Fryette Ultralead/CLX/Sig X

[itsgoodnow]

Hey All,

I recently purchased a Fryette CLX and am digging it.

I was wondering how the Sig:X compared to the CLX and the Ultralead. I used to own a minty loaded ultralead (and let it go, like a moron) and am wondering how all 3 compared/differed and if it would be stupid/redundant to add a sig:x or ultralead to the CLX. Thanks all.

 

[OldGtrGuy]

Hey All,

I recently purchased a Fryette CLX and am digging it.

I was wondering how the Sig:X compared to the CLX and the Ultralead. I used to own a minty loaded ultralead (and let it go, like a moron) and am wondering how all 3 compared/differed and if it would be stupid/redundant to add a sig:x or ultralead to the CLX. Thanks all.

I dont think it would be redundant but I love VHT. The sig X should be less aggressive but still aggressive and also cover more ground. Like all the bells and whistles.

As far as the UL idk, you should have no problem offloading one if you find it's too similar to the CLX. I havent played that one but I think it is the same amp just "master built" Just going off what I remember from the Fryette forums and take that with a grain of salt.

 

[itsgoodnow]

I dont think it would be redundant but I love VHT. The sig X should be less aggressive but still aggressive and also cover more ground. Like all the bells and whistles.

As far as the UL idk, you should have no problem offloading one if you find it's too similar to the CLX. I havent played that one but I think it is the same amp just "master built" Just going off what I remember from the Fryette forums and take that with a grain of salt.

Thanks for that. I know the CLX and UL are the same controls and preamp, but the power section of the CLX is EL34 and the UL is KT88.

 

[the4thlast1]

I’ve had CLX and Ultralead a couple times. The UL has an impressive low end that is a bit more percussive. Personally I prefer the more traditional midrange of the CLX. In most amps I don’t like the KT88 sound. They are scooped in the middle and have a dry thing going on. If you want the Fryette KT88 sound the Deliverance is an option too.

 

[Apex1Rg7X]

I've owned pretty much every Fryette model over the years except the CLX. They all have their own pro's/con's thats for sure. Between the UL, CL, Sig:X and Deliverance series, I think I prefer the D60 by a wide margin. Sig:X being last.

 

[Devin]

I used to own a Pittbull Classic (the amp they eventually started calling the CLX) and a D60 and my old room mate had a Sig:X

My Classic was by far the driest/stiffest amp of the three

The D60 is my favorite high gain amp of all time, and the Sig:X is kinda sorta in between the two


In order of preference I'd probably say 1 - D60 2 - Sig:X 3 - Classic


I've never gotten to play a UL

 

[TotallyRadGuitars]

I haven't had a CLX/UL yet, but I have your old CL50 GEQ and another CL50 without EQ (but with Reverb), as well as a Sig:X and a PB45

It's not a perfect comparison, but I wouldn't say the Sig:X is any less aggressive than the CL's. It does have a completely different feel while playing it though, if that makes sense. I was a little disappointed in the modes on the Sig:X, they don't make that huge of a difference, but I guess it doesn't hurt to have the option. The part I do really like is the ability to combine the boost with or without the high gain switch - much like a CL, the Sig:X has that switch to engage an extra tube gain stage. They both have a boost too - except the Sig:X has a gain knob to adjust the boost and you can make it much more prominent (or not) than the CL's boost, which I usually leave off. The Sig:X with "more" and "boost" definitely gets more saturated than the CL... hard to describe exactly but the palm mutes feel a bit "wider," as in, I feel more bass and treble in them, while I feel like the CL's are more "middy." Of course, the GEQ on the CL can bring the bass or highs back in as much as you want, which you can't do without a pedal GEQ on the Sig:X.

But if you're looking for an excuse to buy one, I would say it is not at all redundant and you should definitely do it. It's definitely different enough that it doesn't step on the CL's toes for certain sounds. Most importantly I guess, I think the Sig:X is a lot more versatile in the mid-gain realm - it can do a very good Marshall impression, it's voiced brighter, and the adjustable boost is really useful for classic rock type stuff. That's where I think it excels over the CL, don't get me wrong those CL's are some of my top amps of all time, but they are a little too dark at times, to my ear. That's not the case at all with the Sig:X.

 

[Greazygeo]

I used to own a Pittbull Classic (the amp they eventually started calling the CLX) and a D60 and my old room mate had a Sig:X

My Classic was by far the driest/stiffest amp of the three

The D60 is my favorite high gain amp of all time, and the Sig:X is kinda sorta in between the two


In order of preference I'd probably say 1 - D60 2 - Sig:X 3 - Classic


I've never gotten to play a UL

I also had a Classic for a short time. Talking to Steve about it he said it was an old design and not representative of current models. This would have been early 2000’s.

 

[OldGtrGuy]

I also had a Classic for a short time. Talking to Steve about it he said it was an old design and not representative of current models. This would have been early 2000’s.

That's another thing to look out for with VHT in general. Especially the Ultra Lead. At some point, I think early 2000s maybe they made a big design change with the phase inverter.

The pre change Ultraleads are not as aggressive. I had one and my 100CL blew it out of the water. I'd say be sure the PI is an ax7 and not an au7 if you get a UL (the older models also had a kt88/6l6 switch on the back)

 

[RedB4Black]

I had latest versions of the CLX and UL at same time (both from 2011 and built a few months apart). They pretty much sounded 98% the same. UL having a slight bigger bottom end and the CLX more mids. I preferred the UL and sold the CLX… but I’d have been happy either way.

The D60II is a killer amp. I’d recommend that over the Sig-X

 

[Greazygeo]

That's another thing to look out for with VHT in general. Especially the Ultra Lead. At some point, I think early 2000s maybe they made a big design change with the phase inverter.

The pre change Ultraleads are not as aggressive. I had one and my 100CL blew it out of the water. I'd say be sure the PI is an ax7 and not an au7 if you get a UL (the older models also had a kt88/6l6 switch on the back)

The phase inverter is the main difference in the CLX/UL if I remember right. UL uses a two tube setup and the CLX only the standard one tube.
Mine was the dual tube with the KT88/6L6 switch.

 

[shredhead7]

I've always loved this tone, and Chris has said that it was a Pitbull. Those that own the various VHT's/Freyettes, does this sound like a typical VHT amp? I've always chased this tone with Marshall variants.

 

[itsgoodnow]

I've always loved this tone, and Chris has said that it was a Pitbull. Those that own the various VHT's/Freyettes, does this sound like a typical VHT amp? I've always chased this tone with Marshall variants.

Those tones can be copped with a pittbull variant. My UL Sounded a bit drier than this on its own, but perhaps doubled or with a pedal it would be in this realm. It sounds like my cl/clx honestly.

 

[shredhead7]

Those tones can be copped with a pittbull variant. My UL Sounded a bit drier than this on its own, but perhaps doubled or with a pedal it would be in this realm. It sounds like my cl/clx honestly.

Thanks! I know he has a lot of instructional videos from Japan with his Suhr modded Marshall, so I assumed it was always that amp. But I asked him about this song in particular and he said it was a VHT, that he regrets selling.

 

[itsgoodnow]

Thanks! I know he has a lot of instructional videos from Japan with his Suhr modded Marshall, so I assumed it was always that amp. But I asked him about this song in particular and he said it was a VHT, that he regrets selling.

Nice. I have a CAA OD SE+ which is channel 3 of the 3+SE and what was the original Aldrich mod on a marshall (and was the se lead mod to a marshall, also is in the suhr production se-100 amp). The other mod he did was the SE crunch (which was channel 2 and is really kind of like a frequency trimmed jcm 800--its the dookie from greenday amp). Neither sound anything like the VHT for comparison. Those mods are fairly loose, thick, and saturated amps (the se plus variant in particular). The fryette is really tight, percussive, and dry. The recording is very impressive if it was with a VHT because those amps leave you nowhere to hide if you are having a remotely off day lol. The CAA I could play a few drinks deep and no one would be able to tell the difference

 

[jabps]

I had latest versions of the CLX and UL at same time (both from 2011 and built a few months apart). They pretty much sounded 98% the same. UL having a slight bigger bottom end and the CLX more mids. I preferred the UL and sold the CLX… but I’d have been happy either way.

The D60II is a killer amp. I’d recommend that over the Sig-X

Agreed. Had the UL myself and the Sig X. Oddly enough at one time I was in love with the Sig X, had a little more squish to it, preferred it's high gain tone to the UL (more forgiving) fantastic clean tones and overall just preferred it to the UL. However my second time around the Sig just didn't do it for me anymore.

I think if I was going Fryette again I'd go old Deliverance with the loop.

 

[PeteLaramee]

I've wanted a CLX for a long time, but never pulled the trigger. I had a sigx, a classic, a gp3 w/2/50/2 power amp, and 3 different ULs. They all got me about 90-95% there. Some day...

 

[MatrixClaw]

I couldn't get enough gain out of the SigX for the life of me. Didn't matter how hard I picked, the only way to do it was to crank both gains and then it became super muddy. The first channel is great, though.

UL is cool but I just don't love KT88s. They always sound hollow to me. I don't think you'd be missing much with the CL-X. I'd get a Deliverance.

 

[itsgoodnow]

I couldn't get enough gain out of the SigX for the life of me. Didn't matter how hard I picked, the only way to do it was to crank both gains and then it became super muddy. The first channel is great, though.

UL is cool but I just don't love KT88s. They always sound hollow to me. I don't think you'd be missing much with the CL-X. I'd get a Deliverance.

I think a d60 is in my future. I usually do not like kt88 for the record which is why I think I got rid of the ultra lead the first time. The clx is verrrrry similar but doesn’t seem to have the hollow round thing.

 

[MatrixClaw]

I think a d60 is in my future. I usually do not like kt88 for the record which is why I think I got rid of the ultra lead the first time. The clx is verrrrry similar but doesn’t seem to have the hollow round thing.

Yeah, that's why I sold my UL as well. Always thought I'd like the CLX a lot, but never tried one as they seem much more rare. I liked the 50/CL the best but the Deliverance was very cool, I just needed more than one channel at the time.