Fender Vibro Champ - 68 Custom reissue

Koa

Fender have at last created a reissue of the Vibro Champ. Pre order only at the moment, they seem to have added digital reverb, I wonder how the tremolo sounds and if it’s still analog valve driven. The Vibro element was always the crowning glory of the old Champs.

ICBM

It’s not a reissue.

Koa

Point taken.....and a good one at that.

idiotwindow

Koa said:

I wonder how the tremolo sounds and if it’s still analog valve driven.

Yes, at least according to the description and spec at fender.com which states it has "tube driven tremolo". The manual also has more details of the spec.

If I'm not broke by the time these are actually available to buy, I may give one a whirl. I was initially put off by the digital reverb but I usually add a Flint to the front of my "pure analogue" tweed Champ anyway so it doesn't make much sense to rule out the new Vibro on that basis. However, at £799 it is expensive IMO for a PCB mass production amp (roughly the same price as the arguably more useful ToneMaster Deluxe) so I may end up ruling it out on that basis.

munckee

idiotwindow said:

Koa said:

I wonder how the tremolo sounds and if it’s still analog valve driven.

Yes, at least according to the description and spec at fender.com which states it has "tube driven tremolo". The manual also has more details of the spec.

If I'm not broke by the time these are actually available to buy, I may give one a whirl. I was initially put off by the digital reverb but I usually add a Flint to the front of my "pure analogue" tweed Champ anyway so it doesn't make much sense to rule out the new Vibro on that basis. However, at £799 it is expensive IMO for a PCB mass production amp (roughly the same price as the arguably more useful ToneMaster Deluxe) so I may end up ruling it out on that basis.

I may try one of these, I have a 79 silver face champ and always fancied changing it for a vibro champ.  I use a white whale spring reverb/analogue tremolo in front of the champ so I doubt I would hear an improvement but would be interesting to compare them.

ICBM

idiotwindow said:

The manual also has more details of the spec.

No valve rectifier, although I was expecting that. It makes little difference with a single-ended amp anyway.

It's good that they've given it a proper speaker jack, rather than the phono on the originals... but bad that they've made it 3.2-ohm - although it can also safely take 4, contrary to what they say. Given that it's not intended to be a reissue it would have been far more sensible to make the speaker 8-ohm instead, then it could have used a much wider variety of external cabs.

They could have picked a much better speaker than the remarkably average-sounding Ten 30 as well, although that seems to be standard for this series...

idiotwindow

ICBM said:

idiotwindow said:

The manual also has more details of the spec.

They could have picked a much better speaker than the remarkably average-sounding Ten 30 as well, although that seems to be standard for this series...

Yes, it does seem to be a bit of a cheapo choice for the amps that Fender have been putting it into.

ICBM

idiotwindow said:

Yes, it does seem to be a bit of a cheapo choice for the amps that Fender have been putting it into.

Cheap or not, it's just the wrong voicing - likewise the V-type in the 12" models. They seem to be trying to make them a sort of nondescript mid-Atlantic-sounding amp instead of a proper Fender. I'm puzzled why they don't want to use Eminence... or even an A-type, if they want to go with Celestion.

munckee

ICBM said:

idiotwindow said:

The manual also has more details of the spec.

No valve rectifier, although I was expecting that. It makes little difference with a single-ended amp anyway.

It's good that they've given it a proper speaker jack, rather than the phono on the originals... but bad that they've made it 3.2-ohm - although it can also safely take 4, contrary to what they say. Given that it's not intended to be a reissue it would have been far more sensible to make the speaker 8-ohm instead, then it could have used a much wider variety of external cabs.

They could have picked a much better speaker than the remarkably average-sounding Ten 30 as well, although that seems to be standard for this series...

I had a 68 princeton, changing the speaker for a jensen alnico made a big improvement, more like the 65 princeton I should have bought.

dindude

ICBM said:

idiotwindow said:

The manual also has more details of the spec.

No valve rectifier, although I was expecting that. It makes little difference with a single-ended amp anyway.

It's good that they've given it a proper speaker jack, rather than the phono on the originals... but bad that they've made it 3.2-ohm - although it can also safely take 4, contrary to what they say. Given that it's not intended to be a reissue it would have been far more sensible to make the speaker 8-ohm instead, then it could have used a much wider variety of external cabs.

They could have picked a much better speaker than the remarkably average-sounding Ten 30 as well, although that seems to be standard for this series...

The designer was on Gearpage saying that they kept the 3.2 ohm as it sounded best by far, not sure what difference it would really make. Also said safe to use with 4 or 8 ohm but would change the sound a little. 

dindude

Other info worthy of interest - for the VC the power amp valve socket is chassis mounted but the preamp ones are PCB mounted. The foot switch is not included - both seem a little mean for the money! 

ICBM

dindude said:

The designer was on Gearpage saying that they kept the 3.2 ohm as it sounded best by far, not sure what difference it would really make. Also said safe to use with 4 or 8 ohm but would change the sound a little. 

I find that hard to believe if they did it properly and changed the OT ratio and the feedback resistor value as well to compensate. Amps with impedance selectors don't sound that different at different impedances (although they can a little).

But I'm pretty sure it would have sounded a lot better if they'd used an 8-ohm *decent speaker*...

dindude said:

Other info worthy of interest - for the VC the power amp valve socket is chassis mounted but the preamp ones are PCB mounted. The foot switch is not included - both seem a little mean for the money! 

Preamp valves are arguably better mounted on the PCB as it keeps the lead dress to them totally consistent.

Not including the footswitch is *very* cheeky at that price though.

Stuckfast

What do we think about them using a 10-inch speaker at all? I know people complain about it, but surely the 8-inch speaker is part of what differentiates a Champ from a Princeton?

The Vibrochamp is for recording precisely because it doesn't have any low-mid flab.

ICBM

Stuckfast said:

What do we think about them using a 10-inch speaker at all? I know people complain about it, but surely the 8-inch speaker is part of what differentiates a Champ from a Princeton?

The Vibrochamp is for recording precisely because it doesn't have any low-mid flab.

The stock speaker in BF/SF Champs can be *very* farty though - not because of its size, because it's crap. But the amp has a surprising amount of bass as well.

I would prefer a Vibro-Champ with a decent 8, I think. I do like the original Super Champs with a 10', but they're actually based on a Princeton Reverb circuit anyway.

Stuckfast

Was there only one stock speaker used in the originals? Mine has a Jensen of some sort, not sure if it's original but it doesn't sound farty.

ICBM

Stuckfast said:

Was there only one stock speaker used in the originals? Mine has a Jensen of some sort, not sure if it's original but it doesn't sound farty.

They used several different types, some of the earlier Alnico frame magnet ones were Jensens, but always labelled 'Fender Special Design' - if it's actually labelled Jensen then it will be a replacement. The later silverface ones with no Fender labels are basically cheap ceramic radio speakers. Most of these are pretty farty when pushed - modern Jensens aren't.

Stuckfast

I've just looked, mine is actually a Jensen Special Design SP832 HAR, so a replacement that's actually older than the amp itself. Weird!

UnclePsychosis

I really wanted to love this but £800 is too expensive (especially if the footswitch is extra) and being honest with myself, digital hall reverb (hall? Really?) instead of analogue spring just seems wrong. I had visions of getting one to pair with my 65 PRRI but don't think I could justify at that cost! 

thermionic

By adding a 10” speaker it’s encroaching on Princeton territory. Adding a spring reverb would make the Princeton redundant, as most Princetons seem to be bought for home playing, where it’s often just a little too loud.