Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

[BFahz]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

Man thats some funny ****! Glad you got the issue worked out. Ive noticed too that a lower channel volume with a high master really gets the tubes working, and helps the tone. My send/return knobs are running at 3'oclock each, channel at say 3, then master at 5-6. The tone is SWEET.

PS - Do you have the name of that nurse? I could use a good beating...

 

[JOLLY]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

guys, I just got beat up pretty bad. Still have tears (sniff). I mean I haven't been this brutalized since my doctor told me I needed more ruffage and then the nurse came in and beat the crap outta me. I removed the FX from the loop on my Triple X, and cranked the return as well as the send, just to see. Strummed something.

my amp threw me against the wall, bloodied my nose, knocked the wind outta me. Asked me if I wanted some more. I sobbed, "o-o...oh...kay...." and I launched into one of my death metal riffs at the end of the neck. When I woke up on the floor to the roaring feedback, and I gathered my wits and courage, I turned the master down *from 4 to 1* so I could try and figure out the new tone accompanying this new volume blast. Because, yes, it was twice as loud. I just unplugged after a fearful hour of high-decibel devastation to type this. Still crying though.

I mean I played with the send and returns when I got the thing, and I new the loop could do a volume boost, but not like this! I don't know how I never realized this, and I've had the amp a while. But I've been running for quiet operation per the manual: send up, return down. And I've only been running at 4 ohms for only a few months, maybe that makes a difference with the loop boost nightmare I just barely lived through. That Genz-Benz G-Flex 412 conveyed the amp's forceful message quite persuasively (with the Mesa 212 just behind, yelling, "Yeah!!! Take that you little rock punk bee otch!!!").

I am still shaking. Holy Frijoles, Batman. I think this successfully nukes the "XXX ain't loud" theory right out of the water. Not loud, oh whatever. It's like another master volume I just opened up, that FX loop. Much more to XXXplore now. Kuh CHUNK.


Props and points to BFahz and MotorBoy (with his total of one post - but what a post) for the education.

peace. I'm exhausted and ready for sleep. And scared.

That was beautiful!!

 

[TSE]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I have owned both but kept one, the 6505+ all the way! I bought the XXX first even though I was looking for a 6505, but they didn't have one at the time. The sales guy told me they sound similar and I can get the 6505 tone from the XXX with more features. I used it in a black metal band I was in for about a year and one day I went back to the store I got the XXX from to get some strings, but this time they had a 6505+ on the floor. I tried it with a SD equipped guitar and I could not stop playing it. I spent about 2-3 hours messing with it. I sold my XXX later that week and bought the 6505+ the following week. I knew I found my amp! It has a much more tubeyer sound than the XXX. I would say the XXX is what a hybrid amp should sound like and the 6505+ is more straight tube goodness! The XXX has more gain in my opinion. I think the XXX is about two notches higher on gain than the 6505+, but the 6505 is ten notches higher on tone. 6505 is brutal and heavy, but also fluid and warm. I can get a very syrupy higain solo tone from it and the rhythm channel sounds awsome with a booster pedal in front of it. Alot of people don't like its clean channel and I didn't either until I learned how to use it! If you use the rhythm channel as a clean you need to back off the gain and turn up the volume, it sounds much cleaner that way. Anyway, you should try all three over and over in order to find out what works best for you. In my opinion the XXX is kind of anemic when compared to the 6505. But, that's just me!

Good Luck!

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I like the 6505. I wish I had one, and may get one. Then I'd put EL34s in my XXX and still have a great 6L6 amp. Afterward, in a blind taste test, I doubt anyone could tell the difference between the XXX and the JSX. Yep I said it.

I would say the XXX is what a hybrid amp should sound like and the 6505+ is more straight tube goodness!

<rantMode attrib=slightly whiney>

The XXX is not a hybrid. It doesn't sound or behave like a hybrid. It's a 6505 with a master volume mod. If you open up the master volume all the way (ie as if there wasn't a master volume at all) it's a 6505, with a cleaner clean channel, plus a lead channel.

If you took the XXX rhythm channel and stuck it in a box of bolts that said "Soldano" on it and taped a $2500 price tag to it, everybody would want one.

Me? I am dumbfounded, flummoxed even, by the bad rap XXXs get.

</rantMode>

... but I want KT88s. I wish Steve Freyette (sp?) hadn't ~doubled the prices on his VHTs in the last few years. When I bought the 3rd Bogner Ecstacy ever made, which was in 1993 (ser # -+^ if folks don't believe me), the Pittbull was $1800. Today, the Bogner is the same price as in 1993, but Pittbulls are $3300. The first company that puts out a reasonably priced KT88 amp w/ several gain stages, and hopefully a master volume, gets my money. And I hope that company is Peavey. Peavey rocks, they've given us some of the best products out there (Wolfgangs, 5150/6505s, Classics, XXXs, JSXs, ValveKings), most that compete with the boutique stuff at half or a third the price.

I may cave in and get a Deliverance anyway, because I am an addict. No, I don't know everything, I just sound like it sometimes.

peace, out.

 

[TSE]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

"The XXX is what a hybrid should sound like." I never said it is a hybrid or sounds or acts like a hybrid. I meant more hybrid amps should sound like this because I think it sounds a little different than most tube amps, has a slight SS feel to it in my opinion. And in my opinion the XXX in not a 6505 with a master volume, I think they are designed differently and also sound different as well. The 6505 dosen't have an active preamp and has more tubes than the XXX. The 5150/6505 was designed for EVH and I heard the XXX was supposed to be launched as a signature model for George Lynch, but he backed out and they had to market it as the XXX. I didn't mean to sound like I was ripping on this amp, it's all a matter of personal taste. Play what sounds good to you, good luck and have fun.

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

"The XXX is what a hybrid should sound like." I never said it is a hybrid or sounds or acts like a hybrid. I meant more hybrid amps should sound like this because I think it sounds a little different than most tube amps, has a slight SS feel to it in my opinion. And in my opinion the XXX in not a 6505 with a master volume, I think they are designed differently and also sound different as well. The 6505 dosen't have an active preamp and has more tubes than the XXX. The 5150/6505 was designed for EVH and I heard the XXX was supposed to be launched as a signature model for George Lynch, but he backed out and they had to market it as the XXX. I didn't mean to sound like I was ripping on this amp, it's all a matter of personal taste. Play what sounds good to you, good luck and have fun.

okay, I feel that. gotcha. I was waitin for it!

I will admit, I'm overly defensive about the XXX. Maybe cuz of the chicks on the front, they must have gotten to me, and i feel the need to protect them.

I will also humbly confess, and in the process invalidate the million words I've typed into this thread, that some days I like the 6505 a little more. So I guess I'm wishy-washy. But I bet just maybe, if the 6505 did have a master volume, it would sound XXXish. Maybe a master volume is my crutch. Maybe my parents didn't hug me enough. Maybe I need a drink.

Maybe I am having way too much fun on this forum. I'm just glad I FINALLY found some people I can talk to/argue with about all this stuff. I certainly don't have many folks in real life for this.

I have never typed anything into any forum until I found the SD forum. So hat's off to every single person who contributes here, from the bottom of my heart. It has quickly become quite an outlet for me, much needed.

thanks

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

Nah dude, the XXX and 5150 are voiced extremely different - no chance in hell that a master volume is going to make up for that. The 5150 is huge, open, organic, squishy, and the XXX is tight, more processed, and more stiff.

Plus, the 5150 IS a master-volume amp. It has seperate pre and poweramp gain controls, which is the definition of an MV amp. The XXX just has an extra stage to regulate the overall volume as well as the balance between channels - removing that stage really wouldn't make much of a difference, tone wise.

Also, I HAVE done a blind test between an XXX with EL34's and a JSX... totally different! The JSX is way smoother, closer to the 5150 actually. Sounded best with 6L6s, IMO, as well.

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

It has seperate pre and poweramp gain controls, which is the definition of an MV amp.

I see what yer saying, but, what is the difference between a preamp output attenuator and a power amp input attenuator? if there is only one knob, the "post", doesn't it more or less do both?

that definition would make pretty much every amp an MV amp, wouldn't it?

but *if* there's 2 knobs after the preamp tubes and EQ, then you can drive the preamp into what people smarter than me call "harmonic distortion" without going deaf, because there is another attenuator there to control power amp input as well? what the wise ones call trainwrecking, which is what I always thought was meant by "master volume"? If so, the 5150 doesn't have such a feature, right?

I'm just going by the little block diagram schematic in the XXX manual, and the fact that the 5150 doesn't have that extra knob.

"Master volume" as a term has become overloaded and taken on different meanings, like global volume or something for multi-channels. I'm not talking about that sort of thing, and neither is the XXX. Just keeping it to a single channel.

For instance, there are single-channel amps that have a preamp input level (Gain, or Pre), a preamp output level (Volume, or Post), and a power amp input level (Master Volume). Many amps do not have that last one. It is a common Marshall modification. The 5150 is missing one of those last two, not that it needs it. And some amps have all 3 of those attenuation knobs for each of those stages, *** plus a 4th knob for extra gain-stage leveling in the preamp, like the VHT Deliverance does. All for one channel. But keeping it to the 3 common attenuators,

1. ) pre-in,
2. ) pre-out (post), and
3. ) power-in

which of the 3 is missing from the 5150? Isn't the "Post" on the 5150 doing both 2. ) and 3. )?

and finally, on the XXX, 3. ) has a dedicated tube driver. Not just a rheostat. So the XXX is a "true" master volume amp, and my old Bogner Ecstacy, and the 5150 as well, are not "true" master volume amps, though both have so much gain staging that who cares. You can get harmonic distortion from the preamp easier with the Bogner and the 5150; they each have 6 preamp tubes (actually, only the 5150 II/6505+ does). But if they ALSO had a "true" master volume, you could get into Diezel territory with them. Which is why I'd like a 6505. So I can mod it with a true master volume and avoid spending $4000 on a Diezel.

In this manner I would be trve, kvlt, grim, *AND* frostbitten (hail Norway).



keep it going until we got it, if you please:1:

 

[TSE]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

For the XXX lovers, you guys have to try the GT 12AX7C tubes in the pre-amp section, all positions! Seriously! It backs off some of the fizz and gives the amps a bigger, rounder voicing and more crushing ability! The tubes that come stock are good too, but the 12AX7C have more gain, current output, and a warmer, fatter tone. You might need a noisgate, it also makes it a bit noisier.

Cheers!

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

a NOS for the first position is on my to-do list

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

No - think about old Fenders with just a volume knob. The gain increases as you turn it up. With an MV amp, you increase the gain with one knob, and increase the volume with the other.

All you're doing with that volume knob on the XXX's individual channels is driving the preamp tubes harder, not the poweramp tubes, so it's not the same 'harmonic distortion' you get from cranking the power section, which is generally the more desired of tube breakup sounds.

Tube drivers have nothing to do with MV vs NMV from what I know - gain control + volume control or pre + post gain controls = MV. One knob for volume + gain = MV.

While the 5150 has 5-6 preamp tubes, only two are ever used at the same time for gain. V1 is for input, the next 2-3 are for channel gain, but for instance, the lead channel only uses two 12AX7's, while the crunch uses 2, and the clean uses 1. The last two are just the FX loop + PI tubes.

The 5150 is a 'true' MV amp, and even if it wasn't and you added it, how would that suddenly change the entire gain structure of it, the components inside, and the transformers? You would not be able to get a Diezel tone out of a 5150 without a complete rebuild.

I see what yer saying, but, what is the difference between a preamp output attenuator and a power amp input attenuator? if there is only one knob, the "post", doesn't it more or less do both?

that definition would make pretty much every amp an MV amp, wouldn't it?

but *if* there's 2 knobs after the preamp tubes and EQ, then you can drive the preamp into what people smarter than me call "harmonic distortion" without going deaf, because there is another attenuator there to control power amp input as well? what the wise ones call trainwrecking, which is what I always thought was meant by "master volume"? If so, the 5150 doesn't have such a feature, right?

I'm just going by the little block diagram schematic in the XXX manual, and the fact that the 5150 doesn't have that extra knob.

"Master volume" as a term has become overloaded and taken on different meanings, like global volume or something for multi-channels. I'm not talking about that sort of thing, and neither is the XXX. Just keeping it to a single channel.

For instance, there are single-channel amps that have a preamp input level (Gain, or Pre), a preamp output level (Volume, or Post), and a power amp input level (Master Volume). Many amps do not have that last one. It is a common Marshall modification. The 5150 is missing one of those last two, not that it needs it. And some amps have all 3 of those attenuation knobs for each of those stages, *** plus a 4th knob for extra gain-stage leveling in the preamp, like the VHT Deliverance does. All for one channel. But keeping it to the 3 common attenuators,

1. ) pre-in,
2. ) pre-out (post), and
3. ) power-in

which of the 3 is missing from the 5150? Isn't the "Post" on the 5150 doing both 2. ) and 3. )?

and finally, on the XXX, 3. ) has a dedicated tube driver. Not just a rheostat. So the XXX is a "true" master volume amp, and my old Bogner Ecstacy, and the 5150 as well, are not "true" master volume amps, though both have so much gain staging that who cares. You can get harmonic distortion from the preamp easier with the Bogner and the 5150; they each have 6 preamp tubes (actually, only the 5150 II/6505+ does). But if they ALSO had a "true" master volume, you could get into Diezel territory with them. Which is why I'd like a 6505. So I can mod it with a true master volume and avoid spending $4000 on a Diezel.

In this manner I would be trve, kvlt, grim, *AND* frostbitten (hail Norway).



keep it going until we got it, if you please:1:

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I didn't mean to make this a syllogism:

"....on the XXX, [the power section] has a dedicated tube driver. Not just a rheostat. So the XXX is a "true" master volume amp..."

- forget the tube driver part in that statement.


the power section "tube driver" doesn't make the XXX an MV. The fact that there's a power section attenuator at all does. But having a tube driver for it is neat, extra.

You say, "One knob for volume + gain = MV." I don't think that's true. I don't think amps let you control power amp "gain". I think the power amp level on most amps is determined by the preamp output level (usually labeled Volume, or Post on the 5150) simply *because* there's no attenuator after that. On amps where there *is* a 3rd attenuator after that, which is for power amp input level, which lets you trainwreck the preamp into the power amp, and whether it has a tube driver or not, you have a M.V. amp.

So I'm still trying to understand you. Forget about what each preamp tube does for a minute.


1. ) preamp-input level (pre), ie "Gain"
2. ) preamp-output level (post), ie "Volume"
3. ) power amp-input level, ie "Master Volume"

which of the 3 is missing from the 5150? Isn't the "Post" on the 5150 doing both 2. ) and 3. )? Therefore no trainwrecking? Therefore, not a master volume? As with most amps, one of 'em is missing. So one of the other 2 is pulling double-duty.

Here's how I understand it,

People begged Marshall to install Master Volumes (the 3rd attenuator in my above 1-2-3) for 2 reasons:
1. to get harmonic distortion out of the preamp without going deaf
2. to have discrete controls for the preamp and the power amp, so they could balance a.) how much distortion was coming from the preamp and b.) how saturated the power section was, according to their tastes.

Some people go a step further and place attenaution between the output transformer and the speakers to get preamp distortion and power amp saturation without going deaf.


The design of the XXX is brilliant because you get to control:
1. preamp harmonic distortion without going deaf. Or, if you instead prefer:
2. power amp saturation. Or both 1 and 2, without going deaf as much. And,
3. If you prefer 2 more than 1, and your preamp level is down, there's a tube driver for the power section to help get saturation a little easier.


How would adding an MV to a 5150 get it into Diezel territory? Imagine that you could crank the PRE and the POST at practice volume instead of needing the required stadium.

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I ****ed up on that last one - single knob for gain and volume is Non Master Volume. Typo ftw!

The 5150 is lacking number 3 in what you're saying - but that's not a master volume in the true sense of the word. It's just a "collective output control." Cranking the channel volumes and lowering that master output control does not in any way shape or form work the powertubes - it's not an attenuator at all.

Just because the 5150 is missing that, though, does NOT mean it's NOT master volume amp. It IS.

Marshall installed a gain control to get preamp saturation and gain without cranking the amp - that's what a master volume amp is. I don't get why you're arguing that point so vigorously? Seperate gain + volume controls = Master Volume.

Again, you won't get power amp saturation without high volume levels or a power attenuator. No way around it.

Cranking a 5150 won't get it sounding anything like a Diezel. I don't get what you're on about there.

I seriously think you have a skewed view of what your volume controls do, and are arguing about it like it's solid fact.

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

let's narrow it down to just this part for a second, and then I'll give up quietly, and let you have the last word if you'd like:

Marshall installed a gain control to get preamp saturation and gain without cranking the amp - that's what a master volume amp is.

Nope. That's the OTHER common Marshall mod. That's the "Hello, Mr. Jackson/Soldano/Bogner? Dude, I need more gain" mod. More gain. An extra gain stage. An extra preamp tube.

Preamp gain.

Sticking a rheostat between the preamp output and the power amp input, that's a master volume mod.

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

actually, I re-read yer last and it's starting to sound like we are saying the same thing in different ways, about some things. "preamp saturation without cranking the amp." yes, that is the goal of a master volume. Unless you meant adding preamp gain to get that, but now I don't think that's what you meant.

this part: "Again, you won't get power amp saturation without high volume levels or a power attenuator. No way around it." I agree.

but just to make sure I am not drunk I looked in a handy reference, The Tube Amp Book. I looked up the Ken Fischer of Trainwreck Circuits "Marshall Master Volume Modification."

it's the installation of a "...rheostat applied to the phase inverter section ... [that] feeds the output tubes' grids."

The XXX has a 4th 12ax7 in there too. Has nothing to do with our MV discussion, it's just an extra thing.


well this was fun

 

[Gr8Scott]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

Nah dude, the XXX and 5150 are voiced extremely different - no chance in hell that a master volume is going to make up for that. The 5150 is huge, open, organic, squishy, and the XXX is tight, more processed, and more stiff.

Plus, the 5150 IS a master-volume amp. It has seperate pre and poweramp gain controls, which is the definition of an MV amp. The XXX just has an extra stage to regulate the overall volume as well as the balance between channels - removing that stage really wouldn't make much of a difference, tone wise.

Also, I HAVE done a blind test between an XXX with EL34's and a JSX... totally different! The JSX is way smoother, closer to the 5150 actually. Sounded best with 6L6s, IMO, as well.

I also tried a XXX with EL34's and I thought it was unbearably nasal and fizzy compared to with the 6L6 tubes.

You mention in your second paragraph above that the XXX has something in between the pre and power amp sections of the amp to reduce overall volume. Could this have something to do with the odd feel that the XXX gives? Mine felt weird and didn't interact with the guitar in the same way that other tube amps do. For instance, I'm a pinch harmonic addict at times (yes I know that it's lame), but I couldn't get the XXX to do decent harmonics until the pre gain was so cranked that it was obscene and noisy as can be. They just sounded flat and limp and the guitar responded in the same flat and limp manner until mucho gain was added. I can add 1/10 the amount of gain on any other amp and I can pinch harmonic on it like there's no tomorrow. Must be that regulator or whatever it is causing the issue. Cool amp, but I don't dig the weird feel it has or the lack of marshally mids.

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I'm afraid folks are getting tired and fed up with me, but ...

I also tried a XXX with EL34's and I thought it was unbearably nasal and fizzy compared to with the 6L6 tubes.

You mention in your second paragraph above that the XXX has something in between the pre and power amp sections of the amp to reduce overall volume. Could this have something to do with the odd feel that the XXX gives? Mine felt weird and didn't interact with the guitar in the same way that other tube amps do. For instance, I'm a pinch harmonic addict at times (yes I know that it's lame), but I couldn't get the XXX to do decent harmonics until the pre gain was so cranked that it was obscene and noisy as can be. They just sounded flat and limp and the guitar responded in the same flat and limp manner until mucho gain was added. I can add 1/10 the amount of gain on any other amp and I can pinch harmonic on it like there's no tomorrow. Must be that regulator or whatever it is causing the issue. Cool amp, but I don't dig the weird feel it has or the lack of marshally mids.

yeah I suppose. Everybody hates it, and 10,000 rockers can't be wrong. Maybe the XXX just suits me well right now, and matches up with my guitars well. My pinch harmonics are great. Sometimes they go beyond the range of hearing, then the harmoncs and overtones creep in while I shake it - sounds like the guy from Nazareth on No Mean City, song called Claim to Fame.

With the master opened up, it is as if there is no master, and it reminds me of my TSL 100. Which is another very underrated amp, and my favorite modern Marshall. I wish THAT one had a master volume.

To me, with the master up, the XXX sounds more like a non-MV Marshall, and with the master down, and the channel volume up, it sounds more like a Mesa.

Now let me defend Crate and Gorilla amps....

btw, I've had 3 Marshalls, including 2 TSLs. The first one quit working, no one could figure out why, so Marshall gave me a new one (yep, you heard me correctly) in the box, and that one sounded a lot better for some reason.

I was interested in the Vintage-modern, but the one at the store had blown up....

didn't mean to make this a Marshall thread....

 

[daemon barbeque]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I don't think Both Peaveys are for me!
I dig the XXX for it's power and tightness.
I dig the 5150 for it's saturation.
But both are not enough.
If i want a Mesa like tone ,i get a MArkIV
If i want a Marshall tone i get e JVM
If i want something special ,i would go with ENGL or Diezel.
Peaveys are great ,but not my thing!

 

[metalmike]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

I don't think Both Peaveys are for me!
I dig the XXX for it's power and tightness.
I dig the 5150 for it's saturation.
But both are not enough.
If i want a Mesa like tone ,i get a MArkIV
If i want a Marshall tone i get e JVM
If i want something special ,i would go with ENGL or Diezel.
Peaveys are great ,but not my thing!

That's cool dude, I like ya anyway.

And I'm with you about the Diezel, at least from what I've read. And you know, heard from the band Tool.

 

[BlueSky]

Re: Peavey 6505 or XXX Head?

That's cool dude, I like ya anyway.

And I'm with you about the Diezel, at least from what I've read. And you know, heard from the band Tool.

Yep Adam Jones loves his. so thats always a great sign.