Bruce Egnater said FACK YA FEELINGS Randall Smith fanbois ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChuggNorris
  • Start date Start date
For anyone curious, here's the SLO compared to the Rev C preamps. The drec preamp is connected with the Mark IIC power amp rather than the regular SLO power amp that everyone usually uses. EDIT: Also note the Revs A&B were prototypes built in the Mark chassis - i.e. a gutted Mark series with the SLO preamp dropped in.
The preamp pot value of 500k (SLO) vs 250k (Drec) would be a design choice and cause a small tonal difference. The 470p Vs 500p treble capacitor change would have just been from the component values available to mesa based on their parts supply chain. No tonal difference.
 

Attachments

  • SLO V DRec.jpg
    SLO V DRec.jpg
    58.6 KB · Views: 45
Last edited:
Eazy-ESP said:
What’s the source or evidence for this claim? The Eddie being pissed that he had to pay Soldano so he went to Peavey and had them rip him off part.
Click to expand...
Well, it's pretty clear that the preamp from the 5150 is straight from an SLO. That's been well known for 30 yrs. When Mike Soldano described Ed's visit to him, when he purchased 2 SLOs from him, well you can come to your own conclusion when you see what followed with Peavey and the design of the 5150.
It isn't hard.
 
Racerxrated said:
Well, it's pretty clear that the preamp from the 5150 is straight from an SLO. That's been well known for 30 yrs. When Mike Soldano described Ed's visit to him, when he purchased 2 SLOs from him, well you can come to your own conclusion when you see what followed with Peavey and the design of the 5150.
It isn't hard.
Click to expand...
I don't care too much for Ed's Peavey 5150 tones but his tones with the SLO were just killer IMHO. I think the Vanhalen archive cleaned up the audio some that's why I posted the actual video and the Vanhalen archive vid.

 
WarHed said:
For anyone curious, here's the SLO compared to the Rev C preamps. The drec preamp is connected with the Mark IIC power amp rather than the regular SLO power amp that everyone usually uses.
The preamp pot value of 500k (SLO) vs 250k (Drec) would be a design choice and cause a small tonal difference. The 470p Vs 500p treble capacitor change would have just been from the component values available to mesa based on their parts supply chain. No tonal difference.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That's exactly what I wanted to know.

Very interesting!
 
Mesa Boogie's 16+ patents and lawsuits against Fender, Korg, U.S. Music Corp., etc. certainly aren't in the spirit of improving upon what came before. Did Fender sue Mesa for copying the Princeton? There's a reason Randall Smith is persona non grata in the amp builder world.

Mike Soldano is the last person to publicly complain about his innovations being shamelessly ripped off. Decades of R&D didn't land Mesa an uncomplicated high gain circuit that sounds good without graphic EQ fixing it.

Mike retired an honest man—can Randall say the same?
 
Last edited:
I would love to talk with the engineers and designers of Tech 21 amps and pedals
 
Here is what I think may be the most accurate/complete amp ‘family tree.’ There are a few in here I’d maybe take with a grain of salt, though.

Source: https://fewtubefx.blogspot.com/2022/04/guitar-amplifiers-genealogy-chart.html

Everything is kissing cousin, sitting on shoulders of that before it. That’s innovation. SLO’s cold clipping stage is the biggest game changer for modern amps, though…but even that’s inspired by the JCM800 circuit still I think just taken to a much colder bias.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0824.jpeg
    IMG_0824.jpeg
    224.8 KB · Views: 42
dead-pan said:
And still, SLO, 5150 and the Dual Rec sound nothing alike.
Click to expand...

I think the point all the fanbois miss, intentionally or not, is that without the stolen circuit the dual rec wouldnt sound like a dual rec either.
 
Had a few Egnater amps, sold them all pretty quickly.
 
Snave said:
Mesa Boogie's 16+ patents and lawsuits against Fender, Korg, U.S. Music Corp., etc. certainly aren't in the spirit of improving upon what came before
Click to expand...
Yeah from what I'm reading from Bruce's comment

This is the main issue. MESA religiously defends "their" IPs while ripping off others
 
changeofaseason said:
Here is what I think may be the most accurate/complete amp ‘family tree.’ There are a few in here I’d maybe take with a grain of salt, though.

Source: https://fewtubefx.blogspot.com/2022/04/guitar-amplifiers-genealogy-chart.html

Everything is kissing cousin, sitting on shoulders of that before it. That’s innovation. SLO’s cold clipping stage is the biggest game changer for modern amps, though…but even that’s inspired by the JCM800 circuit still I think just taken to a much colder bias.
Click to expand...
I thought Trainwrecks were Vox based
 
NewWorldMan said:
I’ll say this and leave it be - longer post, so scroll on by if you don’t want to read, haha.

<rant>

Every guitarist is much better off because builders over the decades have borrowed, copied, been inspired by, etc…other designs. Do they all sound the same? No, and that’s what matters.

Too many guys look at designs on paper, read a schematic, and subsequently listen with their eyes instead of their ears. Did the Marshall sound like a Fender? No. Does the Recto sound like an SLO? No. Does a 5150 sound like either of them? No. There’s a lot more that goes into how a final product sounds than what you see on paper, but that’s all some people want to focus on because people love to be offended online.

Some builders and manufacturers - like Randall Smith and Mesa - had much more business acumen, put out a variety of products, listened to what players wanted, and changed with the times. It’s why they had tremendous success while others had modest success by comparison.

Let’s look at Soldano for example since it’s everyone’s favorite talking point. Soldano dropped the SLO and within a few years of its release was charging around $3200 by the early ‘90s with a (not good) loop and line out. That’s $7200-$7400 current day money. He also released the X88 preamp, a concept that Soldano got from Bob Bradshaw. We don’t talk about that though. Bob approached Soldano with the preamp concept (not circuit), had them build them, then Soldano had a successful product that was essentially Bob’s idea. Meanwhile Soldano sold them to Bob for just a hair under retail, so Bob made no money on them despite bringing the concept to Soldano. But, that’s apparently cool. Anyway.

The Dual Rectifier comes out priced around $1200 compared to the $3200 of the SLO. It was originally targeting the Sunset strip crowd, but Mesa saw times were changing and listened to player feedback. Within around 1.5 years of release, Mesa had already went through 5 revisions because it’s what players wanted. Meanwhile, the Soldano remained unchanged.

The Rectifier was arguably the most successful and iconic amp of its time. It owned the airwaves in the ‘90s and early ‘00s. Mesa still evolved the line and the 3 channel version was born, which also went through 4 revisions in the first couple of years. Meanwhile, 15+ years later, the Soldano remained unchanged. They also had virtually nothing that wasn’t a spin off or variation of the SLO.

By 2010, Mesa evolved the Rectifier *again* based on player feedback. Countless options added, revisions made, etc. Meanwhile, nearly 24 years later, the Soldano remained unchanged.

By the time Soldano was sold, it was 32+ years since the release of the SLO. The Recto was on its 14th-15th revision and its 3rd major iteration and adapted to countless changes in the musical landscape. The SLO hadn’t changed at all, but still cost more than double what the Recto did. What else did Soldano do that was significant during those 30 years? Not much. The amp and circuit stubbornly was kept the same despite user tastes changing numerous times, and in Soup Nazi fashion, you either liked it as-is or moved on. The more years that passed, the less value and options you got for the money as other amps advanced.

While I’m glad Soldano had that 1 cool idea 35+ years ago, that doesn’t breed long-term success or mean you have business savvy. If you refuse to change, adapt to player feedback, or even try to expand your product line beyond - basically - cheaper variations of your 1 amp idea, then what should you expect? You saw the success others were having. You saw the changes in the music landscape. You had literal decades to do R&D and make other amps. Don’t bitch and complain because companies like Mesa continued to evolve and listen to players, expanded their product portfolio, and sold countless amps for it.

Complaints about Mesa having success vs Soldano because an amp has a similar preamp section but sounds completely different would be like Marshall complaining about all the British style manufacturers, or Vox complaining about Matchless in the ‘90s, or Fender complaining about Marshall, or etc. If you don’t like it, then stop bitching and whining and make an affordable product that appeals to a wider user base. If you want to stubbornly keep your product the same, then you’ll forever be a niche product for a niche crowd.

This isn’t a knock to Soldano. I have an OG SLO right beside me as I type, and they’re great amps. But c’mon. If some of these Mesa critics spent even half as much time over the last 35 years listening to what players want and doing R&D on new designs for new offerings as they did acting personally aggrieved and offended, maybe they would have moved as many amps as Mesa over the years.

</rant>

Agree, disagree - don’t care. Just my $0.02 on the “I’m offended because others created something similar to my idea but had more success than me” crowd.
Click to expand...
Solid points
 
It's so annoying that Randall Smith was a competent businessman.
 
WarHed said:
James Brown (5150 designer) tells the story of Eddie bringing him the amp to clone in his Tone Talk episode.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get that bit. I’m talking about all the rest of the backstory that has just been made up. That he was pissed off at Mike Soldano and decided to rip it off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top