Which amp out of these....

[Greazygeo]

Slo with a depth mod done has huge lows but the M90 does also and definitely is more versatile. You can't go wrong with either one. I love the SLO sound and have since the begining since I bought #008 in 1988. They are built just about as tough as the Wizards. The M90 on the other hand covers more ground. If you buy a SLO used, chances are it will retain its value forever being that it has been a mainstay for over 20 years now. If you told me I had to choose one, I wouldn't be able to. I didn't like the Herbert and found the preamp to be a little grainy sounding compared to my other amps.

Right now its a toss up between those two I think......Does the M90 have as much headroom as the SLO?

 

[Greazygeo]

You could also slave your current amps into a VHT 2150/Mesa Strategy 400/SS power amp. That'll really tighten things up, but won't really change the voicing into a modern one. Just an idea.

You had the ENGLs for a while, wouldn't that do the trick ?

Slaving does help, but need another voicing for the recording thing.

Nah no ENGL's. They don't use chokes and I don't like that feel. Too Bogner like.

 

[Szar]

The Diezels are more modernly voiced, but not SCOOP DEATH voiced. They have a nice mid-range. They will also handle the low tuning of your 7th string.

 

[Variable]

UL?

 

[se7en]

1 - Diezel VH4
2 - VHT UL

I don't find the Elmwood's very modern sounding and I owned an SLO...it was great for leads, but not amazing for downtuned rhythms/has limited versatilty...also, I wouldn't call it modern.

 

[dstroud]

What about an Uberschall? I think it was kind of designed for what you're talking about - FWIW I like it better than the amps you listed in your initial post.

 

[Greazygeo]

UL?

I had one of those and it's a great amp. Looking for something alittle different.

1 - Diezel VH4
2 - VHT UL

I don't find the Elmwood's very modern sounding and I owned an SLO...it was great for leads, but not amazing for downtuned rhythms/has limited versatilty...also, I wouldn't call it modern.

Hmm....versatility isnt a big deal really since its for recording. I wish I knew someone local that had a Diezel to try.

I didnt like the VH-4, but I really liked the Herbert

What didnt you like about it?

What about an Uberschall? I think it was kind of designed for what you're talking about - FWIW I like it better than the amps you listed in your initial post.

I had one of those Darren and hated it. I tried all kinds of stuff with it too.

The Diezels are more modernly voiced, but not SCOOP DEATH voiced. They have a nice mid-range. They will also handle the low tuning of your 7th string.

But is it a compressed tone?

 

[J.B.]

I've had all the Elmwoods and 2 SLO's. If you're going for an amp to excell at the lower tuning stuff (and have narrowed it down to these two), I wouldn't choose the SLO. There's just too much "hair" on the lower notes. I can't see it being good for that stuff unless you're running the gain lower or running the master at least at 11:00, which is stupid loud. The M90 would do a much better job and I think you would like the fact that it doesn't really sound like a Marshall, Mesa, Diezel, etc, etc. Has a voice of it's own. Very cool mid sweep too.

My $.02

Edit: KT66's might work well in the SLO for what you're looking for (from what I've heard).

 

[White_Van]

For low tuned stuff I would go for the Herbert.

 

[duesentrieb]

SLO + depth is cool. One of the best lead sounds ever, but a one trick pony with a shitty loop (if you should need a loop at all). I like them better with EL34s though (Avenger ).

Regarding the Diezels I'm biased of course, today I'd go with a VH4, esp when you're "new" to Diezel stuff. Ch 3 is THE Diezel sound. Not that Herbert isn't nice . . .

 

[Greazygeo]

I've had all the Elmwoods and 2 SLO's. If you're going for an amp to excell at the lower tuning stuff (and have narrowed it down to these two), I wouldn't choose the SLO. There's just too much "hair" on the lower notes. I can't see it being good for that stuff unless you're running the gain lower or running the master at least at 11:00, which is stupid loud. The M90 would do a much better job and I think you would like the fact that it doesn't really sound like a Marshall, Mesa, Diezel, etc, etc. Has a voice of it's own. Very cool mid sweep too.

My $.02

Edit: KT66's might work well in the SLO for what you're looking for (from what I've heard).

Thanks for the info. Running an amp loud isn't a problem. They pretty much always get the snot run out of them. I just watched a bunch of M90 vids. They seem to sound very VH-ish, is that what you found?

 

[Greazygeo]

SLO + depth is cool. One of the best lead sounds ever, but a one trick pony with a shitty loop (if you should need a loop at all). I like them better with EL34s though (Avenger ).

Regarding the Diezels I'm biased of course, today I'd go with a VH4, esp when you're "new" to Diezel stuff. Ch 3 is THE Diezel sound. Not that Herbert isn't nice . . .

Thanks Olaf. I listened to some Herbert stuff. It sounds pretty compressed to me...VH4 more open?

 

[Death by Uberschall]

My 2 cents from experience.

The SLO is a great tight amp with plenty of headroom. Get one with the depth mod, turns it into a completely different animal on the low notes. Originally the SLO was voiced for "the times" when hair bands were becoming the norm and it probably helped usher in the sound of 80's metal, but the depth mod shifts it into more of a modern voiced amp with plenty of low end. 6L6's or KT66's makes it better also. I disagree with previous post about the loop. It's tube driven and works just fine. The big problem most people have with the loops is that it's line level (+4db) which works great for rack gear, something it was designed for. But it can overdrive pedals that don't have a level in volume control.

The Avenger is nothing but a SLO minus the clean channel and has no loop. Same overdrive circuit as the SLO. Not sure if it uses the DeYoung trannies that are in the SLO? Soldano tries to keep them just for the SLO since they are such a major part of it's sound.

Something not mentioned yet, the Rivera K-Tre'. Read the review I posted recently in this forum, it could be the amp you are looking for. My review is spot on. I also own a SLO with the depth mod and give a comparison of the K-Tre' to the SLO.

Hope this helps.
-Mike

 

[Greazygeo]

My 2 cents from experience.

The SLO is a great tight amp with plenty of headroom. Get one with the depth mod, turns it into a completely different animal on the low notes. Originally the SLO was voiced for "the times" when hair bands were becoming the norm and it probably helped usher in the sound of 80's metal, but the depth mod shifts it into more of a modern voiced amp with plenty of low end. 6L6's or KT66's makes it better also. I disagree with previous post about the loop. It's tube driven and works just fine. The big problem most people have with the loops is that it's line level (+4db) which works great for rack gear, something it was designed for. But it can overdrive pedals that don't have a level in volume control.

The Avenger is nothing but a SLO minus the clean channel and has no loop. Same overdrive circuit as the SLO. Not sure if it uses the DeYoung trannies that are in the SLO? Soldano tries to keep them just for the SLO since they are such a major part of it's sound.

Something not mentioned yet, the Rivera K-Tre'. Read the review I posted recently in this forum, it could be the amp you are looking for. My review is spot on. I also own a SLO with the depth mod and give a comparison of the K-Tre' to the SLO.

Hope this helps.
-Mike

Thanks for the info Mike. Whatever I get will spend the majority of the time in the studio, so the loop isn't that big of a deal. I don't use any rack gear, so if I did use it sounds like my pedals would not be happy.

I've tried and heard some Rivera stuff before. None of it sounded very good to me except for the clean tones. Too much modded Fender/ Boogie-ish tones. They also seemed to have alot of pull pots that were very confusing. These were older ones.

 

[J.B.]

I've had all the Elmwoods and 2 SLO's. If you're going for an amp to excell at the lower tuning stuff (and have narrowed it down to these two), I wouldn't choose the SLO. There's just too much "hair" on the lower notes. I can't see it being good for that stuff unless you're running the gain lower or running the master at least at 11:00, which is stupid loud. The M90 would do a much better job and I think you would like the fact that it doesn't really sound like a Marshall, Mesa, Diezel, etc, etc. Has a voice of it's own. Very cool mid sweep too.

My $.02

Edit: KT66's might work well in the SLO for what you're looking for (from what I've heard).

Thanks for the info. Running an amp loud isn't a problem. They pretty much always get the snot run out of them. I just watched a bunch of M90 vids. They seem to sound very VH-ish, is that what you found?

Nah.. You can get a VH "type" tone out of it I would say. But not really that type of tone in general. I really think the Elmwoods have a voice/vibe of their own. I mentioned the mids before on the M90 having a really good swing to them. The mids really voice what you're going after in that amp IMO. I found the mid control to be "not just a mid control" if you know what I mean. Pretty cool...

 

[Death by Uberschall]

The loop is no where near a big deal as some people make it out to be. Some older low level analog pedals might, and I say might have an issue and try to distort. But it's easily fixed with a simple volume pedal or some type of simple (and cheap) volume box or mini mixer to control the send volume.

The K-Tre' is a new animal from Rivera. If you haven't read my review, take few minutes to do so. Very simple layout, simple eq, and the Foundation control which acts like a sub level will kick you in the chest, especially when detuned. The controls are stripped down for a Rivera, no need to be a rocket scientist with this amp. I was skeptical about it at first too. Thinking the same way, "it's just Rivera's take on a Boogie", but it's much more and kills the Recto for an all out in your face amp. Very tight amp. Just do yourself a favor and go play one. Not for just a few minutes, but really spend some time with it. You might be suprised. ;-) If you find it's just not for you, there's always a SLO waiting for you.

 

[duesentrieb]

SLO + depth is cool. One of the best lead sounds ever, but a one trick pony with a shitty loop (if you should need a loop at all). I like them better with EL34s though (Avenger ).

Regarding the Diezels I'm biased of course, today I'd go with a VH4, esp when you're "new" to Diezel stuff. Ch 3 is THE Diezel sound. Not that Herbert isn't nice . . .

Thanks Olaf. I listened to some Herbert stuff. It sounds pretty compressed to me...VH4 more open?

Vice versa, George. Out of the three the VH4 has the most compression, Einstein is more open while Herbert is in the middle - it depends a bit on your volume of course and your gain settings - Herbert has the biggest headroom for obvious reasons, but most clips are made at low volumes, so one could be under the impression that Herbie has more than the others.

What I meant was that the typical Diezel is VH4/ch3, which is a compressed sound. If you need a "tool" which can do lots of stuff, incl. the "evil" side of things it is true that Herbie might be a better choice.

 

[duesentrieb]

The loop of the SLO is "shitty" (sorry for the wording) because its level isn't uptodate anymore. This can be easily fixed (one resistor, one cap) - my point is that the circuitry of Mike Soldano, which IS awesome, sounds IMO much better without the loop - as in the Avenger. Thats a super open, high gain sound.

edit: also the position of the loop within the circuitry is sub-optimal when the amp is used as a twin channel amp, because the levels of the two channels are different and there's no way to adjust this difference when using - lets say a good pedal in the loop - and both channels. Huge volume difference for the unit which makes it hard to dial everything in correctly.

edit 2: this all might not affect you using it for recording as you've said. I'd still try the SLO and Avenger side by side - and would be curious how you'd feel about them

 

[johnnyjellybean]

Slo with a depth mod done has huge lows but the M90 does also and definitely is more versatile. You can't go wrong with either one. I love the SLO sound and have since the begining since I bought #008 in 1988. They are built just about as tough as the Wizards. The M90 on the other hand covers more ground. If you buy a SLO used, chances are it will retain its value forever being that it has been a mainstay for over 20 years now. If you told me I had to choose one, I wouldn't be able to. I didn't like the Herbert and found the preamp to be a little grainy sounding compared to my other amps.

Right now its a toss up between those two I think......Does the M90 have as much headroom as the SLO?

For cleans, It has more headroom than the SLO. On crunch and OD , it is definitely at least on par with the SLO

 

[se7en]

I've heard that the VH4 picks up where the VHT UL leads off. It's supposed to have more bloom to the notes vs. the rigid decay of the UL. I know you weren't too impressed with the XTC (my favorite amp), but I know a lot of guys that like KT88's/6550's in there and they say it tightens it up and makes it less compressed. There are some clips on netmusicians.org of the 6550's. Did yours have the updated post 2004 red channel mod on it? Oh and to throw another amp out there: How about a H&K Triamp MKII?