SLO 30..Talk me off the ledge!

ZEN Amps said:
I tried a friend's and my old HR50+ kinda blew it away, maybe check one out on the used market first before shelling out big money for a small amp (y)
Click to expand...
I had an HR 100+ years back; when I got my first SLO it was no contest. The HR sounded like a budget clone version of the real deal. Not on the same level at all.
If the SLO 30 is not on the level of the HR 50, hard pass on the 30.

OP, I'd just wait it out a little until you can grab the SLO 100. They sound good at lower volume, great turned up AND take boosts like a good Marshall. Not many amps have the bloom and clarity of the SLO.
 
I was initially enamored by the HR25 when it first came outas well but the more I listended to it it just sounded like a smallish amp, the tone was great you can really hear the difference when it's next to a 50 or 100 watter IMHO.
 
Racerxrated said:
I had an HR 100+ years back; when I got my first SLO it was no contest. The HR sounded like a budget clone version of the real deal. Not on the same level at all.
If the SLO 30 is not on the level of the HR 50, hard pass on the 30.

OP, I'd just wait it out a little until you can grab the SLO 100. They sound good at lower volume, great turned up AND take boosts like a good Marshall. Not many amps have the bloom and clarity of the SLO.
Click to expand...
You know what I've heard this a number of times but I've not had that experience. Last year we had an older SLO in a local guy was hoping to sell us, so we tested it out against the Hot Rod, recorded some clips and had a really close listen.

It was quite an eye-opener really, about $2000 (aussie) between them and the differences were pretty minimal both in the room and in the recordings. I can't say which one sound better - they were just slightly different. The SLO seller seemed a bit put off by how similar they were but he left happy - we bought a Triple Rec and 5150 off him instead :rock:
 
Racerxrated said:
I had an HR 100+ years back; when I got my first SLO it was no contest. The HR sounded like a budget clone version of the real deal. Not on the same level at all.
If the SLO 30 is not on the level of the HR 50, hard pass on the 30.
Click to expand...
I had an HR50+ for years before finally getting an SLO. The SLO obviously sounds better but not 2x better but it was more than twice the price.
 
ZEN Amps said:
You know what I've heard this a number of times but I've not had that experience. Last year we had an older SLO in a local guy was hoping to sell us, so we tested it out against the Hot Rod, recorded some clips and had a really close listen.

It was quite an eye-opener really, about $2000 (aussie) between them and the differences were pretty minimal both in the room and in the recordings. I can't say which one sound better - they were just slightly different. The SLO seller seemed a bit put off by how similar they were but he left happy - we bought a Triple Rec and 5150 off him instead :rock:
Click to expand...

The thing is that the HR's are built inexpensively next to the complete overbuild that is the SLO, but they're still built to a standard superior (or on par) to most company's flagships. Really, that's a bunch of the SLO cost: complete overbuild for a guitar amplifier. Of course, with different transformers there'll be a minor difference in sound, but it's not huge. The 2-channel HR's lack the clean switch, so you only have crunch, but the crunch actually cleans up to those clean sounds. It's just a PITA as it's very sensitive on the gain at those levels.

If you ever run across the single channel HR, check them out. Despite the name, they're a completely different amplifier. They are the hot-rodded SLO modded Marshall and sound it. Cool amps.
 
Racerxrated said:
I had an HR 100+ years back; when I got my first SLO it was no contest.
Click to expand...
godgrinder said:
I had an HR50+ for years before finally getting an SLO. The SLO obviously sounds better but not 2x better but it was more than twice the price.
Click to expand...
I certainly believe your experiences, so am interested in your observations.

What exactly are you guys noticing? Points if you don't use words like bloom, swirl or 3D... I have an engineering background so please use words my left brain will understand!
 
ZEN Amps said:
I certainly believe your experiences, so am interested in your observations.

What exactly are you guys noticing? Points if you don't use words like bloom, swirl or 3D... I have an engineering background so please use words my left brain will understand!
Click to expand...
Uh, well, how about it just sounds much better? The HR 100 that I had is a cool amp; I enjoyed it while I had it. Comparing it to the SLO I had, without using those other words....I would say the HR is flat sounding or kind of sterile in comparison. That's not to say it is a sterile or flat sounding amp; not at all. But the SLO to me just has better clarity, a sweeter or less harsh high end..not that the HR is harsh...I'd maybe compare it to the differences between a Mesa Mark 2C+ to a Mark III....you think the Mark III sounds good until you play a C+....and the III seems very flat or just un-dynamic in comparison.
It's hard to put sonic nuances down in words sometimes...some guys say the SLO has a more Hi-Fi tone; that's a good description. Another might be comparing a 2203 with a boost pedal to a NMV JMP with a boost or two...the 800 hits like a hammer while the NMV hits like a sledgehammer with better clarity than the 2203.
 
ZEN Amps said:
I certainly believe your experiences, so am interested in your observations.

What exactly are you guys noticing? Points if you don't use words like bloom, swirl or 3D... I have an engineering background so please use words my left brain will understand!
Click to expand...
The HR100 or 50+ aren’t going to capture the clean channel being in circuit but 180* out of phase to the lead channel when the lead channel is selected for the original SLO revisions.

Either you love the sound of a SLO or hate it. They went to relays for the BAD SLO so the tone, albeit claimed to be the same, isn’t due to modifications made for whatever reason to include a different switching method.
 
ZEN Amps said:
I certainly believe your experiences, so am interested in your observations.

What exactly are you guys noticing? Points if you don't use words like bloom, swirl or 3D... I have an engineering background so please use words my left brain will understand!
Click to expand...
I had the same experiences as those 2 guys with the SLO just sounding a lot better than the HR’s and have done the comparisons multiple times. I actually remember even liking the Avenger more than the HR, but not as much as the SLO. Honestly I don’t think we really can easily describe why it sounds better other than using those terms. I guess maybe I can also say more clarity or hearing more detail in the notes. It’s like asking me to describe why fresh squeezed oj tastes better than the from concentrate version. It’s been admittedly though about a decade now since I’ve last compared them. If it was fresh in my head I might be able to describe it more concretely

Not saying you’re like this, but those of engineering or more technical backgrounds I think sometimes listen for different things in their sound than I might be. They often listen more for functional stuff like balance, eq curve and whatnot rather than just how complex, rich or beautiful the actual core tone is. The latter is imo what usually distinguishes gear in their various price ranges, except for maybe the guitars where too many guys sadly don’t judge them much on actual tone, but more so on looks, playability, fit, finish, fretwork, etc

FWIW, I’ve not yet tried any BAD made Soldano’s, but have tried at some point pretty much all the various models that came before except the HR25 and currently have an ‘89 SLO that I love
 
braintheory said:
Not saying you’re like this, but those of engineering or more technical backgrounds I think sometimes listen for different things in their sound than I might be. They often listen more for functional stuff like balance, eq curve and whatnot rather than just how complex, rich or beautiful the actual core tone is. The latter is imo what usually distinguishes gear in their various price ranges, except for maybe the guitars where too many guys sadly don’t judge them much on actual tone, but more so on looks, playability, fit, finish, fretwork, etc
Click to expand...
My background merges the best worst of both worlds, a guitar player with a penchant for the technical. So I try and balance both afflictions with an open mind. We've likely all dealt with techs that tell you something sounds fine because it meets technical standards, but sounds like shit. Conversely many of us are guilty for claiming that $100 NOS tube or $300 pickup we installed is changing lives and has lifted the proverbial blanket, when deep down we know the difference is minimal.

I've found there's a happy balance of the two worlds, and why I asked about this particular amp comparison. Cheers guys, always nice to hear of others experiences without histrionics and insults being thrown around.
 
Get the 100 watter. Sell the car if need be:thumbsup:

202576708_10226065291042787_3934747694028391563_n.jpg
 
I’ve had the SLO 30, it’s got a great mid range grind to it but it means it’s a very honest amp, not much squash in it so if you’re a sloppy player it will show. A couple of things put me off, I loved the clean and the crunch mode but you can only use one or the other and physically the amp felt a bit cheap considering it’s price, hated the grills being plastic and mine also rattled. I ended up with a bogner 3534, more my kind of sound, more flexible and built better.
 
Manxmusicman said:
I’ve had the SLO 30, it’s got a great mid range grind to it but it means it’s a very honest amp, not much squash in it so if you’re a sloppy player it will show. A couple of things put me off, I loved the clean and the crunch mode but you can only use one or the other and physically the amp felt a bit cheap considering it’s price, hated the grills being plastic and mine also rattled. I ended up with a bogner 3534, more my kind of sound, more flexible and built better.
Click to expand...
That
`s Soldano in general.
 
Ok, I'm over it! Thanks for all the feedback. Money better spent elsewhere on a head with better features at that price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rck
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top