keano
New member
Are these only good for metal? Different the rectos in which way?
Thanks
Thanks
glpg80
Well-known member
6505's are loud as fuck.
they need to be cranked, they are not a bedroom amplifier, and are not designed to be one at all.
before i go into describing in detail the amplifier ill answer your question that they are generally subjective to the metal department because its a grab-and-go metal tone.
however ive seen guys use them for blues jams, classic rock, country, and power metal.
the 5150 series and 6505 series have a looser feel to them, and alot - and i do mean - alot - of gain on tap that no normal human being should ever actually "need" hence the normal stereotyping.
the channel design of a 5150 and 6505 model are terrible. the clean tone is nothing more than a choked down first gain stage and passes this clean tone through every single gain stage in the amplifier that the lead channel uses.
the crunch channel is the same thing, and is why the crunch channel sounds so simillar to the lead channel.
the 5150 II's and 6505+ models have less gain on tap on the lead channel, and are a "tougher" feeling amplifier and can wrestle with your playing so to speak. however the upside is that it tracks fucking amazing and allows for great tight rhythm tones.
the clean channel has its own dedicated gain stage, and allows you to use any type of reasonable preamp tube you like to experiment with tones without modifying the preamp circuitry.
the 5150 II's have more mids in the lead channel.
FWIW i have used my 5150 II for blues jam's many times, and if you can work a volume control properly on your guitar, you wouldnt need any other amplifier in the world. every channel is responsive and every channel cleans up great. the trick that no-one gets is that you need to crank the hell out of them to do it. people who play them on 0.5 or 1 or 2 on the volume are not doing the amplifier justice and is the reason it gets so many negative reviews i believe.
the tone of them is subjective - either you love it or you hate it.
it was originally designed around eddie's SLO - so the amplifiers respond simillarly. i have played both a real SLO and all 5150 models including the combo, and i say that a stock 5150 II with a bias mod and a nice set of tubes is damn close to a SLO when you are cranking volume. otherwise, the SLO wins hands down on the lower volume stuff, and also build quality, and also a looser feel than the 5150's.
for metal, if i had to do it again, i would grab a 5150 combo instead of a 5150 II. however i can make do with what i have, because i have no reason to change otherwise.
the clean channels on the 5150 series are sub par. dont expect fender cleans in them at all. they are working cleans, and get the job done. but theres no magic sparkling or amazing layering going on at all in stock models.
they need to be cranked, they are not a bedroom amplifier, and are not designed to be one at all.
before i go into describing in detail the amplifier ill answer your question that they are generally subjective to the metal department because its a grab-and-go metal tone.
however ive seen guys use them for blues jams, classic rock, country, and power metal.
the 5150 series and 6505 series have a looser feel to them, and alot - and i do mean - alot - of gain on tap that no normal human being should ever actually "need" hence the normal stereotyping.
the channel design of a 5150 and 6505 model are terrible. the clean tone is nothing more than a choked down first gain stage and passes this clean tone through every single gain stage in the amplifier that the lead channel uses.
the crunch channel is the same thing, and is why the crunch channel sounds so simillar to the lead channel.
the 5150 II's and 6505+ models have less gain on tap on the lead channel, and are a "tougher" feeling amplifier and can wrestle with your playing so to speak. however the upside is that it tracks fucking amazing and allows for great tight rhythm tones.
the clean channel has its own dedicated gain stage, and allows you to use any type of reasonable preamp tube you like to experiment with tones without modifying the preamp circuitry.
the 5150 II's have more mids in the lead channel.
FWIW i have used my 5150 II for blues jam's many times, and if you can work a volume control properly on your guitar, you wouldnt need any other amplifier in the world. every channel is responsive and every channel cleans up great. the trick that no-one gets is that you need to crank the hell out of them to do it. people who play them on 0.5 or 1 or 2 on the volume are not doing the amplifier justice and is the reason it gets so many negative reviews i believe.
the tone of them is subjective - either you love it or you hate it.
it was originally designed around eddie's SLO - so the amplifiers respond simillarly. i have played both a real SLO and all 5150 models including the combo, and i say that a stock 5150 II with a bias mod and a nice set of tubes is damn close to a SLO when you are cranking volume. otherwise, the SLO wins hands down on the lower volume stuff, and also build quality, and also a looser feel than the 5150's.
for metal, if i had to do it again, i would grab a 5150 combo instead of a 5150 II. however i can make do with what i have, because i have no reason to change otherwise.
the clean channels on the 5150 series are sub par. dont expect fender cleans in them at all. they are working cleans, and get the job done. but theres no magic sparkling or amazing layering going on at all in stock models.
glpg80
Well-known member
i saw your other post about the 5150 III
i have also played a 5150 III for a year straight in retail stores and i go back and forth on that amplifier. i can say that they dont have the same tightness at all that a 6505 has. although they do play very very very loosely, and they track so great - that i guess the end result is the same thing. only, the "feeling" of having to fight the amplifier is not there on a 5150 III.
the compression is there, and is not too much different than a normal 5150/II. but the 5150 III's have a more compressed tone in the gain structure. so the swap would decrease some of it. i personally like that tone - when you crank a 5150 III, the sweetspot that amplifier has, the compression adds just enough structure right where the amplifier is supposed to have it and i think it really sounds great.
but if you hate it, the combo doesnt have that compressed tone in the gain structure in comparison to everything else here, but is compressed in general. every 5150 is compressed in general - they are all the same in that statement. that ties back into the volume of your guitar and cranking the shit out of the volume.
the design of 5150 III's makes solos effortless if the amplifier is bone dry, where a 6505/5150/5150 II doesnt get that loose feeling until you are tearing the paint off of club walls and/or shaking windows out of buildings. 5150 II's are worse about this than 5150's/6505s.
the 6505/5150/5150II/combo series uses a negative earth inverter stage biased to a negative 1 value, and not the normal marshall/SLO/ common sense design of a cathode follower.
its why it tracks tighter, has such a high headroom, but is also the demise of the amplifier because it can be harder to play. adding chokes and upgrading the stock OT makes its more prominent, and can make it worse (or better... depending on the player and wants)
personally i like the 5150 low end punch and power, and i like the feel of a 5150 III. but the 5150 III does not have the same headroom as a 6505 or 5150 - it distorts differently.
the 5150 III does not have resonance controls, and the presence controls are different in design - subpar i believe.
im currently designing a prototype modification thats over 70 mods for a 5150 II that combines all of the properties and research ive ever found and known in 5150's into a single package for 5150 lovers.
im currently trying to get the bugs out of a design for the power transformer from heyboer and ill have it completed by late spring of this year.
mesa single/dual/ and triple rectifiers also modeled their design off of the SLO. but they also fucked with something. they put the tone-stack of the rectifier early in the triode stages where the effects loop is supposed to go in a SLO instead of the SLO method. this means not only do you have to crank the fuck out of them in a simillar way to the 5150's, but now your tone controls had better be set properly, otherwise no matter what you do the amplifier could sound like ass.
i personally do not have enough experience about mesas to talk beyond this in a tonal aspect. but i will say that they dont call mesa boogies messy boogers for nothing. their build quality and initial circuit design is terrible and not the correct way most people would design an amplifier.
but sometimes you get the golden models that sound great with them. its just one of those things and among the many reasons i dont like mesa's.
the build quality of peavey 6505's is something you might want to research, i typed up a good bit about this on this forum and i would suggest giving it a read if you are thinking of unloading a 5150 III for a 5150/6505 model.
hope this helps.
i have also played a 5150 III for a year straight in retail stores and i go back and forth on that amplifier. i can say that they dont have the same tightness at all that a 6505 has. although they do play very very very loosely, and they track so great - that i guess the end result is the same thing. only, the "feeling" of having to fight the amplifier is not there on a 5150 III.
the compression is there, and is not too much different than a normal 5150/II. but the 5150 III's have a more compressed tone in the gain structure. so the swap would decrease some of it. i personally like that tone - when you crank a 5150 III, the sweetspot that amplifier has, the compression adds just enough structure right where the amplifier is supposed to have it and i think it really sounds great.
but if you hate it, the combo doesnt have that compressed tone in the gain structure in comparison to everything else here, but is compressed in general. every 5150 is compressed in general - they are all the same in that statement. that ties back into the volume of your guitar and cranking the shit out of the volume.
the design of 5150 III's makes solos effortless if the amplifier is bone dry, where a 6505/5150/5150 II doesnt get that loose feeling until you are tearing the paint off of club walls and/or shaking windows out of buildings. 5150 II's are worse about this than 5150's/6505s.
the 6505/5150/5150II/combo series uses a negative earth inverter stage biased to a negative 1 value, and not the normal marshall/SLO/ common sense design of a cathode follower.
its why it tracks tighter, has such a high headroom, but is also the demise of the amplifier because it can be harder to play. adding chokes and upgrading the stock OT makes its more prominent, and can make it worse (or better... depending on the player and wants)
personally i like the 5150 low end punch and power, and i like the feel of a 5150 III. but the 5150 III does not have the same headroom as a 6505 or 5150 - it distorts differently.
the 5150 III does not have resonance controls, and the presence controls are different in design - subpar i believe.
im currently designing a prototype modification thats over 70 mods for a 5150 II that combines all of the properties and research ive ever found and known in 5150's into a single package for 5150 lovers.
im currently trying to get the bugs out of a design for the power transformer from heyboer and ill have it completed by late spring of this year.
mesa single/dual/ and triple rectifiers also modeled their design off of the SLO. but they also fucked with something. they put the tone-stack of the rectifier early in the triode stages where the effects loop is supposed to go in a SLO instead of the SLO method. this means not only do you have to crank the fuck out of them in a simillar way to the 5150's, but now your tone controls had better be set properly, otherwise no matter what you do the amplifier could sound like ass.
i personally do not have enough experience about mesas to talk beyond this in a tonal aspect. but i will say that they dont call mesa boogies messy boogers for nothing. their build quality and initial circuit design is terrible and not the correct way most people would design an amplifier.
but sometimes you get the golden models that sound great with them. its just one of those things and among the many reasons i dont like mesa's.
the build quality of peavey 6505's is something you might want to research, i typed up a good bit about this on this forum and i would suggest giving it a read if you are thinking of unloading a 5150 III for a 5150/6505 model.
hope this helps.
M
mrbobo
New member
One could do rock and hard rock all day long on a 5150/6505. Lead channel with the gain on about 3.5 ..... skip the channel switching, and use the guitar volume knob.
Compared to my (ex) Tremoverb, the Tremoverb had a looser bottom end, and allot more pronounced "sizzle" could be dialed in; my 5150 has allot of low mids.
Compared to my (ex) Tremoverb, the Tremoverb had a looser bottom end, and allot more pronounced "sizzle" could be dialed in; my 5150 has allot of low mids.
D
D-Rock
Well-known member
The reality is that this amp was designed as a classic and hard rock amp. It just so happens that it has amazing modern metal capabilities.
A lot of people forget that.
A lot of people forget that.
keano
New member
Thanks everyone
mrp5150
Active member
D-Rock":pxrlvg9x said:
Yeah, I still find it crazy that an amp designed for Eddie Van Halen ended up being the definitive sound of low tuned Swedish Melodic Death Metal.
mikeyen
New member
Check out the 6505+ as well - the green channel has some amazing crunch sounds in there, not to mention amazing high gain tones as well with a boost up front.
MississippiMetal
New member
glpg80, great post. Very informative.
I think the green channel on the 6505+ is one of the most useful channels you can find on just about any amp within its price range. With hot enough pickups it can even do a great hard rock or metal tone with the pre at 7 or 8. It can also get some phenomenal classic rock tones. A bias modded 6505+ with some JJ's in the power section sounds like a darker hot rodded JCM800 without the sometimes too-high mids, imo. Great sound.
I think the green channel on the 6505+ is one of the most useful channels you can find on just about any amp within its price range. With hot enough pickups it can even do a great hard rock or metal tone with the pre at 7 or 8. It can also get some phenomenal classic rock tones. A bias modded 6505+ with some JJ's in the power section sounds like a darker hot rodded JCM800 without the sometimes too-high mids, imo. Great sound.
K Odell
New member
I find the lead channel on these heads absolutely useless. Thats my opinion though. A ton of people love the red channel. I have owned around 5 5150s and all versions except the 5150 III. And every version I have owned I have never once found a use for the red channel. It just doesnt jive with my playing.
Now that said I absolutely adore the 5150 series bc I have not been able to find a better rythmn or lead tone for me than the green channel with the crunch switch engaged. Its just so thick and heavy sounding.
Back on topic I think these heads can do a lot of things. You just gotta put into the equation pickups, tubes, pedals,etc. Some lower gain tubes could help ease the gain back a bit bc as was stated before these heads have a retarded high amount of gain that I don't think anyone would ever need to use, but now that I think of it. Pat from The Absence ran his gain on 10 on the lead channel and his sounded pretty bangin.
Now that said I absolutely adore the 5150 series bc I have not been able to find a better rythmn or lead tone for me than the green channel with the crunch switch engaged. Its just so thick and heavy sounding.
Back on topic I think these heads can do a lot of things. You just gotta put into the equation pickups, tubes, pedals,etc. Some lower gain tubes could help ease the gain back a bit bc as was stated before these heads have a retarded high amount of gain that I don't think anyone would ever need to use, but now that I think of it. Pat from The Absence ran his gain on 10 on the lead channel and his sounded pretty bangin.
droptrd
Active member
Great review dude 
glpg80":3odk2yva said:i saw your other post about the 5150 III
i have also played a 5150 III for a year straight in retail stores and i go back and forth on that amplifier. i can say that they dont have the same tightness at all that a 6505 has. although they do play very very very loosely, and they track so great - that i guess the end result is the same thing. only, the "feeling" of having to fight the amplifier is not there on a 5150 III.
the compression is there, and is not too much different than a normal 5150/II. but the 5150 III's have a more compressed tone in the gain structure. so the swap would decrease some of it. i personally like that tone - when you crank a 5150 III, the sweetspot that amplifier has, the compression adds just enough structure right where the amplifier is supposed to have it and i think it really sounds great.
but if you hate it, the combo doesnt have that compressed tone in the gain structure in comparison to everything else here, but is compressed in general. every 5150 is compressed in general - they are all the same in that statement. that ties back into the volume of your guitar and cranking the shit out of the volume.
the design of 5150 III's makes solos effortless if the amplifier is bone dry, where a 6505/5150/5150 II doesnt get that loose feeling until you are tearing the paint off of club walls and/or shaking windows out of buildings. 5150 II's are worse about this than 5150's/6505s.
the 6505/5150/5150II/combo series uses a negative earth inverter stage biased to a negative 1 value, and not the normal marshall/SLO/ common sense design of a cathode follower.
its why it tracks tighter, has such a high headroom, but is also the demise of the amplifier because it can be harder to play. adding chokes and upgrading the stock OT makes its more prominent, and can make it worse (or better... depending on the player and wants)
personally i like the 5150 low end punch and power, and i like the feel of a 5150 III. but the 5150 III does not have the same headroom as a 6505 or 5150 - it distorts differently.
the 5150 III does not have resonance controls, and the presence controls are different in design - subpar i believe.
im currently designing a prototype modification thats over 70 mods for a 5150 II that combines all of the properties and research ive ever found and known in 5150's into a single package for 5150 lovers.
im currently trying to get the bugs out of a design for the power transformer from heyboer and ill have it completed by late spring of this year.
mesa single/dual/ and triple rectifiers also modeled their design off of the SLO. but they also fucked with something. they put the tone-stack of the rectifier early in the triode stages where the effects loop is supposed to go in a SLO instead of the SLO method. this means not only do you have to crank the fuck out of them in a simillar way to the 5150's, but now your tone controls had better be set properly, otherwise no matter what you do the amplifier could sound like ass.
i personally do not have enough experience about mesas to talk beyond this in a tonal aspect. but i will say that they dont call mesa boogies messy boogers for nothing. their build quality and initial circuit design is terrible and not the correct way most people would design an amplifier.
but sometimes you get the golden models that sound great with them. its just one of those things and among the many reasons i dont like mesa's.
the build quality of peavey 6505's is something you might want to research, i typed up a good bit about this on this forum and i would suggest giving it a read if you are thinking of unloading a 5150 III for a 5150/6505 model.
hope this helps.
mrp5150
Active member
raginkjinn":2mywqn6v said:
I'm pretty sure the first 7 songs on From Your Grave were recorded with a 5150 with the gain dimed.