6505+ VS Tremoverb

[94Tremoverb]

giorikas81: "Then again the rectifier and the 5150 are both soldano knockoffs of the SLO preamp...with some minor differences."

No they aren't. That's one of the biggest myths there is out there in internet-land about amp design.

First, the Rectifier is not a SLO knockoff - it certainly is partly based on one, in that the overall layout of the first few preamp stages and a few specific and crucial (and very unusual, which provides enough evidence that it can't be a coincidence) resistor values are identical. But after that they are completely different - the channel switching, clean channel, FX loop, negative feedback circuit, and power supply are totally different and unrelated. So, you could say it shares some of its initial preamp distortion voicing with the SLO... but that's about it.

The 5150 has nothing in common with the SLO whatever... apart from the fact that it uses multiple tube gain stages and has generic gain stage resistor and cap values in several places. The whole circuit is utterly different, and in particular the Peavey has no cathode-follower stages - the SLO has two, as does the Rectifier but they are in different places. If anything the 5150 is more similar to a Mark series in that all the stages are plate-output... but it's still not remotely related. The 5150 II does actually have one cathode-follower, but it's purely the FX loop driver and does not feed the tone stack as it does in the SLO and Rectifier (and all the circuits derived from the classic '59 Bassman/Marshall JTM45) and which is a fundamental part of their sound. The SLO actually has two of the exact type of DC-coupled cathode-followers which are V2 in the Bassman/Marshall, cascaded one after the other... the Rectifier does not, it only has one (the other is configured differently as the FX loop driver).

I don't know where this myth has come from, or how - one look at the schematics of all three amps by anyone who has the faintest clue how to read one and it's immediately obvious they are not copies of each other, and the Peavey is not remotely related to either of the other two. The two versions of the 5150 are very different from each other too.

 

[fluff191]

Huh interesting read. I had a 5150II for years and it's was VERY mid-range heavy. But it was UPPER mid-range heavy. My old 2 Channel Recto had alot of low end mid-range and I personally like that alot more.

 

[vitor gracie]

Ok, yes...I take my statement back about 5150s being scooped heavily in the mid-range. I listended back to a rock track I did on one (producer's idea to use the amp) and I think it's more accurate to say they are heavy in the upper midrange. Unlike a Recto which is heavy in the low mids. I think I have always thought of them like that because they seem to lack something that I am used to hearing in my Mesa's. The upper mids in the 5150s and the way the lows and highs behave are why percussive palm muting works so well with them. I think for general chording, though, they have always been hollow in the middle to me especially if I am doing anything interesting chord-wise beyond a power chord.

When I turn my mids up on my Rectos on the Orange channel, there just seems to be more usefull sound there for solos or complex chords. I think that's why I always thought of 5150s as being so scooped out in the mids. It's not that they are scooped, just that the mids are so much higher the where a Rectos sit...at least to me anyways.

Lastly, I have always had trouble tracking both amps in the past for high-gain stuff. I now use the Orange channel on my TOV heavily for rythym or lead work (low or high gain sounds) I think all this talk of mids has made me want to look into another amp to experiment with for the group I play for now.There have been some good coments and it's all making me keep an open mind when it comes to amp tones. I'm such a loyalist I tend to want to stick with one brand but I keep reminding myself that amps are just different tools. I just gotta land on the right one for the job.

 

[Disintegrated Skies]

Ok, yes...I take my statement back about 5150s being scooped heavily in the mid-range. I listended back to a rock track I did on one (producer's idea to use the amp) and I think it's more accurate to say they are heavy in the upper midrange. Unlike a Recto which is heavy in the low mids. I think I have always thought of them like that because they seem to lack something that I am used to hearing in my Mesa's. The upper mids in the 5150s and the way the lows and highs behave are why percussive palm muting works so well with them. I think for general chording, though, they have always been hollow in the middle to me especially if I am doing anything interesting chord-wise beyond a power chord.

When I turn my mids up on my Rectos on the Orange channel, there just seems to be more usefull sound there for solos or complex chords. I think that's why I always thought of 5150s as being so scooped out in the mids. It's not that they are scooped, just that the mids are so much higher the where a Rectos sit...at least to me anyways.

I think the upper mids of 5150s/6505s are what help them cut through the mix so well though. You don't hear too many people complain about them not cutting through with solos and such, but from my own experience with Rectos and what I've read, people can struggle to get a decent lead sound out of them stock.

At the same time, I own a 6505 combo, and sometimes it can sound harsh sounding, especially doing open chords, even with only a moderate amount of gain.

Unfortunately no amp is perfect! Maybe the best route to go is to use a Dual Rect and a 6505 at the same time?

 

[jamme61]

there's a filter, built in the TOV, that gives you those scooped low mids. No way around that filter, it sucks those high mids righ out of there. Still TOV sounds great IMHO

 

[stephen sawall]

there's a filter, built in the TOV, that gives you those scooped low mids. No way around that filter, it sucks those high mids righ out of there. Still TOV sounds great IMHO

Could you further explain this filter ? I have seen high and low filters in a amp .... but not one in the midrange.

 

[94Tremoverb]

There isn't one. The amp does have an inherent voicing - like all the Rectifier series - but there is no 'filter'.

The closest thing in any Mesa amp would be the 'contour' circuit they put in several of the models, which is a graphic EQ circuit with a preset V curve, but that isn't in the Tremoverb or any other Rectifier. The Maverick and Blue Angel also have a 'mojo module' which is similar but without the preset V shape. (And although they are called 'Dual Rectifiers' they aren't really what we think of as a Rectifier.)

 

[jamme61]

off the master pot, there is a 22k resistor tied to a .003 cap to ground . This filters select signal to ground. Not a tech but, you can see it on the schematic. On the clean channel set to orange modern mode, it disconnects the filter, and you can hear all the highs and mids that get sucked out, with the filter. On the red channel, the filter is always engaged unless you mod the amp. This is all IMHO, not a tech.

 

[94Tremoverb]

That's a treble roll-off. (Described in another thread as the 'blanket circuit' .) It cuts highs, not mids, and if anything does the opposite of scooping the sound because the lack of treble gives the impression of more midrange. On the Orange channel it only operates in Vintage High-Gain mode; on the Red channel it's part of the Presence circuit, so that can still operate in Modern mode with the negative feedback disconnected; in Blues it's set full on. It's certainly not this that's responsible for the generally low-mid focused, less upper-mid sound of the Rectifier.

 

[jamme61]

.003 is more then just highs. Disconect it and let me know what you hear?

 

[94Tremoverb]

More highs. It does roll off down into the upper midrange a bit too, but not as much as the highs - caps do this, they can't roll off *more* of a lower frequency than a higher one... that isn't how it works, the amount of roll-off increases with frequency. It is certainly *not* a "mid cut filter" or anything like that. You cannot produce a mid-cut with one cap and one resistor.

What you're saying about the amp having a 'built in mid filter' is simply wrong, sorry. The natural voicing of the amp is a product of a lot of factors all through the signal path, not just one high-pass roll-off.

 

[jamme61]

More highs. It does roll off down into the upper midrange a bit too, but not as much as the highs - caps do this, they can't roll off *more* of a lower frequency than a higher one... that isn't how it works, the amount of roll-off increases with frequency. It is certainly *not* a "mid cut filter" or anything like that. You cannot produce a mid-cut with one cap and one resistor.

What you're saying about the amp having a 'built in mid filter' is simply wrong, sorry. The natural voicing of the amp is a product of a lot of factors all through the signal path, not just one high-pass roll-off.

I agree with what your saying tech wise but, If you disconect the cap (.003) you will hear what I'm talking about. The amp sounds a lot more like a marshall with highs and mids and not so bass heavy. I hear you tech wise and agree 100% but, disconect the cap and hear what I'm hearing. I have it set up with a pull pot to be stk or without cap and it's a major difference (more highs and mids without cap). Yes there are a lot more things in this amp then this, that effect the tone in this amp (agree 100%).