Diezel (VH4) with UA OX

I am curios what are your experiences about the Universal Audio Ox with your Diezel(s)?

I saw Myles Kennedy has used them with his amps. I assume he used his amps with the ox only (instead of cabs) as the Diezel Master volume is good enough to eliminate the usage the ox as a attenuator.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BwKHxkigqMp/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

What do you think about it?

I think the better way is to use Suhr Reactive Load: it's cheaper(pure load box without any compromises, additional bells and whistles) and most importantly you free to use any IR you want, instead of IR that comes with OX box(if I recall correctly they don't have any Diezel IR so far.) Diezel Cab is big part of Diezel sound.
I have Suhr RL for good couple years – one of the best pieces of gear I ever bought.

belensky":13ervjm7 said:

I think the better way is to use Suhr Reactive Load: it's cheaper(pure load box without any compromises, additional bells and whistles) and most importantly you free to use any IR you want, instead of IR that comes with OX box(if I recall correctly they don't have any Diezel IR so far.) Diezel Cab is big part of Diezel sound.
I have Suhr RL for good couple years – one of the best pieces of gear I ever bought.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your feedback!
If I would consider only the costs for an IR, I would rather take the st.Rock REACT:IR. It sounds pretty impressive.

right, st.Rock REACT:IR, is also very good option.

Suhr's proven itself worthy over the many years and as a name in this business of post-amp-boxes.

But that said, the UA Ox has received GLOWING commendations 'round the globe for its simplicity and perfection. Being UA, I doubt I'd fuss too much about the limited IRs as I am almost positive they'll have upgrades as they see fit. It's an expensive pieve of kit, no doubt - but I've not seen or known many people to buy into one only to say it sucks. The biggest beef with it is limited IRs - but outside of this?? It's rated the best out of the lot for all things else.

I am debating a few upgrades to my home workshop/studio. The UA Ox is top of the list, FWIW.

Peace
Unkle Mo

The OX has been phenomenal since they introduced the V30 models for high gain tones. I bought it as soon as it came out and it has been my preferred way of recording cleans, but it sounded awful for anything heavier. I think it's the complete recording tool now it has the essentials for metal. Cheers, Greg

the prophet 5150":16uv5j9o said:

The OX has been phenomenal since they introduced the V30 models for high gain tones. I bought it as soon as it came out and it has been my preferred way of recording cleans, but it sounded awful for anything heavier. I think it's the complete recording tool now it has the essentials for metal. Cheers, Greg

Click to expand...

I´ve tried a VH4 with the OX before its update. And telling the truth I was not impressed at all what I´ve heard.
I will try it again with fresh tubes and with the 1.2 update.....

It would be awesome if the OX would get the cab sim from the VHX.

belensky":shm2m606 said:

I think the better way is to use Suhr Reactive Load: it's cheaper(pure load box without any compromises, additional bells and whistles) and most importantly you free to use any IR you want, instead of IR that comes with OX box(if I recall correctly they don't have any Diezel IR so far.) Diezel Cab is big part of Diezel sound.

I have Suhr RL for good couple years – one of the best pieces of gear I ever bought.

Click to expand...

Just to be clear, in this setup you're using the Suhr Reactive Load and not the newer Suhr Reactive Load IR, correct? So are you using another piece of gear for the IRs? If so, what is your setup for that?

Do you find that doing it this way sounds better than the Ox Box or Waza TAE?