belensky
Active member
Diezel Herbert vs. Fryette Pitbull Ultra Lead
A good friend lent me his Fryette Pittbull Ultra Lead and Soldano SLO-100, giving me the chance to compare them with my Diezel Herbert and Mesa Dual Rectifier.
I spent quite a bit of time getting familiar with each amp, learning their quirks and features. I tried different guitars and pickups and recorded a number of riffs to highlight the differences.
I’ll be uploading a series of A/B comparisons so you can hear them for yourself. I mostly focused on rhythm playing because, in a band context, that’s what guitarists do most of the time. There are a few clean and lead samples as well, but my baseline is always rhythm playing—how an amp sits in a mix, handles chord structure, fills out the sound, copes with lower tunings, and glues with bass and drums so the instruments feel like one cohesive unit
For these comparisons, the goal was a fair, apples-to-apples comparison while still letting each amp sound like itself. I tried to dial them so they sounded reasonably similar without stripping away their individual character.
The Pitbull is noticeably more scooped than the Herbert. Not Rectifier-level scooped, but definitely a step in that direction, even without the graphic EQ engaged.
In terms of low end, both amps can produce far more bass than you'd realistically need. The low end remains tight and controllable even when pushed to extremes, although the Ultra Lead starts to flub out a little sooner. The Herbert, paired with a good 4×12, delivers a ridiculous amount of bottom end without breaking a sweat. What's really special about the Herbert is that the lows never get in the way—they're huge, but they don't linger or overwhelm the rest of the sound.
On the top end, the Fryette, thanks to its graphic EQ, can achieve a much more aggressive sizzle. The Diezel, even with the Presence turned all the way up, still sounds fairly natural. Ignoring those extreme settings, both amps can actually be dialed surprisingly close, especially once you hear them in a full mix.
The feel of the two amps is quite different. Using a car analogy, the Fryette feels faster in a straight line, while the Diezel feels faster and easier through tight corners.
If you're playing lots of palm-muted Drop C riffs, the Herbert holds everything together beautifully. This is what people often refer to as "Diezel compression," although it's nothing like a compressor pedal. Chords stay solid, unpleasant harmonics don't fight each other, and the amp already sounds like a finished record.
If the Herbert punches you in the gut, the Fryette slaps you in the face.
Since both amps have three channels, I'll compare them channel by channel.
Clean Channels
The Herbert's clean channel is like a huge grand piano. It stays clean no matter what you throw at it, so if you prefer your cleans to break up naturally, this isn't really that kind of channel—although you can always get there with a boost or compression pedal.
What makes the Herbert's clean channel great is its depth. Single notes have a lot of weight behind them, so clean passages glue together nicely with the bass and drums. The mix never feels hollow in the low mids.
The Ultra Lead's clean channel is a bit more tweakable, but it's also grittier. I'd describe it as more vintage or even slightly lo-fi sounding. It's easier to push into overdrive with hot pickups, pedals, or simply by running the amp very loud, as I did in the video. You can even hear my analog delay producing dirtier repeats compared to the Herbert.
Crunch Channels
The crunch sounds (Herbert Channel 2- and the Ultra Lead's Orange channel in Normal mode) are equally good. The Herbert has a touch more clarity and smoothness, while the Ultra Lead sounds a little rawer and has more bite.
Rhythm Channels
Moving to the main rhythm tones (Herbert Channel 2+ and the Ultra Lead's Orange channel in High Gain mode), the differences become much more obvious.
The Ultra Lead feels faster when playing open chord patterns rather than constant palm-muted riffs. It has a real sense of urgency. The Herbert, going back to my car analogy, handles palm-muted playing a little better and feels more composed under the fingers.
Interestingly, the gain controls behave almost opposite to each other.
On the Herbert, you can dial in much more gain than you'll ever realistically need, and the more gain you add, the easier the amp becomes to play. On the Ultra Lead, it's the opposite. Too much gain starts slowing the amp down.
With the Herbert, you keep adding gain until your engineer, producer, or bandmates tell you to stop. With the Fryette, you add as much gain as the amp still feels comfortable to play.
I wasn’t a huge fan of how the Ultra Lead’s Orange channel seemed to lag slightly behind my pick attack. Maybe that’s what people mean when they describe Fryettes as “honest,” “dry,” or “hard to play,” but I didn’t personally notice a dramatic difference in terms of difficulty. Both amps expose mistakes equally well. The Fryette just feels less composed in the low end, which makes you compensate more with pick angle and how you hit the strings.
The real difference is in the dynamics and voicing. The Herbert is more refined and mix-friendly, while the Fryette is rawer and less compressed, which leaves the low end feeling a little less controlled during palm-muted riffs.
I also noticed that the Fryette responds more dramatically to boost pedals, whereas the Herbert has a strong inherent character that most overdrives end up sounding more like subtle color variations on the "Herbert sound"
Lead Channel
The Fryette's lead channel is slightly colder sounding but has a little more sizzle and clarity. Herbert's Channel 3 is thicker and more liquid. Interestingly, I actually prefer the Fryette's lead channel for rhythm playing over its dedicated rhythm channel. For lead playing, however, I prefer the Herbert. It thickens up beautifully as you move higher up the neck. At this point, though, I'm really splitting hairs. Both lead channels are simply different shades of excellence.
Mid Cut vs. Graphic EQ
Obviously, the Fryette's graphic EQ is far more tweakable. The amp sounds perfectly fine without it, but the graphic EQ definitely unlocks the full Ultra Lead experience. Without it, you're certainly missing part of what makes the amp special.
The EQ lets you compensate for some of the slower low-end frequencies I mentioned on the rhythm channel and makes the amp incredibly aggressive when dialed correctly. On the other hand, it's also very easy to suck the life out of the amp, small tweaks go long way here
One thing I really didn't like is that there's no output level control on the graphic EQ to compensate for volume changes. With subtle adjustments, you can get the amp to have roughly the same perceived volume with the EQ on or off, but once you start making more dramatic changes, you have no way of matching levels. In practice, you end up leaving the EQ permanently on or permanently off. There’s also no LED indicator showing whether the EQ is engaged. You can’t switch it on and off from the front panel, only via the footswitch, but if you forget it, you’ve effectively lost your EQ as well.
The Herbert's Mid Cut is a much more straightforward solution.
It's a single control centered around roughly 500 Hz. The more Mid Cut you apply, the narrower the affected range becomes, so with one knob you're effectively adjusting both the amount of cut and its bandwidth.
An additional Level control lets you compensate for the lost mids, meaning the amp can stay at the same perceived volume with or without Mid Cut engaged. That makes it practical to switch it in and out depending on the song or guitar. With Mid Cut turned all the way down, the Level control even doubles as another channel volume control.
Because switching is so seamless, the Herbert effectively gives you six—or even eight(mk3)—distinct sounds across its three channels.
Most of the time I actually prefer running without Mid Cut, but when I want to supercharge the sound, it's incredibly effective.
Interestingly, it doesn't just remove 500 Hz. It also seems to add a lot of upper-mid bite—or at least that's how I perceive it. Both settings cut through a mix well, although that obviously depends on the rest of the signal chain.
You can still overdo it and suck the life out of the amp, but compared to a full graphic EQ, the Herbert's Mid Cut is much more foolproof.
Another interesting point is that if you really want a full graphic EQ like the Ultra Lead or Mesa Mark series, the Herbert can easily accommodate one. It has three effects loops (serial, MIDI-switchable serial, and parallel). you could easily dedicate the series loop to an external EQ..
A good friend lent me his Fryette Pittbull Ultra Lead and Soldano SLO-100, giving me the chance to compare them with my Diezel Herbert and Mesa Dual Rectifier.
I spent quite a bit of time getting familiar with each amp, learning their quirks and features. I tried different guitars and pickups and recorded a number of riffs to highlight the differences.
I’ll be uploading a series of A/B comparisons so you can hear them for yourself. I mostly focused on rhythm playing because, in a band context, that’s what guitarists do most of the time. There are a few clean and lead samples as well, but my baseline is always rhythm playing—how an amp sits in a mix, handles chord structure, fills out the sound, copes with lower tunings, and glues with bass and drums so the instruments feel like one cohesive unit
For these comparisons, the goal was a fair, apples-to-apples comparison while still letting each amp sound like itself. I tried to dial them so they sounded reasonably similar without stripping away their individual character.
The Pitbull is noticeably more scooped than the Herbert. Not Rectifier-level scooped, but definitely a step in that direction, even without the graphic EQ engaged.
In terms of low end, both amps can produce far more bass than you'd realistically need. The low end remains tight and controllable even when pushed to extremes, although the Ultra Lead starts to flub out a little sooner. The Herbert, paired with a good 4×12, delivers a ridiculous amount of bottom end without breaking a sweat. What's really special about the Herbert is that the lows never get in the way—they're huge, but they don't linger or overwhelm the rest of the sound.
On the top end, the Fryette, thanks to its graphic EQ, can achieve a much more aggressive sizzle. The Diezel, even with the Presence turned all the way up, still sounds fairly natural. Ignoring those extreme settings, both amps can actually be dialed surprisingly close, especially once you hear them in a full mix.
The feel of the two amps is quite different. Using a car analogy, the Fryette feels faster in a straight line, while the Diezel feels faster and easier through tight corners.
If you're playing lots of palm-muted Drop C riffs, the Herbert holds everything together beautifully. This is what people often refer to as "Diezel compression," although it's nothing like a compressor pedal. Chords stay solid, unpleasant harmonics don't fight each other, and the amp already sounds like a finished record.
If the Herbert punches you in the gut, the Fryette slaps you in the face.
Since both amps have three channels, I'll compare them channel by channel.
Clean Channels
The Herbert's clean channel is like a huge grand piano. It stays clean no matter what you throw at it, so if you prefer your cleans to break up naturally, this isn't really that kind of channel—although you can always get there with a boost or compression pedal.
What makes the Herbert's clean channel great is its depth. Single notes have a lot of weight behind them, so clean passages glue together nicely with the bass and drums. The mix never feels hollow in the low mids.
The Ultra Lead's clean channel is a bit more tweakable, but it's also grittier. I'd describe it as more vintage or even slightly lo-fi sounding. It's easier to push into overdrive with hot pickups, pedals, or simply by running the amp very loud, as I did in the video. You can even hear my analog delay producing dirtier repeats compared to the Herbert.
Crunch Channels
The crunch sounds (Herbert Channel 2- and the Ultra Lead's Orange channel in Normal mode) are equally good. The Herbert has a touch more clarity and smoothness, while the Ultra Lead sounds a little rawer and has more bite.
Rhythm Channels
Moving to the main rhythm tones (Herbert Channel 2+ and the Ultra Lead's Orange channel in High Gain mode), the differences become much more obvious.
The Ultra Lead feels faster when playing open chord patterns rather than constant palm-muted riffs. It has a real sense of urgency. The Herbert, going back to my car analogy, handles palm-muted playing a little better and feels more composed under the fingers.
Interestingly, the gain controls behave almost opposite to each other.
On the Herbert, you can dial in much more gain than you'll ever realistically need, and the more gain you add, the easier the amp becomes to play. On the Ultra Lead, it's the opposite. Too much gain starts slowing the amp down.
With the Herbert, you keep adding gain until your engineer, producer, or bandmates tell you to stop. With the Fryette, you add as much gain as the amp still feels comfortable to play.
I wasn’t a huge fan of how the Ultra Lead’s Orange channel seemed to lag slightly behind my pick attack. Maybe that’s what people mean when they describe Fryettes as “honest,” “dry,” or “hard to play,” but I didn’t personally notice a dramatic difference in terms of difficulty. Both amps expose mistakes equally well. The Fryette just feels less composed in the low end, which makes you compensate more with pick angle and how you hit the strings.
The real difference is in the dynamics and voicing. The Herbert is more refined and mix-friendly, while the Fryette is rawer and less compressed, which leaves the low end feeling a little less controlled during palm-muted riffs.
I also noticed that the Fryette responds more dramatically to boost pedals, whereas the Herbert has a strong inherent character that most overdrives end up sounding more like subtle color variations on the "Herbert sound"
Lead Channel
The Fryette's lead channel is slightly colder sounding but has a little more sizzle and clarity. Herbert's Channel 3 is thicker and more liquid. Interestingly, I actually prefer the Fryette's lead channel for rhythm playing over its dedicated rhythm channel. For lead playing, however, I prefer the Herbert. It thickens up beautifully as you move higher up the neck. At this point, though, I'm really splitting hairs. Both lead channels are simply different shades of excellence.
Mid Cut vs. Graphic EQ
Obviously, the Fryette's graphic EQ is far more tweakable. The amp sounds perfectly fine without it, but the graphic EQ definitely unlocks the full Ultra Lead experience. Without it, you're certainly missing part of what makes the amp special.
The EQ lets you compensate for some of the slower low-end frequencies I mentioned on the rhythm channel and makes the amp incredibly aggressive when dialed correctly. On the other hand, it's also very easy to suck the life out of the amp, small tweaks go long way here
One thing I really didn't like is that there's no output level control on the graphic EQ to compensate for volume changes. With subtle adjustments, you can get the amp to have roughly the same perceived volume with the EQ on or off, but once you start making more dramatic changes, you have no way of matching levels. In practice, you end up leaving the EQ permanently on or permanently off. There’s also no LED indicator showing whether the EQ is engaged. You can’t switch it on and off from the front panel, only via the footswitch, but if you forget it, you’ve effectively lost your EQ as well.
The Herbert's Mid Cut is a much more straightforward solution.
It's a single control centered around roughly 500 Hz. The more Mid Cut you apply, the narrower the affected range becomes, so with one knob you're effectively adjusting both the amount of cut and its bandwidth.
An additional Level control lets you compensate for the lost mids, meaning the amp can stay at the same perceived volume with or without Mid Cut engaged. That makes it practical to switch it in and out depending on the song or guitar. With Mid Cut turned all the way down, the Level control even doubles as another channel volume control.
Because switching is so seamless, the Herbert effectively gives you six—or even eight(mk3)—distinct sounds across its three channels.
Most of the time I actually prefer running without Mid Cut, but when I want to supercharge the sound, it's incredibly effective.
Interestingly, it doesn't just remove 500 Hz. It also seems to add a lot of upper-mid bite—or at least that's how I perceive it. Both settings cut through a mix well, although that obviously depends on the rest of the signal chain.
You can still overdo it and suck the life out of the amp, but compared to a full graphic EQ, the Herbert's Mid Cut is much more foolproof.
Another interesting point is that if you really want a full graphic EQ like the Ultra Lead or Mesa Mark series, the Herbert can easily accommodate one. It has three effects loops (serial, MIDI-switchable serial, and parallel). you could easily dedicate the series loop to an external EQ..
