VHT Pittbull 100CL or Diezel Einstein / DMoll

[MetalHeadMike]

Most people seem to prefer the UL. I had a UL and have the CLX. Same preamp but different power section. The UL is slightly tighter, but I thought the power section on the CLX had a little more character. That ultra lead would stay insanely clean with no break up in the gain section

Depends on the year and particular circuit. I had an 01 UL (think that was the year), but there's a change that occurred. I lusted for a UL because of forum opinion that it was the tightest, most high headroom, clean gain amp out there, but the the earlier one like the one I bought was different. Still cool, but it was crazy saturated and the gain was almost too compressed and saturated. Crazy to say for an UL I know, but that was my experience.

The CL50 I had was waaaaay more open, dry. So was the 100CLX. That UL was like something so sickeningly sweet you almost couldn't stand it..in terms of saturation/compression.

 

[Kelly]

Get a mid to late 60’s Bassman and with one of your pedals it would absolutely crush and you’ll also have an amp that sounds amazing cranked on it’s own.
Or a Showman head and a Rat pedal

I had a '68 Bassman, and have a Deliverance. The Bassman is not anywhere near in the same league, unless you're playing SRV riffs all day.

 

[itsgoodnow]

Depends on the year and particular circuit. I had an 01 UL (think that was the year), but there's a change that occurred. I lusted for a UL because of forum opinion that it was the tightest, most high headroom, clean gain amp out there, but the the earlier one like the one I bought was different. Still cool, but it was crazy saturated and the gain was almost too compressed and saturated. Crazy to say for an UL I know, but that was my experience.

The CL50 I had was waaaaay more open, dry. So was the 100CLX. That UL was like something so sickeningly sweet you almost couldn't stand it..in terms of saturation/compression.

That’s wild. I heard about the year? Or two where the circuit was different and affected the tone. Mine was one of the last years they made it and it was cool.

 

[Kelly]

That’s wild. I heard about the year? Or two where the circuit was different and affected the tone. Mine was one of the last years they made it and it was cool.

The UL changed in the early nineties, mainly the PI. All of them after 1996 were the same circuit.

 

[braintheory]

Depends on the year and particular circuit. I had an 01 UL (think that was the year), but there's a change that occurred. I lusted for a UL because of forum opinion that it was the tightest, most high headroom, clean gain amp out there, but the the earlier one like the one I bought was different. Still cool, but it was crazy saturated and the gain was almost too compressed and saturated. Crazy to say for an UL I know, but that was my experience.

The CL50 I had was waaaaay more open, dry. So was the 100CLX. That UL was like something so sickeningly sweet you almost couldn't stand it..in terms of saturation/compression.

I tried once an earlier VHT UL at a studio in NJ that matches your description. I was also surprised. The Fryette UL I had and other I tried though was dry, open and kinda sterile/hollow like the CL and Deliverance's I've played. They're tight, but far from the very tightest amps I've tried. Same with respect to headroom imo. Some things just get exaggerated on forums sometimes. I think more so back in the day here

 

[Orvillain]

Im gonna tag @Orvillain , because I am sure he has some thoughts on this subject.

I think, but I could be wrong, he owned/owns both of these, at one time, or had access to both.

Again, I could be wrong.

They're very different amps tbh. I'm not sure I'd compare a Diezel to a VHT - totally different sound.

I've got a VH4, D-Moll, and a Hagen... and to be perfectly honest with you, I've not played them that much for the past year. I do like the VH4 the most out of them though.

The amps I've been playing most lately are the Mesa Dual Recto and Mark Five.

Diezel amps are fat and round and are not "modern" in the sense that, if you want a strong pick attack and fast response, you'll want to boost it. The Pitbull is dry and tight feeling, with a fast response... but sometimes lacks a little in the balls department.

 

[braintheory]

They're very different amps tbh. I'm not sure I'd compare a Diezel to a VHT - totally different sound.

I've got a VH4, D-Moll, and a Hagen... and to be perfectly honest with you, I've not played them that much for the past year. I do like the VH4 the most out of them though.

The amps I've been playing most lately are the Mesa Dual Recto and Mark Five.

Diezel amps are fat and round and are not "modern" in the sense that, if you want a strong pick attack and fast response, you'll want to boost it. The Pitbull is dry and tight feeling, with a fast response... but sometimes lacks a little in the balls department.

This part of why I don’t love either, but mostly just preferred other amps at their respective fortes

 

[jabps]

I'm really leaning on grabbing the CL ....... I've wanted a Pittbull before I even knew what a Diezel was ....

Then you should probably scratch that itch or you'll never know. I had the UL years ago and owned the SigX twice. Would have gotten the Deliverance at the time they were first released but no loop. At the time my chops were top notch and I liked them both. My second go around with the Sig, again great amp but my chops are shit and just easier to play the Marshall. Only Diezel I've ever liked is the Herbert which I owned for a minute. Side by side, with my chops together I'd probably go Fryette. Never got to play a CLX though and frankly I'd probably prefer that with the 34s.