Which Amp Should I Sell? Opinions Wanted!

hellzington said:
I was surprised by how bad the Bogner sounded. It sounds great in the room. Maybe it didn't translate to video/YouTube.
Click to expand...
Until you hear it in a band setting it's impossible to make a proper judgment call IME. Even then you should probably check the recorded tones with a band as well. My Twins always sound sorta shrill and harsh at home with my usual settings but put them in a band setting and bam, sits perfectly into that mix both live and recorded as well.
 
VonBonfire said:
Until you hear it in a band setting it's impossible to make a proper judgment call IME. Even then you should probably check the recorded tones with a band as well. My Twins always sound sorta shrill and harsh at home with my usual settings but put them in a band setting and bam, sits perfectly into that mix both live and recorded as well.
Click to expand...
This is something I thought about a lot when doing this video. The clips are in complete isolation. What sounds good in isolation often does not sound good in a mix and vice versa. I considered doing some playing to backing tracks but I didn't want to spend all the time it would take.

Believe it or not, it takes a TON of time to make these videos even when you keep the setup simple like I did here. In fact, editing usually takes longer than production.
 
Id sell the following:

The original 70 superlead
The White VH4
The Bogner XTC Classic

I’d keep the rest.
 
VHTStark said:
Agree 100%. We complain about how modern amps are too filtered and neutered....but that is what a ton of players were asking for: Rectos with way tighter low end and no fizz, Marshall's with more gain and less abrasive upper mids. Everyone wanted the amps to sound recorded right out of the box and in doing so, it took away the mojo that made those amps unique in the first place.
Click to expand...
It seems like maybe just trade offs. We may want our Recto’s tighter, but if we were told beforehand that the trade off would sacrifice growl and richness in tone or make it more filtered, we’d say I’ll just stick to boosting it, thank you very much. Same with Marshall’s. This is I think partly why some modders like Cameron and few others are considered by many better. They don’t distance the mids as much (still do imo, just not as much so) or as much other qualities, but still not perfect IME

If anything, I’d actually like a mod that makes the upper mid kerrang even better/stronger if that’s possible lol. That’s part of what makes Marshall’s great and distinctive to other amps. A lot of these mods kind of take away qualities that makes the donor amps unique in the first place in hopes that it’ll please other’s complaints
 
Last edited:
hellzington said:
I have to agree. I didn't think the Deliverance sounded that great when compared to the other amps. I do like the white VH4, though. It has a lot of wonderful harmonic content. Upon hearing the video now, I would increase the midrange on Chs 2 & 3 and lower the bass on Ch 2.

The XTC sounds good on the boosted modes. The red channel with no boost sounds good. I didn't care for the blue channel without the boost, though. Sounded pretty thin and sterile especially compared to something like a Friedman.
Click to expand...
Yes, I preferred them on the boosted modes too and also preferred the red channel in your clip. It wasn’t admittedly my favorite sound, but it had that signature Bogner chewiness and fatness that can maybe make it worth keeping for that flavor in your collection
 
braintheory said:
Yes, I preferred them on the boosted modes too and also preferred the red channel in your clip. It wasn’t admittedly my favorite sound, but it had that signature Bogner chewiness and fatness that can maybe make it worth keeping for that flavor in your collection
Click to expand...
Yeah I think the Bogner is going to be a bit of a tricky one to sell. I want to do a video featuring it so y'all will have a chance to hear it again.

The red channel sounds good unboosted and boosted. The blue channel sounds pretty vintage without the boost. I mean, my Super Lead has more gain than that amp's blue channel.
 
hellzington said:
Yeah I think the Bogner is going to be a bit of a tricky one to sell. I want to do a video featuring it so y'all will have a chance to hear it again.

The red channel sounds good unboosted and boosted. The blue channel sounds pretty vintage without the boost. I mean, my Super Lead has more gain than that amp's blue channel.
Click to expand...
Yeah I definitely preferred the red ch in your clip as well as my experience with most of the ones I’ve tried in person, including a friend’s ‘90’s XTC 101B that was also Cameron modded

I’ve grown to really like the signature fat, chewy quality of Bogner’s (UU kinda lost it for me though). No other amps I’ve tried quite have it the same way as them for that sound. My personal favorite high gain amp is my Rev 1 Uber very closely followed by the Rev C and IIC+
 
braintheory said:
It seems like maybe just trade offs. We may want our Recto’s tighter, but if we were told beforehand that the trade off would sacrifice growl and richness in tone or make it more filtered, we’d say I’ll just stick to boosting it, thank you very much. Same with Marshall’s. This is I think partly why some modders like Cameron and few others are considered by many better. They don’t distance the mids as much (still do imo, just not as much so) or as much other qualities, but still not perfect IME

If anything, I’d actually like a mod that makes the upper mid kerrang even better/stronger if that’s possible lol. That’s part of what makes Marshall’s great and distinctive to other amps. A lot of these mods kind of take away qualities that makes the donor amps unique in the first place in hopes that it’ll please other’s complaints
Click to expand...
Yup....there is always tradeoffs, whether it is filtering out a bunch of low end early in a circuit, removing/altering bright caps, adding a gain stage, diodes, etc. And like you said, the better modders and designers command a premium for a reason as they can retain more of magic the original circuit has.

Over the past few years I have gone more towards simple, classic circuits and a good boost. The exception would be my Wizards, but they feel more like an old amp in how they respond, even gained up.

That said, as @hellzington duly noted, a guy like Friedman has done a LOT of business making and selling recorded sounding, polished modded Marshalls, so there are still alot of players that are after that!
 
VonBonfire said:
Ok well then def take what i said with a bigger grain of salt. I been using Twins for about ten years now and have two of them for gigging. I like to play loudly and Twins are also very revealing of player error. Especially loaded with higher efficiency speakers. I've grown so used to it that when I play a tube rectified lower watt amp I feel like I'm playing a shitty sponge with no detail and not enough power for lower register licks to get over the top of a powerhouse band. I play blues but the principle is kinda the same. Greater risk of revealing my errors, but greater personal reward when I can keep my technique clean. Thanks for your time helzington.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I think we are in same boat. I like to barely touch string and get cleaner tone, then slam the thing to make it go wild. Touch dynamics are the difference between playing a keyboard and a grand piano.

I think that compressed amps can be fun to play if you are sticking to playing heavy or have a channel switcher. But if you are a single channel guy, your picking/volume control are the best tools in your tool bag. In general, the stiffer, open, uncompressed amps are like driving a muscle car with a 4 speed vs playing cruisin usa at the arcade.
 
I’d sell the Mark, VH4, and Deliverance. The reason being you still have the VH4 and Mark tones covered in the other amps you have. The VHT you can buy back at any point if you really wanted. Keep the Marshall and Bogner and put some of the funds from the sale of the others towards a Wizard MTL or MCII.
 
hellzington said:
Yeah it seems there's four general "eras" for VH4s:
  1. 1996 - 2002 - Blueface spec-based, less gain, far darker, Ch 2 very different
  2. 2003 - 2006 - Gainier, more saturated and "browner" with an improved Ch 2
  3. 2007 - 2017ish - "Fizz resistor" added, far brighter with more gain, extremely compressed, a lot of negative feedback
  4. 2018 - Present - Leaner and meaner, less fizzy but still bright, very compressed, records extremely well
Click to expand...
Hi man, do you feel comfortable to take some pictures of the 2004 VH4? I have lots of picture of a 2002, 2003 and they are pretty similar except a couple of spots. I have a 2015 which has that resistor but the other values are Blueface spec, being a custom order that I bought from the previous owner 2 years ago. It would be beautiful to see 3-4 spot that I'd like to compare. Thanks :cool:
 
Did you make any decisions yet @hellzington ? Good video as usual. :yes:

I would agree on III++, too redundant. And if you also get rid of one of the VH4s, that means you can get a new amp right :lol:

VHTStark said:
Agree 100%. We complain about how modern amps are too filtered and neutered....but that is what a ton of players were asking for: Rectos with way tighter low end and no fizz, Marshall's with more gain and less abrasive upper mids. Everyone wanted the amps to sound recorded right out of the box and in doing so, it took away the mojo that made those amps unique in the first place.
Click to expand...

So true
 
VHTStark said:
Agree 100%. We complain about how modern amps are too filtered and neutered....but that is what a ton of players were asking for: Rectos with way tighter low end and no fizz, Marshall's with more gain and less abrasive upper mids. Everyone wanted the amps to sound recorded right out of the box and in doing so, it took away the mojo that made those amps unique in the first place.
Click to expand...

100%. This is actually my #1 complaint with most new high gain amps that I try and don't like. It's usually that they sound too filtered/too smooth (or sometimes also too honky in the mids). Not a lot of new amps have that really aggressive top end bite that I'm looking for. That's one reason why I think the Skeleton Key is badass. Tons of bright, cutting, articulate aggression in the highs and upper mids. It's also why a lot of people still love the old Peavey 5150s and the Rev F and Rev G Rectifiers. They had a ton of top end cut/grind.

What a lot of people don't understand is that "produced" smooth quality you hear on a lot of the best sounding metal albums is mostly coming from good mic placement + using darker/warmer sounding speakers, like older Mesa 8 ohm V30 cabs or older 90s Greenbacks. These speakers are less fizzy and let you get away with more raw, aggressive sounding amps without sounding too harsh. Using a more smooth/filtered sounding amp with a fizzier sounding speaker just does not produce the same result.
 
311splawndude said:
Did you make any decisions yet @hellzington ? Good video as usual. :yes:

I would agree on III++, too redundant. And if you also get rid of one of the VH4s, that means you can get a new amp right :LOL:



So true
Click to expand...
Thanks :) I did make some decisions.

I've already sold the Bogner XTC. Bummer, it's a great amp, but a bit redundant with the other things I have.

I have the VH4 and Deliverance listed on Reverb but haven't listed it here yet. Might later today. I love that VH4 but I have the other VH4 and I want to make room for some new amps I've been eyeing. The Deliverance isn't worth as much so there is a world in which I might keep it. I tried it out yesterday with my Suhr 2x12 loaded with H75 Creambacks and it honestly sounded a lot better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top