Vintage 59 / R9 comparison video clips

hoss · Feb 22, 2008

Done by Udo "Sgt." Pipper for German Gitarre & Bass Magazine

They are using a German/Chinese made Cream JTM clone.

http://www1.gitarrebass.de/magazine/index.php?ID=200803270

(I hope it's OK that I am posting this to the Sunburst Pub since it fits both the Historic and Vintage dept.)

Beano Geno · Feb 22, 2008

I wonder what the article says. Can any body translate the German magazine and give a brief summary?:hmm

hoss · Feb 22, 2008

Beano Geno said:
I wonder what the article says. Can any body translate the German magazine and give a brief summary?:hmm

I just bought the magazine and am going to read the article. I am not going to do a full translation, there may be some greedy copyright lawyers out there.

The R9 had the following mods: 50s wiring, real 1959 bumblebees, real 1960 ABR-1 bridge

marklp69 · Feb 22, 2008

I have to be honest, through my computer the 59 sounded better, but for $250K less, that historic didn't sound bad! :salude

I'd like to put one of my R9's up against a burst. I'm sure it would lose, but i'd still like to hear the comparison because my R9 sounds mighty fine!

les strat · Feb 22, 2008

I don't think that guitar sound is conducive to giving an equal comparison of the two.

j45 · Feb 23, 2008

I didn't expect to hear much if any difference. I do a lot of clips and never all that conclusive. In this case I hear exactly what I hear in most new guitars compared to vintage. It's mainly about mid-range content. The burst has an open midrange with a lot of richness, almost juicy sounding (yes, this is getting ridiculous). The RI sounds like the mids are being sucked into the wood , very constiopated without any life. Dehydrated, if you will. This has been my exact experience even when dropping PAF's in a RI. The mids just don't wake up and come alive. BUT, is it $250,000 better? Hell no.

MikeB_18 · Feb 23, 2008

I think the real '59 has a bit more of an open sound but I wouldn't call the R9 bad. It's certainly a good substitute for those of us who can't afford the real deal.

60pinstripe · Feb 23, 2008

j45 said:
The mids just don't wake up and come alive. BUT, is it $250,000 better? Hell no.

Is a Strad 1mil - 2 mil better??

skhan007 · Feb 23, 2008

Would a Cloud 9 R9 'wake up' those mids as a result of the chambering? I've heard others say yes to that, but I don't own one, so I don't know for sure.

BurstMeUp · Feb 23, 2008

It's all about the wood.

marklp69 · Feb 23, 2008

60pinstripe said:
Is a Strad 1mil - 2 mil better??

Why do people keep doing the Strad comparison? The violin is a completely different animal in the music world.

It's not an apples to apples comparison. Strads have been around for hundreds of years and they're used by highly trained & skilled classical musicians, generally to perform written & studied compositions with an orchestra, chamber ensemble or as a solo, maybe with piano accompaniment. Not just strads but lots of stringed instruments in that world cost as much as a nice home.

Bursts have only been around for 50 years and they're primarily famous for a certain type of classic rock music which, for the most part, was recorded 30 - 40 yrs ago. They're completely different animals.

So, why do people on this forum keep making the comparison? I doubt any Strad owners would compare their instruments to a burst!

and before you flame, I'M NOT SAYING BURSTS AREN'T GREAT!!!! Just: "Why do people compare them to a Strad!"

shuie · Feb 23, 2008

Translation not necessary.

fjs1962 · Feb 23, 2008

I've heard that much or more tonal difference just comparing different R9s.

Zoomer · Feb 23, 2008

j45 said:
I didn't expect to hear much if any difference. I do a lot of clips and never all that conclusive. In this case I hear exactly what I hear in most new guitars compared to vintage. It's mainly about mid-range content. The burst has an open midrange with a lot of richness, almost juicy sounding (yes, this is getting ridiculous). The RI sounds like the mids are being sucked into the wood , very constiopated without any life. Dehydrated, if you will. This has been my exact experience even when dropping PAF's in a RI. The mids just don't wake up and come alive. BUT, is it $250,000 better? Hell no.

Yes I agree - I have a 1954 to 1957 conversion it almost has an "acoustic" type of clarity.

I really think a lot of that has to do with the fact that the wood is 50+ years old - I have a Historic that is light and vibrant and it gets close to that sound.

I think the wood continues to dry out and "season" the guitar ages more - I really believe that as our historics age and get "played in" - in 10, 20 30 years down the road will improve. Both my 1995 R9's sound way better than they did new - they are 12 years old. I put heavy gage string on them after reading beauty of the burst as he says that the extra stress on the necks effects the way the neck "sets in". I don't know if that really has an effect but I did it anyway.

I believe many of our historics will be comparable to bursts in the future - but only time will tell.

:2zone,

Zoomer

cyberpunk409 · Feb 23, 2008

WOW, the real '59 sounds awesome! i can certainly tell a difference, even though i thought i probably wouldn't.

But it would've been a real A/B test if they used the '59 PAF's in BOTH guitars... it's kinda not fair when 2 different types of pickups are being used, regardless of what the R9 pickups 'might' be modelled on. Agree?

Would've also been nice to hear both guitars recorded unplugged/acoustically using a great mic.

CharlieS · Feb 23, 2008

I hear a big difference between the two. The 59's mids are clear, while the R9's are choked or congested. I experience the same thing with my old wood vs. new wood. The R9 sounds good, but once you get a taste for the clear voice of a good old one, it's hard to go back.

As much as I hear a difference in sound, I'll bet that the difference in feel and responsiveness is even more apparent.

moonweasel · Feb 23, 2008

I don't hear 100$ difference, much less 100k diff. There is no way you could tell the difference between the two with a band involved. Given, this IS a 7 meg crappy video file.

In the video, it almost looks like he is playing the same guitar in both clips. Its probably the crappy video quality.

curt1lp · Feb 23, 2008

The burst had more sustain and richer tone and sounded better. The player who was doing the Free song seemd to play the Burst effortlessly compared to the R9. How much of that was a psychological boost from having the fabled 300K guitar in hand, I do not know. There definitely seemd to be a difference though.

Todd Louis · Feb 23, 2008

Train

shuie · Feb 23, 2008

Sure there's a difference. Every two guitars are different. However, even without PAFs, that R9 does a pretty good job of reproducing the sound of the '59 in those clips. Sure, the R9 lacks some of the finer harmonic details. There probably is a bigger difference in person, or in the feel of the two guitars. Thats just two guys noodling around without a band, tho. The thread would end badly here, but it would be real interesting to hear some clips of a similar A-B comparison in a mix with other instruments.

Vintage 59 / R9 comparison video clips

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Member

New member

Active member

Member

New member

New member

New member

Member

New member

Member

Active member

New member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

New member