PDA

View Full Version : Silvertone 1396?


LowWatt
02-02-2010, 01:55 PM
I'm looking at a Silvertone 1396 as a nice backup amp and for trashy dirty garage rock.

Can you guys tell me anything about them? Thoughts?

nmiller
02-02-2010, 02:47 PM
Built 1957-1959 by Danelectro. Two 12" speakers, 50W, four 6L6s, a combination of 12AX7s and octal preamps. I've never played through one, but they're supposed to have a lot of headroom (like most Danelectros).

mad dog
02-02-2010, 03:25 PM
I owned a 1336, the previous generation cosmetics, but I think it's essentially the same amp. The earlier one had a deeper cabinet, which can affect sound. Mine was loud, very strong. Had a tweed covering but not that tweedlike in tone. Had a hard edge, more on the rock and roll side. A big sound. In retrospect, it was the Utah speakers I didn't get on with. Not easy to find speakers that fit in the type of cab (center mounted PT), but I should have tried. It's a whole lotta amp for the (typically) modest price.

If it's in good shape and reasonable, just grab it.
MD

LowWatt
02-02-2010, 03:44 PM
I owned a 1336, the previous generation cosmetics, but I think it's essentially the same amp. The earlier one had a deeper cabinet, which can affect sound. Mine was loud, very strong. Had a tweed covering but not that tweedlike in tone. Had a hard edge, more on the rock and roll side. A big sound. In retrospect, it was the Utah speakers I didn't get on with. Not easy to find speakers that fit in the type of cab (center mounted PT), but I should have tried. It's a whole lotta amp for the (typically) modest price.

If it's in good shape and reasonable, just grab it.
MD

Thanks. It is at a cheap price. I think because the speakers in it right now are modern day Fenders. I was thinking to pick it up and toss a pair of Weber Sig 12Ss in down the line. Affordable, good vintage sound, and shallow enough with a small enough magnet to fit into a tight amp.

Was just curious to get some opinions. Really just looking to get a nice Velvet Underground tone out of it that could keep up with a drummer if I need to use it in a pinch.

mad dog
02-02-2010, 08:24 PM
You won't have any problem keeping up with a drummer with that amp. Assuming you have half way decent tubes in there and the amp is healthy, lack of volume will not be an issue.

The speakers I should have tried with my 1336 are Jensen C12PS, the small magnet ceramics from the 60s. Not the loudest ceramics, but they sound so nice. (Had one in a Magnatone M10A, now have two in a valco made Gretsch 6165.) I'm curious how that amp would do with ceramic speakers ... should you find any that fit.

Maruuk
02-02-2010, 09:07 PM
http://www.gbase.com/files/store_images/gear/2276413/p1_uwkvylgo0_ss.jpg
Gorgeous amp!

LowWatt
02-02-2010, 09:28 PM
So it's my understanding that with the dual transformers it's like having two 2x6L6 amps and less like one 4x6L6 amp.

Does this mean I have to do any bridging of the channels to be using all four power tubes and both speakers?

LowWatt
02-03-2010, 09:19 AM
Thanks guys...now the big question. There are both a 1396 and 1484 available to me right now.

Ignoring everything about price/value/etc... and thinking about just tone, which one would you rather have?

Keep in mind I'm going for a trashy blues/garage rock sound and quality trem is definitely needed on 3 of my songs.

thedroid
02-03-2010, 01:21 PM
Never played a 1396, but I love my 1484. Great garage amp. Seems like the 1396 might be a better investment if they're the same price. They made a lot more of the blue wallpaper tolex models in the 148x family. But you can't beat the sound of a good 1484.

LowWatt
02-03-2010, 02:19 PM
Leaning towards the 1396 now. The price for the 1484 ended up coming in about $200 more than I was willing to pay. The 1396 has non-original speakers, but is cheap enough that even if I order some Webers to improve the crap speakers in it right now, I'll still be $200 less than the 1484 after everything.

Sorry lots of numbers there, but long story short, in my deal the 1396 is a good value and the 1484 isn't.