Affordable, Practical, Vintage Tube Amp

[Litterick]

DawgBone at least is talking about a vintage tube amp, which is the purpose of this thread.

[Litterick]

We all know how much you love Twins. I love Twins too. But let's be realistic - they're not compact by any stretch of the imagination, and there are many other amps that sound as good and get as loud. You may not like them, and that's OK - but they're still that good and many serious players agree. Start with the Quilter artists' roster. Top players like Mark Whitfield (now sadly gone), Elvin Bishop, Rich Severson, Howard Alden, Doyle Bramhall, John Pisano, Bruce Forman, Gilad Hekselman, David Hidalgo, Tim Lerch, Vernon Reid, Albert Lee, Deke Dickerson and many others who could use whatvever amp they want play Quilter. Some of these (like many others on the full roster) play seriously loud rock and blues. If they thought they needed a Twin to do what they do, they'd be using Twins.

Here is Albert Lee with his Fender Twin.

[ruger9]

Solid state amps sound a lot better than tubes, up a long flight of stairs.
.

HAHA boy ain't that the truth!! I've got a Fender tube amp at the rehearsal space, but a Roland solid state amp (Cube Artist) to carry to gigs.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

DawgBone at least is talking about a vintage tube amp, which is the purpose of this thread.

A 1978 Boogie is a vintage tube amp.

My Boogie 1x12 with EVM was louder than any of my Twins ever was. It was an honest 100 W RMS and it was certainly more compact than any Twin. A Boogie is 18 x 18.75 x 10.5" and a '65 BF Twin is 19.87" x 26.5 x 10.375"". A Boogie is also lighter

I agree with jads57 in that...

...I appreciate certain older tube amps and their tonalities [but] I can’t imagine other than as collector,why anyone actually gigging would pick one over the modern alternatives.

But an old Boogie 1x12 would be a great choice for a jazz player who wants a vintage tube amp. Boogies are solid as rocks, relatively easy to maintain and repair, reliable as Old Faithful, and (most importantly) great sounding amps. The clean channel in every one of them is excellent. The cab has an open back, for a sound dispersion pattern similar to that of any open back Fender amp (like a Twin). The repairability issue is simply that they're pretty crowded inside, so they're not "fix it in a minute" simple like most traditional HW Fenders. A Twin is easier to fix, but Boogies are easy for any decent tech,

I just looked at prices for early Boogies (later to be called Mark 1), and they've really jumped up. So there's no longer a nice Mark 1 (even a reissue) or Mk 2 anywhere close to $1k. But there are 50W DC-5 1x12s readily available for well under $1k. There's one on Reverb right now for $650 that looks pretty good. I had a .50 Caliber for a few years that was also a very nice jazz amp and a lot like the DC-5. These are "only" 50 Watt amps, but Boogie Watts are very big Watts! The DC-5, .50 Caliber, and other similar Mesa models in the 20 to 50 Watt range are all excellent amps that qualify for the thread title.

A Twin was suggested as an affordable, practical vintage tube amp and described as "compact". I disagreed with this and proposed a Boogie as a sonic equal that's closer to "compact" and an alternative far preferable to me. But truth be told, even if I hadn't sold my beloved Boogie after 30+ years of loyal service, I'd still be taking the Quilter OD202 on any gig that called for that kind of power. I'd have kept the Boogie if we still lived in the house and I had room to let it sit. But like my Twin and Princeton today, it would be a special treat to be used at home and on very select gigs.

Vintage tube amps are like my vinyl collection - these are luxury pleasures to be savored, but they're not for exclusive daily use any more. When I'm in the mood for the whole experience, I pull out an album, read the liner notes, drop the needle, and revel in the entire ritual of playing records through my tube powered audio system. But for most daily listening, it's digital files through powered monitors. For most playing, it's Quilter, Henriksen, DV Mark etc - my Twin and Princeton live happily under the piano and come out to play when I'm in the mood. I'm just sorry I bought the 5'3" grand instead of the 6'10" - the bigger one would have given me room to keep the Boogie under it too

[ruger9]

While I appreciate certain older tube amps and their tonalities. I can’t imagine other than as collector,why anyone actually gigging would pick one over the modern alternatives.
.

TONS of pros do...

You may be limiting your scope to jazz only(?), I am not. Gear is gear, regardless of genre. A majority of touring pros still use tube amps, some of them vintage tube amps.

[rpjazzguitar]

"Vintage" and "practical" seem in potential conflict. "Affordable" also narrows the selection. Here's a story about one that's affordable and vintage, but I'd argue against practical.

I bought my 64 Reverberocket new. It worked reliably for about 35 years with no attention of any kind. Then, it started to show its age. One thing that happened was that the little wings on the RCA jack to the reverb tank stopped making good contact. They needed to be bent slightly with a needlenose plier.

But, that was not obvious. I had it in for repair a couple of times, replaced all the tubes, the caps (need that anyway) and put in a 3 prong plug and I can't remember what else. It was out of service for years. Then, somebody on line (that opinionated amp guy from usenet) suggested replacing a particular cap on the board, which I did myself. The amp guy was wrong about the cap. But in the course of replacing it, I noticed that wiggling a certain wire reproduced the problem. And, I traced the wire to the RCA jack. It was seated firmly but still not making contact.

So, I started using it again. The replacement tubes proved fragile. JJ's I think. Two broke. The originals never broke.

The tone "stack" isn't a stack, it's a single treble cut. Might have been practical in 1964, but compared to the ability to shape tone with modern amps, not so much. Of course, other vintage tube amps have 3 band, but those aren't so affordable.

And then, I discovered that the Little Jazz actually sounds quite a bit like that old Reverberocket. And, chords sounded a little clearer on the LJ. I really don't know why, but I never had that reaction with the original tubes. Might have been because I didn't have anything cleaner to compare it to.

On Fender amps I've seen a locking device for the reverb tank. The Ampeg doesn't have that. So, when you're driving you can hear the springs rattle in the trunk of the car. It's not a comforting sound on your way to a gig, even though that tank has worked perfectly for 60 years, counting the RCA jack years.

And, the Ampeg isn't that loud. So it's not practical for some gigs even if you like the sound. Of course you could mic it, but that's a little more trouble. I'd rather take my LJ and run it through a powered speaker. And, I can put the powered speaker on a pole. Any volume and built in redundancy in case one fails.

So, the Ampeg lives in a closet. To some ears, it might sound way better than my alternatives, but I can get my sound from the modern gear which is easier to carry and more reliable.

[Gitfiddler]

One of the most affordable vintage tube amps is the Fender Princeton (non-reverb). They run about $1,000 +/- depending on condition, but wow, do they sound wonderful!

[paulkogut]

Is there a good amp tech in your area? You might have better luck seeking out the repair/restoration person first, and let them steer you towards an amp that's 'practical' for your needs.

PK