|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 7:45:57 GMT -5
I saw someone selling their pro mod on harmony central and it said that it had 3 12ax7's in the pre amp...
now I'm curious..my amp right now has 7 12ax7's all said and done..one for reverb, one for the fx loop, then the remaining five...(four and a phase inverter I guess you'd say?..anyway, there's five more in the pre amp)..
how many pre amp tubes does the QR have?
and that leads me to the question of gain..does more pre amp tubes actually mean more gain? does it even mean 'better' gain? not sure how it works..some said that less pre amp tubes might mean some type of solid state circuitry in there to help with the gain stages...
I always thought that the more tubes you had the more gain..apparently it's not the case?
|
|
|
|
Post by Shawnee on Aug 29, 2005 8:24:22 GMT -5
There is no solid state circuitry in Scott's amps at all.
If I'm not mistaken, the way a tube is made, you can actually get two gain stages from one tube.
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 8:38:32 GMT -5
ahh, gotcha..yeah, someone had said that number of tubes doesn't always equate to gain stages....cus like I said, alotta hi gain amps don't have all that many pre amp tubes..but they have multiple gain stages some how anyway.....
I kinda figured there was no SS in scott's amps, but just something I heard =)
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirrty Craig on Aug 29, 2005 8:54:54 GMT -5
In my experience the more pre-amp tubes the fuzzier the gain. For exmaple the 5150 II, which is a horrid sounding amp has 6 just for the pre-amp. The orginal 5150's had 5, Soldanos have 3 or 4 , classic Marshalls have 3 etc..
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 9:00:01 GMT -5
In my experience the more pre-amp tubes the fuzzier the gain. For exmaple the 5150 II, which is a horrid sounding amp has 6 just for the pre-amp. The orginal 5150's had 5, Soldanos have 3 or 4 , classic Marshalls have 3 etc.. funny you should mention the higher tubes=fizzy gain...my original 5150 was pretty fizzy...mine now has 5 and while it's not fizzy, it's VERY bright...I have to have the treble at about 9 o'clock... the 6505+ does have six as you've said...WTF do you need THAT many pre amp tubes for...lol... so, how many does the splawn have? three I'm guessing being that it's based on a marshall.. as an aside, since you mentioned soldanos....as you well know, the SLO is a rock/metal legend I guess you'd say..and you said you had the opportunity to play your splawn against one...what were the differences? just curious..never played through a soldano and I couldn't afford one even if I wanted to...lol.. |
|
|
|
Post by motrock on Aug 29, 2005 9:33:42 GMT -5
I have personally played my Splawn head to head against a SLO-100. The Splawn won hands down! The Soldano still had the annoying Peavey 5150 fuzz..............if you know what I am saying?! The Splawn sounded like the best Marshall that I have ever played.
All the Splawns have 3 preamp tubes!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirrty Craig on Aug 29, 2005 9:35:19 GMT -5
Well I have to admit I've always liked the SLO, and at the time I made the call to Scott, I had one I was ready to buy. My final choice for my new amp was between the SLO and the Quick Rod. I still may get one someday just for fun when I have lots of money to waste,,LOL
The SLO had one really undesirable charateristic that the QR didn't which helped me make my final choice. It was an annoying high-mid, treble that I could get away from. A lack of warmth that the QR had and a warm chunk that I couldn't get out of the SLO. Alot of people point to Warren DeMartini for how good the SLO sounds, but in fact he used Marshalls on every record until Detonator in '91 or so when he finally recorded with the SLO.
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 9:37:08 GMT -5
yeah, I know what you're saying in regards to fuzz...fuzz is a guitar players mortal enemy! hehe...
I've said it before, but the funny thing is I HATE marshalls...and lemme explain..I don't hate the tones that have been recorded with them over the years....lynch, evh, john norum, jake e lee..these are all guys who's tone I've lvoed and they've all used marshalls..now, everytime I plug into one at a music store, I'm like 'WHY do I keep doing this??'..cause I hate them every single time...lol...
I guess I'm looking for the hot rodded marshall chunk and grind, but I could never get it out of a $2000 marshall..go figure! =)
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 9:39:36 GMT -5
Well I have to admit I've always liked the SLO, and at the time I made the call to Scott, I had one I was ready to buy. My final choice for my new amp was between the SLO and the Quick Rod. I still may get one someday just for fun when I have lots of money to waste,,LOL The SLO had one really undesirable charateristic that the QR didn't which helped me make my final choice. It was an annoying high-mid, treble that I could get away from. A lack of warmth that the QR had and a warm chunk that I couldn't get out of the SLO. Alot of people point to Warren DeMartini for how good the SLO sounds, but in fact he used Marshalls on every record until Detonator in '91 or so when he finally recorded with the SLO. I was just thinkin' as you mentioned warren before I got through your whole sentence: 'waitaminnit...didn't he use marshalls??'..lol...being that he and lynch were evil tone/technique twins separated at birth, I always knew they had similar setups =) I don't like annoying high mid like that...guess you could call it honk or fizz? and it's funny, cuz you and motrok pretty much said the same thing about the SLO =) and those things are EXPENSIVE! |
|
|
|
Post by Dirrty Craig on Aug 29, 2005 9:50:25 GMT -5
EVH also used a SLO on Judgement Day and The Dream is over on F.U.C.K. Imagine how much better those tunes would have sounded with a QR..LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 9:52:43 GMT -5
he did? this I did not know....those are my two favorite songs off of that album..go figure...tone wise though, they don't sound that much different than his peavy...
|
|
|
|
Post by VomHalen on Aug 29, 2005 10:31:42 GMT -5
he did? this I did not know....those are my two favorite songs off of that album..go figure...tone wise though, they don't sound that much different than his peavy... the 5150 was built to sound similar to the SLO...from what i rememeber, the 5150 wasn't used on F.U.C.K. because it wasn't finalized yet. |
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 11:29:02 GMT -5
also news to me...wow, the things ya learn after the fact =)
as an aside, if the SLO sounds like a 5150 (or vice versa) I definetly don't want one...lol..if I liked my 5150 I would still have it ;0)
it seems to be THE metal amp..alotta different bands are using them..but I wonder how many of those are stock and how many have some mod mojo going on
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirrty Craig on Aug 29, 2005 11:59:40 GMT -5
yeah hes right,, many people have said that the 5150 was modeled after the SLO same with the Boogie Rectifiers. I can't 100% confirm that, but its pretty commonly said among the techie types out there.
I will have to say though the SLO sounds worlds better than either a 5150 or a Boogie.
|
|
|
|
Post by shreder75 on Aug 29, 2005 12:03:33 GMT -5
yeah hes right,, many people have said that the 5150 was modeled after the SLO same with the Boogie Rectifiers. I can't 100% confirm that, but its pretty commonly said among the techie types out there. I will have to say though the SLO sounds worlds better than either a 5150 or a Boogie. for the price, I would hope so..lol....didn't much care for my recto either...oh well! I coulda probably bought a couple of bogners if I didn't waste money on amps I didn't like =) NOW, saying that the slo sounds alot better than a 5150 or a boogie, then saying that the QR sounds better than that (which you even said, the slo owner mentioned it) I think it's my kinda amp! I swear, if that dealer doesn't get it in this week, I'm gonna have to take the plunge and buy it....and clutch my chest until it arrives...lol |
|
