# Blackface..Silverface???



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi!
I would like to know the real difference between a twin reverb ''blackface'' and a ''silverface''
I have heard that the only real difference is that the blackface has a master volume knob....
If you know about this mabye you can let me know


----------



## jcayer (Mar 25, 2007)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackface_(Fender)

For a starter :smile:


----------



## jcayer (Mar 25, 2007)

I also found this.

Tho maybe someone can confirm the validity on these info...

http://www.unclespot.com/SF2BF.html


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Blackface: http://www.ampwares.com/amp.asp?id=59

Silverface: http://www.ampwares.com/amp.asp?id=60


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

jcayer said:


> I also found this.
> 
> Tho maybe someone can confirm the validity on these info...
> 
> http://www.unclespot.com/SF2BF.html


Yeah! uncle spot... he knows alot....but if you are lame like me
and dont know what the fu** a bias is..then i guest your screwed


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

FrankyFarGone said:


> Yeah! uncle spot... he knows alot....but if you are lame like me
> and dont know what the fu** a bias is..then i guest your screwed


http://www.hans-egebo.dk/Tutorial/biasing.htm


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

FrankyFarGone said:


> Hi!
> I would like to know the real difference between a twin reverb ''blackface'' and a ''silverface''
> I have heard that the only real difference is that the blackface has a master volume knob....
> If you know about this mabye you can let me know


Blackface never had a master volume. Depending on the the year of the silverface there may be no real difference at all.

We need more information, specifically years of each amp.


----------



## bcmatt (Aug 25, 2007)

I have an issue of Guitar Player Magazine from some time in the last year that walks you through the conversion (Silver to Black) at the back of the mag. 

I believe it is also in Pittman's "Tube Amp Book".

I believe one difference would be that the color of the faceplate might be different....maybe....ya, I'm pretty sure.


----------



## Big White Tele (Feb 10, 2007)

I have a bunch, The Blackfaces are basically all the same, The first year Silverface (67), and 68"s untill May still were the same amps. After may 68, the newer circuit was used. Later 68, and 69"s are different and some consider them to suck, not me, they are a cleaner sounding amp. The master volume twins in from the early seventies are different again, more output and even cleaner, but can be dirtied up with the master set low. Totally a matter of opinion on what sounds best, but those Blackfaces are magical. Theyre all great amps with different tones. However, there are dogs in all years. A good tech and a few hundred dollars and they are golden..


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

FrankyFarGone said:


> Yeah! uncle spot... he knows alot....but if you are lame like me
> and dont know what the fu** a bias is..then i guest your screwed


Ok Frank! Here's the scoop! I'll try to tone down the techy talk. Those links were good links about WHY BF and SF sound different but not so good as to what ARE the differences!

Basically, the tone of the BF Fenders was considered better for guitar at the time. The SF series came out after Leo Fender sold his company to CBS Music who promptly hired a bunch of electronic engineers to start to change his circuits. The attitude seemed to be that Leo was just an old TV repair guy so what could he have known?

Those new engineers may have had great resumes but it was obvious that they weren't guitar players! Any good tech can tell from the changes that started appearing that those guys were from the hifi world and not musicians. Their focus was on amps being as clean and distortion free as possible. This of course is exactly the WRONG thing for a rockin' guitar player! The amp is SUPPOSED to distort! It's just that not all forms of distortion are alike or sound as good.

The market obviously hated the new SF sound and sales fell like lead farts! CBS finally bailed out, selling the company to the employees. They struggled along, finally hiring some new engineers in the early 80's who understood what guitarists wanted and designed circuits that gave better guitar tone.

So SF tended to be cleaner, with poorer distortion tone. However, there was one amp that was an exception...the TWIN!

A Twin is SUPPOSED to be clean and distortion free! Just really freakin' loud! The SF Twins didn't sound all that different. Even the last years where they went to what techies call ultralinear output transformers. 

If you understand about this the Twin is a great amp for that kind of an application. Tube amps normally don't sound great until you crank 'em up to at least 7-8. They need the power tubes working to give the best sounding distortion. Since a Twin is loud and clean it sounds the same at 3 as at 9.

That being said, there's one more kicker. Although Fenders are famous for having perhaps the best clean tones they really aren't much on 'crunch'. However, they LOVE boost pedals! A TS-series tube screamer or an MXR Distortion + box can really make them come alive. The consensus is that this effect is best with BF circuits and not so much with SF.

These factors are all reasons why BF amps get much better prices than SF. If you're not a collector but are just looking for the best sound for the best buck, any good tech can re-wire a SF amp to BF specs. Even after paying the tech this is usually MUCH cheaper than buying a BF amp!

I can't be more specific 'cuz sound is such a 'personal taste' kind of thing. I hope this proves useful.

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Ok Frank! Here's the scoop! I'll try to tone down the techy talk. Those links were good links about WHY BF and SF sound different but not so good as to what ARE the differences!
> 
> Basically, the tone of the BF Fenders was considered better for guitar at the time. The SF series came out after Leo Fender sold his company to CBS Music who promptly hired a bunch of electronic engineers to start to change his circuits. The attitude seemed to be that Leo was just an old TV repair guy so what could he have known?
> 
> ...


Great post Bill, 

Fender had a penchant for following trends in the '70's instead of creating them. The BF amps as the tweed ones before them were definitely in the trend setting category. What happened, as Bill points out was CBS. 
When the trend for master volume to create overdrive took off then Fender followed suit first by converting the Twin reverb/ Vibrosonic reverb to master volume in '72. The other large amps soon followed suit.....In the mid to late '70 all the rage was to make amps that went as loud as possible (ie..Marshall Major) not to be outdone...around '75/'76 all the medium/ high powered amps got ultralinear transformers...this created huge increases in output wattage to amps like the Twin, Super and Pro....but it also took away from the character that made Fender popular in the first place. 
By theway, there is an amp by Fender called the PS400. I've just completed repairing one...it puts the SVT to shame. It has 6 6550's, 765 volts B+, transformer driven phase inverter by a 6L6 and three separate outputs @ 145 watts RMS each.
This is the extreme example of Fender uber wattage...problem is it weighs in at about 90lbs and will smoke any output tubes that aren't up to par.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

nonreverb said:


> Great post Bill,
> 
> Fender had a penchant for following trends in the '70's instead of creating them. The BF amps as the tweed ones before them were definitely in the trend setting category. What happened, as Bill points out was CBS.
> When the trend for master volume to create overdrive took off then Fender followed suit first by converting the Twin reverb/ Vibrosonic reverb to master volume in '72. The other large amps soon followed suit.....In the mid to late '70 all the rage was to make amps that went as loud as possible (ie..Marshall Major) not to be outdone...around '75/'76 all the medium/ high powered amps got ultralinear transformers...this created huge increases in output wattage to amps like the Twin, Super and Pro....but it also took away from the character that made Fender popular in the first place.
> ...


PS400? What an amp!

I had one in from a young bass player. It was his uncle's amp and when I talked to him I realized that his uncle used to play in one of the early psychedelic bands in Stoney Creek, Ontario. Small world.

The interesting part of the story is that he plunked the amp down in my shop, fresh from his uncle's barn where it had been stored the last 25 years. The overhaul was nothin' special but the neat thing is when I picked up the amp something thin, brown and fluttery fell off the bottom.

When that amp had been put in the barn all those years ago it had squashed a mouse. What fell off was the mummified flattened remains!

I started thinking of my old Iron Maiden debut vinyl album, with 'Eddie' on the cover.

Run for the hills!

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Paul said:


> I can't speak to the "why, but as for the "what" with a 135 Watt Silver Face Master Volume Fender Twin Reverb with the ultralinear output transformer, I have one, and I can speak.
> 
> It's freaking heavy, and it's freaking loud. I play clean, and at the volumes I play, the clean headroom it provides I don't need. Nobody does. My 15-ish watt Tweed Deluxe kit amp is more than enough most times, and for that extra 3dB, I've got a 35 Watt amp too.
> 
> Where the 135 Watt Silver Face Master Volume Fender Twin Reverb with the ultralinear output transformer shines, in both my opinion and my home, is with a Rhodes Stage Piano. The amp has the headroom and power to handle the low end required from a Rhodes, and enough character to make the piano really sing. It sounds like a Rhodes, (Babe, by STYX anyone?), but most days that is a good thing.


Quite true!...sounds great with a Wurlitzer 200A as well:smile:


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

well I don't know the exact details, but I had a '72/73 twin reverb that sounded amazing....brought it in to a tech for a tube change, he convinced me to let him "blackface" it.....it has sounded like crap ever since


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

nonreverb said:


> Quite true!...sounds great with a Wurlitzer 200A as well:smile:


Sure do sound mighty fine.


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Paul said:


> Don't the Wurlies have a built in amp and speaker?


Sure if you like lo-fi...they have a line out jack just like the Rhodes so you can get BIG sound out of them:smile:


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

bolero said:


> well I don't know the exact details, but I had a '72/73 twin reverb that sounded amazing....brought it in to a tech for a tube change, he convinced me to let him "blackface" it.....it has sounded like crap ever since


Interesting. I don't know the tech you used so it's not right for me to cast stones but I will say that a lot of guys don't really know how to "blackface". They may change a trivial thing or two and disregard those that are most important!

The term gets bandied around a lot by folks who don't really understand what it means. Like on Ebay where you see an old tube PA head for sale and the description reads "modified for guitar".

You win the amp and when you get a chance to look inside you see that all that was done was someone mounted a regular guitar jack on the panel to drive into the original "hifi" circuit. 

Is that really "modified for guitar"? Maybe to a lawyer but to me it's not even remotely close. When I mod a PA amp I gut the circuitry and wire it up like a classic Fender or Marshall. Hifi and guitar circuits are completely different. Who cares about the jack?

I'd be interested in getting a look at what was done to your Twin.

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

Wild Bill said:


> Ok Frank! Here's the scoop! I'll try to tone down the techy talk. Those links were good links about WHY BF and SF sound different but not so good as to what ARE the differences!
> 
> Basically, the tone of the BF Fenders was considered better for guitar at the time. The SF series came out after Leo Fender sold his company to CBS Music who promptly hired a bunch of electronic engineers to start to change his circuits. The attitude seemed to be that Leo was just an old TV repair guy so what could he have known?
> 
> ...


Thanks for those valuable info...really


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

What would be a fair price for a Twin reverb like this








It is a 65 reissued








If someone could let me know,it would be appreciate


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

What you have there looks like a reissue of the '65 Blackface Twin Reverb.
The picture of the back is a little fuzzy, but I don't see a courtesy outlet.
Those speakers look like the Eminence Special Design speaker the RIs came
stock with. These are popular amps these days because the vintage originals
are just going through the roof price wise. The grill cloth and tolex seem to be in good shape, and I see you have the footswitch. These amps sell new for
about $1200, so unfortunately the used ones,even in this condition might not
get much more than $600-$650. This is a slightly educated guess. You may 
have the best luck selling it in the paper or Kajiji. Ebay can be a serious pain in the a$$. This amp weighs almost a hundred pounds, and these courier guys don't baby stuff like this(trust me my fiancee works at DHL). To bad you
got to sell it. An old friend had one of these and at 3-4 on the volume it was so loud it my ears would ring, and the bass would rumble through the whole
building.Not a home/practice amp that's for sure. Good luck.

Just poking around on the net and I'm seeing some very nice prices for Silverface (70's era) Twins going for low $$. Unless
you really need the money, you could always get rid of the RI and get a true handwired vintage Fender. They'll only go up in
value. Cheers.


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

Actually i was thinking buying one....eventully

I mean my silvertones are more then i need for the crunch...espacially
the 120w six ten.

But i really need something else... amp that would compare at least with my twin twelve in power but less darker...when pump to the roof ..n with reverb onboard


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Hi Franky.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I thought it was a pre-sell price check. These
amps are super loud and have tons of headroom. Like I said in my post the SF
hand-wired amps of the late 60's and 70's are really going for good prices
(especially in the U.S. where a bit of panic has set in). Fender is planning a
price hike starting Feb 1. Apparantly this will put some of the smaller RI amps
up over a grand before tax. This may or may not have an immediate impact on
the vintage market. With the shape of the economy, I'm leaning towards the
latter. Keep your eyes out for the old ones. they're built way better and are 
easier to service. These amps are fantastic, but they weigh a ton and are
"Arena Rock" loud. Two things a lot of players are trying to scale back on 
these days. All the better for you!

Cheers Shawn.


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

Do you know about accutronic reverb tank?...Is that the one originally use by fender on there amp?
If not what you think of those?


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Hi Franky.

The Accutronics reverb tanks are now the industry standard, and your not
likely to get your hands on much else that's being made today. The original
tanks were made by Hammond (the organ company). Some vintage guys insist
that these older vintage Hammond tanks are the best, and that may well be.
In my humble opinion there are a lot of other factors that influence the quality
of the reverb tone. Good NOS drivers and healthy circuitry being at least as 
important. The tank also needs to be well shielded from any vibrations, hence
the old vinyl bags they're housed in. So if the tank is working properly and
these other points have been addressed, it should sound just as good as the 
old Hammond units.Hope this helps.

Shawn.


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Rugburn said:


> Hi Franky.
> 
> The Accutronics reverb tanks are now the industry standard, and your not
> likely to get your hands on much else that's being made today. The original
> ...


Unfortunately, The newer Accutronics reverb tanks coils have a tendency to open up more often than they should. They solved the broken wire problem common to the older tanks with heavier guage wire and edge connectors but seem to have cut corners with the coils. I find a sizeable proportion of reverb problems in new Fender amps are due to this.


----------



## FrankyFarGone (Dec 8, 2008)

Yes it did..thanks again Shawn

Actually i find most of your treads very Nutritive
And thats what make a forum so interesting


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Well thank you very much Franky. Hi Nonreverb. I hope their not giving you so much trouble that it's the reason you gave yourself your user name. Just kidding. I've been hearing about problems with the Blues Jr reverb. I thought it was poor tubes related. How do you feel about the new Fender production tube amps quality wise? I see so many forums and sites devoted to ripping these things apart and upgrading tubes.speakers and components It seems to be going beyond the usual "tinkerer fringe". Thanks for the insight into the tech side of this reverb tank question. To think Fender is putting there prices up by as much as 20% on some of it's products!!

Cheers Shawn.


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Rugburn said:


> Well thank you very much Franky. Hi Nonreverb. I hope their not giving you so much trouble that it's the reason you gave yourself your user name. Just kidding. I've been hearing about problems with the Blues Jr reverb. I thought it was poor tubes related. How do you feel about the new Fender production tube amps quality wise? I see so many forums and sites devoted to ripping these things apart and upgrading tubes.speakers and components It seems to be going beyond the usual "tinkerer fringe". Thanks for the insight into the tech side of this reverb tank question. To think Fender is putting there prices up by as much as 20% on some of it's products!!
> 
> Cheers Shawn.


Nope, the drive/ recovery section on the Blues Jr's is done with opamps. Most of the reverb problems that I've seen is due to the tank. 
As for new Fender production stuff....they're good quality for the money.
They are mass produced and therefore parts such as transformers, cabinets and speakers are in keeping with the price point. The reissue amps are decent value and they have upgraded the speakers over the production run from the Eminence line which IMO weren't great too the Jensen line.
As for upgrades, well, people are upgrading all makes of amps these days whether it's a Fender or a Bogner. It's a personal thing. I know guys that love they're newer Fender amps just the way they are while others have me tweaking several things in theirs.:smile:


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

This may be better suited to the "Amp Tech" section, but I was looking for tube amp building workshops here in Ontario. I haven't been able to find any.
Nonreverb how did you learn about amps,tube amps in particular? I went to a night class at college this past fall for circuit board and advanced hand soldering. The "advanced" part was SMT related. The problem being, we were using 1/8 of an inch Wellers to accomplish this! I 'm not all that interested in that kind of circuitry, but it was as close as I could get to learning basic skills needed to repair and build amps from a college course. Is an apprenticeship my best chance at getting into this field? I'm pretty handy with a soldering iron, but draining filter caps and other high voltage excursions, are something I'd like to learn first hand (not out of a book). It dawns on me now that I should've sent this by way of a PM. If there's any tips or suggestions please feel free to let me know.Cheers

Shawn.

This clears it up for me, you were of course bang on. It was nagging at me though, that I'd heard some non-tank related reverb issues with these amps.

http://home.comcast.net/~machrone/bjr/bjreverb.htm


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Rugburn said:


> This may be better suited to the "Amp Tech" section, but I was looking for tube amp building workshops here in Ontario. I haven't been able to find any.
> Nonreverb how did you learn about amps,tube amps in particular? I went to a night class at college this past fall for circuit board and advanced hand soldering. The "advanced" part was SMT related. The problem being, we were using 1/8 of an inch Wellers to accomplish this! I 'm not all that interested in that kind of circuitry, but it was as close as I could get to learning basic skills needed to repair and build amps from a college course. Is an apprenticeship my best chance at getting into this field? I'm pretty handy with a soldering iron, but draining filter caps and other high voltage excursions, are something I'd like to learn first hand (not out of a book). It dawns on me now that I should've sent this by way of a PM. If there's any tips or suggestions please feel free to let me know.Cheers
> 
> Shawn.
> ...


Hey Shawn,

Well, when I went to college abut 20 years ago they had already stopped teaching tube design although the solid state stuff helps....the lessons can be applied to all manner of electronics. I remember about a week into my couse my electronics theory teacher told us that we wouldn't learn our trade in class but rather out in the field. He was absolutely right. I have held several tech jobs since then including aircraft guidance systems repair as well as a component-level repair tech for computer monitors. That particular job is where I had my first real encounter with high voltage circuitry and it's where I really started to understand electronics. Transferring into solid state and tube amps after that was relatively easy.
All to say that experience certinly helps but also keep investigating ie. reading as much as you can on amp repair and like you're doing here, talk to as many experienced people as you can. I find this place a valuable spot for information as there's always something I'm learning here. Mhammer and Wild Bill are two examples of techs here that can answer most if not all questions you may have.....welcome to the wonderful (if not shocking) world of tube amp repair Shawn:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Thanks again nonreverb. I have the Dave Hunter book which has been very interesting. I recieved "The Soul of Tone" for Xmas. Great book, but it's more of a hybrid between amp history and amp porn. Is the Gerald Weber DVD a good resource? It's kinda on the pricey side, but if I can see what's going on I tend to learn faster.

Shawn.


----------



## nonreverb (Sep 19, 2006)

Rugburn said:


> Thanks again nonreverb. I have the Dave Hunter book which has been very interesting. I recieved "The Soul of Tone" for Xmas. Great book, but it's more of a hybrid between amp history and amp porn. Is the Gerald Weber DVD a good resource? It's kinda on the pricey side, but if I can see what's going on I tend to learn faster.
> 
> Shawn.


Have you checked out Randall Aiken's web page? I'd recommend giving it a look. Lots of interesting and useful info there. 

www.aikenamps.com


----------

