M60 vs M90 tone wise

Shark Diver

New member
Thinking about adding a M90 or M60 to my rack, which now has a SLO 100 in it. Just wondering what the opinions are in the tone differences between the M90 and M60? And which might best compliment the SLO?

My initial research suggest to me that the M90 would give me a great clean, and the OD channel would be both a great Brown sound and can be boosted for a heavier gain than the SLO. I love the lead tone on my SLO so I wouldn't be looking to get a lead sound, even though reviews say that the Elmwoods do that very well. Also, I get a great blues crunch with the SLO clean. So, I am mainly trying to get a Marshally, classic rock type tone, a more modern metal type tone, and a Fendery clean tone.

Any advice would be appreciated.
 
You will get way more headroom and brown sound out of the M90 than the M60. Give Rob (Tone Merchants) a tick and he can give you a better recommendation. I too was heading toward the M60 just because of the EL34 voicing but went with the M90 after talking to him. But, the KT88's blow me away. You won't need any external boosting as the M90 (and 60) have dual masters and a drive on each channel. You can pretty much dial in the level the saturation and boost you are after. You can get brown and you can get a modern driven JCM800 out of Ch.1 with the gain/drive all the way up. Ch.2 picks up where 1 lets off and it goes from mild to wild from there.

Steve
 
Shark Diver":2gw12qhz said:
Thinking about adding a M90 or M60 to my rack, which now has a SLO 100 in it. Just wondering what the opinions are in the tone differences between the M90 and M60? And which might best compliment the SLO?

My initial research suggest to me that the M90 would give me a great clean, and the OD channel would be both a great Brown sound and can be boosted for a heavier gain than the SLO. I love the lead tone on my SLO so I wouldn't be looking to get a lead sound, even though reviews say that the Elmwoods do that very well. Also, I get a great blues crunch with the SLO clean. So, I am mainly trying to get a Marshally, classic rock type tone, a more modern metal type tone, and a Fendery clean tone.

Any advice would be appreciated.

See this...

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=46236

Steve
 
Shark - you are all about those Suhr guitars! Mine is in transit to here from Tone Merchants. Should have it tomorrow or next day. Looking forward to it.
 

Attachments

  • Suhr Modern.jpg
    Suhr Modern.jpg
    51.4 KB · Views: 1,193
Hey Shark,

I see great minds think alike, I'm also thinking about getting an M90 or a Cameron CCV-100.

Chuck
 
Hey Dave

u have a few options. the m60 and 90 will do exactly what you are looking for it to do and would be a great compliment to the soldano. another option would be to get an M90 and put el34s in it like the one I have at the shop. It is also biased slightly colder than normal. This gives it a tighter sound to compliment the bigger trannies and sounds much bigger than a normal M60 but retains the characteristics of the M60 w? el34s. These are incredible 4 channel amps. Come by and check it out
 
Seitz333":1srt9g6e said:
Hey Shark,

I see great minds think alike, I'm also thinking about getting an M90 or a Cameron CCV-100.

Chuck


Yeah, I've heard great things about the Cameron too.

I really want to try the Elmwoods though. I love rack amps.

So, Rob what is the tonal differences between a M60 and M90 as they sit with the EL34s and KT88s respectively. I have scoured the net for info, but even in a video with Jan - all I can find is the tubes are different along with the tranny. But that doesn't tell me about the voicing differences because since the tranny is different just knowing the tube differences isn't helping. Wattage isn't an issue because I'm sure both are plenty loud. Of course I might be able to get some power tube break up faster in the M60.

I really want something that has the articulation of the SLO with a tighter, heavy, more modern gain - and a really Fendery clean. Diezels are too compressed for me, and I don't like the cleans better than the SLO. A Suhr PT 100 would be perfect, but unless John will make me a rack amp I'm probably looking at the Elmwood. Which Elmwood is more like the PT?

I'm gonna run 2 SLOs (maybe 1 if the Elmwood can cover the ground I need) and I want a third amp just for those 2 tones above. If it can do more that's a bonus! Gonna ditch the Fish, I think a Suhr or Elmwood would have better cleans, though I got a very good heavy, tight, modern tone from the Strato channel on the Fish.
 
To my ears, the voicings are exactley the same. One just sounds a bit bigger with more clean headroom. I use own both the M90 and M60 at the same time. I liked the M60 cleans a little bit better and the M90 for heavy chunk. The M60 and M90 leads were even although I was able to hit the harmonics a little easier with the M60. One of the reasons I love the elmwood so much besides its versatility, is that it has a new and unique voice i havent heard before and it sounds incredible at low volumes. It has this big fat tight bottom end with a high end that can either be real smooth or evil sounding. Also, it has one of the most responsive eqs I have ever heard. So knowing pretty much what u like and your current set up, we can dial in a real nice fender clean and then add the drive for a nice crunch. On channel 2 we can do a nice tight brown marshall crunch/lead and then add the 2nd drive on channel 2 for the over the top evil sounds on the 2nd master and then to top it all off, we kick the soldano at the same time all in stereo. :rock: Thats the way I would do your rig Dave.

One of the best tones Ive heard was when george Lynch was sound checking at tone merchants. He had his 68 plexi dimed and we added the M90 because george likes to run 2 amps at once. When we added and kicked in the M90's heavy channel and George started rippin it up, me and his tech were almost in tears.
 
Back
Top