Peavey 6505+ vs EVH 5150 iii

  • Thread starter Thread starter seanseanhd
  • Start date Start date
S

seanseanhd

Member
is there much difference. i have the 6505 but have been gassing for the 5150 how much difference is there between them. does the 5150 have the high fizz like the 6505
 
A little confused by your post. Do you have a 5150/6505 or 5152/6505+ ?

I had a 5152/6505+ many years ago before I was a gear whore and went through countless amp flipping. I ended up using an EVH for a long time, at home and live with various bands. I assumed the EVH was better than the 6505+ I had previously , so much time went by I didnt remeber what it sounded like.

Anyways I picked up a 6505+ again to see . At that point I also had the EVH 5153 Stealth (6L6) as well as the original 100 watt 5153 So I played all three amps a lot at home and with bands.

I ended up keeping the 6505+ and selling my EVH amps to try other stuff. Not that they arent great also , I prefered the regular EvH over the Stealth and the Peavey over both ....Comparing lead channels the Peavey is actually clearer and cuts better .. Cleans are equal in my book if not better on the 6505+ , I know some gus will argue that which is fine but most make this judgment from owning a regualr 5150/6505 which doesnt really do clean.

Now as far as channel two goes on the EVH you would have to compare it to the crunch setting on the 6505+ , in this case I like channel two on the Evh a bit more .. Although they can do similar things.

Overall I found the Peavey to be better for rhtyhm especially in a live situation ....EVH is no slouch for rhythm either but seems to work better for warm liquidy solos ...

With all that said if you were talking about the original 5150 my opi ion is that that amp is a bit different than the others. It sounds a bit bigger, meaner , fuzzier , more raw....I personally like the 5152/6505+ more.
 
Thanks for the reply i am referring to the new 50watt EVH compared to the peavey 6505+ sorry for the confusion.
 
These questions come up all the time, I had the same question myself.

I've owned both, the 6505 imo, is the way to go. The 5153 50 was OK, cut through well, used in a cover band, but was very compressed.

BUT, you may feel differently. Play one.
 
ElectricVoodoo":3rs0rddz said:
These questions come up all the time, I had the same question myself.

I've owned both, the 6505 imo, is the way to go. The 5153 50 was OK, cut through well, used in a cover band, but was very compressed.

BUT, you may feel differently. Play one.
Click to expand...

I agree with the EVH being compressed/dark, and I'll throw in a potentially unpopular opinion as far as this thread is concerned which is that I think the 5150/6505 lead channel has a better rhythm/lead sound than the 5150II/6505+ and just cuts better in general than the other two varieties. If you use the clean channel in your songs then it will suffer going this route, but hell one well placed resistor can change that. Or buy a dedicated cleans amp and use a head switcher. If you're looking for a single amp that can cover all levels of gain sounds well, then you are looking into the wrong line of amps IMO.
 
Still not sure why people say this about cleans... The Evh does have warmer cleans yes but I like the more open highend chime the 6505+ has on cleans , it is a brighter clean though.

Overall everything's is warmer, darker and more compressed with the Evh 50 and 100 watt, clean crunch and lead
 
the4thlast1":2fvggvbv said:
Still not sure why people say this about cleans... The Evh does have warmer cleans yes but I like the more open highend chime the 6505+ has on cleans , it is a brighter clean though.

Overall everything's is warmer, darker and more compressed with the Evh 50 and 100 watt, clean crunch and lead
Click to expand...

I'm agreeing with you. He has a 5150II/6505+ now, I was referring to what would happen if he swapped it for a 5150/6505.

This line of amps is all about balance, and oh the irony that VH has an album by that title.

5150/6505 = best in the line lead channel, worst everything else.
5150II/6505+ = improved clean and crunch at the expense of lead channel, improved commercial convenience.
EVH = OK everything, most convenient, best "channel switcher" not truly great anything IMO
 
Man, every time I see this discussion I am reminded of how nice it is to be a player who doesn't give a shit about clean channels.
 
Yeah if you don't care about cleans there are some great single channel amps out there that kick serious ass.... Personally I didn't think the lead channel on the 5152 was a compromise , I like it more than the original because its tighter , clearer and has more upper mids. I understand though alot of people like that big angry wall of sound with thick low mids you get from the original, palm mutes are devistating lol
 
Ugh this again. Peaveys were not designed for a clean channel. They are as labeled. Rhythm and lead. I know Ed said the 5150 II had better cleans. But the amps were never supposed to have a "clean" channel. And I used the rhythm channel on my old 5150 for cleans. But it wasn't made to do cleans. The new EVH 5150 III line does have a clean channel and people love to try and compare. But it's not a fair comparison. 5150 III red vs 5150/6505 and 5150 II/6505+ lead channel is a good comparison. Different days I prefer different amps. Mostly I prefer the old 5150 lead channel. For rhythm it's no contest. 5150 III all day. I should say I have the 5150 III 2x12 combo so it's basically the 50 watt head 5150 III. and two Peavey 5150 half stacks. Both are great amps and I could live with only one and be happy.
 
CP5150":17dntxa8 said:
Ugh this again. Peaveys were not designed for a clean channel. They are as labeled. Rhythm and lead. I know Ed said the 5150 II had better cleans. But the amps were never supposed to have a "clean" channel. And I used the rhythm channel on my old 5150 for cleans. But it wasn't made to do cleans. The new EVH 5150 III line does have a clean channel and people love to try and compare. But it's not a fair comparison. 5150 III red vs 5150/6505 and 5150 II/6505+ lead channel is a good comparison. Different days I prefer different amps. Mostly I prefer the old 5150 lead channel. For rhythm it's no contest. 5150 III all day. I should say I have the 5150 III 2x12 combo so it's basically the 50 watt head 5150 III. and two Peavey 5150 half stacks. Both are great amps and I could live with only one and be happy.
Click to expand...

I've had them all side by side... 5152 does have a usable clean channel , stop the madness. Yes the original 5150 was not designed to get any kind of a clean clean. BUT The 5152 On the rhythm channel with the crunch disengaged, cleans all day , just as good as the EVH 5153 version just not as warm and dark, depends on what you like. The disadvantage here is that the rhythm channel shares the clean and crunch kinda like how the 50watt Evh version is set up...So to get the best cleans you have to set the gain low, if you want a higher gain setting when you switch to crunch you have to turn the gain up, it doesnt have three separate channels like the 100watt EVH version.
 
I really like the clean channel on the 6505+, actually far better than I liked the green channel on the EVH 5153 I had.
 
I have a 5150. Have had a 5153 100w, 5153 50w and 5153 Stealth. The OG 5150 has hands down the best tone of all of them. The 5153's are more versatile with 3 channels. But for a crushing high gain tone, the 5150 is it. The rhythm channel can get great lower gain rock tones too. I don't need a clean channel anyway....I'm a volume knob roller-backer.

Mine has matched JJ 6L6's and I hand selected a mixture of preamp tubes that sounded best. Don't ask me what they are, I forget by now. Maybe that's why it sounds so good. But for a $5-700 amp, it's impossible to beat.
 
Do you think the current standard 6505 (non plus) is comparable to the old 5150 (not II, but the old blockletter or signature)?
Or is this myth really dead that the old versions were better?

I sometimes feel like it's partial to what tube combinations they used to use back then vs now. Maybe the amp has not changed that much over the years.

The reason why i mention this is that i tried like 4 peavey 5150 and each one sounded a bit different.

One was super cold and dry almost flat sounding and harsh, the other was juicy and dark reminded me a bit of the bogner we had in the same room and I loved it, the next had a lot of static noise and feedback and the fourth sounded like a huge growly fat almost rectoish brutal wall. That was the best I ever heard it and I can't tell why, heh. all amps non modded.

Later I had a similar experience with standard 6505, one being lifeless and cold, the other was great.


:rock:
 
K-Roll":ll9zmx5z said:
Do you think the current standard 6505 (non plus) is comparable to the old 5150 (not II, but the old blockletter or signature)?
Or is this myth really dead that the old versions were better?

I sometimes feel like it's partial to what tube combinations they used to use back then vs now. Maybe the amp has not changed that much over the years.

The reason why i mention this is that i tried like 4 peavey 5150 and each one sounded a bit different.

One was super cold and dry almost flat sounding and harsh, the other was juicy and dark reminded me a bit of the bogner we had in the same room and I loved it, the next had a lot of static noise and feedback and the fourth sounded like a huge growly fat almost rectoish brutal wall. That was the best I ever heard it and I can't tell why, heh. all amps non modded.

Later I had a similar experience with standard 6505, one being lifeless and cold, the other was great.


:rock:
Click to expand...

The 6505s ship with cheaper tubes. The differences in 5150s is likely down to differences in pre and esp power tube gain differences due to the amps fixed bias, differences in pot sweep, or filter caps that need replacing. Maintained and re-tubed with fitting tube sets, either should sound nearly identical. Still you have mental people like me that need to have early run 5150s anyway :loco:
 
Al 5150/6505 amps are the same. That includes the block letter so don't believe the hype. As stated most differences are tubes. The block letter came with I believe Sylvanias. Then they switched to cheaper Chinese tubes. The 6505 is exactly the same Amp. Zero changes. I can't say anything about the newer overseas built 6505.

Also as with all amp builders as production continues parts either aren't available or are bought from a cheaper manufacturer. Parts may differ slightly. But the amp should still sound the same. I have two 5150 heads and they both have different ac chords. One is squared at the plug and one is rounded off. And they sound very different. One sounds like a 5150. One is, well better sounding. Warmer with a more open growl. I had a third that I sold. It sounded like my regular 5150. I never use the good one. Saving it. For what I don't know.
 
I've got a 5150 212 combo and a 5150 III 50 watt right now. I've also owned a 5150, 5150 BL, 5150II, and 2 6505+ heads...and a 5150III Stealth. This is my third 5150 212 combo (which, to me, is by far the best of the 5150 series).

I like the 5153 a lot, but I still prefer the Peavey. The Peavey has this gut punch that the EVH just will not do no matter what I do with it.

However, the EVH wins in terms of low volume capabilities and transport. It gets the most use right now because of those 2 things. Its so small and light and easy to move to and from practice. That aspect alone is worth me hanging on to it. In a live setting, it sounds so similar to the Peaveys that I don't feel like I am really sacrificing anything. For recording, the EVH sounds weaker, fizzier, and has a much warmer midrange than the Peavey. It doesn't get that low mid punch or hollowed out midrange that I love about the Peaveys.
 
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.
 
I forgot to mention the 5150 II/6505+ rhythm channel is the best kept secret about these amps. Crank the pre and slowly bring the rhythym volume up. At gig volumes it's a a great rock tone that almost no one knows about. Alone in you one bedroom apt it will suck. Which is why no one gives these amps the credit they deserve. These amps(Peavey) were designed to be played loud and sound best that way. Period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top