From tremolu–(at)–ol.com Fri Jun 16 13:52:50 CDT 1995
Article: 54702 of rec.music.makers.guitar
Path: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: tremolu–(at)–ol.com (Tremolux)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar
Subject: Re: Q: Fender Pro or Pro Reverb
Date: 16 Jun 1995 02:28:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: roo–(at)–ewsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <3rr8as$bj--(at)--ewsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <3rq11n$s6--(at)--nramp.arc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: tremolu–(at)–ol.com (Tremolux)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

A buddy of mine picked-up a BF Pro Amp at a show for $350. It was good
cosmetically, but the C15N needed a recone job. Also there were some
minor circuit mods that I took out for him, and put it back to stock.
That amp sounds great and is LOUD. All you need is an external reverb.
Since it uses the same output transformer as the Vibroverb, and the plate
voltages are CLOSE, power is nearly as high.

The most massively FAT tone comes from a real BF Vibroverb with the JBL.

Regards.