School me on Soldano FX loops!

[rstites]

You can't get clean repeats on the SLO. And you can't hear the repeats while you are playing (I'm talking about on the OD channel). It's no different than putting a delay pedal in front of the amp.

Tonight, I plugged an old Intellifex into the loop of the SLO. There's something a bit muffling about it that I don't like. It's noticeable, but I could probably dial around it if I was more of an effects-hound than I am. I like the raw SLO too much to put up with this little loss. It's why I just placed 3 pedals out front before.

Delays in the loop sound nothing like a delay in front of the amp, not even remotely the same pile of mush you get from a delay pedal into the front end. Maybe that muffling is distortion on the delays. I dunno. I suppose I could test this. It sounds equally as likely to be an impedance mismatch issue. Either way, there's definitely something there and it is more pronounced on the OD channel. At the level I run the clean/crunch channel it's not massive, but is very noticeable.

As to not hearing delays while I'm playing on the OD, I guess I don't see the downside there, but it also doesn't seem like anything out of line for a typical high gain head. Heck, one of the reasons I bought the Intellifex is for the good ducking delay to kill the repeats while I'm playing. I hate having delays bouncing around on top of my playing! I'm probably misunderstanding what you want here.

 

[rstites]

I've seen a few different ways of doing it. One takes most everything out and bypasses the extra tube stage. Another way does not. I think have some schematics somewhere.

I was curious what Soldano's actual schematic looks like without the loop. The only schematic I've found is the one with the loop: I assume the one you built the clone from. Alternatively, I'd be curious what the "official" mod to remove the loop is from Soldano.

I'm familiar with those two schematics. They go about it in different ways, but are essentially the same final circuit. I'm guessing the V3A and V4B are not part of the original circuit, though obviously V3B and V4A would have been from the same 12AX7 in that case.

 

[Luca79]

Tonight, I plugged an old Intellifex into the loop of the SLO. There's something a bit muffling about it that I don't like. It's noticeable, but I could probably dial around it if I was more of an effects-hound than I am. I like the raw SLO too much to put up with this little loss. It's why I just placed 3 pedals out front before.

Not blame the loop, the loss is caused by the intellifex.

 

[PlayAndersons]

I recently picked up a Lexicon PCM 80 to run in the loop of my SLO and am very happy with the results...

 

[rstites]

Not blame the loop, the loss is caused by the intellifex.

I could believe that. I haven't played anything in any amp loop that's been truly transparent. They all color the sound in my experience: both loop circuitry and effects units.

I was just testing the horribleness of the SLO loop. It still has a massive problem in volume matching due to location. There's no doubt about that. That is a legitimate issue, especially if you want spill-over delay and echo.

 

[rstites]

I recently picked up a Lexicon PCM 80 to run in the loop of my SLO and am very happy with the results...

I've been tempted by those but have been put off by the slow patch changes, which seems to make them problematic for live use. I've also been concerned about how big the learning curve is to program them. I know it'd be a step up in power over the trusty old Intellifex, Gmajor (not so trusty), or similar, but wonder if I'd gain anything practical out of going that direction. I don't really need much for effects.

....really, I'm 90% of the way there with this W/D rig and I'm almost tempted to dump it and just go back to 3 pedals out front and just play the thing straight 90% of the time, like I've always done.

 

[Luca79]

Not blame the loop, the loss is caused by the intellifex.

I could believe that. I haven't played anything in any amp loop that's been truly transparent. They all color the sound in my experience: both loop circuitry and effects units.

I use an Intellifex XL, but i put it into a line mixer, and use the effects 100% wet.
With this method, you can prevent the signal loss (if the mixer is well made).

 

[FourT6and2]

I have thought about putting in the loop-bypass switch. I've heard the rumor that completely removing the loop improves the tone too. No idea, as I've never heard on without it, but I can believe it'd be noticeable.

My ears can't tell a difference from the YT clip...

Exactly! That's the point I'm making. Loop or no loop. It isn't gonna change the core sound of the amp all that much. Although I think the amp had a simple bypass mid. The looo tube stage is still in the circuit. But I've heard an SLO that had no loop whatsoever and it does sound slightly different.

I definitely hear how the tone differs in that clip. It's thinner sounding with the loop engaged.

This difference is pretty striking in person.

I hear zero difference in that clip. Absolutely none. And I'm listening on decent cans. But most of Lasse's clips sound the same anyway lol, regardless of amp...

I just don't have golden ears, man. Maybe I should drink more mojo juice.

I'm listening on iPad speaker and can hear the difference.

I do long-range competitive shooting. And I'm a member of a shooting forum. We were discussing Laser Rangefinders. The kind you use to laze an object and it tells you how far away it is. The thing is, we shoot out at long distances, like 1200 yards. And our targets are about 10" in size. And the rangefinder we were talking about have a 7x magnification. That's not a lot. Less than most binoculars. There are a few guys on that forum who claim they can see a 10" metal plate at 1,000 - 1,2000 yards away. And they can hit that 10" plate with a glorified laser pointer. Me? I can't do that. I can't see a 10" circle that's 12 football fields away. But these guys claim they can. I guess I just don't have the eyes they do.

What's my point?

I don't hear a difference in that clip that's worth mentioning. But you say you do. I don't doubt that you do. But I definitely don't have the ears for that.

Let's pretend there is an actual difference. Is it enough of difference that a twist of the treble or presence knob can't make up for it?

I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. Yes, I hear a difference. Is it enough for me to send my SLO to get the amp modded to take out the loop? Based on this clip, no. But if I were standing in the room and the difference were dramatic, then I probably would consider it. I'm not going to over analyze it.

There are no ruffled feathers. I'm having a calm conversation here.

 

[FourT6and2]

I've seen a few different ways of doing it. One takes most everything out and bypasses the extra tube stage. Another way does not. I think have some schematics somewhere.

I was curious what Soldano's actual schematic looks like without the loop. The only schematic I've found is the one with the loop: I assume the one you built the clone from. Alternatively, I'd be curious what the "official" mod to remove the loop is from Soldano.

I'm familiar with those two schematics. They go about it in different ways, but are essentially the same final circuit. I'm guessing the V3A and V4B are not part of the original circuit, though obviously V3B and V4A would have been from the same 12AX7 in that case.

That first schematic is how I've seen Soldano do it. This is right out of a real SLO with a factory mod.

 

[FourT6and2]

It's easy to ruffle his feathers...he's the Soldano expert and he's quite sure his opinion is the truth and to challenge him is futile. Chimes in on every SLO thread....and seems to always turn into a negative, nit-picky,...the SLO is flawed and I know best, post fest.


Mike feel's the SLO is perfect the way it is and will never change it. The SLO is one hell of an amp! It's not for everyone, but it's the muscle car of the amplifier world.

Look, none of this is opinion. You can't argue with facts.

Fact: The SLO's FX Loop is before the tone stack.
Fact: The original SLO did not have an FX loop.

Hearsay: Mike Soldano has told plenty of people (and in interviews) that he prefers the amp without the loop, as it originally was. Call him and ask. He'll pick up the phone. He'll talk to you. Ya don't need to take my word for it. You can talk to the man himself.

But, coming from a person with a screen name based on the SLO, confirmation bias might be hard to overcome... Why is that when other people say the exact same thing I'm saying, it's ok. But when I say it, suddenly I'm the bad guy. Countless other threads exist on the internet on every guitar form, where people complain about the SLO's loop. It's a thing. I did not make this up. It's been going on for 30 years. It's not like I started some rumor. Soldano himself has talked about it.

 

[rstites]

I use an Intellifex XL, but i put it into a line mixer, and use the effects 100% wet.
With this method, you can prevent the signal loss (if the mixer is well made).

What's interesting about this is that the Intellifex has it's own internal line mixer. Part of it's selling point was that it maintained the analog signal. Really, it has been much better than pretty much every other multi-fx I've used, but yeah it still sucks tone IMO. I could try a line mixer with it. I suppose the advantage of those is they'll be useful for everything going forward, even when/if I move away from the Intellifex.

 

[duesentrieb]

The SLO has THE perfect overdriven sound for so many styles of playing. It is not a perfect channelswitcher though.

Just mod it. Place the loop after the channel volumes (which is more important than the tonestack's position) , use a good loop circuit (plenty available) or even something LND based (which this forum seems to like) and please add a master volume.

Btw: I do not think that the blackface Intellifex changes the sound (of well designed) loops. I'm using it as a reference.
The TC G Majors I/II though I'm using with a Rane SM whatever the number is, run in kill dry mode.

Just IMO of course.

 

[SpiderWars]

Although I think the amp had a simple bypass mid. The looo tube stage is still in the circuit. But I've heard an SLO that had no loop whatsoever and it does sound slightly different.

When I was listening to it that's what I thought I was hearing; as in, no difference. Because if that's all that was done it's the same circuit, they just moved the 'jumper' from the jacks to the circuit board/tube pin. When I think 'remove the loop' I think it means removing all the extra circuitry (basically all of V4). And that's what I think sounds different (and imo inferior). The distortion in V4 (both the gain stage and the CF after it) smooths and fattens the tone and adds a bit of saturation.

FWIW, somebody mentioned pedals in the loop sucking tone. What can happen is that if the pedal is buffered then that buffer is getting slammed and is totally squashing the signal, even when OFF. A Boss GE-7 will do that for example. Some pedals have better buffers than others.

 

[AmpliFIRE]

The SLO has THE perfect overdriven sound for so many styles of playing. It is not a perfect channelswitcher though.

Just mod it. Place the loop after the channel volumes (which is more important than the tonestack's position) , use a good loop circuit (plenty available) or even something LND based (which this forum seems to like) and please add a master volume.

Btw: I do not think that the blackface Intellifex changes the sound (of well designed) loops. I'm using it as a reference.
The TC G Majors I/II though I'm using with a Rane SM whatever the number is, run in kill dry mode.

Just IMO of course.

Totally agree brother!

 

[lespaul6]

It's easy to ruffle his feathers...he's the Soldano expert and he's quite sure his opinion is the truth and to challenge him is futile. Chimes in on every SLO thread....and seems to always turn into a negative, nit-picky,...the SLO is flawed and I know best, post fest.


Mike feel's the SLO is perfect the way it is and will never change it. The SLO is one hell of an amp! It's not for everyone, but it's the muscle car of the amplifier world.

Look, none of this is opinion. You can't argue with facts.

Fact: The SLO's FX Loop is before the tone stack.
Fact: The original SLO did not have an FX loop.

Hearsay: Mike Soldano has told plenty of people (and in interviews) that he prefers the amp without the loop, as it originally was. Call him and ask. He'll pick up the phone. He'll talk to you. Ya don't need to take my word for it. You can talk to the man himself.

But, coming from a person with a screen name based on the SLO, confirmation bias might be hard to overcome... Why is that when other people say the exact same thing I'm saying, it's ok. But when I say it, suddenly I'm the bad guy. Countless other threads exist on the internet on every guitar form, where people complain about the SLO's loop. It's a thing. I did not make this up. It's been going on for 30 years. It's not like I started some rumor. Soldano himself has talked about it.

This is what Mike also told me back in the late 90's when I called him about my 92 with no loop.. he also mentioned that's what the slave out was for really. He didnt care for the loop

 

[rstites]

Tonight, I tried the W/D set up on the SLO. I can recommend it. I ran the SLO dry through one of my old Marshall 4x12s. I pulled off the DI into my Intellifex and amped it with a Velocity 300 into a second Marshall 4x12. Both 4x12s have the old G12-65s in them.

It sound great. I just messed around with the overdone, soupy presets for this, but it still sounded pretty good since I had the dry sound coming through. When I'm hitting things hard, the effects do tend to disappear due to the dry cab, but I suspect with some tweaking I could fix that. OTOH, I actually like that I don't hear too much effects on the distortion until I stop playing, then they carry on in the space after.

When I back off the guitar volume and clean the amp up, I could get some nice ambiance over the top without killing tone.

Anyhow, I can recommend giving this a try. I've known about this forever and even run several stereo racks, but just never got around to it once I simplified back away from the whole rack setup. Really, the amp sounds so good, I still may just play it dry most of the time or maybe just a little delay on rhythm to fatten it up and a little more delay on leads to fatten them up. Basically, I want effects that enhance the sound, but don't sound like effects.

 

[Jack Luminous]

The SLO has THE perfect overdriven sound for so many styles of playing. It is not a perfect channelswitcher though.

Just mod it. Place the loop after the channel volumes (which is more important than the tonestack's position) , use a good loop circuit (plenty available) or even something LND based (which this forum seems to like) and please add a master volume.

Btw: I do not think that the blackface Intellifex changes the sound (of well designed) loops. I'm using it as a reference.
The TC G Majors I/II though I'm using with a Rane SM whatever the number is, run in kill dry mode.

Just IMO of course.

Hey Olaf !! Long time no talk ! What you describe is exactly what my local tech guy did to my SLO ten years ago. He put the send after the tone stack and channel volumes and a new master volume after the return. If you have two minutes, can you take a look at the innards pic (viewtopic.php?f=93&t=183142) and tell me what you think of the mod ? I'd like someone to make a schematic out of it.

 

[Zoso1973]

The SLO has THE perfect overdriven sound for so many styles of playing. It is not a perfect channelswitcher though.

Just mod it. Place the loop after the channel volumes (which is more important than the tonestack's position) , use a good loop circuit (plenty available) or even something LND based (which this forum seems to like) and please add a master volume.

Btw: I do not think that the blackface Intellifex changes the sound (of well designed) loops. I'm using it as a reference.
The TC G Majors I/II though I'm using with a Rane SM whatever the number is, run in kill dry mode.

Just IMO of course.

I have seen a youtube video of a guy with a modded loop in his SLO, really sounded great with the fx running. It was some Celestion speaker video though. I will have to find it.

 

[Razvan S.]

Each time I read one of these threads, I wonder what the fuss is all about. it's not that complicated. Just have a good tech move the loop after the tone stack. I had it done to my SLO years and years ago. Cost : $150 parts and labor. The tone of the amp didn't change at all and now the amp is fully usable as it should be. Don't think twice about it. All this talk about "the broken loop is essential part of the tone" etc. is total hogwash.

BTW, for the technically enclined, I posted a hires pic of the mod there : viewtopic.php?f=93&t=183142

Hello!
Could you possibly repost the image? It doesn't work anymore. Thanks a lot!