My take on the beautiful machine that is the Soldano SLO100

  • Thread starter Thread starter jdel77
  • Start date Start date
jdel77

jdel77

Well-known member
I've spoken to Mike Soldano a couple times on the phone, emailed about this and that to do with my amp since I got it (2010 SLO100 and an earlier Soldano cab with 4 x Eminence X12000's).

I really believe that Mike designed the amp, as said on various Internet interviews to basically replicate EVH's early Plexi tone, without the need for copious post production. Straight outta the amp to the speakers, boom, there's the sound.

I also believe that the Crunch channel on the SLO is criminally underrated. In fact I think Mike designed the Crunch channel to be where the majority of the rhythm playing would take place, with the Lead or Overdrive channel covering Lead breaks and super saturated rhythm, mimicking what a roaring Marshall sounds like with a boost like an SD-1 or Rat in front of it.

Add in a Bright switch, rack FX loop and the insane ability for the amp to clean up on the guitar's volume knob AND the ludicrous volume and headroom it has and it really is the perfect modified Marshall style amp.

Lately I've been getting into that Crunch channel as much or even a little more than that infamous Overdrive/Lead side. What a masterstroke of a sound that Crunch channel is. The PERFECT cranked modded Plexi/JCM800 drive sound, beautifully balanced in the EQ, raw and aggressive.

The SLO100 is a lifetime amp, truly a classic.
 
It's super underrated. Idk why they aren't more widespread.
 
Well put! I love the Crunch channel! Has plenty of gain when cranked up and cuts through the mix. I get tired of guys slamming or concentrating on the Effects Loop instead of appreciating the amp as a whole for what it does and can do...plus the killer tones and build quality.

I describe and think about the SLO as a MOPAR muscle car. I've had just about every version of the SLO and after owning about 10-12 different ones, I prefer bone stock best.

:rock:
 
I really loved the SLO. I was surprised at how nice the crunch channel sounds. I ended up spending most of my time there (and ultimately ended up using a 2204 instead because I gravitated more to its crunchy tone). But the SLO is magnificent.
 
Definitely a dream amp for me. I will have 1 one day.
 
Timeless amp like the Ferrari F-40 an analog monster stripped of bells and whistles.
 
They're fun amps but I do like how many people will say they had one and it's amazing but "ultimately went with...." :lol: :LOL:

I would like one for what it does but could never have one be my #1. It has something going on in the upper mids top/end that I find gets fatiguing but the right speakers help a lot. Greenbacks are a great match. Don't care for the way they sound with their stock eminence speakers. The few bands I've seen use them over the years as a boutique Marshall replacement always had a tone that wore me down before the set was done.
The reason they're not more widespread IMO is because of the price plus of what I said above about the tone with the wrong speakers and possibly most importantly but superficially, it hasn't changed in 30 years. Mass market appeal has a lot to do with what is new and cool. The SLO never breached the rich rockstar/ studio musician wall in the late 80's and early 90's and then came the Rectifier for less and the 5150 for even more less. These much more mass produced, lower price point amps sucked up all the mainstream market share that a SLO might make a dent in. Enough time went by and no changes to promote in the SLO design so it just stayed as a highly regarded studio/rockstar amp. Now the price has only gotten more extravagant. Apart from raising costs involved with transformers and labor how much does the price of an amp that hasn't changed in 30 years need to increase. If these were mid to high 2K's new they would be vastly more out there.

All of the above is absolutely just my opinion and I'm not knocking the amp, which is a hoot to play through (well at least until my ears say stop) :lol: :LOL: .
 
skoora":1klefq5n said:
Apart from raising costs involved with transformers and labor how much does the price of an amp that hasn't changed in 30 years need to increase. If these were mid to high 2K's new they would be vastly more out there.

The main reason why SLO100 is still a "holy grail" amp is how it hasn't had any major change. Otherwise people would just start to hype up older iterations (like people do with Recto/5150/Uberschall etc).

The Avenger 100 is $2000 new and the HR100+ is $2800. They're pretty good for the price but the supply to dealers seem a bit on-and-off.
 
skoora":2nemdq36 said:
They're fun amps but I do like how many people will say they had one and it's amazing but "ultimately went with...." :lol: :LOL:

I would like one for what it does but could never have one be my #1. It has something going on in the upper mids top/end that I find gets fatiguing but the right speakers help a lot. Greenbacks are a great match. Don't care for the way they sound with their stock eminence speakers. The few bands I've seen use them over the years as a boutique Marshall replacement always had a tone that wore me down before the set was done.
The reason they're not more widespread IMO is because of the price plus of what I said above about the tone with the wrong speakers and possibly most importantly but superficially, it hasn't changed in 30 years. Mass market appeal has a lot to do with what is new and cool. The SLO never breached the rich rockstar/ studio musician wall in the late 80's and early 90's and then came the Rectifier for less and the 5150 for even more less. These much more mass produced, lower price point amps sucked up all the mainstream market share that a SLO might make a dent in. Enough time went by and no changes to promote in the SLO design so it just stayed as a highly regarded studio/rockstar amp. Now the price has only gotten more extravagant. Apart from raising costs involved with transformers and labor how much does the price of an amp that hasn't changed in 30 years need to increase. If these were mid to high 2K's new they would be vastly more out there.

All of the above is absolutely just my opinion and I'm not knocking the amp, which is a hoot to play through (well at least until my ears say stop) :lol: :LOL: .

It doesn't need to change nor does it need to be ubiquitous. Mike S. doesn't strike me as the kinda bloke who's out to sell as many SLO's as possible.
But for those who want the best, and want that sound, he'll make the best and most rock solid amp ever.
 
candletears7":362zijr5 said:
It doesn't need to change nor does it need to be ubiquitous. Mike S. doesn't strike me s the kinda bloke who's out to sell as many SLO's as possible.
But for those who want the best, and want that sound, he'll make the best and most rock solid amp ever.


Yeah, not questioning Mike's motivations for the amp. Just ruminating on the earlier comment about why they aren't more widespread. The amp's need to change is purely from a market perception process of something new or different appearing. From a tone lovers perspective, it's nice when a maker doesn't fuck with something that works, un-necessarily, for the sake of a perceived market.
 
Besides it having "the tone" for me, the fact that Mike S. goes against the grain of the typical amp company helps make the amp so unique and puts it in a class by itself.
 
Gary Moore live...Still got the Blues...the SLO sweet spot... :thumbsup:
 
Gary was running pedals into the clean/crunch Channel. He wasn't using the lead Channel. Again, not a knock against the SLO but I didn't care for Gary's tone in his Blues period.
 
First time I heard a live SLO was Ratt a few years back. Just unreal. As far as popularity/cost, why don't more players use Wizards? They are also one of a kind amazing amps, and between an SLO and a Wizard I don't know which has more power, thump or clear awesome articulation/clarity. But they both retail for around the same money. 4K...cost does matter.
 
godgrinder":3v8ux5fz said:
skoora":3v8ux5fz said:
Apart from raising costs involved with transformers and labor how much does the price of an amp that hasn't changed in 30 years need to increase. If these were mid to high 2K's new they would be vastly more out there.

The main reason why SLO100 is still a "holy grail" amp is how it hasn't had any major change. Otherwise people would just start to hype up older iterations (like people do with Recto/5150/Uberschall etc).

The Avenger 100 is $2000 new and the HR100+ is $2800. They're pretty good for the price but the supply to dealers seem a bit on-and-off.

I paid $1,200.00 for my Avenger 100 Watt Hot Rod Model....Well Actually my Fiancé Bought it for me as a gift. It was/is in Mint Condition & the first time I plugged it in, I Damn near had a heart attack.
 
DET1973":2gkg4wt5 said:
godgrinder":2gkg4wt5 said:
skoora":2gkg4wt5 said:
Apart from raising costs involved with transformers and labor how much does the price of an amp that hasn't changed in 30 years need to increase. If these were mid to high 2K's new they would be vastly more out there.

The main reason why SLO100 is still a "holy grail" amp is how it hasn't had any major change. Otherwise people would just start to hype up older iterations (like people do with Recto/5150/Uberschall etc).

The Avenger 100 is $2000 new and the HR100+ is $2800. They're pretty good for the price but the supply to dealers seem a bit on-and-off.

I paid $1,200.00 for my Avenger 100 Watt Hot Rod Model....Well Actually my Fiancé Bought it for me as a gift. It was/is in Mint Condition & the first time I plugged it in, I Damn near had a heart attack.

Lol haha
 
My favorite lead tone I've recorded was my SLO into a THD slotted 2x12 with one of their treated/UK-made CL80s and an old G12-65. Nothing fatiguing whatsoever. Just an amazingly chewy, swirly, snappy-yet-liquid tone.

Now, the downside was that rig got THAT tone but struggled with anything else. As a session player I had to get something more flexible. But it was the very best at that sound.
 
Back
Top