Fender Hot Rod, is the IV worth it?

Haych

Looking for a smaller versatile valve amp and obviously the HRD come highly recommended. 

Just a few questions regarding the range. 

I understand the original version had a common fault with some of the resistors failing - was this fixed with the MkIII version?

Speaking of versions, was there a MKII or was the III the replacement for the original?

Looking at the changes Fender made for the MKIV it doesn’t seem to be a huge upgrade, so is it worth spending the extra on the IV or would a good used III be a better option? 

Is there anything worth noting about the range that I should know?

Lastly, are there any other contenders at the same sort of value that I ought to check out?

TIA

stratman3142

Haych said:

...Looking at the changes Fender made for the MKIV it doesn’t seem to be a huge upgrade, so is it worth spending the extra on the IV or would a good used III be a better option? 

Is there anything worth noting about the range that I should know?. ..

I once had an HRD III and now own an HRD IV.

These things are down to personal taste, but I didn't like the speaker in the HRD III. I ended up putting a Celestion V type speaker in the HRD III, which worked well for me.

The HRD IV has a Celestion A type speaker as stock and I liked the sound of of the IV out of the box.

The weight of the HRD IV is a bit less than the HRD III.

I definitely much prefer a stock HRD IV to a stock HRD III (with its original speaker).

There was quite a gap between owning the two amps, so it's difficult to be absolutely certain in comparing sound of an HRD III with a Celestion V type speaker and a stock HRD IV. However, I've bonded with the HRD IV, more than I did with the HRD III (even when it had an upgraded speaker).

I only use the clean channel. The drive channel isn't to my taste for either amp. 

ICBM

Haych said:

I understand the original version had a common fault with some of the resistors failing - was this fixed with the MkIII version?

Yes, the I had a problem with resistors overheating, and also easily-broken jacks. Both of these were fixed in the II.

Haych said:

Speaking of versions, was there a MKII or was the III the replacement for the original?

The II is actually the most common and was made for the longest of any of them. However, as far as I remember they are not actually marked on the back as IIs, which may explain why they appear to not exist!

Haych said:

Looking at the changes Fender made for the MKIV it doesn’t seem to be a huge upgrade, so is it worth spending the extra on the IV or would a good used III be a better option?

Personally, I don't like the III - it addressed the most common complaint about the II, that the taper of the volume controls was too abrupt and difficult to dial in a good sound at low volume - but to me, you have to turn it up *further* to make it sound good, and even then it doesn't seem to. That probably wasn't helped by the quite poor Celestion Seventy/80 speaker.

I've only heard one IV so far, and it sounded better - which may just be the upgraded speaker, I'm not sure.

So my choice would be either a used II or a IV.

Haych said:

Is there anything worth noting about the range that I should know?

All of them come set to 230V as stock, because of EU regulations. The correct setting in the UK should be 240V, and it's easy to swap it - two push-connectors on the PCB inside - which is a good idea because it makes the amp run slightly cooler and more reliably. (Including the still very occasionally problem-causing resistors and the diodes they supply.) This is more important on the Deville, but I would still do it on the Deluxe since there is no penalty.

Earlier models also have a modern Accutronics reverb tank which are prone to failing. Fender now use Ruby tanks, but I'm not sure if the change corresponds to any of the model changes - I don't think so, I think it was some time in the III. A used one may or may not have already had the tank replaced.

Haych

ICBM 
The II is actually the most common and was made for the longest of any of them. However, as far as I remember they are not actually marked on the back as IIs, which may explain why they appear to not exist!

So if the II wasn’t labelled II how does one know which one is a MKI and a MKII?

ICBM

Haych said:

So if the II wasn’t labelled II how does one know which one is a MKI and a MKII?

The jacks.

Five identical thin black plastic/metal insert/thin metal nut jacks is a MkI. Two of those for the Preamp Out/Power Amp In and three thick black plastic/no metal insert/thick metal nut jacks for the inputs and footswitch is a II.

The brittle jacks on the I often lose their metal inserts, but the thickness of the plastic and the nut is still obvious.

KrisGee

ICBM said:

All of them come set to 230V as stock, because of EU regulations. The correct setting in the UK should be 240V, and it's easy to swap it - two push-connectors on the PCB inside - which is a good idea because it makes the amp run slightly cooler and more reliably. (Including the still very occasionally problem-causing resistors and the diodes they supply.) This is more important on the Deville, but I would still do it on the Deluxe since there is no penalty.

That's interesting. I imagine it would void warranty if done on a brand new unit?
Considering one myself.

ICBM

KrisGee said:

I imagine it would void warranty if done on a brand new unit?

I assume it would if they knew about it - but it’s easy enough to put back without any evidence, if you don’t cut the cable tie on the bundle of wires, which you usually don’t need to. 

Haych

ICBM said:

Haych said:

So if the II wasn’t labelled II how does one know which one is a MKI and a MKII?

The jacks.

Five identical thin black plastic/metal insert/thin metal nut jacks is a MkI. Two of those for the Preamp Out/Power Amp In and three thick black plastic/no metal insert/thick metal nut jacks for the inputs and footswitch is a II.

The brittle jacks on the I often lose their metal inserts, but the thickness of the plastic and the nut is still obvious.

Thanks, that’s useful to know. 

What about the special editions; the FSR, Dukes of Hazzard and George Benson flavours - are they different in any way apart from the livery?

exocet

Haych said:

ICBM said:

Haych said:

So if the II wasn’t labelled II how does one know which one is a MKI and a MKII?

The jacks.

Five identical thin black plastic/metal insert/thin metal nut jacks is a MkI. Two of those for the Preamp Out/Power Amp In and three thick black plastic/no metal insert/thick metal nut jacks for the inputs and footswitch is a II.

The brittle jacks on the I often lose their metal inserts, but the thickness of the plastic and the nut is still obvious.

Thanks, that’s useful to know. 

What about the special editions; the FSR, Dukes of Hazzard and George Benson flavours - are they different in any way apart from the livery?

I have the George Benson model. It has a 12AT7 in V1 - less gain which impacts on both clean headroom and the drive channel. It also has a Jensen speaker and a pine cabinet (the new iv appears to have taken the same approach with the cab construction).

In the main I use it clean with pedals for drive. I like it a lot but it is horses for courses because I play  mainly clean in a funk / function band. For me the clean  tone produced was better than a Lonestar Classic (reverb excluded). I suspect that the Jensen speaker had a lot to do with that. The Mesa had a standard C90.

ICBM

Haych said:

What about the special editions; the FSR, Dukes of Hazzard and George Benson flavours - are they different in any way apart from the livery?

Some of them have different speakers and (I think) ply or pine cabinets. The only one I’ve come across is the orange/black lacquer one, which had a V30 and I think a ply cab, but was otherwise standard.

Haych

exocet said:

I have the George Benson model. It has a 12AT7 in V1 - less gain which impacts on both clean headroom and the drive channel. It also has a Jensen speaker and a pine cabinet (the new iv appears to have taken the same approach with the cab construction).

In the main I use it clean with pedals for drive. I like it a lot but it is horses for courses because I play  mainly clean in a funk / function band. For me the clean  tone produced was better than a Lonestar Classic (reverb excluded). I suspect that the Jensen speaker had a lot to do with that. The Mesa had a standard C90.

It's high praise if the clean tone is better than a Mesa Lonestar.  In honesty it's the cleans and lower gain tones that the amp can deliver that I'm mostly interested in.  I've even thought about a Blues Deluxe too as I think they sound a little sweeter than the HRD but then they don't have the same amount of drive should it ever be needed either, and there seem to be fewer of them and command a higher price used, too.

ICBM said:

Haych said:

What about the special editions; the FSR, Dukes of Hazzard and George Benson flavours - are they different in any way apart from the livery?

Some of them have different speakers and (I think) ply or pine cabinets. The only one I’ve come across is the orange/black lacquer one, which had a V30 and I think a ply cab, but was otherwise standard.

Thanks again, I sincerely appreciate your knowledge and input.

exocet

Will you be playing live with a band? If so the HRD is definitely a contender. If it's "just bedroom" then there are probably other options that are better suited to that purpose. I also have a Roland Blues Cube artist - this is more manageable when used in the house and has a better drive sound in my opinion. I also use this amp live but the HRD definitively has the edge when playing live (more punch / headroom).

Haych

It’s definitely intended for live use. Have decided to pop into my local PMT next week to compare a HRD IV and a Blues Deluxe Reissue. Could prove to be an expensive visit lol. 

stratman3142

exocet said:

Will you be playing live with a band? If so the HRD is definitely a contender. If it's "just bedroom" then there are probably other options that are better suited to that purpose. I also have a Roland Blues Cube artist - this is more manageable when used in the house and has a better drive sound in my opinion. I also use this amp live but the HRD definitively has the edge when playing live (more punch / headroom).

I agree. I use both an HRD IV and a Blues Cube Artist for gigs. That's for the spread, with the Blues Cube on the other side of the stage, as we're just vocal, guitar, bass and drums. Either amp would be loud enough on it's own for me.

I use then both clean live. I've done side by side comparisons and prefer the HRD IV clean sound, although the Blues Cube Artist isn't bad and I use it for rehearsals because it's lighter.

So the HRD IV wins for clean. But if I wanted to get crunch/OD from the amp I'd go for the Blues Cube Artist which sounds good to me in that area, whereas the HRD doesn't.

exocet

stratman3142 said:

exocet said:

Will you be playing live with a band? If so the HRD is definitely a contender. If it's "just bedroom" then there are probably other options that are better suited to that purpose. I also have a Roland Blues Cube artist - this is more manageable when used in the house and has a better drive sound in my opinion. I also use this amp live but the HRD definitively has the edge when playing live (more punch / headroom).

I agree. I use both an HRD IV and a Blues Cube Artist for gigs. That's for the spread, with the Blues Cube on the other side of the stage, as we're just vocal, guitar, bass and drums. Either amp would be loud enough on it's own for me.

I use then both clean live. I've done side by side comparisons and prefer the HRD IV clean sound, although the Blues Cube Artist isn't bad and I use it for rehearsals because it's lighter.

So the HRD IV wins for clean. But if I wanted to get crunch/OD from the amp I'd go for the Blues Cube Artist which sounds good to me in that area, whereas the HRD doesn't.

I used both for the first time at a large gig back in December - like you I needed more sound spread on stage (for the bassist) as we don't use comprehensive on stage monitoring. I liked the effect of both amps together but was critical on this forum about the apparent disparity in output levels between the two amps. I have since discovered that the Radial D.I / Splitter box that I was using in the feed to the Blues Cube has a very significant signal loss.....6dBs at least so that accounts for the difference. Under normal "guitar signal level" conditions - I use the low gain input on the BC, that way I can get clean tone up until around halfway on the input gain. On the standard input, I find that the BC starts compressing / light crunch at the 9 O'Clock postion...even with low output Strat Single Coils.

Mark1960

Haych said:

It’s definitely intended for live use. Have decided to pop into my local PMT next week to compare a HRD IV and a Blues Deluxe Reissue. Could prove to be an expensive visit lol. 

I can recomend the Blues Delux. Have had (and giged with) one for about 4 years now - really good amp. I prefered the voicing compared to the HRD, but that's just a personal thing, either way you get a very nice amp! The drive on the BD is very minimal just breaks up so unless you can crank it, so a decent drive pedal will be needed (I use a Thorpy Fx Gunshot - great tone) if that's what you want.