5150 and SLO schematics compared...

[Twisteramps]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

No offense box, but you were probably pooping in diapers the first time I said "sketchy" [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Pete

[Firebird V]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

[img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/poke.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Boxcar Willie 84]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[slo100]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

My feeling is the everyone pretty much stole from someone else. This can be traced all the way back to the original Bassmans which came from some RCA receiving manual. The Bassman circuit started it all.

The key is who does it the best. The basics are all the same, the formulas for getting there are where the differences lie.

Mike Soldano spent a lot of time modding Marshalls and fixing Boogies, Oranges, Laneys, and HiWatts. He did not start out as an engineer. He tinkered around and learned as he went and the SLO was the culmination of all that experience, knowledge, and tinkering. He took bits and pieces from each, decided on a specific quality of components, and put it all together in one masterpiece of an amp. From what I have read, the SLO's roots came from MKII Boogies, Orange Overdrive Heads, and Master Lead Marshalls. Mike just did it better than anyone else.

Another fellow named Lee Jackson made quite a name for himself modding and repairing amps. It can be assumed he and Mike S. had the same level of experience in this area. Lee has had a number of amps of his own as well as models he built for other companies and (to me) I have never heard a Lee Jackson amp I even remotely liked. I think it is all about the ears of the designer as well as the designer's philosophy of components, quality, and build.

Peavey has a whole bunch of stuff they have ripped off. The whole "Classic" series rips Fender tweed amps. (The Classic 50 in 4x10 is actually a great amp which I really like). The XXX amps with the metal grills are obvious attempts to latch on the Rectumfrier rage. The 5150 was a result of taking apart Ed's SLO amps and duplicating them with parts and build techniques suited to mass production Peavey is known for.

The Rectifier, as someone pointed out, was originally an attempt to compete with the SLO and the MKIII Marshall Master Lead heads. Fortunately for Mesa, the nu-metallists latched onto the Rectifier as the amp of choice so it got a new lease on life through all these PRS + Rectifier players started buying en masse. As much as I don't like the tone of Rectifiers, they have carved themselves a niche and are one of the most successful amp lines out there right now, which is great for M/B.

The thing I like about the Soldano is it has/is/always will be regarded as "the" high gain amp to own and one of a kind. The type of players who have used it over the years really points to that. If you think about it, it is really an early 80's era amp with series loop, shared tone stack, few bells and whistles yet it STILL is the supreme being of high gain amplitude. That says something about the forumla Mike came up with way back when. I also think it is cool as hell Mike never decided to come out with an SLOII or tried to update the design to modern specs. That would ruin the amp, the mystique, and the legend.

I have been bashing on mine for years and will never part with it!

[terrax]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

anyone in this thread even own a slo? if so post some mp3's. i'd love to hear it, i'd even like to hear it with the 5150 side by side, with the same guitar, and cab... pepsi challenge?


every soldano i've heard sounds like a buzzsaw, too harsh.

Dave

[rstites]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

I've got one, but no recordings with it that I can put in the public domain. I'll see what I can do sometime. Lately, I've actually been using the Egnater for most things. It's got a high gain channel that holds its own with the SLO, but is significantly different.

The Hot Rods are very nice amps at their price points. They easily compete with Marshalls, Mesa/Boogies, Peaveys, etc. However, their sound is not up with the SLO. Honestly, the difference suprised me. I've played several of the Yamahas that Pete mentions and I actually like them. They do not sound like a Soldano really...about as close as a 5150 for example. I have not played them at volume, but would definitely give one a shot if I was in the market for a sub-$500 all tube two channel head. (They have a nice bonus over the Soldanos of having separate EQ and built in reverb.)

Ross

[Boxcar Willie 84]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

Hey Ross, what models are you reffering to? I'd like to look into those if you can give me some more info that would be cool. Thanks!

[rstites]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

The Yamahas? They're the T50 and T100 (heads) and T50C and T100C (combos). Their claim to fame is that Mike Soldano had some hand in their design. I see them advertised all the time as Soldanos, and then the Yamaha part in small print. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Give one a try and see what you think.

Pete will be along shortly to tell you not to waste your time on one.

[Twisteramps]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

Originally posted by rstites:
The Yamahas? They're the T50 and T100 (heads) and T50C and T100C (combos). Their claim to fame is that Mike Soldano had some hand in their design. I see them advertised all the time as Soldanos, and then the Yamaha part in small print. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Give one a try and see what you think.

Pete will be along shortly to tell you not to waste your time on one.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've heard several people rave about em... the one I had was a lackluster tone coffin. A Peavey Bandit is a better amp than the one I had. And yes, mine was checked by a tech, replaced tubes, biased, etc... it sounded like nails on a chalkboard. HOWEVER, some people love these amps, so what I always say is that you should check it out in person if at all possible. Everyone I know who had one or heard one either loved it or hated it... I think the QC was crap. Has to be some reason why some sounded great and the others were terrible. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

Pete

[skidd]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

The one I played with in the early 90's ripped.But saying that, A guy that played in the same warehouse as us had one and sounded like $hit, so there ya go.

[Chuckracer]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

SLO100 owns one.
Rstites owns one.
I own one.

I wish I could post MP3s, I certainly would. It would eliminate that "Soldanos are too bright" complaint I've heard so many times.

As with any high end amp or rack, it is capable of tremendously horrible sounds if you don't know how to tweak it. It is also extremely sensitive to pickups,Guitar construction, woods, cables, and speakers. The combination has to be spot on. It also has to be run loud to get the goods, so to speak. I keep thinking of Ken playing an SLO and a Triple X back to back in the store and buying the Triple X. I know where he played the SLO, and I know you cannot find the magic at low volumes in that amp. I'm running mine with two output tubes pulled to calm it down just a hair and get to the meat just a tad earlier on the master volume.

I think that's the major difference between mass produced amps and boutique stuff. The mass produced amps have a limited range of sounds available to them so they sound good in the store when anybody plugs in, thereby making a sale. Its not at all unlike Multi Effects Processors with the factory presets that are over the top and designed to sound good amongst the din of a music store, but are not usable in the real world. I'm not saying Triple X's and the like are not usable! Just illustrating my point.

The boutique stuff assumes you have a clue and gives the player more than enough rope to hang his or her self.

My band is back in the studio again this weekend. If I get something I can stomach letting you guys hear, I'll see about posting some song samples.

[ May 07, 2003, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Chuckracer ]

[Twisteramps]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

Originally posted by terrax:
anyone in this thread even own a slo? if so post some mp3's. i'd love to hear it, i'd even like to hear it with the 5150 side by side, with the same guitar, and cab... pepsi challenge?


every soldano i've heard sounds like a buzzsaw, too harsh.

Dave

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ross Stites and Bret (SLO) and Chuckracer all have SLOs. I've heard some HR series and the *gag* Yamahas that sounded terrible.

BTW, I've heard a lot of buzzsaw, harsh sounding 5150s too. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

Pete

[slo100]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

terrax, SLO amps turn a lot of people off due to the fact they are inherently bright and can sound buzzy at low volumes. I would hate my SLO as a practice amp in the bedroom. The magic of the SLO comes when playing with a band. I guess you'd have to experience it but going to battle with bass players, cymbals, and singers the SLO will get you out in front of the mix without having to turn up to extreme volumes like all these new low-end heavy amps have to.

I'll never forget the first time I jammed with a 5150 player who had just bought his amp. He had to turn that SOB up so loud just to be heard because it could not cut to save its life. Amps like that sound killer when you are alone practicing but in the real world of live sound, amps like the SLO are Godsends.

So listening to an MP3 of an SLO probably won't do you much good. It is best if you can find someone who plays live who has one and go check it out in a live situation. If you are not currently in a band or doing any heavy recording (with other people) I would not even bother with an SLO. They are expensive and don't play well by themselves. But there is no other amp like them on the planet! ;-)

[trillian guitars]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

i cant believe the response to this thread....to me its obvious and nothing new....you have got to be nuts or tone deaf to go with a peavey over a soldano.....to get a 5150 to even get close to sounding good, you have to do so much work to it changing bias and even values of resistors......i have never seen anything made by peavey that used quality parts....period.....its kinda funny, cause everyone is trying to chase eddies brown sound and of all the amps, the peavey misses completely.....theres a reason they are such "good deals", but in the end i hope you get your money back when you sell it to get a better amp

i play egnater [img]graemlins/images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

[thingman]

Re: 5150 and SLO schematics compared...

Originally posted by DerekB:
The SLO does nothing for me at all and I would take a 5150 over one anyday cause I am a metal player and the SLO is weak in the Gain department.I was really disappointed when I finally played an SLO a couple weeks ago and felt the tone was overall just dry,harsh and weak.

Derek

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm with ya, I just tried over the weekend and to be honest, the SLO was a good sounding metal amp.. that was it. It sounded good, not knocking it, but the price tag did'nt justify the cost.