Peavey 6505+ vs EVH 5150 iii

[f550maranello2]

Man.. This keeps on coming up..

I have the 6505+ and 5153 (non stealth)... First thing is first.. The cab is what makes the difference in these amps, the stock 6505 cab sounds WAY different than the fender one (obviously) .. Now if you play both amps on the same cab... Barely any difference in the lead channel.. The crunch channel is a different story, the fender amp tighter and has a bit less gain. But there is absolutely NO difference between the 5150/5152/6505/6505+ lead channel.. I wish people would stop saying there is, the only thing different in is the tubes and 6505+ and 5152 have what they call a "Clean channel" which is BS anyways, its not clean.

 

[JakeAC5253]

But there is absolutely NO difference between the 5150/5152/6505/6505+ lead channel.. I wish people would stop saying there is.

Now that's just intellectually dishonest. There are quite a few discrete components that are different in the lead channel design of the 5150 vs 5152 amps. Discrete in the sense that it is a quantifiable and intentional difference on the designer's part.

5150 vs. 6505 = same
5152 vs. 6505+ = same
5150 vs. 5152 = different
6505 vs. 6505+ = different

 

[the4thlast1]

Man.. This keeps on coming up..

I have the 6505+ and 5153 (non stealth)... First thing is first.. The cab is what makes the difference in these amps, the stock 6505 cab sounds WAY different than the fender one (obviously) .. Now if you play both amps on the same cab... Barely any difference in the lead channel.. The crunch channel is a different story, the fender amp tighter and has a bit less gain. But there is absolutely NO difference between the 5150/5152/6505/6505+ lead channel.. I wish people would stop saying there is, the only thing different in is the tubes and 6505+ and 5152 have what they call a "Clean channel" which is BS anyways, its not clean.

Man most of what you said makes me wonder if you have played any of these amps let alone own them. Seriously though I agree with what you said about the lead channel of the 6505+ and the EVH lead , they sound ver similar.

What you said about the 5150 lead channel is not true though. The eq curve and the very aggressive nature is different than the voicing of the 5152 and the EVH.....If anything the 5152 and the EVH would be the amps to compare. The original 5150 Lead channel has a bigger looser lowend, more low mids , more of an aggresive nature and a more extended highend . I would agree the original 5150 does not do cleans. However to risk sounding like a broken record I gotta say again the 5152 does do cleans , not a bad clean either .

Knobs are there to be turned , on your 6505+ just set the gain (Pre) very low on channel one , disengage the crunch button and turn the volume (Post) up, Wow try it and guess what there is a clean tone. Maybe its the pre and post labels on the knobs that throw people off ? Pre= Gain. Post= Volume

 

[NinjaRaf]

5153 100 watt (non Stealth) is a different beast than the 5153 50 watt.

Blue channel is the biggest difference. I didn't care for the Stealth or 50 watt Blue channel. Just too compressed, too much gain, and too much like the Red channel. On the original 100 watt 5153, the Blue channel is great.

If you're playing metal, take rbasaria's opinions seriously. He's had the drive time with them to know. I'm more of a rock guy (which is why I like the original 5153), so I can't comment the same way he would.

Yeah, blue on the regular 3 is a lot less compressed and gainy compared to the stealth or 50 watt. Im not really a huge fan of the blue channel on the 50 watt. It doesnt have quite enough gain for me...so I stick with green and red and just use it as a 2 channel amp...which is all I need. Blue on the Stealth is a monster. Still more gain and compression than the 50 watt. I LOVED that channel, but I ended up returning it because it sounded almost identical to my 5150 212 combo...I couldn't justify the same basic tone for an amp that cost 5x what my Peavey cost.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

Peavey 5150 vs 6505 comparison

5150 III 50W vs 6505

More

That last video cracked me up. "When I was younger" So when he was like 15 and he's now what......16 I love these kids that make videos with gear that mommy and daddy bought them. The internet is making a lot of idiots feel knowledgeable

 

[f550maranello2]

Man.. This keeps on coming up..

I have the 6505+ and 5153 (non stealth)... First thing is first.. The cab is what makes the difference in these amps, the stock 6505 cab sounds WAY different than the fender one (obviously) .. Now if you play both amps on the same cab... Barely any difference in the lead channel.. The crunch channel is a different story, the fender amp tighter and has a bit less gain. But there is absolutely NO difference between the 5150/5152/6505/6505+ lead channel.. I wish people would stop saying there is, the only thing different in is the tubes and 6505+ and 5152 have what they call a "Clean channel" which is BS anyways, its not clean.

Man most of what you said makes me wonder if you have played any of these amps let alone own them. Seriously though I agree with what you said about the lead channel of the 6505+ and the EVH lead , they sound ver similar.

What you said about the 5150 lead channel is not true though. The eq curve and the very aggressive nature is different than the voicing of the 5152 and the EVH.....If anything the 5152 and the EVH would be the amps to compare. The original 5150 Lead channel has a bigger looser lowend, more low mids , more of an aggresive nature and a more extended highend . I would agree the original 5150 does not do cleans. However to risk sounding like a broken record I gotta say again the 5152 does do cleans , not a bad clean either .

Knobs are there to be turned , on your 6505+ just set the gain (Pre) very low on channel one , disengage the crunch button and turn the volume (Post) up, Wow try it and guess what there is a clean tone. Maybe its the pre and post labels on the knobs that throw people off ? Pre= Gain. Post= Volume

You can believe what you want.. Fact is these pretty much all sound the same, I made the wrong decision of purchasing that 6505+ just to confirm that to myself. As far as that clean channel... lets not try to polish a turd here.. The 5153 100 watt is light years better than the Peavey.

 

[Badronald]

Disagree.

The clean channel on the 6505+ is fantastic.

 

[NinjaRaf]

I also completely disagree that the 5150 and 5152/6505+ are the same. Not even close. That loose, massive low end is what I hate about the originals. The II/+ is significantly tighter and clearer. And I also agree that that 5152/6505+ clean is not bad at all. I do not think the 5153 is better than the Peaveys. Different, yes. Better, no. I find the Peaveys to be clearer than the 5153. 5153 clean channel is pretty damn good.

 

[Badronald]

We all should be able to agree that all of these variants are great rock amps at good prices. Peavey and Fender are doing a great job providing professional quality tone machines that most can afford.
Good on them.

 

[the4thlast1]

Absolutely great amps.... Every version so far has been good in different ways. We all can agree to disagree on some things about them , best thing to do is try them all and see what you prefer. The Fender version have a really sweet lead tone, Not sure if I said that even though I like the 6505+ the most overall I probably prefer the EVH for solos but I play rhythm stuff 98% of the time so its not the priority for me. I could see shredder guys , especially 80s style maybe liking the fenders more.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

Really did not like the 50w or 100w EVH I owned. Definitely will be buying a 6505+ or 6534+ to try at some point in the near future.