New Synergy module - Peavey 6505

[TheGreatGreen]

The Syn-1 and Syn-2 units have an internal 12ax7 but yeah still less than the head.

Oh ok, I'm curious about that. Is the internal 12AX7 in the syn-1 and syn-2 units hard-wired to the input stage of each of those units, or is that tube wired outside the input stage and simply made "available" for each module to utilize?

Like, does the syn-1 and 2 route the guitar straight from the input jack to the module, which itself has the option of running the signal out to that extra 12AX7 and back into the module? Or is the input stage of the synergy unit essentially hard wired, utilizing that built-in 12AX7 input stage?

Does what I'm asking make sense?

 

[BesaMoogie]

Oh ok, I'm curious about that. Is the internal 12AX7 in the syn-1 and syn-2 units hard-wired to the input stage of each of those units, or is that tube wired outside the input stage and simply made "available" for each module to utilize?

Like, does the syn-1 and 2 route the guitar straight from the input jack to the module, which itself has the option of running the signal out to that extra 12AX7 and back into the module? Or is the input stage of the synergy unit essentially hard wired, utilizing that built-in 12AX7 input stage?

Does what I'm asking make sense?

The module "tells" the Syn unit which cathode values to choose in the first gainstage. The first gainstage is in the Syn unit, not the module. How this "communication" exactly works I can`t tell.

 

[errrrrl]

I ordered one... should be pretty cool. Haven't had anything 5150 flavored in awhile.

 

[BesaMoogie]

I ordered one... should be pretty cool. Haven't had anything 5150 flavored in awhile.

Maybe give it a look inside. I read somewhere people speculating that the "missing" gains stage was possibly accomplished by a transistor of some sort? (highly speculative

 

[MatrixClaw]

Friend of mine ordered one yesterday and had it delivered today. He says it's garbage and his real 5150 sounds much better Would like to check one out myself, but I just sold my SYN-1 and don't plan on going back right now.


That said, I don't personally get the market for the module, since you can buy a used 6505 for like $200 more, but I guess if you're already heavily invested and want to stay with the smaller footprint.

 

[ZEN Amps]

Oh ok, I'm curious about that. Is the internal 12AX7 in the syn-1 and syn-2 units hard-wired to the input stage of each of those units, or is that tube wired outside the input stage and simply made "available" for each module to utilize?

Like, does the syn-1 and 2 route the guitar straight from the input jack to the module, which itself has the option of running the signal out to that extra 12AX7 and back into the module? Or is the input stage of the synergy unit essentially hard wired, utilizing that built-in 12AX7 input stage?

Does what I'm asking make sense?

Yes hardwired / always utilised - it feeds the 2nd stage in the module. Although the cathode R/C is loaded with three common options, there's still serious limitations with this system, e,g. the 1st stage plate (anode) R/C values arguably being the most important.

This is why the modules are at best an approximation of the original, not a clone. Mind you, it's no impediment to getting good tones, but after a while this and the fact that the power amp is half the equation means that the more you 'invest' in a bunch of modules the more redundancy you have. They all just start sounding the same after while - far, far less fun than multiple amps IMO.

 

[Kelly]

Wasn't there a new v2 release of the Deliverance module planned too, or have the problems with that module been fixed already in those currently available from shops?

I think it's already out there. Has better cleans than v1.

 

[errrrrl]

They all just start sounding the same after while - far, far less fun than multiple amps IMO.

Thats how I felt when I got my first syn1. Got to play all the modules out at that time and felt they sort of sounded the same. Once the Fryette stuff started coming out thats when it got interesting to me.

 

[ClintN667]

Here is the thing. I had the Kartakou colossus and the first one I had was great second one sounded great but had some quirks that I didnt like. But... I just like having the actual amp.

 

[TheGreatGreen]

Thanks @ZEN Amps !

It seems kind of nuts that they would put all that effort into getting all those amp makers on board, only to homogenize everything with a universal input stage like that. Sure there's options for capacitors dictated by the module, but it still limits options.

I could see the whole system being fantastic for something like live use though, where you want to maintain a mostly unchanging overall sonic footprint as you move through several different levels of gain and thickness, but it doesn't sound like a perfect substitute for actually having a studio full of different amps.

 

[ZEN Amps]

Thanks @ZEN Amps !

It seems kind of nuts that they would put all that effort into getting all those amp makers on board, only to homogenize everything with a universal input stage like that. Sure there's options for capacitors dictated by the module, but it still limits options.

I could see the whole system being fantastic for something like live use though, where you want to maintain a mostly unchanging overall sonic footprint as you move through several different levels of gain and thickness, but it doesn't sound like a perfect substitute for actually having a studio full of different amps.

Yeah it's not a bad idea, just limited and can get expensive pretty quickly. Lots of redundancy in their lineup - Plexi, Metro, 800, Shirley, BE - all pretty similar sounding really.

 

[cetanu]

It seems kind of nuts that they would put all that effort into getting all those amp makers on board, only to homogenize everything with a universal input stage like that.

It's because they didn't have the balls to start from scratch and prioritised backwards compatibility with the old Egnater/Randall modules over actually improving on the modular concept. Steve Fryette mentioned that he argued for ditching the old system, but was overruled.

I'm not even surprised. There's little to no innovation in the guitar gear market especially if you prefer to keep your amps analog but even digital modeling is kinda boring and repetitive IMO.

So, the amp designers have to work within that Synergy framework and some modules probably turn out great and the Synergy system is probably as good as the old Egnater/Randall modular concept could get but when I played a few of those I wasn't convinced. I'd a Randall RM4 with some custom modified modules back then and the Synergy.. I mean, I'm kinda spoiled with what I have and had but I think the pricing for a Synergy SYN2 alone is ridiculous. And some of those modules.. I paid $400-500 for my first 5150 blockletter back then and don't see much value in an ENGL module when I can get an used E530 for less.. and so on.

But maybe that's just me not getting easily excited about guitar gear anymore.

 

[TheGreatGreen]

It's because they didn't have the balls to start from scratch and prioritised backwards compatibility with the old Egnater/Randall modules over actually improving on the modular concept. Steve Fryette mentioned that he argued for ditching the old system, but was overruled.

I'm not even surprised. There's little to no innovation in the guitar gear market especially if you prefer to keep your amps analog but even digital modeling is kinda boring and repetitive IMO.

So, the amp designers have to work within that Synergy framework and some modules probably turn out great and the Synergy system is probably as good as the old Egnater/Randall modular concept could get but when I played a few of those I wasn't convinced. I'd a Randall RM4 with some custom modified modules back then and the Synergy.. I mean, I'm kinda spoiled with what I have and had but I think the pricing for a Synergy SYN2 alone is ridiculous. And some of those modules.. I paid $400-500 for my first 5150 blockletter back then and don't see much value in an ENGL module when I can get an used E530 for less.. and so on.

But maybe that's just me not getting easily excited about guitar gear anymore.

Wow thanks I didn't know that stuff. I'm also with you on the absolutely bananas $800 price tag on that syn2 loading dock btw. And yep, the decision to make the input stage universal seems... ill advised and counter to the entire point of such a system.

It's kind of a shame there's no system that truly replicates all those preamps one-to-one. But like @ZEN Amps said, the poweramp is also hugely influential to the tone as well, and as long as there's no real comprehensive selection of tube poweramps out there, true modular analogs to the tones everybody wants can't really be achieved in this format, which is a shame. They can get close, but not 100%. Along that line of thinking, it's strange that no monoblock tube poweramps for guitar have ever really been made, huh. Seems like companies have always approached rack vs heads as two entirely different universes. You would think in the 80's, at least Marshall would have built something like a rack mountable JCM 800, if not separate JCM 800 preamp and monoblock JCM 800 power section as rack gear. Mesa made a bunch of rack stuff but their studio pre and quad weren't really the same preamps as what was in the heads, and the Triaxis (as much as I love mine) was also entirely different than the heads. They made rack poweramps but again, all stereo.

You know, I don't think it will ever happen, so much so that it's almost embarrassing to even type it out, but if somebody was to actually try to develop the modular tube preamp idea the right way and make true 1-to-1 representations of all those famous preamps, and then companies were to make a bunch of monoblock poweramps representative of every major tube type (KT88, 6L6, 6V6, EL34, EL84) that would each handle a quad of those tubes, and where each poweramp let you adjust basically every poweramp parameter that matters (full watts switchable down to as low as possible, pentode / triode, class ab / a switching, knobs for Presence and Depth and control over Presence and Depth frequencies, global Negative Feedback control, etc), then you could lay the groundwork for true, actual representations of pretty much whatever amp you wanted in rack form.

It'll never happen though.

 

[ZEN Amps]

It'll never happen though.

Never say never

 

[tonedover]

Now this has me reinterested in the Synergy stuff.

I've wanted to go back down the OG 5150 path for a long time but the master volume on those amps is terrible. And I don't want to get into load boxes etc, or volume pedals in the loop... regardless of how good they are these days, been there done that with the OG. In fact why didn't PV fix the Master Volume on the new reissue 6505?

But this running into my Marshall or my EVH, or even just getting the full blown head w/ 6L6's so you're even more in the ballpark than some of the other modules, plus some great switching options...very interested.

its a good quality system and once i got in w the syn1 i was quickly addicted to buying and selling modules, ive tried nearly all of them at this point. and i now use a syn2, bc more is always better

i actually just traded my evh 5153 away thinking this would be coming soon.

 

[tonedover]

Wow thanks I didn't know that stuff. I'm also with you on the absolutely bananas $800 price tag on that syn2 loading dock btw. And yep, the decision to make the input stage universal seems... ill advised and counter to the entire point of such a system.

It's kind of a shame there's no system that truly replicates all those preamps one-to-one. But like @ZEN Amps said, the poweramp is also hugely influential to the tone as well, and as long as there's no real comprehensive selection of tube poweramps out there, true modular analogs to the tones everybody wants can't really be achieved in this format, which is a shame. They can get close, but not 100%. Along that line of thinking, it's strange that no monoblock tube poweramps for guitar have ever really been made, huh. Seems like companies have always approached rack vs heads as two entirely different universes. You would think in the 80's, at least Marshall would have built something like a rack mountable JCM 800, if not separate JCM 800 preamp and monoblock JCM 800 power section as rack gear. Mesa made a bunch of rack stuff but their studio pre and quad weren't really the same preamps as what was in the heads, and the Triaxis (as much as I love mine) was also entirely different than the heads. They made rack poweramps but again, all stereo.

You know, I don't think it will ever happen, so much so that it's almost embarrassing to even type it out, but if somebody was to actually try to develop the modular tube preamp idea the right way and make true 1-to-1 representations of all those famous preamps, and then companies were to make a bunch of monoblock poweramps representative of every major tube type (KT88, 6L6, 6V6, EL34, EL84) that would each handle a quad of those tubes, and where each poweramp let you adjust basically every poweramp parameter that matters (full watts switchable down to as low as possible, pentode / triode, class ab / a switching, knobs for Presence and Depth and control over Presence and Depth frequencies, global Negative Feedback control, etc), then you could lay the groundwork for true, actual representations of pretty much whatever amp you wanted in rack form.

It'll never happen though.

disagree, friedman has repeatedly said the pre are the exact same layout and circuit of his amps. and i have A/B the pres through the power section of his amps. they sound the same,

whereas u say "probably" i can say ive owned 12-14 diif synergy modules and of those, 75% sounded excellent.

its an excellent system w, yes, a point of entry cost.

 

[MusicIsLife]

To me, one of the better things about the previous modular generation was the Randall RT2/50 power amp. It's not a bland-sounding power amp, plus the option to load each side with different power tubes, and switch between them via MIDI. Sure, it's still not going to mimic the design of the various power amp sections of every standalone amp, but that doesn't mean it doesn't sound great.

I never cared that the modular stuff doesn't sound identical to their name sakes. I look at it more as a really solid, flexible foundation for building great tones. I don't think any sensible person is going to expect that a variety of modules through a common power amp will sound identical to every individual amp.

 

[fek]

Just watched some vids of the 6505. I will buy one at least to try out. Pete Thorn does a quick comparison to the 6505 and SLO. They sound very very similar but the 6505 has a touch more warmth to it.

I was big into the RM100's and modded modules back in the day so I knew what I was getting into with Synergy. Picked up a Syn1 with free BE module from Sweetwater a bit ago and was really impressed so I picked up 3 other modules. Moved recently, so I also wanted to reduce my gear square footage footprint, and the Synergy stuff has just been working for me.

Not gigging and I am not missing having four 100 watt heads around. That is a lie. I do miss having them be pieces of furniture in my music space, but I have stopped hoarding over the past couple of years. Still have a modded JCM800 and am always looking! Just showing more restraint on full size amps.

 

[eddyrox]

I ordered one... should be pretty cool. Haven't had anything 5150 flavored in awhile.

love to hear your reaction IMHO so many of these YT reviewers are either paid too much to endorse/demo or just aren't providing all of the insights that hi-gain players need (audiences vary of course)
i haven't seen PT's demo, but Pete's not exactly about the brootz...(love PT though!)
did Ola demo yet? i need to check out Kyle Bull's vid...

 

[eddyrox]

ok just viewed the John Browne demo....
the Syn 6505 is really good... wow!
brighter in the mids than the OG script logo - if i didn't have the original...this would be on the "buy" list for sure!!
Browne Demo