NAD: SLO

[mmolteratx]

Got this in about a week and a half ago, but I've been out of town and just got back today. Played around with it for a few hours and I'm in love. It's a '92, and it's the first SLO I've played without a depth control. TBH, I don't miss the depth control at all, at least through my Creamback loaded Diezel 412. More than enough low end for me, though obviously not ridiculous like a Herbert. I've never been able to understand the fizzy/bright comments I hear over on TGP about these either. I've got the master at 2 on the OD channel and no fizz at all. Gets better as it's turned up obviously, though I think anything above 5 or 6 starts to get a bit too mushy in the low end for me. Stupid loud by that point though, so it doesn't really matter. Definitely a keeper, and I'll probably be dumping most of my amps save for it and the 100B and a 412, just because I haven't been using much else.

Wall of doom before it gets dismantled:

 

[R45VT]

How does the Diezel cab compare to the orange?

 

[Deleted member 16554]

Killer amp dude, congrats!

 

[belmontbluekings]

that is a fucking nice rig! soldanos rule!

 

[mmolteratx]

compared to the bogner ?

Two sides of the same coin really. The 100B is a lot more modern, in that it's got more of a low mid emphasis and a subdued treble that's never harsh. 100B's cleans are much better (very AB763-ish, no grit at all) and the effects loop is certainly much better with switchable pedal/line level. Crunch mode on channel one of the SLO is more open sounding and dynamic than the 100B's blue channel with less low end punch, though it's tighter as a result. SLO's OD channel is definitely tighter and more aggressive than the 100B's red channel, though the 100B's low mid emphasis is really nice for rhythms, just not all that tight. The red channel seems to have almost as much high end as the SLO, but in a different (lower) frequency range and a lot less presence. The 100B is also considerably more compressed, which makes for great liquid lead tones, but the SLO's percussiveness also makes for great lead tones. You can hear the Marshall base in both, but they're a lot more than that. SLO leans a bit more towards the classic Marshall bark, but with a wider mid response and incredible clarity/immediate response, while the 100B is saggier, smoother and more refined.

 

[blackba]

Congrats on the slo, always wanted one. Not sure it makes sense if 2 is as loud as I could run one.

 

[mmolteratx]

Congrats on the slo, always wanted one. Not sure it sense if 2 is as loud as I could run one.

Yea, if I could only run it on 2 all the time, I'd probably dump it, though it's still pretty kick ass at low-ish. I honestly don't get why everyone always rips on 100w amps at low-ish volumes. Luckily, the lady next door with the baby will be moving out in a couple weeks and I can play louder at home, plus it will get brought out to jams/shows.

 

[Ventura]

I could spend a LOT of time in that room

Congrats!! SLO's are definite pant flappers

 

[gbsmusic]

Congrats! Mines a 92 also. Nice collection you got there.

 

[cardinal]

Congrats. Love the SLO. I also think it has a great master volume. Plenty of low end without the Depth Mod, too. It's not like a Diezel for sure, but it ain't lacking low end.

You mention liking the 100B cleans much better: have you tried running the SLO crunch channel with the master wide open and using the gain knob to control the decibels? Love the SLO clean tones. Watch out if you're running a delay or something similar and switch from the OD channel to the clean tone, though.

 

[mmolteratx]

Congrats. Love the SLO. I also think it has a great master volume. Plenty of low end without the Depth Mod, too. It's not like a Diezel for sure, but it ain't lacking low end.

You mention liking the 100B cleans much better: have you tried running the SLO crunch channel with the master wide open and using the gain knob to control the decibels? Love the SLO clean tones. Watch out if you're running a delay or something similar and switch from the OD channel to the clean tone, though.

The Herbie actually has way too much low end, IMO. The SLO/100B are perfect in that regard. I just tried that with the normal gain/master, and there's too much OD bleedthrough when running the normal master wide open. And TBH, it's not the character so much as the shared EQ. A bit more bass and a bit less treble and it would be fantastic. I think the SRV mod would get it where I want it. Considering opening it up this weekend and trying it without drilling the front panel just to see if I like it. Definitely gonna add a pedal level switch for the loop. Just not useable for me as is, but I do use rack gear occasionally where the hotter signal would be preferable.

 

[Mesa\Kramer]

Congrats

I just picked up an SLO a few weeks ago.

For me it is definetly lacking in the low end dept.

Taking it to Soldao this week for depth Mod.
Hopefully it helps some.

 

[Shark Diver]

Congrats

I just picked up an SLO a few weeks ago.

For me it is definetly lacking in the low end dept.

Taking it to Soldao this week for depth Mod.
Hopefully it helps some.

Try a different cab. I run one of mine with an EVM Black Label - I can't imagine needing more low end unless you never use a bassist.

Nice SLO, and 100B - very cool mix right there.

 

[jlbaxe]

Congrats

I just picked up an SLO a few weeks ago.

For me it is definetly lacking in the low end dept.

Taking it to Soldao this week for depth Mod.
Hopefully it helps some.

Try a different cab. I run one of mine with an EVM Black Label - I can't imagine needing more low end unless you never use a bassist.

Nice SLO, and 100B - very cool mix right there.

Thats good to know… I have a pair of them in 1x12 cabs. Great speakers, I run my Mesa Mk III through them. This is the only amp I am basing for.

To the op, Congrats on the New amp

 

[blackba]

Congrats on the slo, always wanted one. Not sure it sense if 2 is as loud as I could run one.

Yea, if I could only run it on 2 all the time, I'd probably dump it, though it's still pretty kick ass at low-ish. I honestly don't get why everyone always rips on 100w amps at low-ish volumes. Luckily, the lady next door with the baby will be moving out in a couple weeks and I can play louder at home, plus it will get brought out to jams/shows.

I have never played an SLO, but I suspect its a bit like my Marshall silver Jubilee 2553 (50Watt) in that once you have heard it cranked a bit, its hard to go back to playing it a low volumes.

That still doesn't stop me from wanting an SLO, I think I could fit it right in on my next recording project.

 

[cardinal]

When I had the SLO next to a VH4S, my initial impression was that it lacked low end. But it really has plenty of thump and bass. It's not a wall of sound like a Diezel or Rectifier or whatever. It took a bit for my ears to get use to, but once they adjusted, I preferred the SLO by a mile, and I really LOVED that VH4S.

 

[pkripper]

Nice!

 

[Kapo_Polenton]

Low end gets washed out by other instruments sharing those frequencies anyway.. I prefer the bass to fill out the lower spectrum and have the guitar cut through. People forget that.

 

[reverymike]

Some people don't ever play in a band context, so I guess the additional lower end might be desirable. In a band, with bass and a good soundguy, a stock SLO is a glorious thing.

 

[D-Rock]

Yeah, cutting treble from a guitar when you're alone can seem like a nuisance, but it's a godsend when competing with other instruments. As long as the treble is a nice sharp slice, and not just all fizz.