

Clip 2: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=1010088&songID=8497409

[lowbrow]

I pm'd my guess:)...and voted

[metallica_00]

I couldn't tell you which was silverface and which was reissue - I've only played a Silverface Super one, briefly, so I don't have a great idea of what they're like.

 

For whatever it's worth, I liked the first clip better. It was a bit brighter, the guitar popped out with more clarity across the strings. It made the guitar sound more "alive". Also, the reverb on the second clip seemed to dwell a bit longer. So whichever one it is, I'd rather play out of the first one.

 

Did the amps have the same settings? Also, would be an interesting test to play them through each others' cabs, and see how they sound when you hold the speakers and enclosure constant. I'm guessing old Utahs and new Webers have a pretty different sound to them.

[Doctor Morbius]

Did the amps have the same settings?

Yes they did. The only setting that was different was the volume because one amp was louder on 3 than the other so I adjusted them to be approximately the same in a living room setting.

[markrocknroll]

first one sounds better to my ears. is it vintage or reiss?

[Doctor Morbius]

first one sounds better to my ears. is it vintage or reiss?

I'm sure Cratz2 will divulge the answer once he feels there are enough votes and/or responses.

[guitarcapo]

The first was clearer and alnico speakers are muddy at high wattages so i feel that the second clip is the reissue....but as speakers age they get muddy too...I dunno but I think the big difference is the speakers...not the amps.

[Doctor Morbius]

bump

[hecticone]

Nobody cares.

[LARRY L]

 

Here are two quick clips I made the other day at a forum members house. Please forgive the playing AND the sound quality as I had just got the recorder the day before. Two amps. One is a Silverface Twin with a Master Volume. It has stock Utah speakers and is loaded with slightly used (~2 hours) JJ preamp and power tubes. The other amp is a modern Twin Reverb Reissue. It has two Alnico Weber California speakers and has JJ power tubes, NOS RCA and NOS JAN preamp tubes. Both use the amps stock reverb tank, I was playing a partscaster with a warmoth body, MIA Fender neck and Fralin pickups (Vintage Hots, I think) on the neck+middle position. Again, far from scientific, but just a fun attempt at comparing vintage vs modern. Clip 1: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=1010088&songID=8497408 Clip 2: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=1010088&songID=8497409

 

 

My DRRI sounds like the first and the '64 blackface DR original I just tested out sounds like the second. (less bright yet smooth)

 

So on that understanding, I like the first better from the recording yet I'm guessing the original is the second.

[metallica_00]

Nobody cares.

This is an interesting comparison. It's really a shame that "nobody cares", because here's an actual thread with audio comparison of the vintage vs. modern argument. But I guess people here would rather speculate on Agile vs. Gibson for the nth time or chase down "deals" on cheapo gear.

More threads like this are good by me and I'm interested to see how other peoples' ears hear it.

[photon9]

I voted that 2 was the silverface because it sounded a little darker and I would expect that from older speakers. IMHO it sounded like 2 had a little more tonal depth and character as well. Maybe a little more woody. Wish the samples were the same riff, would have made comparison a little easier.

[Angry Tele]

Nobody cares.

 

 

this.

 

Id say one is better off buying a vintage twin but I have a ri. If I knew then what I knew now Id buy a vintage not that theres anything wrong with my ri but i knew nothing of amps when I bought it so I didn't know what to look for.

[mrbrown49]

The first time I listened to them was on a laptop through laptop speakers and the first one really impressed me and the second one sounded dull.

 

Then I went back and listened to it on my studio monitors and a much nicer sound card. In that setting the second one sounded much smoother, complex and natural. It's a subtle difference but the second sounded fuller and richer even though it's somewhat darker and more brooding.

 

I change my vote to the second one being the silverface.

[GreaserMatt]

I too, thought the first clip was the vintage one; now I'm not sure. D'oh! I have mine set very trebly ('icepick' settings, LOL), so I just assumed the first clip was the older one. I haven't messed w/ a re-issue in person though. Great thread...

[hecticone]

This is an interesting comparison. It's really a shame that "nobody cares", because here's an actual thread with audio comparison of the vintage vs. modern argument. But I guess people here would rather speculate on Agile vs. Gibson for the nth time or chase down "deals" on cheapo gear. More threads like this are good by me and I'm interested to see how other peoples' ears hear it.

Just for the fact by the time you post anything up on the web it is so compressed and convuluted that your not getting the real sounds anyhow. I post different amps on the web and it doesn't even come close to sounding the way it should.

[nuke_diver]

Originally Posted by hecticone Nobody cares.

If you don't care why post?

I like the first one better but I don't know those amps so I couldnt even begin to guess. BTW I do think it's easier to make a comparison of anything if the clips are the same or as close as possible...just my opinion

[airwarrior]

1st one is the Silverface, the 2nd one is the reissue.

[cratz2]

BTW I do think it's easier to make a comparison of anything if the clips are the same or as close as possible...just my opinion

 

Point VERY well taken. I was just noodling, mostly playing with the new recorder. I mostly selected sections of each recording that best captured the tone of each amp.

 

In the future, I'll definitely play more similar songs. That is, assuming I have hecticone's permission.

 

[guitarcapo]

It really would be more fair if you used the same brand of speakers for both amps.

[cratz2]

I hear ya, but like I said, it wasn't planned at all. I was literally playing with the recorder. I just made sure the levels were properly matched, the recorder was in the same mode and the mic was the same distance from each amp.

I still have enjoyed seeing some of the comments and the reasoning behind them.

[Johnny Z]

Hard to tell when you consider things like tubes and different speakers, but I can tell which amp is better built, and will out last the other. I bet you can guess that for yourself.

[metallica_00]

Just for the fact by the time you post anything up on the web it is so compressed and convuluted that your not getting the real sounds anyhow. I post different amps on the web and it doesn't even come close to sounding the way it should.

 

Frankly I think a lot of that happens at the mic, not at the recording.

 

On an average pair of speakers, I don't think there is a huge difference between a big wav or aiff file and a decent 128kbps or higher MP3. But there is a HUGE difference between hearing something in the room (as your ears hear it) and a mic an inch away from the cone. Many times when I have recorded my sound hasn't come out as I hear it in the room, but there's not a big difference between playback in Logic versus playback after bouncing to MP3.

 

For whatever reason, I have always found clean tones much easier to nail "as you hear them" than dirty tones. Anyway, interested to hear the result on this one.

[SPONGEBOB]

1st one is the Silverface, the 2nd one is the reissue.

Yes.. without a doubt!... watch us both make asses out of ourselves!

First one is vintage, second one is a muddy reissue!

[hecticone]

Frankly I think a lot of that happens at the mic, not at the recording. On an average pair of speakers, I don't think there is a huge difference between a big wav or aiff file and a decent 128kbps or higher MP3. But there is a HUGE difference between hearing something in the room (as your ears hear it) and a mic an inch away from the cone. Many times when I have recorded my sound hasn't come out as I hear it in the room, but there's not a big difference between playback in Logic versus playback after bouncing to MP3. For whatever reason, I have always found clean tones much easier to nail "as you hear them" than dirty tones. Anyway, interested to hear the result on this one.

But all the stuff I post is recorded with some really decent mics. It sounds great thru the studio monitors but as soon as I post it to the web it sounds not too good. I can play both mixes back thru the monitors and there is a definite difference.