Smash
Hack
It is dead quiet with a zuul. I think the best thing about it the UU is the loop. I mean...Who the fuck uses a parallel loop for high gain? Jesus
B
braintheory
Well-known member
The Rev 1 Uber’s I’ve had definitely varied and I had my clear preferences, but they still at least did their thing overall in sound and feel that I couldn’t get in the later the versions that came after. I would use those same descriptors for the Rev 1’s I had other than hairy, but maybe just different ways of describing things
I love modern IF it’s done well, but not if it’s in the form of sounding filtered, synthetic or cardboard-y/lacking richness. I don’t even think of that as modern, just not good. It did cut surprising well, better than a lot of my amps actually, but at the same time also kind of gets washed out in a way. For more technical stuff where the ultra can maybe have an advantage I also felt when AB’ed the Hell Razor or Hermansson’s were just so much better for that as well as the Mako Dorado. Tighter, more articulate and better tracking. I couldn’t find a logical reason to keep it between those and the Rev 1
MrWoodchuck
Well-known member
Adding one more thing that is slightly off Uberschall topic, but I think an Ecstasy 101b gets heavier than the Uber Ultra. With the bright switches you can get it very tight, modern and cutting. Then there is the Pandora version which can get even tighter.
Here is the XTC 101b in a mix straight in the amp:
Here is the XTC 101b in a mix straight in the amp:
Beyond Black
Well-known member
80’s DM and Doom tones were/are raw, primitive and crusty af, and tones an UU is not capable of.
NewWorldMan
Well-known member
Depends on how we’re defining “heavy” right now. They’ve gotten more percussive and articulate over time, from Rev 1/2 -> Blue -> UU for example, with the oldest ones being the “loosest” as people would say and the most recent being the “tightest” and more articulate, but the older ones sound “bigger” IMO. Depends on your definition of heavy, and as mentioned earlier, no two are ever the same.
What’s funny is the cult following the of the oldest ones (Rev 1/2) tend to fall in line with the people that also want Recto Rev Cs and etc. But, the reason folks allege to like the Cs should be the reason they like later versions of the Uber better, but it’s not the case.
Makes me think what people really like is the oldest and hardest to find versions which everyone has convinced themselves are the “best,” whether it’s Rectos, Ubers, 5150s, Soldanos, Diezels, etc.
What’s funny is the cult following the of the oldest ones (Rev 1/2) tend to fall in line with the people that also want Recto Rev Cs and etc. But, the reason folks allege to like the Cs should be the reason they like later versions of the Uber better, but it’s not the case.
Makes me think what people really like is the oldest and hardest to find versions which everyone has convinced themselves are the “best,” whether it’s Rectos, Ubers, 5150s, Soldanos, Diezels, etc.
OldGtrGuy
Well-known member
The green ubers were cool...Until you added a 2nd guitar or until you copped an ultra. Have to agree with that last paragraph.
OldGtrGuy
Well-known member
You know there is a presence knob on the Ultra?
Beyond Black
Well-known member
Presence doesn’t remove cardboardlike sterility.
VHTStark
Well-known member
I have owned three Ubers. Ranking them for "brutal" capability, I would go:
UU > Rev Green > Rev Blue
However, my order of actual preference would go the exact opposite. The Rev Blue was my favorite Uber. Certainly not as massive sounding as the Rev Green or tight/aggressive as the UU, but it still had a fantastic Bogner feel like the Green, while being a bit more controlled. Mind you, I am more of a skate punk/melodic hardcore guy, as opposed to brutal, down tuned metal.
UU > Rev Green > Rev Blue
However, my order of actual preference would go the exact opposite. The Rev Blue was my favorite Uber. Certainly not as massive sounding as the Rev Green or tight/aggressive as the UU, but it still had a fantastic Bogner feel like the Green, while being a bit more controlled. Mind you, I am more of a skate punk/melodic hardcore guy, as opposed to brutal, down tuned metal.
thegame
Well-known member
Is it a corrugated cardboard tone and how many ply?
Smash
Hack
Papa John's Pizza flavored Cardboard
Qweklain
Well-known member
If it is that greasy, it should be able to do any 80's tones second-to-none!
Smash
Hack
I don't get the cardboard sound at all. I believe others do. I just hear what I think sounds good, and what I think sounds bad. The UU is one of the best sounding amps I have ever heard.
B
braintheory
Well-known member
In some ways I didn't actually find the UU more articulate. Much tighter for sure, but it had the same problem like when I AB'ed a Mark 7 vs real C+ where while it was tighter sounding, on very fast passages the C+ actually tracked much better, with less blur to the notes/more note distinction (I'm not the only one with this experience) and felt the same when I AB'ed the UU with the Rev 1 I had (played other Rev 1's as well and owned one other). There's this washed out quality to the notes on the UU and I can hear it too in most clips
The reason I prefer both the Rev C and Rev 1 is that both IME are the versions I found to sound and feel most raw, organic/alive and 3D tonally. Others may have other reasons for their preferences. With some amps like the Wizard's my favorites are actually the most recent ones like the Hell Razor. I actually didn't like the oldest Wizard MC I had nearly as much. My favorite SLO was a 2014 version I had, but the 1989 SLO I had AB'ed did sound a bit more organic, raw again, better feel, with a juicer, more complex midrange. Maybe it's just from naturally aging, not sure. Both were freshly serviced from my tech with more or less similar tubes to each other
PurityS.L.G
Well-known member
I can see why you say that but I'm one who doesn't fall into that category and there are others as well. I have a Rev G that was modded to a C and while I get the appeal of the sound, I fairly quickly wanted to put it back to G specs (and I did) since I prefer the wall of sound heft of the recto G voicing. If I wanted that C sound, I feel like I could accomplish the same thing with an early built SLO w/ depth mod and a good boost pedal, perhaps even better IMO.
B
braintheory
Well-known member
The cardboard quality I interpret comes from I believe the lack of tonal richness and filtered quality (Omega's, KSR's, Driftwood's, etc have it too). AB it vs a Rev 1 or 2 Uber and I bet you'll I hear what I mean in the contrast despite both having the overall Uber flavor. Hell even just tap a piece of cardboard or maple wood and listen to the tap tone (not kidding)
B
braintheory
Well-known member
I think that's different as some Recto's he did the mod to (or some of his other mods in general) just seem to not always translate as well with it as when they were stock including also some iic's or iic+'s modded to + or ++'s respectively lost their magic from talking to others. IME at least also from AB comparisons with real C's the 2 Triple F/C mods I had orange ch still really wasn't like the actual C's, but actually preferred the red ch in some ways as well as the green, which is awful on the C and D's lol. One Rev C I borrowed though had an unusually good and aggressive red ch
I had in the past a 2014 SLO w/ depth mod and 1989 SLO AB'ed with my Rev C and they sounded and felt nothing alike. Both of course awesome amps, but totally different flavors regardless of how similar they are on paper. The SLO's have a much smoother sound than the rough throaty growl of the recto orange ch and the SLO's mids just inherently sit much higher up (much brighter amps). Even the Rev C's are still dark, fat sounding amps overall despite being brighter than other Recto's and I've had 3 different Rev C's AB'ed in my place with exactly the same tubes to be fair. The earliest serial C I had was maybe more SLO-like, but still quite far away from that flavor
Last edited:
Smash
Hack
I want to believe. And one day we will get together and a/b some amps and see if you can get me to recognize it. I am excited as hell. Although, I hope it doesn't ruin a bunch of amps for me
B
braintheory
Well-known member
Absolutely! If you're ever in the area let me know and I'll let you know if I'm ever in Austin. I'll do the best I can do demonstrate and if I can't that's ok too
R
Racerxrated
Well-known member
Yes, and no. For me, it's about the quality/richness/3D-ness of the tone, not so much about tightness and other aspects. Going from a Rev G dual to ANY previous iteration, F to C, the tone is clearly better with the earlier revision. The Gs I had were sterile and had NO feel whatsoever. G Triples were a bit better but still way short in comparison to the F Triples I had. Then, going even further with the Rev C, the fast tracking and almost C+ level feel, those are things the F had some of, but the C was a revelation. When I think of the C I had, vs the G early serial Duals the C was almost unrelated to those Gs. Night and day difference.
Maybe there are some Gs that sound closer, but for me that wasn't the case. Same with the 2 Mark IIIs I had, harsh mids/highs with no feel; vs the C+ that is a very pleasing amp to play without harshness, and incredible feel.