Peavey 6505 vs 6505+, what's the difference?

Discussion in 'Gear & Equipment' started by MTGeezy, Sep 6, 2017.

  1. MTGeezy

    MTGeezy SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    23
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2017
    One thing I've never messed with is those eq pedals. Does an mxr 10 band make that much of a difference?
     
  2. LiveOVErdrive

    LiveOVErdrive SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    187
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    A GIGANTIC difference. An EQ pedal in the effects loop of any amp will make it sound like a totally different amp. Depending on how you adjust it of course.

    I like to run one in front of the amp to boost the mids before the preamp distortion, and then another in the effects loop to scoop them back out. Sounds great.
     
    DudeManBrother likes this.
  3. DudeManBrother

    DudeManBrother Blames it on "the rain"

    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    95
    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Seattle
    The way I've always used it: It allows you the ability to cut any bass frequencies that muddy up your tone, and some fizz up top can be removed as well. You can also control how much pre amp signal runs through the poweramp which also alters the sound. There is an immediate difference with subtle cuts at certain bands. I like to go band by band and boost it to the max and depending on how terrible the frequency sounds I'll cut from 2-6 dB. If I like the sound of a band then I typically leave it at 0 but sometimes I'll boost those a bit too. I like to keep the sum at 0 or less, so I want to cut 3 dB before I boost 3 dB, but most times the cutting of frequencies allows the ones I like to stand out, without boosting them.
     
  4. HerbalDude420

    HerbalDude420 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2016
    Location:
    midwest
    here is a video showing very little of a difference the difference is so subtle its basically not there if I told you I was playing a 6505 you would believe me. Also when comparing amps you need to compare the same production line also when they are using the same components and tubes.

    "Yes, they are both high gain. They both have the same voicing or tonal qualities. But the Plus model has a cleaner sounding clean channel. Otherwise they sound the same except the Plus model has more controls.
    If they weren't different from each other then there wouldn't be any reason to offer two different models.
    But, the Plus came out after the 6505 model and so we changed some things like cleaning up the Rhythm channel and adding the foot switchable Crunch. The 6505 has Crunch on the Rhythm channel as well, but it isn't foot switchable. Some players still like the 6505 and that's why we continue to make both. Some players don't want a cleaner rhythm channel, for example.
    There is some misinformation on the internet"

    The difference is subtle and after throwing a noise gate, OD, and EQ in the loop that subtle difference is gone. For only $100USD more you get a hell of a lot more versatility
     
  5. HeHasTheJazzHands

    HeHasTheJazzHands greg rulz ok

    Messages:
    20,711
    Likes Received:
    1,984
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    Louisiana
    I don't think so. The Triumph is what it's supposedly based on, but the 5150 is also based more on a Soldano SLO with tweaks by Eddie and James Brown. The VTM sounds closer to a JCM800.

    Also I rarely used a boost with my 5150ii. I found it was tight enough without it. I can see a boost being used with a 5150 but the 5150ii might sound too thin.

    Also once again, YOU NEED TO TRY BOTH. Once again I owned and played both and there's a noticeable difference.
     
  6. KailM

    KailM SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    791
    Likes Received:
    153
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Location:
    MT
    I've watched that video at least 6 times and it does not faithfully demonstrate their differences. In person I can assure you there are QUITE noticeable differences.

    Also, I have always run a boost and an EQ in the loop. When my 6505+ was stock, no amount of EQing would get it to sound like my 6505 -- even with an MXR 10-band. The character of the amps is that different. Yes, they sound very similar, and in a band mix most people probably can't tell the difference. In a recording, I can easily tell the difference. Finally, it is easier to make a 6505 sound like a 6505+ using an EQ pedal, but impossible the other way around.
     
  7. PunkBillCarson

    PunkBillCarson SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    98
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Location:
    Paragould, AR
    There's enough of a difference between these amps that I'm thinking about buying a 6505 to go along with my 6505+. The + has a very slight cocked wah sound and the palm mutes are definitely different between the two.
     
  8. prlgmnr

    prlgmnr ...that kind of idea

    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    253
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Location:
    North Yorkshire, UK
    Hi, I'm calling about the ad for someone to pointlessly argue about something for no reason, but it looks like I got here too late.

    If you change your mind about the other guy, please ask me about tonewoods.
     
    budda and Beheroth like this.
  9. HeHasTheJazzHands

    HeHasTheJazzHands greg rulz ok

    Messages:
    20,711
    Likes Received:
    1,984
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Yes exactly. The cocked wah sound is why I feel the 6505+ is tighter, clearer, less gainy, and more cutting than the standard 6505. Less low end oomph and a more vowely mid range cut.
     
  10. NinjaRaf

    NinjaRaf SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    734
    Likes Received:
    110
    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    I have owned 2 regulars, 3 combos, and 4 II/+s. Aside from the obvious separate EQ controls for each channel on the II/+, the biggest difference to me is that the low end on the II/+ is more controlled to the point where I never needed a boost with one.The low end is tighter, clearer, and to me just sounds better in every aspect. I could never get behind the original versions. The combos sort of sit in between (talking 212 here, not the 112) and have the tightness of the II/+ and the aggression of the original. Really, the originals have WAY too much low end, IMO, and it can be really easy to fight with the bass guitar.
     
  11. sakeido

    sakeido Contributor

    Messages:
    6,661
    Likes Received:
    1,779
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    Calgary AB
    people have been saying the 6505+ clean channel is better, but imo if you want crystal cleans it still sucks. not a very good clean channel at all compared to a 5150III or Mesa Roadster or anything.

    it is an absolutely fantastic crunch channel though
     
  12. PunkBillCarson

    PunkBillCarson SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    98
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Location:
    Paragould, AR
    I mean, these amps aren't really meant for the clean channel and as far as saying the clean channel sounds better, it's being put up to the standard of that particular series, not every other amp in the world. Are the cleans on a 6505+ the best? No, but they are usable with certain tubes.
     
  13. HeHasTheJazzHands

    HeHasTheJazzHands greg rulz ok

    Messages:
    20,711
    Likes Received:
    1,984
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Yeah when I dialed my 5150ii to be pristine clean, it was extremely thin and whimpy. It can be a good sound if you like a slightly crunchy vintagw clean ala Van Halen or get a Malcolm Young style clean crunch rhythm.
     
  14. KailM

    KailM SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    791
    Likes Received:
    153
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Location:
    MT
    I've found the 6505+ clean to actually be a pretty decent platform if you like a lot of ambient effects with your cleans (I do). The reason being, it's a pretty "cold" and sterile clean that takes effects like reverb, delay, and modulation and keeps things pretty clear even with several layers stacked. The tone definitely becomes more three dimensional then and can sound rich and lush without getting over saturated with the effects. On amps that have an inherently more lush clean tone, I've found that I have to spend a lot more time EQing in order to use that many effects without it becoming overwhelming.

    If you like dry cleans without much reverb or other effects though, you'll hate any 6505 -- it's pretty much just the sound of your guitar, only amplified.
     
  15. trem licking

    trem licking SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2013
    Location:
    MI
    the clean on a 6505+ is awesome. crank the gain all the way up and split your pickups or use the middle pickup config. perhaps if you have massive output pickups this might be a bit rich but with the gain up past noon the clean on this amp sounds pretty damn good
     
  16. maggotspawn

    maggotspawn SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    86
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA.
    I hated the clean channel on the 6505+. Also didn't think the Crunch channel had enough gain. Sold it and got a XXX, much happier.
     
  17. Spaced Out Ace

    Spaced Out Ace 0 0 1 0 0 6 5 0 3\

    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    448
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Location:
    Washington
    According to James Brown:

    "Yes....very few people know that, but the 5150/6505 is different than the rest of the 5150s. Originally we had a bit thicker attack with more buzziness, but during the combo R&D, Eddie kept wanting it tighter and I made some adjustments to tighten up the CHUNK. That tweak ended up in all the rest of the line after that, but we never changed the original one [5150/6505].

    "After we came out with the 5150II, I constantly had guys asking me how to change the lead channel back, because they wanted that thicker tone. It was only 3 components different and a very simple mod, but made a dramatic difference to the attack."

    I hope he doesn't mind me sharing this info. And no offense to anyone else in the thread, but whatever other jibber jabber is going on, James Brown's comments hold more weight with me. Again, no offense, but he did put the thing together, so...
     
  18. KailM

    KailM SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    791
    Likes Received:
    153
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Location:
    MT
    Yep, and for the record, I did mention this in an earlier post. Those three components are pretty easy to change out if you've done a little soldering on circuit boards and such. It may not seem like much, but they do make a huge difference in feel and tone.

    As I stated earlier, when I changed my 6505+ over using just those three component changes (two capacitors and a resistor), it was unbelievable how much more low-end chunk I got on the lead channel. You have to be in the room or playing the rig itself to really get a grasp on the difference, but it's night and day. I later picked up a regular 6505 head and my two amps on the lead channel now are almost indistinguishable. FWIW, I think the best of both worlds is to get a 6505+ and then mod the lead channel to those original 5150 specs with those three components; then you still have the better cleans and (IMO) the better of the two rhythm channels and a MONSTER lead channel.
     
    Spaced Out Ace likes this.
  19. budda

    budda Guiterrorizer Contributor

    Messages:
    21,301
    Likes Received:
    1,466
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Location:
    London ONT
    Screw all these cats, get a 6534+.
     
    Dineley, Fretwreck and Beheroth like this.
  20. HeHasTheJazzHands

    HeHasTheJazzHands greg rulz ok

    Messages:
    20,711
    Likes Received:
    1,984
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Yeah, James has said in the past the 5150II is based on a mod he did to one of EVH's touring 5150 heads he used from 1996(?) - 1999. You can notice the change. His pre-mod tone was fatter and growlier, while his post-mod done was tighter and clearer. And also has that cocked wah thing I was talking about before.


     

Share This Page