Vintage vs. Modern tone

[SunByrne]

So, I'm new to all of this, so if this topic has been done to death, I apologize.

But, I've noticed in almost every description of a pedal or an amp and even often for basses, the ad copy or the reviewers or whatever are usually all abuzz about the "vintage tone."

Why is that? Is that just because a lot of the music people are playing is older, and they just want to match the tone of the older recordings? Or is there some belief that "vintage" tones are inherently superior?

Because here there is no attempt to sound "vintage" (Darkglass head, Sire bass) and I just love the tone:



I mean, obviously, you wouldn't necessarily want to be that in-your-face all the time, but dang, I thought that was cool. And I'm old enough to remember the vintage tones...

 

[rodl2005]

Perhaps it's as a lotta 'modern' tones are offa the net etc... are perhaps very clean, slightly scooped in the mids... (note I said perhaps).... which isn't often a tone that'll sound great in a mix.
Most 'vintage' tone is more middy, has a touch of fur or slight overdriven qualities.... all which helps it sit and fatten a mix.
Really... I dunno. Just a cuppla
thoughts

 

[JimmyM]

"Vintage" and "modern" are terms to describe sounds that are 60 years old vs 40 years old. But if you think that tone is modern, you're not familiar with Yes or The Who.

 

[ihixulu]

Bass tones shift according to genre and musical trends. What is appropriate in one setting may not be in another. The "vintage" tag is often ascribed to the kind of tones that you hear in Motown, early rock (60's primarily) while "modern" implies the kind of broad bandwidth tone that came of age in the 80's on. They both work in different contexts.

I use my SWR SM400 to get a vintage modern tone. /s

 

[Michedelic]

So, I'm new to all of this, so if this topic has been done to death, I apologize.

But, I've noticed in almost every description of a pedal or an amp and even often for basses, the ad copy or the reviewers or whatever are usually all abuzz about the "vintage tone."

Why is that? Is that just because a lot of the music people are playing is older, and they just want to match the tone of the older recordings? Or is there some belief that "vintage" tones are inherently superior?

Because here there is no attempt to sound "vintage" (Darkglass head, Sire bass) and I just love the tone:



I mean, obviously, you wouldn't necessarily want to be that in-your-face all the time, but dang, I thought that was cool. And I'm old enough to remember the vintage tones...

Yes, no, maybe. As far as that clanky sound is concerned, as Jimmy M stated, even that goes back a bit; Chris Squire emerged circa 1969, building on the twangy, trebley tone that Entwistle pioneered a few years before. Slapping/popping became established mid-70’s. Listen to a lot of the Punk/New Wave of the late 70’s, Burnell, Hook, Rezillos, Cure, etc.; lotta twang/clank there. What I find missing in so-called ‘modern’ tone is a lack of warmth, which I attribute to the move from tube amps to solid state. But SVTs, a 50 year-old design, are still ubiquitous, although there is the addition of HF tweeters(which came into its stride in the 80’s). What is so modern about the trend, by younger players, to move to flatwound strings and short scale bases? I personally hated flats back in the day, and was thrilled to get my first set of Rotosounds.

 

[Jim Carr]

Bright, clicky, picked, even twangy bass guitar tone goes back at least to studio tick-tack and surf tones heard coming from Nashville, Bakersfield, LA, and even the TV theme music of the mid 1960s. Isn't that at least as vintage as the sounds coming from an SVT in 1974?

 

[bucephylus]

Most of that speak is marketing / sales jive to get you to buy the next greatest amp.

Best I can suggest is to try different amps and use your ears with the amp, not the sales jive.

One reality is that for a vast majority of amps out there, while you can certainly hear differences slamming away in the store or home studio / bedroom, most of the mainstream units deliver what is needed IN THE MIX despite the differences.

 

[SunByrne]

"Vintage" and "modern" are terms to describe sounds that are 60 years old vs 40 years old. But if you think that tone is modern, you're not familiar with Yes or The Who.

I'm familiar with both... and you make a great point! The kind of tone in that video has been around for a long time, too. So maybe the labels "vintage" and "modern" are misnomers—no argument there.

So, sure, the label "vintage" might be wrong, but it's not really the label I'm reacting to, it's the tone being pursued. It seems like the overwhelming majority are pursuing that old-school kind of warm, midrange-y, tube-y sound, and I'm just kind of puzzled as to why. I'm not saying that kind of tone doesn't have it's place, and of course people want to reproduce songs where that's the bass tone, but as pointed out, there's plenty of stuff out there--some of it not exactly new--where that's not the tone.

 

[Nashrakh]

It seems like the overwhelming majority are pursuing that old-school kind of warm, midrange-y, tube-y sound, and I'm just kind of puzzled as to why.

Taking a cheap potshot here, but I have a hunch that has a connection to what many feel is 'the quintessential role of the bass guitar'. Support, don't stand out (too much), KISS. Maybe a certain sound aesthetic goes along well with that philosophy.

 

[Jim Carr]

...it's not really the label I'm reacting to, it's the tone being pursued. It seems like the overwhelming majority are pursuing that old-school kind of warm, midrange-y, tube-y sound, and I'm just kind of puzzled as to why...

If a musical timbre (or tone as we like to call it) is widely used, the reasons are mostly aesthetic. It comes from the existing repertoire. It sounds good to a lot of performers and listeners. It passes the Duke Ellington test. I submit that this still leaves room for a wide range of variation in "warm, midrange-y, tube-y" sounds, but also permits new sounds and even retro sounds. It's Art, not Orthography.

 

[Leo Thunder]

"Vintage" is the obsession of old fools with money to waste and the wish to emulate idols from their teenage years. That's why manufacturers like Fender capitalise on it so much.

 

[sears]

I was learning "Boot Scoot Boogie" for last weekend's gig and thoroughly enjoying the clanky bass sound on the record. It works! I don't think that a conventional (excellent!) dance song has to be played with a vintage tone. The line between inappropriate and inspired vanishes when the musicianship is that good.

 

[SunByrne]

"Vintage" is the obsession of old fools with money to waste and the wish to emulate idols from their teenage years. That's why manufacturers like Fender capitalise on it so much.

Heh, best answer yet.

 

[FugaziBomb]

They are just buzz words and typically have no real life interpretation. They are just words used to sell gear

 

[808P123]

Vintage = colored by technology limitations of the era, transformers, tubes, “distortion”

Modern = HiFi what goes in is what comes out.

Most engineers I know have always strived to make the signal path as pure as possible to accurately reproduce what the musicians did.

 

[Mastermold]

I don't know what label to put on it but I like bass notes that are warm and authoritative, not brittle or burpee. Tube amps get me there most of the time, and I've found the basses I like to get me there as well.

 

[micguy]

Well, the first Fender basses had pickups a bit lower in output, and brighter than what came after, but the flats of the era affected the tone quite a bit. So....., if you put rounds on one of the first Fender's, it'll sound fairly "modern". Does that help? ;-)

 

[Smooth_bass88]

It’s a total paradox. Most modern sessions prefer a more vintage bass tone... but then doesn’t that make it modern?

 

[Rip Van Dan]

"Vintage sound" in my experience hearkens back to the 60's and 70's when flat wound strings were the norm and 215 cabinets were common. It also hearkens to the slightly distorted sound from the tube amps of the time. I had a 1966 Fender Bassman (50-watt tube amp with 212 cabinet) that I bought in 1966 and pairing that with my 1965 Fender Jazz Bass was definitely a vintage sound. The overdrive of the power tubes certainly had a lot to do with that and the speakers did not give nearly the definition that you get now.

Then in ~1972, while I was touring, I needed to replace that Bassman with a more powerful amp because I was getting drowned at. So I bought at Standel MCIIB with SAM30B powered speakers. It was either 200 or 250-watts (don't remember which) and was ungodly loud. I passed up the acoustic 360/361 and the Ampeg SVT for this Standel amp. It had two 15" speakers stacked vertically and had 4 round ports stacked vertically next to the speakers. The cabinet was easily twice as deep as my Fender Bassman had been.

At the time, the explanation was that the sound coming out the back of the speakers was channeled around to the side and came out those 4 ports. I have no idea it that explanation holds water, but I can tell you it pushed enough air out those ports that it would make my bell-bottoms flap if I got within about 3-feet of it. This was a solid state amp and was one of the first ones out there, so it didn't have the overdrive sound from the tubes operating at maximum capacity. It produced a clearer sound, but nothing like my modern gear does. Those old 15" drivers produced a much "woolier" sound (is that a word?) than what you find now. Still it was a great amp and if I still had it, I would use it.

My DNS-410 cab by DNA is a prime example of a modern sounding cab. It has a very flat frequency response across the spectrum and is much punchier because it has much faster transients than those ole 15" speakers did. It also handles about 7 times as much power and gets even louder than that Standel did. I can't actually imagine even using the type of sound levels it's capable of.

I feed it with an Eden 800-watt amp that is clear and warm. I boost the low mids ~250Hz a little bit to give it nice definition in the mix. This amp is super clear with THD less than 0.1%. It is a hybrid amp meaning it does use a tube in the preamp. But the design of the amp operates that tube within very specific parameters that give it warmth, but will not give it overdrive. That amp in combination with my DNS-410 cab generates a really nice clear, articulate, and warm sound. But it is NOT the sound I got out of my '66 Fender Bassman, or my ~1970/71 Standel amp. I love the sounds I get out of my more modern Eden/DNA gear.

So Vintage sound can usually be heard coming out of older type 12" or 15" speakers and/or from tube amps where the tubes are being pushed into saturation (overdrive). Some of that Vintage tube sound comes from the tubes in the preamp and some comes from the power tubes.

 

[JimmyM]

Vintage = colored by technology limitations of the era, transformers, tubes, “distortion”

Modern = HiFi what goes in is what comes out.

Most engineers I know have always strived to make the signal path as pure as possible to accurately reproduce what the musicians did.

That's why I hate most engineers

In all seriousness, though, I choose the sounds I use because I like them. I like nice warm bass tones with just enough treble and upper mids so you can tell what notes I'm playing. Sometimes I like twangy trebly sounds depending on the music, too, but nothing over 5k. Sometimes I like more distortion, sometimes I don't. I don't care if a tone was invented 60 years ago or yesterday.

But we have to nip this "tubes = distortion" nonsense in the bud. It does not. It can, but the most clean sounds I've ever heard have come from tube amps. I'm recording an album full of songs with clean sounds that I achieved by using nothing but a tube amp going direct to the board. Got a couple where I cranked the amp as well, but this idea that tubes are good for nothing but distorted sounds is a complete myth.