Tell me about Soldano SLOs

  • Thread starter Thread starter flametal
  • Start date Start date
King Crimson":839b4 said:
flametal":839b4 said:
umm someone?

Peavey 5150 II if you want to waste an extra $2500.


Umm, bro hate to be a ball buster here, but that is kinda off. Got anywhere you could go play one? If you are still comparing the two, you haven't played an SLO. It is one of my all time favs no contest. If you play one, try to get on one w/ a depth mod and some 66's in it. It'll help if you try it out in a non-band situation. But it will shed some light on you as to the actual tone of the amp. There is no need for an A/B box, as they are so far apart you don't need to switch back and forth to notice.

The SLO kicks some major ass, one of the best amps out there IMO. Everyone that has one is a lucky SOB.

People will complain about the SLO being fizzy or too bright. These are just misrepresentations of people who DON'T play in a band situation and are just using it to play by themselves (which is just fine, not hating on the bedroom wankers!). The amp is focused on some higher mids which will make it seem brighter but in the mix is has a thickness that is just unreal. The higher mids voice it just perfectly and allow it to cut through the mix like a razor! To each his own, but I love the SLO

-Josh
 
danyeo":93056 said:
flametal":93056 said:
I don't know much about these amps. I heard they are marshallish with some fizz. Is this true?
According to Soldano the Avenger is the same amp as the SLO without the clean channel.
And without the mil spec high end components or the kick ass DeYoung transformers. There is a difference.

As far as the fizzyness people talk about, I don't hear it in mine. Who knows, maybe I'm the only one who can turn a treble and presence knob down a little.

Incredible amp, I'll never part with mine.
 
Core9":06d67 said:
danyeo":06d67 said:
flametal":06d67 said:
I don't know much about these amps. I heard they are marshallish with some fizz. Is this true?
According to Soldano the Avenger is the same amp as the SLO without the clean channel.
And without the mil spec high end components or the kick ass DeYoung transformers. There is a difference.

As far as the fizzyness people talk about, I don't hear it in mine. Who knows, maybe I'm the only one who can turn a treble and presence knob down a little.

Incredible amp, I'll never part with mine.


There is definately a difference. I have played several Avengers and owned half dozen or so SLO's. The Avengers are excellent amps, but there is something extra special about the SLO, More 3D and just pure white hot blistering tone.
 
Jdub":e570b said:
There is definately a difference. I have played several Avengers and owned half dozen or so SLO's. The Avengers are excellent amps, but there is something extra special about the SLO, More 3D and just pure white hot blistering tone.
How heavy can they get?
 
Heavy as it gets basically. Just gotta have a heavy riff. I think it sounds big, crunchy,tight and very very heavy on the crunch channel with the pre dimed and the mv on about noon. It is super tight and percussive.. On the lead channel the SLO is simply mean as hell with with huge bottom if you get the depth mod. Big bottom anyways, especially when loud. On top of heavy, the lead channes sings like crazy, is rich with harmonics and notes just explode off the guitar yet remain clear and crisp with definition.
 
flametal":13131 said:
I don't know much about these amps. I heard they are marshallish with some fizz. Is this true?

take a really good sounding modded Marshall 100 watt head...turn the bass and middle to zero and crank the volume, treble and presence...that is an SLO...ice picks to ears IMHO.
 
Echoes":56329 said:
flametal":56329 said:
I don't know much about these amps. I heard they are marshallish with some fizz. Is this true?

take a really good sounding modded Marshall 100 watt head...turn the bass and middle to zero and crank the volume, treble and presence...that is an SLO...ice picks to ears IMHO.
You can't be serious?!?!?! :confused:

If you are, obviously you haven't really heard one dialed in or you heard one that was messed up in a really bad way. It's easy to make a great amp sound bad, but it's very hard to make a bad amp sound great. SLO's have one of the best full range tones out there. Very rich, full, clean and articulate. A SLO will make a bad player sound bad, not pointing a finger at you of course. But your referrence to "take a really good sounding modded Marshall 100 watt head...turn the bass and middle to zero and crank the volume, treble and presence...that is an SLO...ice picks to ears IMHO" is way off the mark. :thumbsdown:
 
Echoes":8b8cc said:
flametal":8b8cc said:
I don't know much about these amps. I heard they are marshallish with some fizz. Is this true?

take a really good sounding modded Marshall 100 watt head...turn the bass and middle to zero and crank the volume, treble and presence...that is an SLO...ice picks to ears IMHO.

Bullshit !!! :lol: :LOL:
 
thanks for the replies. Now I have serious gas. To bad I don't really have the cash for one yet but I think one day it will be mine. Also does anyone have clips?
 
Jdub":106c1 said:
The SLO shares characteristics with hotrodded Marshalls, or boosted marshalls, but has its own thing going on as well. They are extremelely articulate with great string definition, have a very balanced tone that work as good or better than anything in a band situation IMO. They just sit good in the mix with little or no tweaking. They are more refined and harmonically rich than a Marshall, but not so much that they sound too "nice" like a Bogner XTC. They seem to have the perfect balance between sweetness and attitude..They can be dialled to be simply viscious but despite popular belief, they are very very versatile and . Amazing the ground they can cover with varied combos of pre and master volume combos.. They can be dialled in with lots of sizzle, but also cane be dialled in dark and squishy. I have been round the block with most of the high end high gainers and I always return to the SLO. oh yeah, and they do not sound anything like a 5150. The only similariaty is they both have tons of gain..

the FX loop does suck tone..

I would agree with all of this :thumbsup: The other guitarist in my band has an SLO, hotcat 100, and 2203. The SLO is amazingly consistent and always sounds good. I don't think it needs a depth mod honestly. I often wonder when people say that an amp needs more bass, how good does their band's live mix actually sound you know (assuming they even play in a gigging band)? It has plenty of low end stock IMO and you really don't need that much low end on guitars, let the bass have the room it needs.

The SLO can be dialed to sound buzzy sure, but it doesn't have to be like that at all. It cuts amazingly well in a live mix, IMO, sits very nicely. Takes pedals well too. The XTC and SLO get along very well as they both sit in the mix nicely but in different places. Live, he only uses the SLO these days as its way more consistent than the other amps, and it also sounds the same every time. Which is a good thing, because some amps sound great one day and blah the next it seems. I've played A LOT of nice amps and I think the SLO deserves to be regarded as highly as it does. Its the real deal. The clean channel isn't the best, but its certainly not as bad as some would have you believe. I've heard the loop doesn't like pedals, but he runs all of his FX up front so its not really an issue. I've played through the amp lots, and while I prefer the bogner, I would be happy with an SLO for sure. Ane while it sounds even better up LOUD, it sounds great at typical gig volumes too, IMO. So its not a bedroom amp, but really, what 100 watt head is in all fairness?
 
AmpliFIRE":8c8c9 said:
Odin":8c8c9 said:


No offense, but I think that was the worst Haynes tone that I've ever heard.

+1 But it does demonstrate of the things I don't like about SLO's, the balance between lows and highs is bad. When you get a really good thick sounding lead tone, the low strings are flubby, dial that out and the highs are piercing. I like the tone of an SLO, but that little problem keeps me from buying another one. I'd like to try one with KT66's in it, but I had NOS RCA 7581's in mine and it still flubbed out with any speaker configuration I tried it with so I doubt I'd keep it if I got another.
 
Marshall Freak":e3fb9 said:
AmpliFIRE":e3fb9 said:
Odin":e3fb9 said:


No offense, but I think that was the worst Haynes tone that I've ever heard.

+1 But it does demonstrate of the things I don't like about SLO's, the balance between lows and highs is bad. When you get a really good thick sounding lead tone, the low strings are flubby, dial that out and the highs are piercing. I like the tone of an SLO, but that little problem keeps me from buying another one. I'd like to try one with KT66's in it, but I had NOS RCA 7581's in mine and it still flubbed out with any speaker configuration I tried it with so I doubt I'd keep it if I got another.
That sound is muddy, but it could be the ENGL cab that makes it sound shitty. :lol: :LOL: :lol: :LOL: :lol: :LOL: NO FLAMING, I'm kidding people.

All the audio from that vid sounds muddy and fuzzy to me, poorly recorded. Don't get me wrong, Warren could have poorly eq'ed the amp for that neck pickup also. SLO's don't sound like that unless you make it sound like that.

My advice, find one local to try out. Find out for yourself.
 
'63-Strat":0335d said:
. Ane while it sounds even better up LOUD, it sounds great at typical gig volumes too, IMO. So its not a bedroom amp, but really, what 100 watt head is in all fairness?

Any Amplifier with a well designed master volume can be a Bedroom amp or a gigging amp regardless of wattage ;)

I have a boogie coliseum that is 180 watts and it can be played at home or at a gig.

Not trying to sound nasty just sayin!!!
 
Back
Top