5150 vs. TripleXXX

[Fragle]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

well, i'm playing my engl blackmore as i'm typing this, and compared to the 5150 it has less gain, but more USABLE gain, WAY less bottom end chunk, and less midrange. at low volumes i like it better than the 5150. at high volumes i don't, as i've stated countless times. it's quite a bit clearer than the 5150, though....i can see why some people prefer them over the 5150. if it wasn't as bright i'd keep the engl, surely. if i could get my hands on a darker version with more bottom end and punch i'd go for that one, too, as engl amps are certainly higher-end than peaveys.
well....actually this was kinda off topic [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

anyways, i'd just like to know if and how the XXX is comparable to a 5150 soundwise. solid state and fake sounding are two expressions i've often heared when talking about the XXX, and reading you posts above it seems to be true....
however, some people also say the powerball is ss and fake sounding....and i agree. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[jgcable]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

Keep in mind that its pretty hard to find a bad review on the 5150. They also sound even better loud. With that said... my Mesa Boogie Mark III eats 5150's for lunch in every respect. Side by side there is really no comparison. The Mark III does EVERYTHING better.
Just thought I would throw that in.
It sounds to me like you need to keep messin with your Engl. It seems by your posts that you really like it and that it is very close to what you are looking for. I would keep trying things with it until you figure it out. Its a great amp. I would love to own one. Many of us would!

[Twisteramps]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

We all hear things differently... I prefer the 5150 overdrive to Mark series mesa by far, and I never thought the XXX sounded solid state - now, the powerballs sound solid state to me! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

5150 is a killer head, I just didn't like how it was essentially a one channel amp. The IIs that I played didn't sound as good as the 5150 I had. For all out aggression, the 5150 is a great choice. One amp I've heard that really smacks it around though is the Avenger, but again, it's all just opinion. Best thing to do would be to try to gather the amps you're interested in together and compare them.

Pete

[aldog1330]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

Fragle, out of curiosity, how much do the Engl Savages run over there? I thought I read somewhere that they were a darker sounding amp, but still being high gain, extremely versatile, and having the distinct Engl sound. In the US I think you can get one for $2100 new, which is only about $500 more than the Blackmore. If I had the money, it would be the amp I own. Maybe you just aren't driving the right model yet, but you stopped by the right dealer for you.

[Fragle]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

the savage is 1650 euro new, and around 1200 used i think. the blackmore is 1250 new and i paid 750 used for mine.
the blackmore is said to be a stripped down savage....my take on engls is that i don't quite know about the fireball, but the powerball sounds like crap to my ears, my blackmore is too bright (jgcable, actually the 2210 is closer to what i'm looking for than the engl. the engl is exactly what i need when it comes to features, though), and the only band i've ever seen that used a savage had the best live sound i've ever experienced. but then again, the pa was awesome [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]
maybe i should give the fireball a shot. the savage is overkill for me....

i've said it countless times, i like my 2210, it's just not brutal enough. it needs more punch in the lows, more gain for leads, and a second master volume. i'd mod it, but that kills the resale value so i'm really hesitating. if i had it modded it would be a depth (sp?) mod similar to the resonance on the 5150, a second master volume and a gain boost, controllable by using the clean channel's controls - i never use the damn thing anyway.

[siggy14]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

[ QUOTE ]
To me.. and maybe I am in the minority, but I felt the XXX sounded transistorized. It almost has a SS tone to it.
The 5150 on the other hand is a monster and sounds nothing like transistors. Since I owned a 2210 and I have owned a few 5150's I can say with some experience that if you are looking for a 2210 with alot more chunk and bottom the 5150 is a great choice. Its almost as loud too. The 5150 gets a little noisy at extreme gain settings but I did serious heavy shit with mine with the gain on 6. The 5150 has absolutely NO FUZZ at all. Its all gain and a very big sounding amp. Again.. I like the 5150II better than the original block letter 5150 because it has a better clean channel. The lead channels on both of them are VERY similar if not identical to my ears.

[/ QUOTE ]

I second that motion, when i first got my XXX i loved it, but then as i played it more i started getting alot more sterile and started to sound to SS for me. i eventually sold it off and i still have my peavey 5150-2.

One of the biggest users of the XXX was noodles, then he got a mesa tremoverb and the last time i talked to him he was thinking of selling the XXX but that was awhile ago so i am not sure what direction he is in now.

[eaeolian]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

I suspect he may be buying a new amp soon, but that's just me...

For the record, I MUCH prefer the 5150 to the TripleXXX - it has much more presence and "jump". As JG said, as it gets louder, it gets better, too...

[sevser]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

The crunch ch on the XXX is what I use in my death metal band and it crushes. I run it side by side with Steves XXL both of us have the same cab and the XXX sound much different. You not only need to play with the active eq but, you also need to mess with the dampening switch. The lead ch is much different than the crunch too...Not just more gain like most amps.

I keep hearing this SS ref and I dont get it. I found the XXX to sound like a 5150 with more low end. When it's cranked the ground rumbles. Take it from people who have use on extensively. The XXX covers a lot of ground especially in metal.

[edit] I have to agree with Michael on the presence. I thought the XXX needed that for more shaping so I tried messing with my ME-50 in the loop and although the ME-50 is not what I would use for eq-ing I could tell an eq would be very usefull there. I will probably pick up a GE-7.

[charvelguy]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

I think the clean channel sounds more 'transistor' and flat in the eq spectrum than anything else. Peavey should have made the clean channel active as well IMO as the EQ responds so much different relative to the rest of the amp. Still, for what it does, it is useable and not bad. It just lacks warmth so I run switchable graphic on it as I find it lacking in the low end I want.

[jgcable]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

[ QUOTE ]
I think the clean channel sounds more 'transistor' and flat in the eq spectrum than anything else. Peavey should have made the clean channel active as well IMO as the EQ responds so much different relative to the rest of the amp. Still, for what it does, it is useable and not bad. It just lacks warmth so I run switchable graphic on it as I find it lacking in the low end I want.

[/ QUOTE ]

+1. You said it better than I did. I agree. [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

[DSS3]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

To me, the XXX is like the bastard son of a 5150 and Rectifier, with a touch of Marshall thrown in.

Sounds godly, IMO, especially with EL34's.

That said, I'm right now considering on picking up a 5150 or a Recto for to cover that end of the spectrum, or selling the XXX and getting a 5150 and Recto.

Nothing gets the 5150 tone besides a 5150. I'd say to get that and a good tubescreamer to run infront (clean boost mode, drive close to nil, tone at a nuetral setting, level almost full tilt.

[charvelguy]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

I think I can understand where you are coming from. Obviously different amp circuits respond with different character. Outside of the clean channel, the amp doesn't that 'transistor' to me as I get way to much useable harmonic feedback from the Crunch and Ultra channels. I own a few solid state amps..including that little Brian May special. Plugged into a cab and ran at the same volume (which I've tested both at moderate home/b-room volumes) ... a solid state amp would respond with much less hamonic overtones and feedback even with the gain up to rediculous on the Vox.

I used to think an old Music Man I had sounded and felt 'transistorized' compared to a '73 Super Lead I was using. The MM was my backup head which I bought off a guy I used to run sound for. It sounded killer thru the PA, very punchy and dynamic. When the Super went into the shop for a couple weeks I had to make the MM work.
The MM had a SS preamp, and also a depth swith and alot of low mid punch that the Marshall could not replicate especially when I drove it with an EQ.

The Marshall however was an easier playing amp with alot of headroom and a very nice airy mid-it sounded, responded, and felt alot more like a valve amp. I found leads to be more of a fight n challenge on the MM as opposed to the Marshall, so I defnitely needed to work with the sound to make that happen so it was useable.

When I got the Marshall back, it had the new JCM800 series output and it just lacked the character the previous JMP drake had. I was very disappointed. By now I had gotten used to the MM as a few weeks had lapsed. The sound man and the band was happy even tho I would be looking at it on occasion like.."comon"! The Marshall used to clean up nice too when you rolled off your guitar volume then just get that nasty mid snarl Marshalls are famous for when you cranked it up again. The MM had a hard time being that smooth, I know it contradicts itself..but while it had punch and dynamics, the responsiveness of the amp from a clean to dirty felt alot differnt...I had to roll mids off the eq and do little adjustments to get a useable response. I basically ended up giving the Marshall away on consignment as I needed money. The market was flooded with them and people were dumping their JMP's in favor of the newer master vol heads and JCM series.

Anyways..sorry for the little off track rant there.

The 5150 to me was Peavey's affordable answer to the Soldano market and from playing those amps..it was aimed at the the HR series specifically IMO. Essentially a nice one trick pony head with some useable features you could vaguely call a clean channel.

[justiceforall58]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

I have a ENGL PB, and the other guitarist in my band has a XXX, i know ALot about this head, and can compair it to my ENGL, bottom line is the ENGL blows it away, its More brutal, its tighter, and the clean is 10x better than the XXX. i recommend a PB but its your amp so shoot for what interests you.

[charvelguy]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

From the clips I've heard..the powerball is capable of a very brutal amp tone and also a very useable transparent clean..it also costs 2-3x more than your typical Peavey XXX which I think is more aimed at the recto market. For a metal amp tho.. Engl PB is a versatile amp with some nice features built in. I'd probably spend the 1200-1300 used on one.
For that money tho..now you're getting into Bogner, CAE, Cornford and the like territory.

Alot of this is like comparing apples to oranges for some. Eventually you get what you want or you get what you want that you can afford or want to spend. I personally would have a tough time spending the 3000+ for a Diezel here.
Much cheaper in Europe.

[horns666]

Re: 5150 vs. TripleXXX

you want that 5150 to kick your ass even more..

you know what I'm gonna say..

you need a --- in the loop!!! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

5150 ...best bang for the buck for metal! [img]/images/graemlins/toast.gif[/img]

I still need to throw down with my dude at GC..Uber Vs Powerball.. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]