Fractal Audio is searching for a Fender 1963 Vibroverb

FractalAudio said:
There ya go. Only $10K. Buy it and give it to us. In exchange we'll model it.
Click to expand...
Joe Bonamassa has one, let me give him a call and see if he doesn't mind parting with it for a good cause. :)

With all due respect to the OP, there are so many Fender amps in the Axe Fx III that I can't imagine any Fender circuit you couldn't approximate by working with what's there (ok, maybe not the really bad or solid state ones). I mean, if you don't own the amp in question so you can A/B them with the model, how would you know it wasn't right? Even two actual Vibroverbs are going to sound a little different.
 
Rick said:
Joe Bonamassa has one, let me give him a call and see if he doesn't mind parting with it for a good cause. :)

With all due respect to the OP, there are so many Fender amps in the Axe Fx III that I can't imagine any Fender circuit you couldn't approximate by working with what's there (ok, maybe not the really bad or solid state ones). I mean, if you don't own the amp in question so you can A/B them with the model, how would you know it wasn't right? Even two actual Vibroverbs are going to sound a little different.
Click to expand...
The tapped 350k treble pot is a big difference between the 6G16 and the later BF AA763 tone circuit. Another key difference in the preamp is the reverb circuit's dry signal path, which uses a tapped plate load and equal resistance mixer resistors and a gain recovery stage with an unbypassed cathode. The normal channel's second stage plate resistor is a 220k instead of a 100k, which adds a little more gain. It also has a typical brownface phase inverter circuit, but without the presence control. Among Fenders, this circuit is a bit of a unique mish-mosh of different circuits.
 
Joe Bfstplk said:
The tapped 350k treble pot is a big difference between the 6G16 and the later BF AA763 tone circuit. Another key difference in the preamp is the reverb circuit's dry signal path, which uses a tapped plate load and equal resistance mixer resistors and a gain recovery stage with an unbypassed cathode. The normal channel's second stage plate resistor is a 220k instead of a 100k, which adds a little more gain. It also has a typical brownface phase inverter circuit, but without the presence control. Among Fenders, this circuit is a bit of a unique mish-mosh of different circuits.
Click to expand...

and it’s brown and the knobs are different.....? :)
 
Joe Bfstplk said:
The tapped 350k treble pot is a big difference between the 6G16 and the later BF AA763 tone circuit. Another key difference in the preamp is the reverb circuit's dry signal path, which uses a tapped plate load and equal resistance mixer resistors and a gain recovery stage with an unbypassed cathode. The normal channel's second stage plate resistor is a 220k instead of a 100k, which adds a little more gain. It also has a typical brownface phase inverter circuit, but without the presence control. Among Fenders, this circuit is a bit of a unique mish-mosh of different circuits.
Click to expand...
In looking back at the evolution of the Vibrolux 6G11 and 6G11A, as well as the AA964 Vibrolux Reverb that followed in the BF era, it appears the 6G16 Vibroverb is the missing link between the 6G11A and the AA964 VR. It shares most of its circuit topology with the 6G11A, but with reverb added and using the same transformers as the later AA964 VR. The VR could be backdated to the 6G16 circuit without much difficulty.

6G11:
vibrolux6g11.gif


6G11-A. Tweaked bias voltage to increase idle current, a bit more negative feedback:
vibrolux6g11a.gif


6G16: Hey, let's add reverb, add more negative feedback, and beef up the output a bit with new transformers and a bigger smoothing choke:
vibroverb_6g16_schem.gif


AA964 VR. Ok, let's bring the preamp and output section circuits in line with last summer's 'AB763' updates to most of our models, switch back to the smaller smoothing choke, and update the reverb circuit a bit:
vibroluxreverbaa964.gif
 
Last edited:
@Joe Bfstplk what do you know about the Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier revision history? Between the 90s 2 channel rev f/g, the Tremoverb/Rectoverb, the first 3 channel version, the rectifier recording preamp, the Roadking, and finally the multi-watt reborn. I'm tracking the clean channel improvements, they basically put the lonestar cleans in the Roadster and Roadking v2, and then finally in the reborn dual rec (Recto 2). More specifically on the hunt for [red channel + modern mode] changes in the circuitry/bias/filtering/transformer size across the revisions
 
shatteredsquare said:
@Joe Bfstplk what do you know about the Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier revision history? Between the 90s 2 channel rev f/g, the Tremoverb/Rectoverb, the first 3 channel version, the rectifier recording preamp, the Roadking, and finally the multi-watt reborn. I'm tracking the clean channel improvements, they basically put the lonestar cleans in the Roadster and Roadking v2, and then finally in the reborn dual rec (Recto 2). More specifically on the hunt for [red channel + modern mode] changes in the circuitry/bias/filtering/transformer size across the revisions
Click to expand...
Sadly, not a thing. :(
 
shatteredsquare said:
@Joe Bfstplk what do you know about the Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier revision history? Between the 90s 2 channel rev f/g, the Tremoverb/Rectoverb, the first 3 channel version, the rectifier recording preamp, the Roadking, and finally the multi-watt reborn. I'm tracking the clean channel improvements, they basically put the lonestar cleans in the Roadster and Roadking v2, and then finally in the reborn dual rec (Recto 2). More specifically on the hunt for [red channel + modern mode] changes in the circuitry/bias/filtering/transformer size across the revisions
Click to expand...
Rev f has an attached power cord, rev g is detachable.. does that help? :)

Are you looking to mimic something specific in the afx, or more just curiosity?
 
shatteredsquare said:
@Joe Bfstplk what do you know about the Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier revision history? Between the 90s 2 channel rev f/g, the Tremoverb/Rectoverb, the first 3 channel version, the rectifier recording preamp, the Roadking, and finally the multi-watt reborn. I'm tracking the clean channel improvements, they basically put the lonestar cleans in the Roadster and Roadking v2, and then finally in the reborn dual rec (Recto 2). More specifically on the hunt for [red channel + modern mode] changes in the circuitry/bias/filtering/transformer size across the revisions
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I believe I remember hearing that the Lonestar takes its lineage from the MESA Maverick. Which, btw, was an outstanding amp. I remember amp shopping and it was when the Lonestar had just come out, but they had a used Maverick there, and I had already owned a Maverick & loved it, and pretty sure I remember the guy tellin me the Lonestar was taking the place of the Maverick, both Class A amps. Whether he was blowin smoke up my ass, I dunno, either way I’m still a big fan of the Maverick & even bought another one after that (a 1x12). So whether that helps ya at all I dunno, but thought I throw it out there cause not too many people have ever heard of the Maverick.
 
Callan said:
Are you looking to mimic something specific in the afx, or more just curiosity?
Click to expand...

Looking to get the touch sensitivity of the early 3 channel red+modern, as well as the more open pronounced hard clipping tonality at lower gain settings. It legit sounds exactly like what a stock ds-1 does, super bright and super open and the low end all just falls through like a trickle of water through a 3 inch pipe. Weather that's from a smaller Xformer, or cathode follower changes, or bias changes, or filtering changes somewhere that's not accessible to the user, not sure, I just haven't been able to coax it out of Recto 2. I'm going to start working on Recto 1 from now on, loading it up it immediately sounds more touch sensitive, if I had to guess (all of this is guessing) I'd say it's a smaller Xformer and lower operating voltage. The FAS Recto 2 is a mid 2010s multi-watt reborn, and Recto 1 is a 90s rev g, so between the two I guess a early 3 channel is closer to Recto 1. Been working on the wrong one.
 
shatteredsquare said:
Looking to get the touch sensitivity of the early 3 channel red+modern, as well as the more open pronounced hard clipping tonality at lower gain settings. It legit sounds exactly like what a stock ds-1 does, super bright and super open and the low end all just falls through like a trickle of water through a 3 inch pipe. Weather that's from a smaller Xformer, or cathode follower changes, or bias changes, or filtering changes somewhere that's not accessible to the user, not sure, I just haven't been able to coax it out of Recto 2. I'm going to start working on Recto 1 from now on, loading it up it immediately sounds more touch sensitive, if I had to guess (all of this is guessing) I'd say it's a smaller Xformer and lower operating voltage. The FAS Recto 2 is a mid 2010s multi-watt reborn, and Recto 1 is a 90s rev g, so between the two I guess a early 3 channel is closer to Recto 1. Been working on the wrong one.
Click to expand...
Recto 1 is a rev F, but yes, start there for early 3 channel. You might even like it more, hopefully
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom