Soldano SLO vs Mesa MKIV high gain shootout - video inside!

[Racerxrated]

Both sound great. For the cost, Mark IV wins. I paid under $1,000 for my Mark IV. Used SLO's cost over $2,000.

Absolutely. But even better are the Mark IIIs. I think I saw one on GCs website for 699 last month.

Well, the comparison is with the Mark IV . It's really not fair for the SLO. The Mark IV is a 3 channel amp with a killer loop and tons of tonal options all for around $1,000. Tonally, I'd take the Mark IV too.

I have a Mark that I will never sell. Love the tone. To me the C+ has this note separation and clarity that is unique. Some other amps that I've played have that, like the SLO and Cameron modded Marshalls, some stock Marshalls. When I hear Wizard clips and in a live setting they have that. The Mark IIIs that I owned and my friends Mark IV do not. They are cool, and can get very heavy..and of course are very versatile. But my favorite attribute of any amp is the clarity, organic articulation when I play a complex chord. And the power section...how well do they hold up at volume? Kind of splitting hairs, as most of the amps we all talk about here are great in some way. But there aren't many that can match the SLO in that category....power section 'bloom' so to speak. We all have different ears, and there are some that don't get it when it comes to the C+....and some that don't dig the SLO as well. To each their own I say!

 

[hammered]

People that call an SLO a "slow, don't deserve to own one. Sell it to someone who knows how to pronounce SLO. When I hear people refer to it as a "slow", I think is this person a retard? jackass? illiterate? Sell the amp.

 

[cardinal]

I've always called it a "slow." Great amp. I owned a "slower" (SLOr) for a bit. Was forced to sell because I apparently mispronounce it.

 

[yngzaklynch]

Owned both. Love both. Splitting hairs here but would go Boogie for rhythm and SLO for lead work. That said if I could only use the amp at lower volumes... the Boogie wins all day long.

 

[Mr. Willy]

Doesn't the OP have the depth knob all the way up? My SLO is stock, so I don't have any experience with the depth mod (don't think it needs it all). From what I've read, cranking the depth introduces some mud. I think both amps sound great. I'd love to have a MKIV. The only drawback to me of the MKIV is what a lot of people like about it - it's tweakability. I would probably speed a lot of time messing with pulling knobs and moving sliders up and down. I prefer amps that are less complicated and more plug and play.

 

[Racerxrated]

Doesn't the OP have the depth knob all the way up? My SLO is stock, so I don't have any experience with the depth mod (don't think it needs it all). From what I've read, cranking the depth introduces some mud. I think both amps sound great. I'd love to have a MKIV. The only drawback to me of the MKIV is what a lot of people like about it - it's tweakability. I would probably speed a lot of time messing with pulling knobs and moving sliders up and down. I prefer amps that are less complicated and more plug and play.

Once you spend time with a Mark, you kind of learn where your ballpark settings are and maybe tweak a bit here and there like any amp depending on the room. My GEQ on my C+ is pretty set, as are my push/pulls and regular eq. Just a little bit of tweaking from time to time.

 

[AmpliFIRE]

MKIV is sounds better to my ears and it's not even close...

 

[SkaakS]

Thought both sounded great, but it's definitely a personal preference which is better. Thought the SLO was more balanced across the frequency spectrum with a slight mid-boost and had a very 'Vintage' feel, whereas the Mesa was more scooped and 'Modern' sounding. Would bet the Mesa could get close to that 'Vintage' sound w/ the right EQ'ing, but doubt the SLO would do the 'Modern' sound as well. All in all, two incredible, incredible amps. FYI, I own a SLO and love it--the tone is just perfection to my ears. Loved my Mark IV, too, and will probably pick up another eventually.

 

[SpiderWars]

I also noticed that when he first played the Mesa he just played and played well. When he switched to the SLO he immediately reached for knobs to tweak and then didn't play quite as well.

Also, they were played through a Mesa cab with I assume V30s. Through another cab the results might change a bit.

 

[Mailman1971]

Not sure about the slow.
But man I sure love my Marshall "dissle'
Or DSL as the common man would call it.

 

[stephen sawall]

IV

But the SLO sounds great...

 

[cecilbag]

I think Reza's video is a better sonic sample of what an SLO sounds like. It sounds mushy to me in this comparison. I have no problem with the mk 4, I've had a head and combo, I just love the SLO for what I do. If price were the only factor, I would pick the mkiv. But for me, I'm chasing a tone and the SLO, regardless of price, sounds and feels almost perfect for lead work. Both are great amps

 

[motorboy1]

Liked the Mesa more. Nice mids. SLO sounded hollow...

 

[Speeddemon]

Both great, but from this particular vid I gravitate slightly towards the SLO (Ess Elle Ooh. )

You can hear the special 'bloom' in the mids a bit I think.
I played an SLO once; such a great tone. Owned a Mark IV. Contains great tones too, but that particular SLO tone you won't be able to get from a Mark.
Not to mention the SLO can do some awesome low/mid gain refined Marshally tones, whereas the Mark IV can't. R2 =
The Mark IV's cleans OTOH...No SLO can touch that.

 

[Racerxrated]

I also noticed that when he first played the Mesa he just played and played well. When he switched to the SLO he immediately reached for knobs to tweak and then didn't play quite as well.

Also, they were played through a Mesa cab with I assume V30s. Through another cab the results might change a bit.

This. Completely overlooked this factor. As crappy as Marks sound through green backs, the SLO sounds equally crappy through v30s. GBs or 65s for the win with the SLO.

 

[jlb32]

I also noticed that when he first played the Mesa he just played and played well. When he switched to the SLO he immediately reached for knobs to tweak and then didn't play quite as well.

Also, they were played through a Mesa cab with I assume V30s. Through another cab the results might change a bit.

This. Completely overlooked this factor. As crappy as Marks sound through green backs, the SLO sounds equally crappy through v30s. GBs or 65s for the win with the SLO.

I've always thought Soldanos sound really great with V30 speakers versus other speakers. I know Mike isn't a fan of V30's but most don't seem to be huge fans of what he uses in his Soldano cabs either. I've rarely seen anyone gigging a Soldano amp with a Soldano cab.

 

[Chester Nimitz]

Nothing like a good slow ...

 

[gbsmusic]

SLO sounds great but the boogie does too just to compressed for me.

 

[VC4Ever]

Solano SLO's just don't do rhythm tones for me. They shine with single notes and solos. Its a LEAD amp. The Mark series kills it on rhythm tones and does well will solos too and has a way better clean channel. I have owned both and still have the Mark IV. Don't need to own an SLO just to say I own one.

 

[Chester Nimitz]

I think Mailman Dan's MESA MK III blows them both away ...