CrystalSky
Well-known member
Where did your Langner go? ?
P
Philhouse
Well-known member
Cool clips. I really liked the Morris ones best. The Marshall clip has a top end super crisp/sizzle that I don't like, where as the Morris sounded more balanced up top. I'm sure the Marshall in the room would sound fantastic too, just out of those clips I prefer the Morris. Cool amp I've not seen before.
M
motorboy1
Well-known member
Get a Splawn quickrod…
J
jape23
Active member
The UK68 is a really killer amp that I hope more people get to try eventually. There's a lot more to it than what I'm showing in those clips. As for that Marshall clip... it's one I made in haste after first getting the amp and being excited to share. Not a fan of the playing at all on that one or how it came out overall. And that top end sizzle can for sure be tamed a bit if you want.
Regarding the SLO, I've had a love/hate thing with that amp going back 20 years. Owned a couple of them and played several others over the years. Overall, I just prefer a more open amp with greater touch response. I'd choose a good Marshall over an SLO any day, especially for more dynamic playing where you're riding the guitar's volume knob a lot.
J
Jack Luminous
Well-known member
LOL thanks ! It's kinda hard to put sounds into words without getting either overly technical with dB ad kHz or plain weird with crazy metaphors. I chose the second option !
P
Panhead5
Well-known member
That's the way I describe stuff!
Crunchity
Well-known member
Just agreeing with others, owing BOTH would be pretty epic (a long time SLO owner but often keeping an eye out for a STOCK JMP in good condition, recently recapped, tubed, biased and ready for prime time).
Last edited:
jabps
Well-known member
Since I had owned an SLO years ago I had heard the Soldano SLO comparisons beforehand and I thought great, SLO tonally with a modern slant let's give it a go. I couldn't do anything with it except get a decent lead tone. Boost in front, no boost, eq in front and loop...even combined them in various way and it was just a no go. Now the amp build was a work of art, it's seriously a thing of beauty. What made it worse was at the time I had just purchased the Engl Artist which "for me" mind you, blew it in the weeds. Luckily I was just doing some flipping at the time for fun and neither were going to, nor intended to replace my main amps so I got over it pretty quick lol.
Like @CarlF not sure I get the Marshall comparisons. My first three amps growing up where a MKII JMP Combo, MKII Non MV JMP 100 watt head and a MKII MV JMP 50 Watt head, the cherry of the bunch. My current amps are Marshalls but to each their own.
Last edited:
C
cragginshred
Well-known member
So last night I put an Aldrich pup in my R9 and as I dialed in the Alta my conclusion was a Slo is not needed at this time. What say you all?
The Alta has the perfect balance of being able to get as aggressive as a I need with no nasally aspect like others I have had -largely due to the OD into the front that headfirst has masterfully solved!
BTW I just need a pack of Marlboro's rolled up in my T shirt sleeve eh? Lol! Actually just got home from work put sweats on and went out to install pup with no thought of what I was wearing
The Alta has the perfect balance of being able to get as aggressive as a I need with no nasally aspect like others I have had -largely due to the OD into the front that headfirst has masterfully solved!
BTW I just need a pack of Marlboro's rolled up in my T shirt sleeve eh? Lol! Actually just got home from work put sweats on and went out to install pup with no thought of what I was wearing
P
Panhead5
Well-known member
Your life will never be complete until you have an SLO 100!
C
cragginshred
Well-known member
Owned 2, gigged with a slo 30 for a couple of years. Be cool to mix the alta with a Slo 100 kinda like Lynch did on the wicked sensation lp
cardinal
Well-known member
I owned an '89 SLO and mostly play JMP 2204. I didn't think they sounded too much a like.
Others have summed up the differences. The SLO to me just seemed to lack character. Too smooth. There's plenty of cut and high end, but maybe it was too high a frequency. The Marshall high end just seems to bite more and sounded better to me.
Others have summed up the differences. The SLO to me just seemed to lack character. Too smooth. There's plenty of cut and high end, but maybe it was too high a frequency. The Marshall high end just seems to bite more and sounded better to me.
C
cragginshred
Well-known member
A Slo - 'smooth' ?? For my tatses the rude sizzle grainy aspect that cannot be dialed out of either channels is why I got rid of mine
P
Panhead5
Well-known member
I do think that R9 does sound good. I had the Aldrich in a Suhr modern and didn't car for it much.
C
cragginshred
Well-known member
Agreed I'd had an Aldrich in other guitars in the past and had no intention of getting another but a buddy had one in an SG which sounded ok, but I took the plunge and could not be happier. Supper muscular and well balanced is how I would describe it
nevusofota
Well-known member
I realize that a 20 watter doesn’t seem like an obvious answer but the Soldano Astro 20 was the answer for me. SLO gain and voicing that’s 3 channels (7 if using midi). Definitely give it a test run. It easily kept up at band volume.
Last edited: