# Carvin Legacy Vs. Peavey XXX



## Fret Melter (Mar 27, 2007)

Hey Guys, Just a quick question for all the metal amp gurus here. In the near future I am looking to acquire a new amp head. I'm Really leaning towards a Carvin legacy, as that I have wanted one for years, and I really LOVE the sound that come out of those things. But, I have the a oppportunity to acquire a Peavey Triple X for really really cheap. I will check out the sound hopefully soon of the XXX, But I would really appreciate your guy's input for people who have tried both. WHich do you think would be a better amp? The sound I want is a good, powerfull, solid and contemporary metal tone, that has a good clean sound as well. I'm really tired of havin amps that are sub-par when it comes to those qualities. Thanx for takin the time to read this guys. Peace!


----------



## LilithXShred (Mar 27, 2007)

Most people i met that played a XXX (all metal players) were happy when they got rid of it. I was at a studio and they were having a XXX there, the guy told me that he just bought it and it sucks so much that he wants to send it back.
I never really played one so i can't say much about that amp, but i've heard only negative things about it. When i get the chance to check one out will, but first I have to check a lot of other stuff XD


----------



## noodles (Mar 27, 2007)

You have the opportunity to acquire a XXX for really cheap because they have no resale value. I used to own one, and I grew to hate it really quick. Channel two is a great hotrod Marshall sound, but the other two channels are practically useless.


----------



## NecroSamist (Mar 27, 2007)

I haven't heard that many great things about the XXX either.


----------



## jaredowty (Mar 27, 2007)

I liked the XXX personally. I just like that really oversaturated, wet distortion tone. I heard a retube works wonders for it as well. However, I'd expand your options. The legacy isn't really a metal amp from what I've heard...it's got a good clean channel and a good amount of gain, but it's almost too smooth for aggresive metal.


----------



## Mark. A (Mar 27, 2007)

Legacy + Pedal > XXX


----------



## Drew (Mar 27, 2007)

Fret Melter said:


> The sound I want is a good, powerfull, solid and contemporary metal tone, that has a good clean sound as well.



Steer clear of the Legacy, then. That thing does one thing well - sound like Steve Vai's lead tone. Nice clean too, but it's NOT a metal amp. 

For what you're looking for, honestly a used Single Recto would be tough to beat for the price. With a bit of luck, you should be able to score one for 8-900, which IIRC is ballpark for a new Legacy. For a few hundred more, you could grab the dual or triple too, if that's your thing.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Mar 27, 2007)

You could...get the V3


----------



## ohio_eric (Mar 27, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> You could...get the V3



Have you actually heard one? I'm slightly interested but the Carvin forums are divided on this amp. I would love to hear one and check it out. But all the buzz on it is so mixed.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Mar 27, 2007)

ohio_eric said:


> Have you actually heard one? I'm slightly interested but the Carvin forums are divided on this amp. I would love to hear one and check it out. But all the buzz on it is so mixed.


I just know the one guy on the ESP forum likes his a lot, never used one myself.


----------



## sakeido (Mar 27, 2007)

I played on a XXX in a guitar store once because the guy said it would be an adequate substitute for a 6505. Definitely not - it is possibly the worst sounding tube amp I have ever played on, period. I actually prefer the sound of a Fender Metalhead-500 over the XXX. It is just an awful amp. 

Can't speak for the Carvin, but that XXX is just horrible.


----------



## thor von clemson (Mar 27, 2007)

I would go with a Legacy and a boost pedal in front of it. I strongly considered buying a Legacy for leads and cleans and a/b'ing it with my 5150 at one point because I LOVED the Legacy tones. It is definately not metal by itself but throw a boost and maybe some new tubes and you'll be good to go. It may cost a little more but meh. I think it looks pretty slick too.


Regarding a V3; they are a completely different monster. I thought they had a very distinct tone to them. Every sound clip I've heard online sounds very similar to the tone in person. If possible, I'd encourage you to check a V3 out before you get a chance to play it. Otherwise, I would say if you are consider it the clips you hear online to be pretty close to the real thing.


----------



## ohio_eric (Mar 27, 2007)

D-EJ915 said:


> I just know the one guy on the ESP forum likes his a lot, never used one myself.




OK, V3s are like Sasquatch I can't find anyone not a Carvin related forum who's actually used one for any real length of time.


----------



## thor von clemson (Mar 27, 2007)

I thought they had a sort of "grainy" distortion to them. They are definately very versatile. If he's really looking for info on the V3, type in Carvin V3 in youtube and check out the high gain/clean vids.. (here is is incase anyone is looking for it (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Carvin+V3))

Otherwise, I say go with a Legacy, a boost, and some new tubes.


----------



## Fret Melter (Mar 28, 2007)

Thank you guys sooo much for your input. I think I'll give the XXX a play just for sonic reference, but the nail is pretty much nailed in the coffin for me goin to a legacy. My friend has one, and agyer heating it for the first time, I've wanted it for the better half of like 3 years. I have played through multiple mesa's, a bogner ecstacy, A cool soldano 50 watter, and legion of modern heads, and the sound I hear in my head is the legacy. Again, thank you for sharing your experience you guys!!! This forum rules!!!


----------



## Jeff (Mar 28, 2007)

What about a JSX?


----------



## thedownside (Mar 28, 2007)

Drew said:


> Steer clear of the Legacy, then. That thing does one thing well - sound like Steve Vai's lead tone. Nice clean too, but it's NOT a metal amp.
> 
> For what you're looking for, honestly a used Single Recto would be tough to beat for the price. With a bit of luck, you should be able to score one for 8-900, which IIRC is ballpark for a new Legacy. For a few hundred more, you could grab the dual or triple too, if that's your thing.



sorry to kinda jack the thread a little... but whats the difference between a single, double and triple recto? i've never been a huge fan of them, but i've always wondered


----------



## Drew (Mar 28, 2007)

thedownside said:


> sorry to kinda jack the thread a little... but whats the difference between a single, double and triple recto? i've never been a huge fan of them, but i've always wondered



Single recto - 50 watts, solid state rectification. 
Dual Recto - 100 watts, switchable solid state or tube rectification
Triple Recto - 150 watts, switchable solid state or tube rectification. 

There are also evidently a few circuit differences between them - personally, of the ones I've played the Rect-O-Verb Solo 50 is my favorite, but I'm more of a lead guy, and not as interested in uber-metal chunk.

Fret Melter, if the sound in your head is a Legacy, then get one, but if you're looking for modern metal, I think it's maybe not the best match for you. My problem with them is the exact reason they're so popular on Jemsite - I've never heard a clip of one even witgh a boost that didn't sound exactly like the last couple Vai albums. 

They're rumoured to be based on the Bogner Exctacy circuitry he was playing at the time, but if you compare his ALS/1st G3 tone to everything he's done since, I have a VERY hard time buying that. Food for thought though.


----------



## SevenatoR (Mar 28, 2007)

If you played a XXX in a store, especially recently, you were playing through shitty EH 6L6 power tubes. The amp is much better with EL34's. I haven't had any trouble getting a good sound out of mine. For the clean channel, you'll need a lower power tube than a 12ax7 in V1 or V2 (V2 also effects the Crunch channel). The EQ on the dirty channels can be a bugger because it's active. Takes some time and some tube fiddling, but I like mine. 

Of course, if you hate it, then you hate it. LOL

The Legacy does NOT have the dirt that the XXX does if that's a factor in your decision.


----------



## Drew (Mar 28, 2007)

SevenatoR said:


> If you played a XXX in a store, especially recently, you were playing through shitty EH 6L6 power tubes. The amp is much better with EL34's. I haven't had any trouble getting a good sound out of mine. For the clean channel, you'll need a lower power tube than a 12ax7 in V1 or V2 (V2 also effects the Crunch channel). The EQ on the dirty channels can be a bugger because it's active. Takes some time and some tube fiddling, but I like mine.



 It's an amp that I've never played and I never cared to until I heard Pete Starks' recordings of one. Granted, that man's vibrato could make a Crate sound liquid, but I was impressed. Clearly, there's gotta be something going on there...


----------



## budda (Mar 28, 2007)

triple X's cant be total shit, or else satch woulda modeled the ultra channel off a 5150 and not a triple X now wouldnt he?

over at guitarists.net, one of my buddies has a V3. he likes it, but usually plays through his X100B (carvin) instead. he doesnt play death metal or anything like that (he does love his metal tho), and i forget what exactly he said about the V3 (I PM'd him about EQ settings).

with all that said, i'd get a JSX.


----------



## SevenatoR (Mar 28, 2007)

As I said, I like the sounds I get from mine, but some of that is the cab (Mesa Recto - V30's). If you've got a cab that you know you like, it shouldn't be too much of a chore to get a good sound from the XXX, but I will say again, it takes some patience. For what I paid for mine, it's been a good deal.


----------



## Benzesp (Mar 29, 2007)

If I ever get another head for a metal project I will get a V3! Take my word for it they kill! I liked the triple X but when I compared it to the XXL I was amazed that I liked the XXL better...


----------



## starsnuffer (Mar 29, 2007)

budda said:


> triple X's cant be total shit, or else satch woulda modeled the ultra channel off a 5150 and not a triple X now wouldnt he?
> 
> over at guitarists.net, one of my buddies has a V3. he likes it, but usually plays through his X100B (carvin) instead. he doesnt play death metal or anything like that (he does love his metal tho), and i forget what exactly he said about the V3 (I PM'd him about EQ settings).
> 
> with all that said, i'd get a JSX.



Um, Satch doesn't use the crunch or ultra channels on the JSX, he uses a DS-1 into the clean channel.

I hate the XXX personally, and it's derivative the JSX. A Legacy won't do modern metal though. A V3 might be more your thing if you can tame the buzz.

-W


----------



## Edroz (Mar 29, 2007)

i never realized how many people dislike the XXX . it's been my main amp for about 3 years now... it actually replaced my 5150 (which i still use on occasion) and i prefer the xxx over it. i just recently had it retubed with jj 6L6 power tubes and tung-sol 12AX7 pre tubes and all i can say is wow, totally transformed an amp i already loved into something even greater. i highly recommend the xxx with those tubes... gets rid of that high end sizzle and adds soooooo much more tightness and articulation. i also use a DOD YJM308 in front of it (gain on about 1, level on max) and love the results.


----------



## budda (Mar 30, 2007)

starsnuffer, you sure? cuz crunch channel, flat EQ is satch's tone right there.


----------



## Allen Garrow (Mar 30, 2007)

The JSX will melt your face!
~A


----------



## LordOVchaoS (Mar 30, 2007)

It is very true that they ship the XXX with tubes that don't work well with it. After a retube it can be a GREAT sounding amp! I had JJ EL34 power tubes and a mixture of preamp tubes in mine and it sounded killer. I've never seen an amp that changes so drastically with some tube swaps!

I've never played on a Legacy but from what i've heard from clips and opinions I'd say that Drew is absolutely correct, it's not a metal amp.


----------



## saffron shrimp (Mar 30, 2007)

Allen Garrow said:


> The JSX will melt your face!
> ~A



Yes it will.


----------



## Jerich (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> Steer clear of the Legacy, then. That thing does one thing well - sound like Steve Vai's lead tone. Nice clean too, but it's NOT a metal amp.
> 
> For what you're looking for, honestly a used Single Recto would be tough to beat for the price. With a bit of luck, you should be able to score one for 8-900, which IIRC is ballpark for a new Legacy. For a few hundred more, you could grab the dual or triple too, if that's your thing.




I agree 100% Carvin V3 is not for a metal guy the amp has great Rock and country sustain qualities but it simply doesn't sound that good for metal you would need to overdrive the ball-zing-gus's off of it to get that saturated tone and the tail channel switches have now started to come up as major technical issues and need repairs.
The Triple XXX on the other hand is a Gorilla in a dress I hate the ploy Peavey use to get you to try the amp Ie;Diamond plate and Girly motif's...but seriously with the right componets the amp can do stellar stuff...I just rebuilt Edroz here on the board and i hope he chimes in he has plenty of recordings of his amp and vader cabs now too. I changed the wires for the Tube basis to the transformer with High grade alessandro wires and retubed the head with Tung-sols and JJ powertubes "High biased"...peaveys problems mainly are they use low quality componets compared to say mesa he use Really good wire.for the price and the Mod go with a XXX.........


----------



## HighGain510 (Mar 30, 2007)

I played the XXX for about 45 minutes at the local Sam Ash (and yes, I realized it had crappy tubes stock) but I was relatively unimpressed. I will say, however, that the Legacy has a STELLAR clean channel and it is loud as all hell!  WAY too loud for me, but that's another story! I wouldn't say the Legacy is great for metal but there are ways around that like some have proposed using a boost like a TS-type pedal in front of it, or even just a GOOD distortion pedal through the clean channel might be able to do it although I've always been a bigger fan of amp distortion vs pedal distortion personally.


----------



## eaeolian (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> For what you're looking for, honestly a used Single Recto would be tough to beat for the price. With a bit of luck, you should be able to score one for 8-900, which IIRC is ballpark for a new Legacy. For a few hundred more, you could grab the dual or triple too, if that's your thing.





We all know by now how I am about Mesas, but it's hard to beat a used Single for sound/price ratio, unless you go with a 5150 - and the Single's clean is much better, IMO, and you get the lead boost.


----------



## eaeolian (Mar 30, 2007)

HighGain510 said:


> I played the XXX for about 45 minutes at the local Sam Ash (and yes, I realized it had crappy tubes stock) but I was relatively unimpressed.



I've played old ones and new ones, and the only thing I liked was channel two - and I didn't even like it that much. However, both they and the JSX really work for some people, so...


----------



## YYZ2112 (Mar 30, 2007)

I dig my XXX. Channel two is definitely my favorite and if you spend some time with the amp you can dial in a decent tone. I also get some pretty good clean tones from it too IMO. 
I should also add I was a Boogie guy for years before I bought the XXX. Sometimes it's just nice to change things up and get a different sound.

I've never played a Legacy so I can't compare, but I would be interested in hearing one in person some day.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

budda said:


> starsnuffer, you sure? cuz crunch channel, flat EQ is satch's tone right there.



He originally designed it so that he wouldn't have to use pedals, but after one tour of the amp's distortion a DS-1 crept back into his pedal board. 

The crunch channel is alledgedly based on the Classic-30, and not the XXX, anyway. 


[action=Drew]'s tastes have expanded a bit over the years, but at heart he's still a Satriani fanboi[/action]

Jerich, I think you mean Legacy, and not V3.


----------



## Toshiro (Mar 30, 2007)

The JSX's Crunch channel has about as much gain as the lead channel on the Legacy, IMO. It's damn near the perfect amount for metal rhythm.

I liked the Legacy I played through, but it's not near as metal as the JSX.


----------



## 7 Dying Trees (Mar 30, 2007)

Give the JSX a shot. I prefferred it to the rectos, and actually really did like it, i've no idea why i passed on it 2 years ago, but am rectifying the situation at the moment 

JSX'll do metal nicely.

ALthough if you want the mesa tone, you'll need to get a mesa, as the only thing that does mesa is mesa.

And the legacy is such a vai amp it's unreal, i don't think i've ever seen a single metal band use one, and for good reason! Steer clear.

Triple X looks like it also got a massive thumbs down as well!


----------



## budda (Mar 30, 2007)

drew, i believe the crunch and cleans are both peavey classic? and the ultra is the triple X, tweaked for joe.

i live on my crunch channel, unless i actually get the need for really high gain - then its to the ultra channel. JSX will eat you up and spit you out, if you spend some time with it.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

budda said:


> drew, i believe the crunch and cleans are both peavey classic? and the ultra is the triple X, tweaked for joe.
> 
> i live on my crunch channel, unless i actually get the need for really high gain - then its to the ultra channel. JSX will eat you up and spit you out, if you spend some time with it.



Close. The clean channel is designed to stay as clean as possible from the ground up. I doubt it's based on much of anything, least of all a Classic as one of their more appealing aspects was that they DON'T stay pristine. The crunch was alledgedly based on a Classic-30, whereas unless I'm greatly mistaken the Lead is basically a revoiced version of the lower gain channel of a XXX. 

Either way, Joe uses a DS-1 these days for gain.


----------



## starsnuffer (Mar 30, 2007)

budda said:


> starsnuffer, you sure? cuz crunch channel, flat EQ is satch's tone right there.



Yep. Watch him live, you'll never see the channel lights move. I've seen this myself and a lot of other people have reported the same thing.

I agree that they did a good job copping his tone on the crunch channel, but that doesn't mean he uses it. A lot of that tone comes from his fingers/style, so I'd imagine it would sound different if he actually played on that channel. It's a good selling point though.

-W


----------



## noodles (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> Close. The clean channel is designed to stay as clean as possible from the ground up. I doubt it's based on much of anything, least of all a Classic as one of their more appealing aspects was that they DON'T stay pristine. The crunch was alledgedly based on a Classic-30, whereas unless I'm greatly mistaken the Lead is basically a revoiced version of the lower gain channel of a XXX.



The clean channel doesn't even have a gain knob, so there is no way it can be based on anything that came before it. On my XXX, it was sterile to the point of lifelessness. The eq knobs seemed to do nothing at all.

The XXX was my main amp for about a year. Having plugged into a JSX, it really struck me as a XXX with EL-34's. I know this, because I tried EL-34's in my XXX. There was no difference. I'd really like to know what Peavey "reworked", since I couldn't hear anything different. Sure, it has the resonance/presence controls, which replace the simple three way switch on the back of the XXX, but it's not like those do that much.

I still maintain that channel 2 is the only usable channel on those amps. The Ultra channel just sounds like the Crunch channel with a DOD heavy metal pedal in front of it.


----------



## jaredowty (Mar 30, 2007)

Benzesp said:


> I liked the triple X but when I compared it to the XXL I was amazed that I liked the XXL better...



I'd take a retubed XXX over my XXL anyday of the week for gigging purposes alone....I really don't see what people are talking about when they say the XXL is better at high volumes and that it "opens up" when you crank the master. It does what any transistor amp does, sounds shittier, IMO.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

Whatever else it sounds like, the Ultra channel sounds rather like Satriani's most recent high-gain stuff. Personally, I happen to not really care for his recent tones, but people who really dig his tast couple albums also tend to dig the sound of the 3rd channel. We just agree to disagree. 

For me, I don't even have to look to the gain channels. The inability to drive the clean channel into breakup at acceptable volumes is a total dealbreaker for me right there.


----------



## noodles (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> For me, I don't even have to look to the gain channels. The inability to drive the clean channel into breakup at acceptable volumes is a total dealbreaker for me right there.



That is the beauty of a good tube amp IMHO. If I wanted pristine clean, I'd buy a Roland JC-120.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

noodles said:


> That is the beauty of a good tube amp IMHO. If I wanted pristine clean, I'd buy a Roland JC-120.



As an aside, I find it absolutely hilarious how similar our tastes in gear (amps obviously, but I'd love an alder 7, too) and constructing solos are, considering how different the music we write is.


----------



## eaeolian (Mar 30, 2007)

^ 

He doesn't write any music. He just plays what I tell him to.


----------



## YYZ2112 (Mar 30, 2007)

To each his own I guess when it comes to the XXX. I think when it comes to price you really can't complain all that much with whay you get. Like most Peavey products, they are fairly cheap compared to other mid to upper range amp makers out there IMO. 
I think comparing the XXX to other amps that are twice its price is not very fair and that would pretty much mean most Boogie stuff out there.

just my .02 on the XXX


----------



## noodles (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> As an aside, I find it absolutely hilarious how similar our tastes in gear (amps obviously, but I'd love an alder 7, too) and constructing solos are, considering how different the music we write is.



I chalk it up to certain things being classic for a reason. Alder has been a top tonewood choice since Leo decided to build Strats out of them over fifty years ago. It's perfect for almost any style of music. As for Mesa, how many tube amps are so versatile?

Or maybe we're both just really, really smart.


----------



## eaeolian (Mar 30, 2007)

YYZ2112 said:


> To each his own I guess when it comes to the XXX. I think when it comes to price you really can't complain all that much with whay you get. Like most Peavey products, they are fairly cheap compared to other mid to upper range amp makers out there IMO.
> I think comparing the XXX to other amps that are twice its price is not very fair and that would pretty much mean most Boogie stuff out there.
> 
> just my .02 on the XXX



My only point would be to say that Peavey put itself there, since the 5150 compares pretty favorably with more expensive amps. Also, it's not like the XXX is a ValveKing, or anything - it's still $1250, which is in the range of a Mesa Single Recto.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

YYZ2112 said:


> just my .02 on the XXX





Drew said:


> It's an amp that I've never played and I never cared to until I heard Pete Starks' recordings of one. Granted, that man's vibrato could make a Crate sound liquid, but I was impressed. Clearly, there's gotta be something going on there...



You have already been favorably represented here, sir. 





noodles said:


> Or maybe we're both just really, really smart.



I'll agree to that.


----------



## YYZ2112 (Mar 30, 2007)

Good point. 
I may be wrong, but I think the price has actually gone up on the XXX for some crazy reason. I guess people are still buying them up.


----------



## YYZ2112 (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> You have already been favorably represented here, sir.



Thanks, Drew! I didn't see this. 

I think I'll shut up now.


----------



## budda (Mar 30, 2007)

Drew said:


> Close. The clean channel is designed to stay as clean as possible from the ground up. I doubt it's based on much of anything, least of all a Classic as one of their more appealing aspects was that they DON'T stay pristine. The crunch was alledgedly based on a Classic-30, whereas unless I'm greatly mistaken the Lead is basically a revoiced version of the lower gain channel of a XXX.
> 
> Either way, Joe uses a DS-1 these days for gain.



yup, that's what i've read. havent read it in a while though. its funny, because its designed to stay clean, but i can drive it no problems with my les paul. muahahah! all in all, its a beast of an amp.


----------



## Drew (Mar 30, 2007)

Considering the output on a JS (medium-high), and considering the output of a typical Les Paul (low by modern standards), I find that very surprising.


----------



## noodles (Mar 30, 2007)

budda said:


> yup, that's what i've read. havent read it in a while though. its funny, because its designed to stay clean, but i can drive it no problems with my les paul. muahahah! all in all, its a beast of an amp.



I'm calling bullshit on this one. Sorry, but I owned a XXX, and I couldn't drive the clean channel to distort with an EMG 81, a Duncan Invader, or a Lawrence XL-500. Same with the JSX. My Les Paul certainly didn't come close.

I'd seriously love to know how you can overdrive a preamp that makes *no gain*. Peavey's literature on the XXX and JSX clearly state that all three preamp tubes are bypassed on the clean channel. You are going through a passive eq, straight to the power amp. I think you're pulling our legs.


----------



## skattabrain (Mar 30, 2007)

for what it's worth ... i own the JSX and I have hotter pickups, Blaze Custom, and I can't break it. that said ... toss in a tube screamer and the sound is awesome.



noodles said:


> I still maintain that channel 2 is the only usable channel on those amps. The Ultra channel just sounds like the Crunch channel with a DOD heavy metal pedal in front of it.



you got street cred here noddles ... fo'sho ... but the ultra channel on my jsx is pretty awesome and saying it sounds like the crunch channel with DOD Heavy Meta pedal ... isn't even close man. sorry ... it sounds to me like you're trying too hard to dis the amp or you're being overly colorful or something.


----------



## budda (Mar 30, 2007)

i'll record it when i get the chance, but it definitely happens. its not like i get AC/DC crunch out of it, but it doesnt stay perfectly clean if i dont want it to.

i tried a godin with EMG's in it through the 2nd version of a JSX, pristine clean, yup. grabbed a gibbo LP studio off the wall, drove it in about 3 seconds.

mind you if i want that slight grit to clean, i'll just turn the gain down on my crunch channel, and then turn the guitar's volume down.


----------



## noodles (Mar 30, 2007)

skattabrain said:


> you got street cred here noddles ... fo'sho ... but the ultra channel on my jsx is pretty awesome and saying it sounds like the crunch channel with DOD Heavy Meta pedal ... isn't even close man. sorry ... it sounds to me like you're trying too hard to dis the amp or you're being overly colorful or something.



It's just my opinion after using one (XXX) to record a demo and gigging with it for a year. It just doesn't have that sound of all tube growl. I could never dial the solid state-ish fizziness out of it.

Listen to Falling on Me by my old band, Above The Fray. It sounds more like a modeler than a real tube amp on channel three. Just my opinion. 

The lead was on the crunch channel. While I definitely prefer my Mesa, it is a much more usable and musical tone. To me, it is obvious that the ultra channel is this channel with some diode clipping added in.


----------



## starsnuffer (Mar 31, 2007)

We opened for Gary Hoey the other day. He's an old friend of the other guitarist in my band so we hung and chatted for quite a while. Gary and Bill (the other guitarist in my band) are both endorsed by peavey and play XXX's. Gary apparently has a signature model in the works. He said it will have a much nicer clean, and less gain on the crunch and ultra channels, but more "useable" gain. Might be interesting for you XXX people.

On a side note, the XXX (They were both sharing the same amp) died during Gary's first set and I let him plug into my Bogner XTC. His eyes jumped out of his head when he started playing and he kept telling me how much he loved my amp for the rest of the night. So, maybe that will change what he plans for his sig, or maybe he'll get a real amp. Who knows.

-W


----------



## LordOVchaoS (Apr 1, 2007)

noodles said:


> It's just my opinion after using one (XXX) to record a demo and gigging with it for a year. It just doesn't have that sound of all tube growl. I could never dial the solid state-ish fizziness out of it.
> 
> Listen to Falling on Me by my old band, Above The Fray. It sounds more like a modeler than a real tube amp on channel three. Just my opinion.
> 
> The lead was on the crunch channel. While I definitely prefer my Mesa, it is a much more usable and musical tone. To me, it is obvious that the ultra channel is this channel with some diode clipping added in.



I have a XXX schematic and I have personally been inside of one. The only diodes in the amp are in the switching circuits and the noisegate circuit, no diodes are used for gain. The V1 preamp tube is also 100% active on the clean channel. With a high gain 12ax7 there it's easily overdriven by high output pups and digging in hard. I didn't want that with mine, I used a JJ ECC803S which gives you a bigger, rounder tone on all 3 channels. In V2 I used a 12AT7 which lowered the gain on both dirty channels and completely blows your exaggerated description of the Ultra channel to smithereens. For a death metal player I use very low gain and with a tube swap I could run the gain on the Ultra channel at about half and get very dynamic, pick responsive, articulate distortion out of it. Dialed down to 9 o clock or so was the AC/DC territory. The fact that ZZ top uses them for live and recording now should tell you something. Crunch was still my favorite overall, I used it for rhythms and Ultra for leads.


----------



## newfinator (Apr 2, 2007)

For what it's worth I have a Legacy and a 5150 and MUCH prefer the Legacy in every way. I know it's not a XXX but thought I'd mention it for reference.


----------

