Soldano SLO vs Friedman BE100

[SLOgriff]

Obviously power tubes are different (5881/6L6 vs EL34's). But both are farely popular and straight forward rock amps being toured with by some big names! Has anyone owned both and compared these amps? I already know what an SLO can do (crank the master and it stays tight and just blossoms...). Are these amps similar in tones at high volumes/low volumes? So many other amps (beside the SLO) start to "fart out" when cranked up.

SLO = Quality parts and killer tones from blues to hard-rock. Silky and punchy tones that stay tight when cranked up.

BE100 = ???

 

[yngzaklynch]

 

[steve_k]

There are no similarities between the SLO and BE100, whatsoever. The BE will retain a typical Marshall response to gain/volume and tone, although there are several styles to choose from. But, overall, it still behaves the exact opposite of an SLO.

Steve

 

[SLOgriff]

There are no similarities between the SLO and BE100, whatsoever. The BE will retain a typical Marshall response to gain/volume and tone, although there are several styles to choose from. But, overall, it still behaves the exact opposite of an SLO.

Steve

Makes sense.... So is the BE more alike in tone to a Bogner XTC??

 

[SLOgriff]

Someone show me THE DEFINITIVE SLO tone video. I have flirted with the idea of these, but I havent found a good one on youtube yet.

As for the Be-100. I might be able to help with that,

show me a GOOD slo-100 vid.

That Phil X is hilarious! When he playes thru that Luxxtone....well, lets just say I had to change my tidy-whity's!

 

[IntenseJim]

I had a friends' Marsha with the BE/HBE kitchen sink (C45, Saturation, 1/2 power switches) for a week.

Generally speaking my perception is the SLO has a more cutting & open upper midrange and prescence emphasis; the BE/HBE has a lower midrange emphasis and sounds less 'open' than the SLO. As has been posted many times here and in other forums, the BE/HBE is in the Marshall-on-plutonium camp while the SLO has it's own thing going, which I love but clearly some do not. It would not be too redundant to own both.

Most of the videos of the SLO I have seen &heard do not serve the amp justice at all.

 

[hunter]

show me a GOOD slo-100 vid.

Shows the open yet creamy upper midrange and I would say those SLOs of Gary's sound pretty damn good, and I guess it would be hard getting that tone with a Marshall.

 

[Giga]

show me a GOOD slo-100 vid.

Shows the open yet creamy upper midrange and I would say those SLOs of Gary's sound pretty damn good, and I guess it would be hard getting that tone with a Marshall.

Maybe not the best example; I've heard/read several times that was actually his Guvnor into the clean/crunch channel of the SLO. Some even say it's not an SLO ....

Giga

 

[carlygtr]

show me a GOOD slo-100 vid.

Shows the open yet creamy upper midrange and I would say those SLOs of Gary's sound pretty damn good, and I guess it would be hard getting that tone with a Marshall.

Maybe not the best example; I've heard/read several times that was actually his Guvnor into the clean/crunch channel of the SLO. Some even say it's not an SLO ....

Giga

During 1990 Gary was definitely using SLO's. He used the Gov'nor and Tube Screamer likely into the Crunch channel. Having owned both those pedals I can tell you while they were used as OD's, that sound will not be had with either pedal and another amp.

No point comparing the SLO to ANY Marshall or Marshall derivative. They are different.

 

[steve_k]

No point comparing the SLO to ANY Marshall or Marshall derivative. They are different.

Never a truer statement spoken and sums it up well......

Don't get me wrong though, I like my Marshalls and Marshall derivatives, and some better than others. Some derivatives are crap. And, I am not advocating that the SLO is better. They just have a unique tone and can't be replicated by another amp and certainly cannot be compared to any Marshall (or derivative).

Now....taking that one step further, the highest quality Marshall derivative straight off production is a Wizard MCII, in terms of tone and quality build (and price).


Steve

 

[K-mark5]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e2G-ie3wcw I quite like this one

 

[gbsmusic]

As already stated 2 very different amps. IMO the SLO is hand's down the best sounding amp made

 

[Walnuts]

IMO if you have to compare the SLO to something Friedman related, I'd go with the Naked. I have one with a sat switch and while it has its own thing going on, it is much more similar to the SLO than the BE-100.

 

[tokyo tapes]

I think this one show what the SLO can do in a good way:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4nZ1NIS54U

 

[rupe]

The tone that Gary got with his SLOs is really not a great representation of what they sound like IMO...Gary gets them to sound more "Marshally" than they actually do. I can pretty much nail Moore's tone from that era with my Marsha alone...no pedals.

From my experience, the SLO is much stiffer/less forgiving and has more more high end and upper midrange complexity, whereas the Marsha has a tighter low end and a warmer overall sound. I feel that the Marsha does low volume sounds much better where the SLO prefers to reside at ear-splitting levels (although it does low volume better than it typically gets credit for IMO).
The Marsha's full clean channel is head and shoulders better than Soldano's clean tone (which isn't bad, just a little colder and harder sounding). It's simply bigger yet sweeter sounding...the ultimate Fender/Marshall mash-up.

They are simply two different shades of awesomeness...I'd love to hear them together in one rig.

 

[syncrodude007]

I play through both amps...they are very different... as stated by very knowledgeable members/ guitarists on this site...
Both examples of the very best on the market today...just my 2
dude when Gary Moore opens that SLO up...boy howdy

 

[FourT6and2]

Check out any song off of Killswitch Engage's live DVD. Guitar tracks were reamped with an SLO.

 

[billm408]

I agree- two very different amps. I've owned a couple of SLO's and recently had a BE/HBE modded Reinhardt. Not quite the same, but close enough.
The SLO has it's own thing going. Can't really compare it to a Marshall or the XTC. It's got far less saturation than the BE/HBE which makes it a tight, somewhat unforgiving amp. And the mids on the SLO are thick- but not in a Bogner low mid kind of way. The BE/HBE has a definite Marshall vibe and tons of saturation with an upper mid bite.
Both killer amps and a no lose proposition owning either one IMO.

 

[Bronco]

I agree- two very different amps. I've owned a couple of SLO's and recently had a BE/HBE modded Reinhardt. Not quite the same, but close enough.
The SLO has it's own thing going. Can't really compare it to a Marshall or the XTC. It's got far less saturation than the BE/HBE which makes it a tight, somewhat unforgiving amp. And the mids on the SLO are thick- but not in a Bogner low mid kind of way. The BE/HBE has a definite Marshall vibe and tons of saturation with an upper mid bite.
Both killer amps and a no lose proposition owning either one IMO.

Yep...well said. Concur completely...

 

[Shark Diver]

Someone show me THE DEFINITIVE SLO tone video. I have flirted with the idea of these, but I havent found a good one on youtube yet.

As for the Be-100. I might be able to help with that,

show me a GOOD slo-100 vid.

I keep telling you you can borrow mine. I have 3. We'll throw different tubes in them and you can have a blast.