Amp Testing - 5150 III, Nitro, Quickrod vs RM100

[Big Daddy]

I had an interesting opportunity over the last two weeks

I had the opportunity to do a side by side with my MTS stuff ? littered with Jaded Faith Modules ? a Fender 5150 III, a Splawn Quick Rod and a Splawn Nitro. While discussing my findings with another interested board contributor, he thought I should post my opinions on the forum so that others might benefit from the comparisons.

All three amps had one thing in common, a serious lack of weight in the low end department. They were all concussive and had ample thud while palm muting, but big open chords lacked the balls I?m used to from a big old modded Marshall. After listening to the amount of gain they had I?m thinking it probably had something to do with the way they addressed blocking distortion, which must have been an issue considering the amount of gain they had

With the Splawns, I gotta give Rob credit, he really nailed the eq personality of these amps and the gain on the Quickmod is remarkably similar considering the fact that he has to fake all those gain stages with only two preamp tubes

Fender 5150 III Hearing one in my face for the first time ? rather than a recording of one ? I gotta admit I was a bit surprised by the lack of versatility. The clean tones are marvelous, Fender really helped out in this department. The lead channel is obviously the one everyone is using. It has a very unique tone to it. The mids are dry and will cut through the thickest of mixes. The highs compliment the mids well and have a real nice edge to them. The gain is quite over the top, but the lows are out to lunch. Surpisingly ? due to the lack of lows ? it is quite concussive, but when you get the rhythm tone sounding right, solos are brittle and lack warmth. 3 Presence knobs and no Density Circuit? What were they thinking? I got an idea, channel two is basicly useless, get rid of it and give me Density, like the old ones! Just dumb in my opinion. I am told they are reconsidering the omission of the Density. They should. Cool amp, needs lows badly, sounds like I expected it to with the exception of the lows

Quickrod and Nitro. In a similar price range the Splawns sound significantly better than the 5150 III A little less gain, a little more low end, but much more player friendly. The lead boost was nice, but seemed to junk up rhythms with super saturated ? in a bad way ? mids. I preferred the boost off and thought both amps had plenty of gain. The EQ characteristics are a little different between the two, but not so much that one shined over the other. I was a little more partial to the Quickrod, but can?t pin point exactly why. I just liked it better

Overall I thought my RM100 did quite well to hold its own. It seems people just don?t want to believe our MTS stuff sounds quite as good as it does, but for versatility I think our Randalls offer a great value. My SL+ sounds like a Marshall. My Mamba SE sounds like a Framus. My Recto sounds like Boogie, although its heavily modded, so a heavily modded Boogie Do any of my modules exactly duplicate the original amp? Not quite, but they are so close that the versatility of the MTS line more than makes up for the minor percentage points that they differ.

I?m glad I got a chance to play these amps. I?m even more glad I own MTS

Just food for thought

H

 

[gag halfrunt]

Nice, comprehensive review. Thanks for posting!

I have to agree on your assessments. I've owned those amps, and sold them for similar reasons. MTS still rocks harder and better imo.

 

[webrthomson]

Excellent stuff - it's always good to hear from people using their MTS amps in situ with the real thing!

I think the modular amps sometimes get a bit of a bad rap and I recently had an experience that sort of (well in my mind anyway) confirms it.

Bruce sent me my new MHG dual module and off I went with it to practice. So I've got my Mod50 and my Boogie Mark V somewhere I can be loud and you know what's coming next ;-)

Fired up the MHG on the first channel setting up my (metal) rhythm sound and A/B it against my Mark V rhythm sound (channel three, Mark IV mode) and I?ll tell you it was very close!!!

Sure the boogie is actually louder but not that much, only switching in the GEQ really tonewise makes the difference.

So next time I got to practice I?m taking a GEQ pedal for the Mod50?s loop, and I?m definitely thinking about something with a bigger power section as well to see just how close I can get

 

[metalsoup]

Thanks for the report!

I was surprised the Nitro lacked low end since I thought that was supposed to be one of its design strengths.

Interestingly, on the back of the 50-watt 5150III mini there is a resonance knob. Maybe they could do that for the 100-watt head as well. Seems like an unfortunate design oversight.

 

[metalsoup]

So next time I got to practice I?m taking a GEQ pedal for the Mod50?s loop, and I?m definitely thinking about something with a bigger power section as well to see just how close I can get

I love running an EQ in the loop. I get great results by boosting the upper mids on some modules that have massive low end--it gives them a killer edge and cut.

The EQ in the loop allows for more specific tailoring of which frequencies to boost (or cut) and achieve just the right balance between low-end wallop and mid to high end slice. Not all modules really need it or benefit from it, but for some it works like magic. Definitely a great tool to have around in one's toolbox to refine the tone and help zero in on what you're after.

 

[LoD21]

So I was one of the the lucky victim's who went on the amp buying frenzy transporting these things around town like a crazy person. Kind of a waste of time but I learned a lot. All of these amps have their pros/cons.

Great quality amps but i could not achieve my tone, my eq, my flavor like I can with an RM100 and modules. But these amps will all set your hair on fire and have that "real amp" punch that I think comes from being a true 100 watt head vs. the preamp/power amp vibe that an RM100 has. Perhaps the abundance of circuitry is an issue here.

I truly appreciate the versatility and tone tweakability of the RM100. It suits my tastes. I can dial in that eq without a fight. It's just lacks the smackdown and punch of some of the traditional high end heads out there.

I can honestly say the Splawns really disappointed me. Keep in mind these were 2011 models before the transformer and circuit upgrades in 2012 which supposedly make a tremendous difference. As for the low end it was there on the Nitro but only because it was running KT88's, thus the lows were too much and too round. This left us having to dial them out to experience the rest of the signal and frequency range. Keeping this in mind, our best profile lacked lows. Just all around not a great combination of factors. Perhaps EL34's would have shown improvement. For what a Splawn costs I would need to like it more and fight with it less to consider that price.

Now had the 5150 III had more low end,density, and a more versatile EQ, I'd buy two of them. i LOVED the mids and the concussion they bring. The extreme gain was right up my alley.

I wish I could get that clarity, quality, fast response, and concussion out of the RM100. It just sounds a bit more relaxed and saggy compared to high end amps. Perhaps a new transformer and choke are in order. I am eager to check out the new Randall/Fortin Satan.

 

[rblyn]

these amps will all set your hair on fire and have that "real amp" punch that I think comes from being a true 100 watt head vs. the preamp/power amp vibe that an RM100 has. Perhaps the abundance of circuitry is an issue here.

It's just lacks the smackdown and punch of some of the traditional high end heads out there.

This is exactly what I was saying in other posts- Now this only applies if your talking about some of the modern high gain amps (Bogner Uberschall, Engl, Diezel VH4 etc) but those amps have some serious "punch" and its really hard to replicate in the MTS world. I think the upper high mid crunch and softer low end of the hot rodded Marshalls is easily replicated with the MTS set up though- as good or better than any of them- but sit down in front of some of those amps and crank it up- You'll fully understand LoD21's statement. But agan, you can get close and for a LOT less $$$!!

 

[LoD21]

It might even be a simple as crank the power amp and lower the pre but many modules seem sweeter when the preamp is cranked. when i crank power amp it gets more fierce but loses sweetness, so then maybe we need to experiment with finding a power tube that behaves to our liking when cranked and still works well with the preamp. A fiend of mine went with a MM transformer and choke and says it cleans it up, adds clarity, and a little more of that concussion BUT its harder to play on and less perceived gain.The trek never ends.

 

[Rising Farce]

Interestingly, I think my MTS amps sound better with the module volumes set lower and the power-section master turned up to 12 o'clock (50%) or higher. It seems to help provide that "concussive" quality you mention, especially when running big (KT88/6550) power tubes.

 

[LoD21]

I run the power at noon now. RM100 is a super cool amp don't get me wrong. When you compare side by side you get a better idea. I will always have at least 1 MTS rig. For now it will be my primary until something $2k or less blows my mind or until I hear an affordable 5153 with an affordable mod that cures it's stock deficiencies.

 

[audiomidijace]

Just curious if you've tried different bias settings on the RM-100 to address some of these concerns? The easy bias ability is one of the best things about the MTS series in my opinion.

 

[ShomerShabbos]

Great info. Thanks for posting!

Just got a Quick Mod for my RM100 last week. Sounds great

 

[mikegyver]

Sweet! Thanks for the great review, I'm sure everyone (including myself!) is always interested on how these modules compare to the "real" amp.

I'm glad to hear it's usually as good or better than the real thing. Keep up the good reviews!

 

[Kevrock25]

So in your opinion. The trilogy pretty much nails the 5150iii tone
I'm considering selling my mts stff to fund a 5150iii. But after reading your
Review I'm reconsidering. What do u think?

 

[wakeguitar]

cool info. thanks.
Fellow like myself never gets to play real amps that often, but to me MTS is the real thing (as opposed to amp sims).

 

[stemlife]

WORD SON!

cool info. thanks.
Fellow like myself never gets to play real amps that often, but to me MTS is the real thing (as opposed to amp sims).

:lol:

 

[Big Daddy]

So in your opinion. The trilogy pretty much nails the 5150iii tone
I'm considering selling my mts stff to fund a 5150iii. But after reading your
Review I'm reconsidering. What do u think?

In the ball park, but not quite. If I remember correctly, the 3rd channel on the Trilogy - Rob can jump in here at any time - is based more on the new 6505, Peavey's 3rd installment of the 5150. The lows are better, the mids are similar, but the gain is where these guys differ. I would say the Trilogy is more true to the Peavey line and is more well rounded, but less gainy than the Fender EVH 5150 III

If you want something to sound more like the 5150 III by fender, try the Ultra Lead. The mids and highs are in that doamin, the gain is quite abdundant and its an overall GREAT sounding mod. When dealing with MTS, don't get caught up in what the amp was modeled after, let your ears guide you.

If i had commissioned a channel 3 EVH 5150 III mod and got the Ultra Lead as a result, I would be very happy. VERY happy

Remember too, the Framus has been comissioned and is about two weeks out at this point. Rob has even comissioned new demo tracks that will really show the teeth of this module off, once its done. You might wanna hang on and see what this guy turns out like. At this point I am very excited and optomistic to say the least

My honest opinion on your question is that you're losing ore than you're gaining - no pun intended - by replacing your MTS stuff with a 5150 III The Splawns are a slightly different story and the Engls start to make sense, but at a minimum of double your MTS rig

Let us know what you decide

H

 

[Mike361]

It shouldn't surprise anyone that the real amps mentioned here sound different than a preamp version of that amp. Now different doesn't always mean better as tone is always subjective. I like Marshall based stuff and lucky for me, the mts power section sounds like a Marshall. Now if I was dead set on some specific tone I was after, I would just get that amp. But I assume most of us that use a rm want the versatility it allows that is always going to be it's strong suit and we are so fortunate that Rob and the modders have provided us with such great modules. Thanks for the review of the other amps and your opinions. Great to hear how they stack up.

 

[fuzzboat]

would have been nice to hear what the rm100 pre thru the 5153 / Splawns
power section would have sounded like ??

and viceversa

:roll:

 

[The Rossness]

How did Rob's Quick Mod compare with the real Splawn QR? I've been thinking of buying a Splawn Nitro, but If a QM can get me close, Maybe I'll pass.