# Soldano SLO 100



## NewReligion

I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana to play a 1991 Soldano SLO 100 thru the matching 1991 Soldano 412 cab (Speakers Unknown) yesterday. I am posting this only because of the major disappointment. I expected at the least Marshall Like tones and performance. Not even close, I own and have owned 2203's & 2204's. I found the amp to resemble the stock Peavey Triple X Head. It felt very Present, Brittle and Buzzy. I then plugged into a Marshall SLASH SIG JUBILEE SL2555. Huge improvement. It actually reminded me of my JCM 800 2210's with less low end and gain, of course that could of been due to the 1960 cab with 75's. I was really glad that I stopped in and layed those interest to rest. 

The Jub Re-Issue was a great head, but not for the money ($1,999.00). The Soldano @ ($2,999.00) was no more a hot rodded Marshall than anything that has come from the Peavey camp in the last 20 years. It actually reminded me of the crap Mike Soldano tried to push thru Yamaha/Soldano 20 years ago. I have owned and played many amps to include a custom built Splawn (Nice but not for me, Freaky mid range and compression). Nothing on the Major Market compares to the old Marshalls and Re-Issues. Will "they" ever stop trying to re-invent the wheel? 

Just wanted to express my dismay at such a highly regarded amp. Cold, Sterile, Brittle and Buzzy. It in my oppinion does not fit anywhere in the JCM Family and certainly not a Marshall at any price. Sorry if anyone is offended. In that defense I will at the first opportunity play the next SLO I come across however my expectations are certainly grounded if not crashed.

David

David C. Hopkins on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads


----------



## jerryjg

Now try a MarkV.


----------



## NewReligion

jerryjg said:


> Now try a MarkV.



Sounds like a cool amp. Think I will. I owned 3 of the Early pre-1993 Dual Rec's and tried to like them but they never really got me there and two of them blew circuits, one actually caught fire on stage one night. I'm a Metal/Blues player. You think I'll dig the Mark 5?


----------



## jerryjg

NewReligion said:


> Sounds like a cool amp. Think I will. I owned 3 of the Eaely pre-1993 Dual Rec's and tried to like them but they never really got me there and two of them blew circuits, one actually caught fire on stage one night. I'm a Metal/Blues player. You think I'll dig the Mark 5?



Probably not, but I don't know too much about them. Do you like the Rectos?
They won't sound as organic as some of your old school metal marshalls and early Boogies like as were played by Priest, Sabbath, maiden, Metalliaca.
If you dig petruccis latest stuff, then youll love the Mesa rectos, but he's changed to the Marks now. If your bag is clear clean razor sharp fat full lead, then the Marks deliver.
Tahts just my take from waht Ive learned off clips and from reviews..Ive never even played one.


----------



## nedcronin

I have had several boogies and it's always the same for me...I can get every sound but the one I want. And it's just so easy to get the tone I want from a Marshall, because it's a Marshall tone I seek. From your posts that I have read I think you like a Marshall tone too. And I know you are a tone seeker. I think a tone seeker and the Mark V are a bad match because you will drive yourself bananas with all the knobs and shifts and switches.....at least I know I would.


----------



## Bieling3

Im surprised there aren't more Splawn lovers here at the forum. While I haven't had the chance to play one in person yet, they have the best sounding video's on youtube (not that that means all that much). Try to find a good sounding demo video of a DSL and you'll be looking all day. 

Even JCM 800 videos with good sound quality are few and far between. Yet every Splawn video sounds amazing. I wonder what it is that doens't translate. Maybe that compressed nature you're talking about makes it easier for camera mics.


----------



## PaoloJM

NewReligion said:


> I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana to play a 1991 Soldano SLO 100 thru the matching 1991 Soldano 412 cab (Speakers Unknown) yesterday. I am posting this only because of the major disappointment. I expected at the least Marshall Like tones and performance. Not even close, I own and have owned 2203's & 2204's. I found the amp to resemble the stock Peavey Triple X Head. It felt very Present, Brittle and Buzzy. I then plugged into a Marshall SLASH SIG JUBILEE SL2555. Huge improvement. It actually reminded me of my JCM 800 2210's with less low end and gain, of course that could of been due to the 1960 cab with 75's. I was really glad that I stopped in and layed those interest to rest.
> 
> The Jub Re-Issue was a great head, but not for the money ($1,999.00). The Soldano @ ($2,999.00) was no more a hot rodded Marshall than anything that has come from the Peavey camp in the last 20 years. It actually reminded me of the crap Mike Soldano tried to push thru Yamaha/Soldano 20 years ago. I have owned and played many amps to include a custom built Splawn (Nice but not for me, Freaky mid range and compression). Nothing on the Major Market compares to the old Marshalls and Re-Issues. Will "they" ever stop trying to re-invent the wheel?
> 
> Just wanted to express my dismay at such a highly regarded amp. Cold, Sterile, Brittle and Buzzy. It in my oppinion does not fit anywhere in the JCM Family and certainly not a Marshall at any price. Sorry if anyone is offended. In that defense I will at the first opportunity play the next SLO I come across however my expectations are certainly grounded if not crashed.
> 
> David
> 
> David C. Hopkins on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads



The SLO you tried was not set up correctly or was defective. Report back when you try another one that is working correctly.


----------



## Large_Filter_Cap

Everytime I have tried a SLO or a Soldano it has always blown me away, and arguably superior to alot of Marshalls...ya I said it.
IF you are always looking for a 2203 sound, you aren't going to find it in Mark, Stilletto, SLO, or whatever, but if you are looking for a different and great sounding amp, a SLO is an option.


----------



## custom53

Large_Filter_Cap said:


> Everytime I have tried a SLO or a Soldano it has always blown me away, and arguably superior to alot of Marshalls...ya I said it.
> IF you are always looking for a 2203 sound, you aren't going to find it in Mark, Stilletto, SLO, or whatever, but if you are looking for a different and great sounding amp, a SLO is an option.



ditto...


----------



## lucidspoon

NewReligion said:


> I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana


Let me know next time you're going there, because that's the one I usually go to for strings and stuff, since my band practices in Southport.


----------



## siav

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4nZ1NIS54U]YouTube - Soldano SLO 100 amp demo[/ame]


----------



## NewReligion

Yes, I have seen that video many times. Though it sounds many times better than the model I played live, I suspect much of it has to do with the fact that most if not all of the signal you hear is reproduced by the SM57 which has been mastered thru EQ with a low pass filter not allowing freq's above a set limit to pass there by smoothing out the recording. This video was created directly for sales. 

If you watch closely later when the heavey distortion is applied (around the 5 minute mark), the adjustment of the tone knobs has little effect. This tells me that the secondary recording device is "Limiting" the Freq's to be recorded as most producers do with any amp. a quality Camcorder will deliver a more accurate recording but there is always something lost in translation. This recording doesn't sound that different from the Diezel recordings these guys produced and we all know these amps are very different.

Cam Recording of a Cameron JMP2204: This guy has some nice amps. Marshall Growl! 
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gqMMmCK4Yo&feature=related[/ame]

Now don't miss the point. The point is that the Soldano has been EQ'd (Who knows what it really sounds like). The Marshall is recorded with a crappy camcorder pencil mic.


----------



## Bieling3

Man, that hotrodded 2204 sounds sweat! I'd rather just buy a Egnator Renegade than fork over all that money for an SLO:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W-PDv6GlRs]YouTube - Egnater Renegade Wet/Dry - Overdrive Demo[/ame]


----------



## PaoloJM

NewReligion said:


> Yes, I have seen that video many times. Though it sounds many times better than the model I played live, I suspect much of it has to do with the fact that most if not all of the signal you hear is reproduced by the SM57 which has been mastered thru EQ with a low pass filter not allowing freq's above a set limit to pass there by smoothing out the recording. This video was created directly for sales.
> 
> If you watch closely later when the heavey distortion is applied (around the 5 minute mark), the adjustment of the tone knobs has little effect. This tells me that the secondary recording device is "Limiting" the Freq's to be recorded as most producers do with any amp. a quality Camcorder will deliver a more accurate recording but there is always something lost in translation. This recording doesn't sound that different from the Diezel recordings these guys produced and we all know these amps are very different.
> 
> Cam Recording of a Cameron JMP2204: This guy has some nice amps. Marshall Growl!
> YouTube - Cameron Aldrich modded Marshall
> 
> Now don't miss the point. The point is that the Soldano has been EQ'd (Who knows what it really sounds like). The Marshall is recorded with a crappy camcorder pencil mic.



There's loads of uTube vids of SLO sounding great with just cam corders or digicams. I'm at work but I'll dig up a few later.


----------



## Bieling3

Here's one of it's little cousin:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPN8qO57lII]YouTube - Jet City 100 KT88 Demo[/ame]

...and here's one SLO vs 6505+

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT3vnSro458]YouTube - Peavey 6505+ vs. Soldano SLO[/ame]


----------



## JCM1959RR

the jet city sounds more open & clear - the SLO & Peavey sound smoother & more compressed - The Marshall demo sounds the best in my opinion - Full, crisp, clear - bold & open. I like the sound of older Marshall amps - I have owned a lot of newer Marshall amps like DSL50 & 100 - JVM210H - TSL100 & I can say newer Marshall amps have a ton of bass - My DSL50 sounds a lot better with an EQ in the Loop - Turn the EQ off & the clean channel turns to Mud - almost like a blanket over the speakers - Plug in the 1987X with a SD-1 & it's clear - open classic Marshall tone


----------



## FTMF

SLO's are Great Amps.....


----------



## Billyblades

I sold all 3 of the Soldanos i owned. Thought they were great until...well thats another story,,, but lets just say they no longer collect dust


----------



## bulldozer1984

this thread is nearly 3 years old lol


----------



## drgordonfreeman

bulldozer1984 said:


> this thread is nearly 3 years old lol




New poster bumps a 3 year old thread. LOL. nice.

Nonetheless, I wonder if David ever changed his opinion on the SLO?


----------



## SonVolt

bulldozer1984 said:


> this thread is nearly 3 years old lol




I almost responded until I read that, lol.


----------



## mickeydg5

Hold the phone. Even though the topic was three years old something still holds true. I would not trust the overall sound of a demoed amplifier sitting in a music store, especially Guitar Center. Not that I know Soldano's.

That goes likewise for other gear as well like guitars and their setup. Although you can look a guitar over and spot whether it is setup well enough.


----------



## diesect20022000

bulldozer1984 said:


> this thread is nearly 3 years old lol


 don't rain on my shameless Framus plug. it's cold filtered.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## bulldozer1984

mantrasky said:


> The Video's were meant for entertainment, and I'm a little surprised of people that judge the SLO that to this day, many professional guitarist still regard as there key element for recording & touring! I never said they were the best in the whole world and criticize others, I've owned almost every Marshall amp type also modified by Arrendondo, Jackson, Bogner, Soldano etc. I've also owned many Boutique amps, XTC 100b, 101b, Classic & Shiva. VHT Pittbull Classic, Dave Friedman, CAA PT100 and so on. All these amps are great in there own way, they either work for me or they don't, but I can also give an experience unbiased opinion for people that want to know the difference from one to another. For myself I really love my SLO's which led me to this forum, I really didn't know how old this post was from Google (does it really matter?) I posted these two video's just to show the versatility from a couple of guitarist that I respect, sorry if they offended anyone.



Why would we be offended ?


----------



## FTMF

A lot of people seem to be easy to offend these days or a need to hate something??


----------



## Australian

That reminds me, I have to get mine back from my friend. 
I think the hot rod + is a great amp!


----------



## Billyblades

I read thru n didnt see anyone posting "negative "...

It is an old post but you didnt offend anyone n everyone who.posted was just suprised as i was to see the date.

The soldanos arent all they are cracked up to be. Gain doesnt equal tone. Best soldanos were modded Marshalls.

I had a prototype hr50 that killed an slo in the tone dept. It was more marshally.
Soldanos have a bright hiwatt style tone that doesnt agree with me anymore.....

Not saying theyre bad. Quite the opposite. But i dont like that "flavor " anymore...


----------



## solarburn

I've never liked their tone either. Doesn't mean an expressive guitar player won't sound good through it. I think when a player reaches a certain playing ability he can sound good through anything. That I'm sure is obvious. What the SLO is missing for me are the mids I love out of a vintage Marshall.

I like Soldano's Speedster amps which are local here. I've heard/seen one live and the tone the kid was getting from it was mouth dropping. It wasn't a Marshall.LOL

Oh...and welcome to the forum!


----------



## NewReligion

drgordonfreeman said:


> New poster bumps a 3 year old thread. LOL. nice.
> 
> Nonetheless, I wonder if David ever changed his opinion on the SLO?



No Sir. My opinion remains. 

David


----------



## shooto

I had a Hot Rod + and it was pretty kickazz


----------



## Billyblades

Mike S builds a mean n clean machine no doubt. I found them to be better live than recording.
Recording with soldanos sucked because i had to turn down the gain and lose all the sizzle just to get a decent tone.

I moved on and sold them all after achieving my personal "holy grail " amp. 

Now i can record all the "Rage " i want to dial in without sounding like a chainsaw. I prefer biting an Robust over buzzy n cold. Turning the gain up on a soldano "full throttle " yielded this buzzy. N brash tones that aggrivate my ears.

I got a avenger too that when ab 'd with my main amp and it sounded weak n hollow in comparison and i tried to dial it in and it just couldnt hang!


----------



## bulldozer1984

siav said:


> YouTube - Soldano SLO 100 amp demo



has anyone ever noticed that's Zach demoing that SLO ?


----------



## solarburn

bulldozer1984 said:


> has anyone ever noticed that's Zach demoing that SLO ?



You mean Zachman?


----------



## bulldozer1984

solarburnDSL50 said:


> You mean Zachman?



Yup !


----------



## solarburn

HS! I didn't see that at all.LOL

my eyes are bad. I still can't see if it is for sure. I need the hair back on. I'm willing to bet you're the only one that noticed.


----------



## bulldozer1984

solarburnDSL50 said:


> HS! I didn't see that at all.LOL
> 
> my eyes are bad. I still can't see if it is for sure. I need the hair back on. I'm willing to bet you're the only one that noticed.



Yeh that him for sure. I noticed about 6 months ago. Zach had just posted some pics of himself with short hair and when i saw that vid i recognized him straight away. 

The guitar, playing style and look is definitely him.

Oh and look in the description. It actually says Zach lol


----------



## Bigbazz

No surprise that an SLO100 sounds like a 5150/6505, I was always under the impression that the 5150 was basically a ripoff clone of a SLO. No surprise you can't get Marshall tones from it either, still I think they are awesome sounding amps.


----------



## solarburn

bulldozer1984 said:


> Yeh that him for sure. I noticed about 6 months ago. Zach had just posted some pics of himself with short hair and when i saw that vid i recognized him straight away.
> 
> The guitar, playing style and look is definitely him.
> 
> Oh and look in the description. It actually says Zach lol



Yeah I saw it said Zach and after watching the playing I think so too. I've seen that vid before too. Just never noticed. I'm use to seeing him at his place or the store in his vids.


----------



## Billyblades

When.he breaks out in VH tunes that shit sounds horribly thin. Almost like a trap door where all the mids fell thru like wile e' coyote standing over a cliff. Poof! That right there is what brought me back to the ol school hotrodded marshall circuit.


----------



## rmlevasseur

The SLO is my primary amp and always was in my gigging days. It is a tough beast to tame. When i bought it I did not want a Marshall, and frankly it just isn't one. For so few eq controls, it is amazing how much different sound they put out. VH, Ratt, Knoppfler, Aerosmith, i mean the list goes on and on. It is also indestructible. Ten years of heavy gigging and another five of bedroom use and never so much as a crackle. Just dont use it with whatever eminence speaker Soldano was putting in their stock cab. Yuck.

Marshall's do have a certain soul (at east the old ones) that the slo cant touch, just like old Fender's do. The slo may have been built for the desire for a high gain marshall but it became its own thing. 

I have heard people describe it as sterile, but i always thought of it more as a white page. It's up to the player to color it, as opposed to something like a Recto that always sounds like a Recto despite player nuance.


----------



## NewReligion

rmlevasseur said:


> Just dont use it with whatever eminence speaker Soldano was putting in their stock cab. Yuck.



Fair enough. The SLO's I played were through Celestion 75's which I view as less than favorable.


David


----------



## S9X

Soldano also used V30 back in early 90s. I had 412 straight loaded w/ V30s some years ago (made in 92-93 not sure, I bought it used) and it sounded just killer. HUGE bottom end, and not harsh upper mids at all. Very different from typical V30s. Now it gets funny - after I sold it to a friend, he had discovered that previous (first) owner disconnected one speaker, rest was wired series/parallel. Sort of 312 with passive cone. Never tried it with SLO, I had Hot Rod 50 (single channel), but it sounded pretty good, and that trick may be useful for sb.


----------



## zachman

solarburnDSL50 said:


> Yeah I saw it said Zach and after watching the playing I think so too. I've seen that vid before too. Just never noticed. I'm use to seeing him at his place or the store in his vids.



Wow, that was a long time ago. Ya, that's me. It's REALLY awkward playing while someone is twisting knobs randomly.


----------



## zachman

Billyblades said:


> When.he breaks out in VH tunes that shit sounds horribly thin. Almost like a trap door where all the mids fell thru like wile e' coyote standing over a cliff. Poof! That right there is what brought me back to the ol school hotrodded marshall circuit.



Ya, instead of dialing IN the sound to match what I was playing, it seemed almost instinctively that Ed would dial in the exact opposite of what we'd want. Very strange to try playing while someone is doing that to the gain and tone while you're jamming.

The high gain stuff was cool. Very stiff feeling amp, compared to a plexi. Very bright amp too. The clean channel (didn't like it)


----------



## bulldozer1984

zachman said:


> Wow, that was a long time ago. Ya, that's me. It's REALLY awkward playing while someone is twisting knobs randomly.



Yeh ive had people turn knobs while im playing and when something sounds bad i just stop and tell em to piss off. Cant do that while shooting a demo can ya ?? haha


----------



## solarburn

zachman said:


> Wow, that was a long time ago. Ya, that's me. It's REALLY awkward playing while someone is twisting knobs randomly.




The playing's great man...it's the amp I don't care for and you saying its stiff is exactly what I here too. I jus prefer the Plexi feel and tone much more. The SLO has this lack of Marshall in it and it puts me off a bit so its a different animal and I prefer something else. I do enjoy other amps though. Maybe its kind of a sterile saturation with the SLO...I'm not sure...a hollowness in the mids...fuck I don't know?LOL

Dude was all over the place EQing and saturating so it never hit a good zone for long.


----------



## DSL 50

SLO's need volume to deliver the full tone
3-4 on Master minimim


----------



## NewReligion

Okay...no more bashing from me....I dig the Friedman and Cameron circuits which IMO best compliments the Marshall intent. Amazing intellectual properties indeed.

Played a Pink Taco, it was cool and damn near bought it but got home and fired up the Cameron's etc...Damn, at all levels of volume pure smooth bliss. Just can't do the buzz/fizz...that is what turned me off of the EVH III. Greg Howe has a Sig out called the Maragold...check it out. 2 channel and very affordable. Quite a killer amp to say the least.

David ♫


----------



## custom53

I don't know if anyone else had this problem with their Soldano's, but my HR50+ seems to go thru tubes a lot more than any of my other amps. To my ears the tone changes after 10 to 12 months ever since my first tube change... Install new tubes and bias and it is back to "normal" sounding great..


----------



## mickeydg5

NewReligion said:


> Okay...no more bashing from me....I dig the Friedman and Cameron circuits which IMO best compliments the Marshall intent. Amazing intellectual properties indeed.
> 
> Played a Pink Taco, it was cool and damn near bought it but got home and fired up the Cameron's etc...Damn, at all levels of volume pure smooth bliss. Just can't do the buzz/fizz...that is what turned me off of the EVH III. Greg Howe has a Sig out called the Maragold...check it out. 2 channel and very affordable. Quite a killer amp to say the least.
> 
> David ♫


Please explain the buzz/fizz thing. Do you like it or not like it? You said cannot do; does that mean you cannot do or the amplifier cannot do?

When I think of buzz or fizz in a good way the thoughts of Jimi (fizz or fuzz) and Dimebag (buzz) come to mind. I love those sounds and tone. So please describe the situations with these amplifiers.


----------



## NewReligion

mickeydg5 said:


> Please explain the buzz/fizz thing. Do you like it or not like it? You said cannot do; does that mean you cannot do or the amplifier cannot do?
> 
> When I think of buzz or fizz in a good way the thoughts of Jimi (fizz or fuzz) and Dimebag (buzz) come to mind. I love those sounds and tone. So please describe the situations with these amplifiers.



"Can not do" translates to will not tolerate the shitty normal buzy fizzy distortion of for example a stock DSL etc... I am aware that you know the difference between quality saturated signals i.e. Friedman vs DSL...in fact it is what drives me away from a stock 2203/2204 and a pedal...still can not do the buzzy fizzy cheap sounding stiff nasty circuit.

I am convinced it is a scam to just keep guitarist chasing their tails after the latest and greatest next best thing. IMO I am fortunate and have surrounded my self with great saturated roaring amps...Diezel VH4/Cameron/Friedman modded Marshall Improvements.

If I have offended anyone I do apologize but I have been chasing Saturated tones for over 42 years and have founds the circuit mods that make those in the studio happening tones occur live at home at conversation level or loud as hell on stage. 

And thank you Mickey for all of the lessons. David ♫

LIVE / ALL NO PEDALS:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8R-XnixsfM[/ame]

SAME AMP HOME LOW LEVEL:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H12qoOGvH28[/ame]


----------



## mickeydg5

Dude you can never offend. I do not think it is in you. You never disappoint.

It just was not clear in the original statement. I figured what you meant but wanted it to be clear.
You meant the bad fizz or buzz as some over doing, over processing and some not so ideal tube or solid state type situations sound like.

Also you are welcome and I must thank you, a valued member and contributor here.


----------



## solarburn

NewReligion said:


> I am convinced it is a scam to just keep guitarist chasing their tails after the latest and greatest next best thing. IMO I am fortunate and have surrounded my self with great saturated roaring amps...Diezel VH4/Cameron/Friedman modded Marshall Improvements.
> 
> 
> LIVE / ALL NO PEDALS:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8R-XnixsfM
> 
> SAME AMP HOME LOW LEVEL:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H12qoOGvH28



 you may be right about that. Enuff tone to set the hook yet we can't keep them fizzy bubbles down. Amp after amp after amp with the same complaint many of us have. Ya think they'd be able to clip that shit and still be fine in a mix and not a handicap in the studio dialing it out.

That fizz rubs me wrong too and it's a common obstacle I've faced many times...


----------



## mickeydg5

New Religion and Solarburn
What is your setup and initial gain set to including up front pedals if applicable?


----------



## zachman

NewReligion said:


> "Can not do" translates to will not tolerate the shitty normal buzy fizzy distortion of for example a stock DSL etc... I am aware that you know the difference between quality saturated signals i.e. Friedman vs DSL...in fact it is what drives me away from a stock 2203/2204 and a pedal...still can not do the buzzy fizzy cheap sounding stiff nasty circuit.
> 
> I am convinced it is a scam to just keep guitarist chasing their tails after the latest and greatest next best thing. IMO I am fortunate and have surrounded my self with great saturated roaring amps...Diezel VH4/Cameron/Friedman modded Marshall Improvements.
> 
> If I have offended anyone I do apologize but I have been chasing Saturated tones for over 42 years and have founds the circuit mods that make those in the studio happening tones occur live at home at conversation level or loud as hell on stage.
> 
> And thank you Mickey for all of the lessons. David ♫
> 
> LIVE / ALL NO PEDALS:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8R-XnixsfM
> 
> SAME AMP HOME LOW LEVEL:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H12qoOGvH28



I LOVE your taste in gear. 

Here is my tribute in tribute to your tribute: Rhythm track Boogie MKIII Coliseum on the R2 channel, Heavy rhythm Cameron High gain Jose mod Marshall SLP, solo Boogie on Lead channel

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxISv-qed5I[/ame]


----------



## solarburn

Mickey I prefer the power section mixed in enuff to warm and de fizz the preamp as much as I can dial in yet be useable volume wise. Otherwise it's a matter of amp low gain and pedal drive introduced to punch it out, not add fizz, over saturate and I want sound/feel to dynamically feedback or clean up.

My settings depend on amp circuit of course but my tactics are usually the same. My pups are chosen to not be scooped or harsh and not brittle up when rolled off. I usually use Greenbacks(G12M's)and I like upper mids warmed up, yet biting, snarling and sticky haha.

I don't like SLO's. They are missing what I like most about certain Marshall circuits. Dem midz. I hate stiff and sterile amps too.

What exactly are you thinking about Mickey? Don't know if I was too general and you wanted more specifics...


----------



## solarburn

All I have to say is we have some awesome players here in our forum and they know gear too. I've learned so much and continue to.

Thanks Bruthers!


----------



## mickeydg5

solarburnDSL50 said:


> Mickey I prefer the power section mixed in enuff to warm and de fizz the preamp as much as I can dial in yet be useable volume wise. Otherwise it's a matter of amp low gain and pedal drive introduced to punch it out, not add fizz, over saturate and I want sound/feel to dynamically feedback or clean up.
> 
> My settings depend on amp circuit of course but my tactics are usually the same. My pups are chosen to not be scooped or harsh and not brittle up when rolled off. I usually use Greenbacks(G12M's)and I like upper mids warmed up, yet biting, snarling and sticky haha.
> 
> I don't like SLO's. They are missing what I like most about certain Marshall circuits. Dem midz. I hate stiff and sterile amps too.
> 
> What exactly are you thinking about Mickey? Don't know if I was too general and you wanted more specifics...


Nah. Your answer suffices. Low gain, pedal introduced and loudness set to heat things up. I think that is key for a lot of different tones or sounds. Just enough of a solid state or digital distortion to provide an edge to the organic type tube sound. I like lower but decent levels, enough for focus and clarity, up front to feed other gear and power amplifiers. A guitarist needs good bottom and top but the middle needs to be dialed in for good penetration. I believe that to bring everything into place. Hee, hee, I used the word penetration .

The point being I guess with most amplifiers, stock or not, that 100% tube saturation can not always be relied upon. Preamp circuits and tubes can be harsh too.
Its not an argument. Some like their tube amplifier gain at 8 or 10. I like mine much lower. Of course the settings depend on the amplifier and the outboard gear.


----------



## NewReligion

mickeydg5 said:


> New Religion and Solarburn
> What is your setup and initial gain set to including up front pedals if applicable?




I rebuild/modify my Marshall's potentiometer's set on 9 to be operated with Vintage custom shop Ibanez RG's & HSS Stratocasters for optimal saturation, definition and guitar volume roll back for clarity. At 10 I get paracitic ossilation which works for my taste and utilization of equipment. I use no OD pedals all triode tube signal other than rectification. 

I install metro loops for solo boost, delay and reverb if wanted. I go from man in the Box to wonderful tonight (Mean to Clean) with the same rig and axe all night with "one channel" as intended without losing continuity IMO. I have a Cameron modded 1984 JCM 800 2204 I use as a back up to my personal tweaked marshall conversion/s...so far not needed as I maintain my amplification as I do my custom shop guitars and everything else. 

I have just started working on variations on the themes for other guitarist's to enjoy. "I keep my amps high-low passed filtered for LIVE performance as they sit very well in the loud stage mix unlike the toy line6 amps used at home by no gigging guitarist. These amps are compelling enough to play until you must compete with the likes of a "John Henry Bonham" etc... then it becomes obvious they are indeed toys at best. I can't please everyone but must offer an alternative if I ever go public with my developments. 

My observation is that everyone continues to use old world circuit assemblies developed for clean guitar in high gain amps...simply stupid IMO...it is a different animal, it must be fed a new diet. Just some things to ponder.

Peace be with you and by all means keep it clean, clear and precise no matter how saturated...clarity equals definition and dynamics.

David ♫ Plexi converted to a High Gain 2204 straight in. More of a Dark Horse instead of a 2204: 
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPSzSxNbLK4[/ame]


----------



## mickeydg5

Thank you David. You have your eye on the money or in this case your eye on the signal.
That is one variety of approach too, one road which the average do not travel. You are going the all tube route, nice and organic. As you pointed out there are always better ways to get from instrument to amplifier or from point A to point B for specific circumstances. Your approach is to tailor those circuits for best signal. It is not enough to get from point to point but to do it with restraint yet stay powerful. That provides for maximum clarity, definition and dynamics.
Dreyn usually brings up the "correct pickups for the amplifier front end" thing and that is part of it.
It is just like people notice and bring up instances of this guitar or this pedal sounds amazing with this amplifier but not so hot with this one. Some things match up better, literally match up as in something I always mention with impedance, maximum power transfer. Anything less degrades signal. Things work and sound so much better when matched for what is trying to be accomplished.

A lot of people do not fool with higher end gear where one can actually monitor the signal from the guitar and trough the equipment. Some gear may have clipping indicators. Other gear will have multi indicators or analog panels for signal level. When you set the signal to the right levels traveling through the chain it makes a drastic difference in sound to the discerning ear. That is your clarity, definition, dynamics, presence, punch all culminating. That provides maximum transfer for maximum clarity and power prior to distortion/clipping. (not to confused with saturation, overdrive and distortion effects)

Anyway your now approach is different, more meticulous in the amplifier, yet still the same.


----------



## mickeydg5

I wanted to get your setup descriptions to understand it a little better.

The point is I guess to gauge how you were handling signal.
I like keeping gain levels lower for the clarity. When I say lower I mean always below the brink of destruction. I believe that is what you guys are doing too. Once the signal goes beyond that it is degraded and it is downhill from there.


----------



## NewReligion

mickeydg5 said:


> I wanted to get your setup descriptions to understand it a little better.
> 
> The point is I guess to gauge how you were handling signal.
> I like keeping gain levels lower for the clarity. When I say lower I mean always below the brink of destruction. I believe that is what you guys are doing too. Once the signal goes beyond that it is degraded and it is downhill from there.



This ...exactly. 

The art (End Game) is being able to achieve saturation and sustain to coexist with clarity withe the right amount of compression and sag or stiffness for the individual player. Just not going to get it all from any one single amp....period IMO

David ♫


----------



## solarburn

mickeydg5 said:


> I wanted to get your setup descriptions to understand it a little better.
> 
> The point is I guess to gauge how you were handling signal.
> I like keeping gain levels lower for the clarity. When I say lower I mean always below the brink of destruction. I believe that is what you guys are doing too. Once the signal goes beyond that it is degraded and it is downhill from there.



Well I'm a lower gain player so manipulating that signal for what I want isn't as challenging. However I have learned a fair amount of tactics to do it just the same. Occasionally I get some good results.

David's doing the real balancing act cause he is working with a stronger or hotter signal. Much more to tame and at the same time punch out to a specific point. Keeping it organic and touch sensitive at its most tactile point is a feat indeed. David can tweak the whole gear chain to have it mesh however he needs it to. Pays off being able to rework an amp if needed.

Me I do my best to get the chain to deliver with only what I know outside of the amp, guitar/pups, pedals, speakers...excluding tubes and biasing of course. I learn to manipulate any amp I have but I'm limited to its constraints, how it is built. I can't mod an amp ...yet. If I could I would revoice/rework to get what I wanted. Just like David.


----------



## NewReligion

solarburnDSL50 said:


> Well I'm a lower gain player so manipulating that signal for what I want isn't as challenging. However I have learned a fair amount of tactics to do it just the same. Occasionally I get some good results.
> 
> David's doing the real balancing act cause he is working with a stronger or hotter signal. Much more to tame and at the same time punch out to a specific point. Keeping it organic and touch sensitive at its most tactile point is a feat indeed. David can tweak the whole gear chain to have it mesh however he needs it to. Pays off being able to rework an amp if needed.
> 
> Me I do my best to get the chain to deliver with only what I know outside of the amp, guitar/pups, pedals, speakers...excluding tubes and biasing of course. I learn to manipulate any amp I have but I'm limited to its constraints, how it is built. I can't mod an amp ...yet. If I could I would revoice/rework to get what I wanted. Just like David.



Knowing how to get there is what matters. Well part of what matters lol.

David ♫


----------



## zachman

NewReligion said:


> Knowing how to get there is what matters. Well part of what matters lol.
> 
> David ♫



Yup! I like the way you think. 

Knowing, is part of it. The theory...

Doing, is the other part. (The harder part. The part that counts.) The Application...



Not an SLO100 it's a X88 preamp w/ an H & H stereo Power amp big rack w/d/w. KILLER tones

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh0xdDWN9dk&list=FL09LHwVJGOmYixy9Pyt4xXw&index=104[/ame]


----------



## NewReligion

zachman said:


> Yup! I like the way you think.
> 
> Knowing, is part of it. The theory...
> 
> Doing, is the other part. (The harder part. The part that counts.) The Application...
> 
> 
> 
> Not an SLO100 it's a X88 preamp w/ an H & H stereo Power amp big rack w/d/w. KILLER tones
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh0xdDWN9dk&list=FL09LHwVJGOmYixy9Pyt4xXw&index=104



Clean, smooth and tasteful. 

David ♫


----------



## zachman

NewReligion said:


> Clean, smooth and tasteful.
> 
> David ♫



Michael Landau is fantastic. 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vBYxsJQsBk[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfD_QYaGE6E[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsYQDJJ-iv4[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBUtgpM3xXI[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVKNn0XUmbA[/ame]


----------



## NewReligion

zachman said:


> Michael Landau is fantastic.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vBYxsJQsBk
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfD_QYaGE6E
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsYQDJJ-iv4
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBUtgpM3xXI
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVKNn0XUmbA



Killer music...thanks for sharing. I have finally designed a circuit to add to the Cameron and my "like" builds that resolve the parasitic oscillation. retaining ALL of the clear saturated smooth gain without loosing EQ or adding notches so that effect loops may be added successfully. It is an in depth Grid leak design. Mark sure has a different take on the Marshall than his competitors but IMO much more superior.

Zack as I understand you own an atomica. Can you breakdown the difference between real time sonics of the Atomica vs CCV/CCM etc... Feel free to PM or ask for my phone or email address if you wish to discuss sensitive data in depth.

I played a Pink Taco and it is a bad Ass MoFo but just sounds sterile compared to what Mark keeps alive.

Okay...I got side tracked, I am sorry.

David ♫ TRYAX Guitarist - Cameron Amplification.


----------



## zachman

NewReligion said:


> Killer music...thanks for sharing. I have finally designed a circuit to add to the Cameron and my "like" builds that resolve the parasitic oscillation. retaining ALL of the clear saturated smooth gain without loosing EQ or adding notches so that effect loops may be added successfully. It is an in depth Grid leak design. Mark sure has a different take on the Marshall than his competitors but IMO much more superior.
> 
> Zack as I understand you own an atomica. Can you breakdown the difference between real time sonics of the Atomica vs CCV/CCM etc... Feel free to PM or ask for my phone or email address if you wish to discuss sensitive data in depth.
> 
> I played a Pink Taco and it is a bad Ass MoFo but just sounds sterile compared to what Mark keeps alive.
> 
> Okay...I got side tracked, I am sorry.
> 
> David ♫ TRYAX Guitarist - Cameron Amplification.



PM sent. I forgot to mention the Time Zone, just in case you can't call just yet. We're 3 hours behind California time.

The CCV/CCM is a tighter amp w/ less sag than the Atomica. Also dual channel compared to the Atomica which does have the Gain Style switch and the High/Low Input Jacks. That combined w/ the Edge switch on the front panel give the Atomica a ton of tone shaping possibilities, but not foot switchable. If you've ever played through a Bogner Uberschall; the feeling of the amp (not the tone) reminds me a bit of the CCV. Oh, the Clean channel on the CCV is KILLER big glassy and chimey goodness.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl9bvly_t1I[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cm4V63mPPM[/ame]

The Atomica is interesting in that it sounds Marshallesque, but 'Feels' Boogieesque. 

Doing an A/B w/ a Friedman BE/HBE; I was able to dial in the Atomica to match the Friedman hot Rod tone, but I couldn't get the Friedman to get the Atomica sound that I prefer.


----------



## keennay

NewReligion said:


> Killer music...thanks for sharing. I have finally designed a circuit to add to the Cameron and my "like" builds that resolve the parasitic oscillation. retaining ALL of the clear saturated smooth gain without loosing EQ or adding notches so that effect loops may be added successfully. It is an in depth Grid leak design. Mark sure has a different take on the Marshall than his competitors but IMO much more superior.
> 
> Zack as I understand you own an atomica. Can you breakdown the difference between real time sonics of the Atomica vs CCV/CCM etc... Feel free to PM or ask for my phone or email address if you wish to discuss sensitive data in depth.
> 
> I played a Pink Taco and it is a bad Ass MoFo but just sounds sterile compared to what Mark keeps alive.
> 
> Okay...I got side tracked, I am sorry.
> 
> David ♫ TRYAX Guitarist - Cameron Amplification.



Don't mean to be nosy but that's cool info and I'd be interested in reading the differences as well. I'd also like to know how the CCV compares to a Cameron modded Marshall.

I had been following the Cameron scene for quite a while over at the Rig-Talk forums, and I was lucky enough to finally land an Atomica around a month ago. I'd have to say running the Atomica w/ G12-65s in stereo with my stock (OD pedal boosted) JMP 2203 through another G12-65 stack is quite a religious experience! One of these days I'll have to pickup a G12H-30 cab especially after reading Cameron's amps were designed with those speakers in mind.

More about my experience with the Atomica here:
http://www.marshallforum.com/marshall-amps/77985-nad-marshall-jmp-2204-mark-cameron-atomica.html


And David, I used to own a Friedman Pink Taco. It's a great amp, but even after rolling a couple of 12AX7 tubes for flavor I still preferred my JMP 2203 & 2204. I returned it within Guitar Center's 30-day return policy.


----------



## zachman

keennay said:


> Don't mean to be nosy but that's cool info and I'd be interested in reading the differences as well. I'd also like to know how the CCV compares to a Cameron modded Marshall.
> 
> I had been following the Cameron scene for quite a while over at the Rig-Talk forums, and I was lucky enough to finally land an Atomica around a month ago. I'd have to say running the Atomica w/ G12-65s in stereo with my stock (OD pedal boosted) JMP 2203 through another G12-65 stack is quite a religious experience! One of these days I'll have to pickup a G12H-30 cab especially after reading Cameron's amps were designed with those speakers in mind.
> 
> More about my experience with the Atomica here:
> http://www.marshallforum.com/marshall-amps/77985-nad-marshall-jmp-2204-mark-cameron-atomica.html
> 
> 
> And David, I used to own a Friedman Pink Taco. It's a great amp, but even after rolling a couple of 12AX7 tubes for flavor I still preferred my JMP 2203 & 2204. I returned it within Guitar Center's 30-day return policy.



In my opinion, it's different. I have a 100 Watt Marshall SLP that Mark Cameron modded (High/Low Gain Jose), in addition to the Atomica and I love them both-- and they are both different. Similar to Ferrari-- even when driving different models (which drive and feel different), the racing heritage is ever present and recognizable as Ferrari. Same for the Cameron amps. 

The CCV feels and sounds angrier and the articulation is maintained perfectly, no matter how much gain is dialed in. It's more "Modern" vs Vintage feeling, if that makes any sense.


----------



## cragginshred

My Mk II Slo 100


without clips -Everything else is just hot air....


----------



## saxon68

cragginshred said:


> My Mk II Slo 100
> without clips -Everything else is just hot air....


Lol seen and heard enough of David’s playing that he’s got nothing to prove. He’s a great player with a good ear.


----------



## proxy

There was something wrong with SLO I think.
But I will say something that most people do not realize.
In crunch mode just turn the volume pot down on your guitar and you will hear the most beautiful clean EVER ...


----------



## rafalynch

I have had an SLO for many years, it is the most professional amp I have ever owned ... it makes several sounds good and the high gain is the best in its class. but it doesn't make Marshall tone .... marhsalll is another thing like fender. I have the original soldano 4x12 cabin with eminent and it is very transparent, hifi and powerful but if we change to a 1968 Marshall 4x12 with original 1221 greemback ... mmm it changes the color of the SLO a lot ... more organic and effervescent. It still doesn't have the high mids of my JMP super lead from 1971 ... but for that I already have the Marshall and the soldano goes further ... George lynch tones from the 90 '... very real and of an incredible quality. I will never sell it.



SLO does not like high output pickups ... that's a mistake that many players when connecting to a SLO for the first time do not get it right with the guitar. and that is why I read here bad comments I believe for that error. it is better to pickup paf or low output and let the SLO do the work


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## Derek S

I'm adding some hot air too I guess - love my SLO, can't imagine ever getting rid of it. Sounds great cranked, sounds great boosted with a pedal for whisper volume playing, sounds great in a mix with other amps, etc.


----------



## Buzzard

rafalynch said:


> I have had an SLO for many years, it is the most professional amp I have ever owned ... it makes several sounds good and the high gain is the best in its class. but it doesn't make Marshall tone .... marhsalll is another thing like fender. I have the original soldano 4x12 cabin with eminent and it is very transparent, hifi and powerful but if we change to a 1968 Marshall 4x12 with original 1221 greemback ... mmm it changes the color of the SLO a lot ... more organic and effervescent. It still doesn't have the high mids of my JMP super lead from 1971 ... but for that I already have the Marshall and the soldano goes further ... George lynch tones from the 90 '... very real and of an incredible quality. I will never sell it.
> 
> 
> 
> SLO does not like high output pickups ... that's a mistake that many players when connecting to a SLO for the first time do not get it right with the guitar. and that is why I read here bad comments I believe for that error. it is better to pickup paf or low output and let the SLO do the work


Interesting, that’s all I’ve ever heard is the slo is basically a modded Marshall tone.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## JP2036

NewReligion said:


> I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana to play a 1991 Soldano SLO 100 thru the matching 1991 Soldano 412 cab (Speakers Unknown) yesterday. I am posting this only because of the major disappointment. I expected at the least Marshall Like tones and performance. Not even close, I own and have owned 2203's & 2204's. I found the amp to resemble the stock Peavey Triple X Head. It felt very Present, Brittle and Buzzy. I then plugged into a Marshall SLASH SIG JUBILEE SL2555. Huge improvement. It actually reminded me of my JCM 800 2210's with less low end and gain, of course that could of been due to the 1960 cab with 75's. I was really glad that I stopped in and layed those interest to rest.
> 
> The Jub Re-Issue was a great head, but not for the money ($1,999.00). The Soldano @ ($2,999.00) was no more a hot rodded Marshall than anything that has come from the Peavey camp in the last 20 years. It actually reminded me of the crap Mike Soldano tried to push thru Yamaha/Soldano 20 years ago. I have owned and played many amps to include a custom built Splawn (Nice but not for me, Freaky mid range and compression). Nothing on the Major Market compares to the old Marshalls and Re-Issues. Will "they" ever stop trying to re-invent the wheel?
> 
> Just wanted to express my dismay at such a highly regarded amp. Cold, Sterile, Brittle and Buzzy. It in my oppinion does not fit anywhere in the JCM Family and certainly not a Marshall at any price. Sorry if anyone is offended. In that defense I will at the first opportunity play the next SLO I come across however my expectations are certainly grounded if not crashed.
> 
> David
> 
> David C. Hopkins on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads


Totally agree.


----------



## JP2036

cragginshred said:


> My Mk II Slo 100
> 
> 
> without clips -Everything else is just hot air....



"clips" are not prerequisites for opinions on amps or your playing Bro.
Only ears.
As for the SLO MK II ive heard a couple years of these amps and each new clip is even more disappointing than the last.
dnw.
Mike sold B.A.D. & Friedman the Soldano "rights" because at $4800 they weren't selling amps and he wanted a retirement.
Guess what ?
They still aren't selling $4800 amps. Not like they want.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## Buzzard

Personally I’m getting tired of too many amps which are slight tweaks of Marshall amps. They are all starting to sound the same to me. At a certain point they are so close to one another that only someone with golden ears could tell a difference.


----------



## cragginshred

@JP2036 
Keep 'judging' amps from the compressed you tube clips and I'll keep buying them to test in person to make an informed decision whether they make the cut. Then you can watch it on YT 
BTW No one pays $4,800 for a SLO, I didn't.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## JP2036

My ignore list has new members this month.
Cabin fever makes people stupid.


----------



## ibmorjamn

NewReligion said:


> I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana to play a 1991 Soldano SLO 100 thru the matching 1991 Soldano 412 cab (Speakers Unknown) yesterday. I am posting this only because of the major disappointment. I expected at the least Marshall Like tones and performance. Not even close, I own and have owned 2203's & 2204's. I found the amp to resemble the stock Peavey Triple X Head. It felt very Present, Brittle and Buzzy. I then plugged into a Marshall SLASH SIG JUBILEE SL2555. Huge improvement. It actually reminded me of my JCM 800 2210's with less low end and gain, of course that could of been due to the 1960 cab with 75's. I was really glad that I stopped in and layed those interest to rest.
> 
> The Jub Re-Issue was a great head, but not for the money ($1,999.00). The Soldano @ ($2,999.00) was no more a hot rodded Marshall than anything that has come from the Peavey camp in the last 20 years. It actually reminded me of the crap Mike Soldano tried to push thru Yamaha/Soldano 20 years ago. I have owned and played many amps to include a custom built Splawn (Nice but not for me, Freaky mid range and compression). Nothing on the Major Market compares to the old Marshalls and Re-Issues. Will "they" ever stop trying to re-invent the wheel?
> 
> Just wanted to express my dismay at such a highly regarded amp. Cold, Sterile, Brittle and Buzzy. It in my oppinion does not fit anywhere in the JCM Family and certainly not a Marshall at any price. Sorry if anyone is offended. In that defense I will at the first opportunity play the next SLO I come across however my expectations are certainly grounded if not crashed.
> 
> David
> 
> David C. Hopkins on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads


Thanks David , I was about to build a 6v6 SLO but lately I found the Tweed Super amp in a 6v6 build . I wonder if the dislikes it’s in part due to the 6L6’s ? Nice , fooled again by the necro post


----------



## aberry9475

I also saw a SLO once upon a time at the Pittsburgh guitar center, so naturally, I had to try it. For the money they wanted, it was underwhelming. But, I will say it was unique, almost like a Marshall meets Matchless kind of thing. And this was a low volume too. Like most old tube amps, I think it's designed to hit it's stride right around the volume where the mortar starts blowing out between the bricks.

Also I wouldn't be too quick to shit on Mike Soldano though. Whether you dig the tone or not he built very high quality amps and pretty much single handedly spawned the beloved 5150 buzzsaw, rectumfryer, and therefore many other circuits thereafter. That's a lot more than just a tweaked 2203.


----------



## Buzzard

Definitely. And we all benefited.


----------



## ampeq

Just a heads up for folks that do like the Soldano, Ceriatone will be releasing their version very soon. I just talked to Nik and he said a couple amps will be released.


----------



## JP2036

aberry9475 said:


> I also saw a SLO once upon a time at the Pittsburgh guitar center, so naturally, I had to try it. For the money they wanted, it was underwhelming. But, I will say it was unique, almost like a Marshall meets Matchless kind of thing. And this was a low volume too. Like most old tube amps, I think it's designed to hit it's stride right around the volume where the mortar starts blowing out between the bricks.
> 
> Also I wouldn't be too quick to shit on Mike Soldano though. Whether you dig the tone or not he built very high quality amps and pretty much single handedly spawned the beloved 5150 buzzsaw, rectumfryer, and therefore many other circuits thereafter. That's a lot more than just a tweaked 2203.


Mike's original SLO design was taken from a MESA Mark series amp. Then later Mike accused Randall Smith of "stealing" the Rectifier series tone stack from the SLO.
Marshall "stole" the Fender Bassman circuit for the JTM-45.

All guitar amps get their DNA from old RCA {and other} R/C circuit patents some more than 100 years old.
Po-tate-to/Po-tot-to


----------



## rafalynch

Those derogatory comments that are read here from people who do not own an SLO are out of place and seem to be based more on the regret of not being able to buy it since they do not have a real criterion of the amplifier. It is the same as if someone for the first time enters a store and tests an original 1971 Super lead 100w with a 4 × 12, surely at the first impact of the uncontrolled volume and in a store where it is observed by the owner and other customers, their The first intention to control the volume will not correspond to the search for the good tone of a vintage Super Lead. And especially if it is the typical 15w combo or bedroom player. Let there be no doubt what a great amp it is and that a process of time must be worked on and spent to find the tone. Although I recognize that the new price is very high. like almost everything in this life of luxury cars etc.


The same thing happened to me when I received my SLO, I had a hard time, I was disappointed with the sound for a month, I couldn't understand it, it sounded over saturated and muddy. Until I entered the Soldano forum and they advised me pickups and speaker and to work the effects loop. the tone changed as from day to night and I did great gigs with that amp, where sound technicians and other musicians were speechless at the great tone.


sorry for my English


----------



## Drinkingdeath01

I've got an '02 100 watt SLO and its an incredible amp. The wife picked it up used and gave it to me for Christmas. The minute I plugged into it I thought I was in tone heaven. I played it for a few weeks and then it started cutting out. No problem, took it to my tech and he said it had the most worn out tubes he had even seen. He slapped new tubes in it and it lost its Mojo. I stuck with it, with the help of an EQ, and after a few frustrating weeks, it regained its status as one badass amp. I'll never part with it and I'll never understand the hate it gets here on the forum. To me its the ultimate Marshall.


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## JP2036

rafalynch said:


> Those derogatory comments that are read here from people who do not own an SLO are out of place and seem to be based more on the regret of not being able to buy it since they do not have a real criterion of the amplifier. It is the same as if someone for the first time enters a store and tests an original 1971 Super lead 100w with a 4 × 12, surely at the first impact of the uncontrolled volume and in a store where it is observed by the owner and other customers, their The first intention to control the volume will not correspond to the search for the good tone of a vintage Super Lead. And especially if it is the typical 15w combo or bedroom player. Let there be no doubt what a great amp it is and that a process of time must be worked on and spent to find the tone. Although I recognize that the new price is very high. like almost everything in this life of luxury cars etc.
> 
> 
> The same thing happened to me when I received my SLO, I had a hard time, I was disappointed with the sound for a month, I couldn't understand it, it sounded over saturated and muddy. Until I entered the Soldano forum and they advised me pickups and speaker and to work the effects loop. the tone changed as from day to night and I did great gigs with that amp, where sound technicians and other musicians were speechless at the great tone.
> 
> 
> sorry for my English








I don't need to buy a Ford Pinto to know i don't want one.
Same with amps Bro.
Your "amp jealousy" theory is invalid.
* not sorry for my diction.


----------



## Buzzard

ampeq said:


> Just a heads up for folks that do like the Soldano, Ceriatone will be releasing their version very soon. I just talked to Nik and he said a couple amps will be released.


I've been waiting to hear something or see a photo.


----------



## Zado

ampeq said:


> Just a heads up for folks that do like the Soldano, Ceriatone will be releasing their version very soon. I just talked to Nik and he said a couple amps will be released.


I thought the holy Bible of tone said it wasn't possible to replicate the SLO mojo without DY trafos, I wonder how they are doing it now that they are not available anymore


----------



## ampeq

Buzzard said:


> I've been waiting to hear something or see a photo.


It's either this month or next month, not sure but very soon. He is releasing something else also, but I don't know what. Whatever they are it will be interesting.


----------



## brentsp

JP2036 said:


> Mike's original SLO design was taken from a MESA Mark series amp. Then later Mike accused Randall Smith of "stealing" the Rectifier series tone stack from the SLO.



You obviously do not know how to read a schematic. Where do you get your misinformation from? 

1) Boogie Marks are absolutely nothing like the SLO. Mike did play and own a IIB but didn’t take from its circuit. Schematic says so. 

2) The early recto is an exact copy of the SLO preamp in vintage mode. They don’t sound the same because Randall uses a completely different power amp that’s has the elasticity of a worn out trampoline. 

The schematic tells the truth…you obviously don’t. Go head on and put me on your ignore list because I’m not backing down bozo.


----------



## Sapient

I agree, OP. Soldano's are all mids that lack the chime that a Marshall (and other) amps have. They were for pure '80s "pinch harmonic" metal. I tried one out some years ago and wasn't impressed by the constant Ratt (band) sound I'd get no matter what.

Oop ...I bit into a necro.


----------



## Sapient

Large_Filter_Cap said:


> Everytime I have tried a SLO or a Soldano it has always blown me away, and arguably superior to alot of Marshalls...ya I said it.
> IF you are always looking for a 2203 sound, you aren't going to find it in Mark, Stilletto, SLO, or whatever, but if you are looking for a different and great sounding amp, a SLO is an option.



-----------------------------------------------------

We should call this "Amazing MF moments"

187 posts, 4 likes, and 3 of them on this post.

How do some of these things happen?


----------



## Matthews Guitars

Since someone else already dug this up, I'll throw in my 2 cents worth. Being a current Recto owner, having played the SLO 100, and having owned and played many other amps, I'd cheerfully trade in any Recto or SLO for another Mesa fully loaded Mark III blue stripe head. I SO regret having had one and letting financial necessity cause me to sell it. I could have survived and sold off the Recto and other amps instead. I wish I had. That amp had this...I hate the term but it fits...MOJO that no other amp I've ever owned had. It'd do high gain with the best of 'em but it retained a warm and friendly personality at all times. Yet in the lead channel, it was also as aggressive as a pit bull with a rat trap clamped to his balls but it was easily controlled. 


The blue stripe Mark III just out-Rectos the Recto and has more personality and tonal character. Same goes for the SLO. 

Anybody wanna buy my 3 channel Dual Rectifier head with Bigfoot footswitch? All proceeds go toward funding another Mark III Blue Stripe purchase! 

And I know that some people will see it differently, but when going for the thing that made the SLO or Recto thing happen, there's but one rational way to achieve that type of result and any experienced tube circuit designers are going to come up with the identical circuit to get there, more likely than not. A cold clipper stage with 100K plate resistor, 39K cathode resistor, and no cathode bypass cap. You simply can't tell me that Randy had to copy that and couldn't figure it out on his own. If the 10K Marshall cold clipper was a step in the right direction, simple experimentation shows that 39K is the maximum usable value for a cold clipper. Above that you lose signal level and the clipping becomes so extreme it's all but uncontrollable and sounds like a bag of smashed assholes anyway. At 33K you don't have the extreme overdrive some people want for numetal. 

39K is the value any rational designer will end up with. And 100K for overall gain and stability. Go higher and it becomes very demanding of tube quality. (Incidentally V1A in a Recto is the single highest plate gain stage, at 220K, and this is very demanding of quality tubes. A lesser tube will oscillate with the gain turned up in the clean channel.)


----------



## Buzzard

Dammit why did you have to say that. I had that exact amp with matching can in the late 80’s. Sold it like an idiot.


----------



## PowerTube44

Sapient said:


> I agree, OP. Soldano's are all mids that lack the chime that a Marshall (and other) amps have. They were for pure '80s "pinch harmonic" metal. I tried one out some years ago and wasn't impressed by the constant Ratt (band) sound I'd get no matter what.
> 
> Oop ...I bit into a necro.



I owned a brand new Splawn Quick Rod with matching cab for about a month. Every time I plugged into it, I hated it a little bit more than the last time. I finally sold it to Guitar Center, totally took a bath on it, money-wise, and got my JVM410H (I eventually sold it also, but that's another story).

What you said about "all mids" reminded me of it. The Splawn (to my ears) has a super obnoxious, in-your-face midrange that you can't dial out. It was also the stiffest, most "soul-less" amp I've ever had.


----------



## TheToneDig

Does anyone here use this amp for down-tuning stoner metal?

I could swear it sounds close to a Sunn.

It sounded much better than I thought it would. Sunn was all I could think of.


----------



## rmlevasseur

rafalynch said:


> I have had an SLO for many years, it is the most professional amp I have ever owned ... it makes several sounds good and the high gain is the best in its class. but it doesn't make Marshall tone .... marhsalll is another thing like fender. I have the original soldano 4x12 cabin with eminent and it is very transparent, hifi and powerful but if we change to a 1968 Marshall 4x12 with original 1221 greemback ... mmm it changes the color of the SLO a lot ... more organic and effervescent. It still doesn't have the high mids of my JMP super lead from 1971 ... but for that I already have the Marshall and the soldano goes further ... George lynch tones from the 90 '... very real and of an incredible quality. I will never sell it.
> 
> 
> 
> SLO does not like high output pickups ... that's a mistake that many players when connecting to a SLO for the first time do not get it right with the guitar. and that is why I read here bad comments I believe for that error. it is better to pickup paf or low output and let the SLO do the work




This guy nails it. I respect the OP and his ears, but I also respect the ears of the hordes of pros that have put the SLO on some major albums. Even Aerosmith was using them on SNL. I agree that SLO does not have the same vibe as Marshall though, but if u cant get a great tone out of a SLO something is wrong. I also have the original SLO 4/12 with emminence and a 1978 Marshall with pre-rolas, and I much prefer the celestions with it, but I prefer those speakers with just about everything.


----------



## Derek S

PowerTube44 said:


> I owned a brand new Splawn Quick Rod with matching cab for about a month. Every time I plugged into it, I hated it a little bit more than the last time. I finally sold it to Guitar Center, totally took a bath on it, money-wise, and got my JVM410H (I eventually sold it also, but that's another story).
> 
> What you said about "all mids" reminded me of it. The Splawn (to my ears) has a super obnoxious, in-your-face midrange that you can't dial out. It was also the stiffest, most "soul-less" amp I've ever had.


Totally agree about the Splawn (although the odd mid vibe eventually grew on me just enough to keep it for a couple of years), an interesting yet _little too out there_ amp. Eventually I sold my QR because like you, it was ultimately just too damn dry and stiff feeling - which might be cool if you're playing 80's, tight and crunchy intro riffs all night long, but for anything lead wise it just didn't work as well as other amps, absolutely zero touch sensitivity when it came to individual notes IME.

The SLO with the right speakers is both a lead and rhythm players dream amp. Long time owner and fan right here (love old greenbacks with mine).


----------



## Ufoscorpion

NewReligion said:


> I stopped in at the Guitar Center In Greenwood Indiana to play a 1991 Soldano SLO 100 thru the matching 1991 Soldano 412 cab (Speakers Unknown) yesterday. I am posting this only because of the major disappointment. I expected at the least Marshall Like tones and performance. Not even close, I own and have owned 2203's & 2204's. I found the amp to resemble the stock Peavey Triple X Head. It felt very Present, Brittle and Buzzy. I then plugged into a Marshall SLASH SIG JUBILEE SL2555. Huge improvement. It actually reminded me of my JCM 800 2210's with less low end and gain, of course that could of been due to the 1960 cab with 75's. I was really glad that I stopped in and layed those interest to rest.
> 
> The Jub Re-Issue was a great head, but not for the money ($1,999.00). The Soldano @ ($2,999.00) was no more a hot rodded Marshall than anything that has come from the Peavey camp in the last 20 years. It actually reminded me of the crap Mike Soldano tried to push thru Yamaha/Soldano 20 years ago. I have owned and played many amps to include a custom built Splawn (Nice but not for me, Freaky mid range and compression). Nothing on the Major Market compares to the old Marshalls and Re-Issues. Will "they" ever stop trying to re-invent the wheel?
> 
> Just wanted to express my dismay at such a highly regarded amp. Cold, Sterile, Brittle and Buzzy. It in my oppinion does not fit anywhere in the JCM Family and certainly not a Marshall at any price. Sorry if anyone is offended. In that defense I will at the first opportunity play the next SLO I come across however my expectations are certainly grounded if not crashed.
> 
> David
> 
> David C. Hopkins on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Downloads


I’ve not tried an SLO but I find it hard to believe it sounds as ‘ shit ‘ as you imply . Not your thing I canbunderstand understand but come on all the pro’s back in the day can’t all have been tone deaf . Just saying , I’ve never heard one outside of youtube myself and not going to pretend otherwise.


----------



## Kinkless Tetrode

I have tried a SLO as well as the Hotrod 100 and Hotrod 50, although its been a long time ago now. What I recall was that it was somewhat as David described it at music store volumes. You need to turn up the preamp to bypass the bright cap and you need the master up beyond noon. By then it's way beyond music store volume. This is why the Warren Haynes Mod and the Depth Mod came into being. 

Speaking of Warren, and Dicky, playing through a SLO:


----------



## NewReligion

Ufoscorpion said:


> I’ve not tried an SLO but I find it hard to believe it sounds as ‘ shit ‘ as you imply . Not your thing I canbunderstand understand but come on all the pro’s back in the day can’t all have been tone deaf . Just saying , I’ve never heard one outside of youtube myself and not going to pretend otherwise.



It likely was paired with the Celestion 75’s & yes at low volume. It did in fact sound stiff & fizzy which IMO my 2210’s & 2205’s with an SD-1 put to shame.

It sounded nothing like my Marshall 2210 + SD-1 posted below.

Whatever inspires the soul. Just my $.02

David


----------



## FTMF

.


----------



## NewReligion

mantrasky said:


> Hay David your Marshall amp mods sound "Excellent" as I can tell you have that Passion & Care for tone! They hit hard like Cameron or Fortin "Very Cool" \../
> 
> Regarding SLO's (I've owned three) definitely "Preamp tubes makes a difference". At one point I was using JJ ECC83 (or ECC83S more aggressive) straight across and in a live setting, volume up around "8" which is a little loud \../ they sounded great but at "Low Settings" around 1-1/2 to 2
> the amp would sound "Buzzy with no character" not inspiring. There were a few times when I would go to Guitar Center or Sam Ash they would have a Used SLO, I would play it and think "is it broken or something wrong?" when it was either preamp-tubes with the Celestion 75's Hard Sounding
> or a combination of neglect from the owner, definitely GC or SA won't take the time to tweak it. Recently my son (who's carrying the SLO torch) installed a combination of Mullards, Ruby and JJ preamps and it sounds "Killer" not identical to Marshall but Lynch, EVH, Norum, Demartini, Haynes "Yes".
> 
> Nothing is absolutely Perfect, even Marshall but you get to a point "does the amp do what I need?" even my Marshall Plexi's that were modified, one by Jose and another by Lee Jackson aren't perfect and I honestly can't say their the greatest amps (ever?)
> I had Dave go through my BE-100 with a lot of modifications, including Jose circuitry tone & response along with his mods that made the amp Aggressive to Singing voice smooth and yet, Channel switching, Effects-loop, Master-volume and a beautiful Clean-Channel (High-Gain is almost noiseless).
> I do respect your opinion's on amp modifications, obviously your getting Killer-Tones from your albums. I'm not trying to "Justify or Validate" SLO's, it either works for you or not (I love them) and here in this photo my son's SLO next to my BE-100 Jam (all the guitars are his except the Charvel)



Thank you for the valued explanation from guitarist to guitarist as I value your opinion & believe all you have stated to be true.

I am sure they are great concert amps or any other application in which they may be cranked.

I worked hard to ensure the tone of my circuits are as consistent as possible from whisper to deafening. Moving air of course makes a difference.

Thank you for the great words and killer collection.

David


----------



## Gibson_83

rafalynch said:


> Those derogatory comments that are read here from people who do not own an SLO are out of place and seem to be based more on the regret of not being able to buy it since they do not have a real criterion of the amplifier. It is the same as if someone for the first time enters a store and tests an original 1971 Super lead 100w with a 4 × 12, surely at the first impact of the uncontrolled volume and in a store where it is observed by the owner and other customers, their The first intention to control the volume will not correspond to the search for the good tone of a vintage Super Lead. And especially if it is the typical 15w combo or bedroom player. Let there be no doubt what a great amp it is and that a process of time must be worked on and spent to find the tone. Although I recognize that the new price is very high. like almost everything in this life of luxury cars etc.
> 
> 
> The same thing happened to me when I received my SLO, I had a hard time, I was disappointed with the sound for a month, I couldn't understand it, it sounded over saturated and muddy. Until I entered the Soldano forum and they advised me pickups and speaker and to work the effects loop. the tone changed as from day to night and I did great gigs with that amp, where sound technicians and other musicians were speechless at the great tone.
> 
> 
> sorry for my English



I only run my gain between 3-4 on the overdrive channel with my SLO and the master really needs to be set around 6 to make the amp open up. Its similar to when you open up an old Marshall they just come alive and cut through a band mix. I think alot of people who try them in their bedrooms or whatever are disappointed, but I've never had such clarity at high volume in a live mix like the SLO has. 

It doesn't fuzz or fart out like some other amps when pushed, or compress and squash your playing. Oh and speakers make a big difference with them too, same as any Marshall they are sensitive to speakers.


----------

