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



## MTGeezy (Sep 6, 2017)

Joined a new band recently and we are getting things rolling, so I've decided it's time to get an actual amp.

The band sounds in the same vein of bands liked Knocked Loose, but more on a death metal side. 

I've pretty much narrowed it down to either the 6505 or 6505+ as that seems to be the amp that most of these bands use, besides like a dual rec which I can't afford. 

Anyways, what's the big difference between the two? I've heard the cleans on the plus model are a bit better, but I've also heard the plus model isn't as ballsy as the original. I highly doubt I'll ever be writing clean parts, so the clean channel isn't a huge deal to me. 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## LiveOVErdrive (Sep 6, 2017)

6505+ has a higher gain lead channel and a lower gain clean channel for clean (plus a crunch switch to make the clean channel high gain also)

The main reason 6505+ is known for better cleans is that each channel has its own EQ, whereas the 6505 shares one between both channels.

I don't think you can go wrong with either, though personally I'd go with a 6505+ over the 6505. Specifically I'd go for the 112 combo version, which you can usually find on the used market for 3-400 USD. It's very portable on its own and sounds great, and you can always plug it into a recto 412 and blow the roof off.


----------



## wakjob (Sep 6, 2017)

Too much gain VS entirely too much gain.


----------



## trem licking (Sep 6, 2017)

6505+ is the better amp for sure


----------



## LiveOVErdrive (Sep 6, 2017)

Also: Throwing a boost in front of a scooped 6505+ crunch channel is a thing of beauty.


----------



## jerm (Sep 6, 2017)

6505 is a tad more aggressive compared to the 6505+. If you don't play much clean stuff, the 6505 would be better IMO.


----------



## sevenfoxes (Sep 6, 2017)

Since cleans aren't a big deal to you, try to stick with the 5150/6505 as they might be a little cheaper. It also might not hurt to look into their cousins: XXX, Ultra Plus, JSX, 3120, etc. Those can be had for even cheaper If you're patient.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 6, 2017)

6505 is rawer, more aggressive, has a ton more gain, but is looser and less versatile.
6505+ has less gain, slightly smoother, a tighter sound, and is more versatile with a tweakble 2nd channel. But it doesn't have the aggression of the 6505 and I find has a VERY slight cocked wah sound to it that can make it sound and feel a bit stiff.


----------



## jerm (Sep 6, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> 6505 is rawer, more aggressive, has a ton more gain, but is looser and less versatile.
> 6505+ has less gain, slightly smoother, a tighter sound, and is more versatile with a tweakble 2nd channel. But it doesn't have the aggression of the 6505 and I find has a VERY slight cocked wah sound to it that can make it sound and feel a bit stiff.


All of this! Both great amps nonetheless.


----------



## HerbalDude420 (Sep 6, 2017)

None of that they are the exact same amp just the 6505+ has separate EQ and an extra preamp tube. They sound the same the only reason people hear a difference is different setup between the two or they really need to put down the doobie or very popular people want to hear a difference. Ask peavey themselves about the difference they will be happy to tell you.


----------



## jerm (Sep 6, 2017)

^says Herbaldude420.


----------



## KailM (Sep 6, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> None of that they are the exact same amp just the 6505+ has separate EQ and an extra preamp tube. They sound the same the only reason people hear a difference is different setup between the two or they really need to put down the doobie or very popular people want to hear a difference. Ask peavey themselves about the difference they will be happy to tell you.



Ummm, nope. They have several differences in the circuitry in both channels. Not the same by a long shot. The 6505/5150 does not filter out near as much low end in the beginning stages of the preamp and sounds meatier, thicker, and looser. The midrange is also a bit lower and more ferocious. It is the meanest sounding out of all the 5150 family. Kinda loose response unless you boost it with an OD.

The 5150II/6505+ filters a lot more of your beginning low end in the preamp and sounds considerably tighter and more focused as a result. Mids are higher up in range and snarl more than growl.

I have both amps and the differences are immediately apparent-- I don't know what you're going on about. I prefer the original's lead tone so I modded my 6505+ to have 5150/6505 specs on that channel-- completely different amp after that. I do slightly prefer the 6505+ rhythm channel over the 5150/6505 though. For both cleans and mid-gain tones. The cleans on the + are a lot better and not just because of the EQ.

Finally, I've never really noticed a difference in amount of gain on tap. It's kind of like the question: would you like $100,000,000,000,000 or $200,000,000,000,000? ...at that point it's so far beyond what anyone needs that it's irrelevant. I run my gain at 3 and it's enough for death and black metal.


----------



## HerbalDude420 (Sep 6, 2017)

The information I got is straight from the people who actually make the amp ask them yourselves I think they know there amp more than you or anybody that modded your amp. They are the ones who came up with the circuitry I think they know what they are talking about. With everything stock on both amps there should be no difference except separate EQ and cleaner cleans.


----------



## KailM (Sep 6, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> The information I got is straight from the people who actually make the amp ask them yourselves I think they know there amp more than you or anybody that modded your amp. They are the ones who came up with the circuitry I think they know what they are talking about. With everything stock on both amps there should be no difference except separate EQ and cleaner cleans.



I modded my 6505+ myself and saw firsthand that there are differences between two resistor values and a capacitor value between the 6505 and 6505+. VERY different values. Furthermore, those were not the only different components-- but merely the ones that would make the biggest impact in changing the circuit from 6505+ to 6505 specs. I know what I hear in front of the amp as well. To claim they are the same is wrong, and also NOT what anyone who builds the amps at Peavey would say. I'm sorry, but you are under a false impression here and I will link you to schematics and sites varifying what I'm saying when I get to my computer where I have those bookmarked.

But I'm sure there will be others who come along and corroborate what I'm saying before then.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 6, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> The information I got is straight from the people who actually make the amp ask them yourselves I think they know there amp more than you or anybody that modded your amp. They are the ones who came up with the circuitry I think they know what they are talking about. With everything stock on both amps there should be no difference except separate EQ and cleaner cleans.



Now actually TRY a 6505 and 6505+ and tell me you don't notice a difference. 

I owned a 5150II and played a 5150. They're difference. The 5150 is more saturated and beefier, while the 5150II is dryer and tighter. The core tone of the amps ARE the same, but there's a notice difference in the feel and tightness.

Shit, James Brown is a member here. Maybe he can give some insight?

EDIT: Actually just found an interview. James Brown says the 5150II is based on a mod he did to one of Eddie's orginal 5150s to make it tighter. So it's definitely not the same circuit.


----------



## LiveOVErdrive (Sep 6, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> The information I got is straight from the people who actually make the amp ask them yourselves I think they know there amp more than you or anybody that modded your amp. They are the ones who came up with the circuitry I think they know what they are talking about. With everything stock on both amps there should be no difference except separate EQ and cleaner cleans.



Are you maybe thinking of the differences between a 5150 and a 6505 vs a 6505 and 6505+?

Not trying to be a dick, just making sure. Honestly I wouldn't be that surprised if peavey claims 6505 and 6505+ are the same sound other than the EQ.


----------



## DudeManBrother (Sep 6, 2017)

I have both and they are different. Both are great but I like the 6505 more. It has an unrefined quality to it. I'd just get whichever you find first or for the best price, as they are so similar, but apples to apples Id pick the 6505 over the + every time. Also grab a noise gate, a ts9, or Maxon etc. tube screamer and an mxr 10 band for the loop. They are always recommended because they just flat out work so well with these amps.


----------



## Unleash The Fury (Sep 6, 2017)

If you wanted to go cheaper and still sound brutal id check out the vakveking 100


----------



## LiveOVErdrive (Sep 7, 2017)

Or grab an old VTM from the 80s. Supposedly the 5150 was based on that circuit.

But the 6505+ 112 combo is cheap as hell.


----------



## MTGeezy (Sep 7, 2017)

I won't be getting a combo. Looking at obtaining a Marshall cab also so I'll be getting the head!


----------



## MTGeezy (Sep 7, 2017)

DudeManBrother said:


> I have both and they are different. Both are great but I like the 6505 more. It has an unrefined quality to it. I'd just get whichever you find first or for the best price, as they are so similar, but apples to apples Id pick the 6505 over the + every time. Also grab a noise gate, a ts9, or Maxon etc. tube screamer and an mxr 10 band for the loop. They are always recommended because they just flat out work so well with these amps.



One thing I've never messed with is those eq pedals. Does an mxr 10 band make that much of a difference?


----------



## LiveOVErdrive (Sep 7, 2017)

MTGeezy said:


> One thing I've never messed with is those eq pedals. Does an mxr 10 band make that much of a difference?


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 (Sep 7, 2017)

MTGeezy said:


> One thing I've never messed with is those eq pedals. Does an mxr 10 band make that much of a difference?


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.


----------



## HerbalDude420 (Sep 7, 2017)

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


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 7, 2017)

LiveOVErdrive said:


> Or grab an old VTM from the 80s. Supposedly the 5150 was based on that circuit.
> 
> But the 6505+ 112 combo is cheap as hell.


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.


----------



## KailM (Sep 7, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> 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.
> ...




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.


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## prlgmnr (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 8, 2017)

PunkBillCarson said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## NinjaRaf (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## sakeido (Sep 8, 2017)

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


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Sep 8, 2017)

sakeido said:


> 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



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.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## KailM (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## trem licking (Sep 8, 2017)

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


----------



## maggotspawn (Sep 8, 2017)

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.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 9, 2017)

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...


----------



## KailM (Sep 9, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> According to James Brown:
> "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...



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.


----------



## budda (Sep 9, 2017)

Screw all these cats, get a 6534+.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 9, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> 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].
> 
> ...



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.


----------



## HerbalDude420 (Sep 10, 2017)

Can you write or know of a tutorial to perform those mods on my 6505+ finally found clips showing the difference on another site tone wise it's the same but the thump or feel is different very bottom heavy which you could tighten to taste versus being stuck with 6505+ original tightness.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 10, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> Can you write or know of a tutorial to perform those mods on my 6505+ finally found clips showing the difference on another site tone wise it's the same but the thump or feel is different very bottom heavy which you could tighten to taste versus being stuck with 6505+ original tightness.


@amptweaker He might see this and comment. Or you can private message him.


----------



## Fretwreck (Sep 10, 2017)

budda said:


> Screw all these cats, get a 6534+.


Yup. Kick ass head.


----------



## KailM (Sep 10, 2017)

HerbalDude420 said:


> Can you write or know of a tutorial to perform those mods on my 6505+ finally found clips showing the difference on another site tone wise it's the same but the thump or feel is different very bottom heavy which you could tighten to taste versus being stuck with 6505+ original tightness.



Here's the site I used to mod my 6505+ lead channel to original 5150 specs. You'll have to pull up a schematic of the amp to help find the components. It works best to completely remove the PCB from the chassis and solder the components from the bottom, but it can be done by clipping the old components from the top and soldering the new components to the old leads. Beware, there are lethal doses of voltage housed in these things, so be sure you know how to discharge it properly before performing the mods. Since the components are pretty cheap (you'll spend less than $5, you might as well get the best components such as Sprague Orange Drop capacitors. Anyway, here's that site:

http://www.audunmelbye.no/2012/10/10/peavey-5150-6505-series-mods/

You're right about being able to dial back in that tightness. IMO there is such a thing as "too" tight and the looseness of those original 5150 specs is kind of desirable to me. However, with my EQ pedal and cutting some additional bass with my OD pedal I can get the lead channel back to sounding like a 6505+, basically. But I could never get it quite as brutal and thick the other way around before I did the mod, even by cranking the bass and resonance and an EQ pedal.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 10, 2017)

KailM said:


> Here's the site I used to mod my 6505+ lead channel to original 5150 specs. You'll have to pull up a schematic of the amp to help find the components. It works best to completely remove the PCB from the chassis and solder the components from the bottom, but it can be done by clipping the old components from the top and soldering the new components to the old leads. Beware, there are lethal doses of voltage housed in these things, so be sure you know how to discharge it properly before performing the mods. Since the components are pretty cheap (you'll spend less than $5, you might as well get the best components such as Sprague Orange Drop capacitors. Anyway, here's that site:
> 
> http://www.audunmelbye.no/2012/10/10/peavey-5150-6505-series-mods/
> 
> You're right about being able to dial back in that tightness. IMO there is such a thing as "too" tight and the looseness of those original 5150 specs is kind of desirable to me. However, with my EQ pedal and cutting some additional bass with my OD pedal I can get the lead channel back to sounding like a 6505+, basically. But I could never get it quite as brutal and thick the other way around before I did the mod, even by cranking the bass and resonance and an EQ pedal.


Absolutely DO NOT clip the old components and solder the new components to the old leads. Either do it right, or don't do it at all.


----------



## KailM (Sep 10, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Absolutely DO NOT clip the old components and solder the new components to the old leads. Either do it right, or don't do it at all.


 
While I won't say you aren't right that it's better to do the job properly-- I don't see the problem if you do a clean job. When I did my mod, I clipped the old parts and soldered to the old leads so that I could reverse the mod quickly if I didn't like it. I intended to go back and do it right but never got around to it. Never had a problem with it and that was years ago.


----------



## DudeManBrother (Sep 11, 2017)

I'm definitely in the "pull the board and solder wick the old shit out; and replace" camp. But it's not my amp...
Chimed in again just to give a tip on draining filter caps: when the amp is on, and standby is off, so the guitar can produce sound; just flip the power switch off without hitting the standby first. This will quickly drain the voltage. Obviously unplug the amp and check everything with a multi meter; but it works quickly and you don't need to make little grounding leads with resistors going one by one.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 4, 2022)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> 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].
> 
> ...


I know it’s an old thread but with the 5150/6505 being different to the rest of the 5150’s what does that mean? Is after they changed the name to 6505 they are different? Or is it 5150’s that are different to the earlier ones? If so when did the change happen?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 4, 2022)

MatsA said:


> I know it’s an old thread but with the 5150/6505 being different to the rest of the 5150’s what does that mean? Is after they changed the name to 6505 they are different? Or is it 5150’s that are different to the earlier ones? If so when did the change happen?


It means the 5150 and 6505 are basically the same, but are different from the 5150 II/6505+.


----------



## sleewell (Jul 4, 2022)

People who have owned both: can a boost get the 6505 into the + territory? 

I really like my 6505 but have never played the 6505+.


I really don't mind the shared eq but i guess having them separate would be nice. I just love how organic and raw it sounds. Really fun amp to play.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 4, 2022)

Thanks!
Ok, but is there any difference between the 5150 and the 6505? Some say There are differencies some it was only a name change.


----------



## KailM (Jul 4, 2022)

MatsA said:


> Thanks!
> Ok, but is there any difference between the 5150 and the 6505? Some say There are differencies some it was only a name change.





Google Image Result for https://media3.giphy.com/media/6pJNYBYSMFod2/giphy.gif


----------



## KailM (Jul 4, 2022)

sleewell said:


> People who have owned both: can a boost get the 6505 into the + territory?
> 
> I really like my 6505 but have never played the 6505+.
> 
> ...



Yes, a boost will get it there on the lead channel, especially one that has some control over the amount of bass cut (you may have to cut a little more bass than a standard Tubescreamer does).

The green channels on both amps are completely different animals, however— really hard to get them to sound alike.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 4, 2022)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> It means the 5150 and 6505 are basically the same, but are different from the 5150 II/6505+.





Spaced Out Ace said:


> It means the 5150 and 6505 are basically the same, but are different from the 5150 II/6505+.


Thanks!
Ok, but is there any difference between the 5150 and the 6505? Some say There are differencies some it was only a name change.


----------



## youngthrasher9 (Jul 4, 2022)

MatsA said:


> Thanks!
> Ok, but is there any difference between the 5150 and the 6505? Some say There are differencies some it was only a name change.


It was only a name change and a difference in what brand of tubes came stock, and after this long the stock tubes probably aren’t / probably shouldn’t be in a used version of whatever you buy.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 4, 2022)

MatsA said:


> Thanks!
> Ok, but is there any difference between the 5150 and the 6505? Some say There are differencies some it was only a name change.


Honestly these days, who knows? 

There was supposed to be no difference. It was a name change because EVH owned the "5150" trademark. 

...then again, Peavey themselves decided to muddy the waters by claiming their new 6505II and 5150 1992 Editions are bulilt to the exact specs of the 5150/5150II, which goes against even what THEY said before about the 6505 sounding exactly like the 5150. 

I know Kyle Bull got a hold of a 6505II and compared it to a 6505+ and there were some differences.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 4, 2022)

sleewell said:


> People who have owned both: can a boost get the 6505 into the + territory?
> 
> I really like my 6505 but have never played the 6505+.
> 
> ...


Can probably get close with an EQ pedal in front. Dump some lows and boost some mids.


----------



## sevenfoxes (Jul 4, 2022)

Man, i hate the 6505+.

The 6505, on the other hand, is one of my all time favorite amps that I’ll never part with.


----------



## Deadpool_25 (Jul 4, 2022)

The 6505 is, for all intents and purposes, the same as the 5150. There are some minor differences like (IIRC) the transformers are a little different but “within a gnat’s ass.” I’ve had both and they’re the same as far as I can tell.

The 6505+ (I’ve had that too) seems significantly different. Other people have used it with great success and I’ve heard it sound amazing in recordings but I didn’t really like it very much. It was bad exactly, but I much preferred the rawness and powerful feel of the 6505 (which I still have).

I’d guess you could get them sounding similar with a boost and some EQ, but I didn’t try that so I’m not positive.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 5, 2022)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Honestly these days, who knows?
> 
> There was supposed to be no difference. It was a name change because EVH owned the "5150" trademark.
> 
> ...


So Peavey have released a 5150 1992 Edition and a 6505 II! I didn’t know that.


----------



## gunch (Jul 5, 2022)

sakeido said:


> 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



I've heard you can get it to sound pretty decent with a EQ infront to scoop the input mids


----------



## Deadpool_25 (Jul 5, 2022)

MatsA said:


> So Peavey have released a 5150 1992 Edition and a 6505 II! I didn’t know that.



They aren’t available yet but they’re supposedly on the way.



HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Honestly these days, who knows?
> 
> There was supposed to be no difference. It was a name change because EVH owned the "5150" trademark.
> 
> ...



I believe 1992 original’s significant difference is they apparently dug up Eddie’s favorite amp and/or transformers and had the new transformers built to those specs. And then there are a couple of creature comforts like a removable power cable and selectable voltage for the ability to use in varying countries. That’s pretty much it. Here is a portion of the official write up that talks about the amp a little. The info mirrors what I was told by someone at Peavey who would _definitely_ know the details. 


“The 6505 Series from Peavey returns in this exciting reissue with a modern design and new features while staying true to form.

Contrary to much folklore since the amplifier's inception, the recipe has remained virtually unchanged. However, over the course of time, component suppliers have experienced changes of ownership and changes to their manufacturing processes, things which can ultimately influence tone and unit-to-unit consistency.

We discovered some items had drifted. In particular, one of the most important items: the output transformer. The changes over the years resulted in a midrange that varied from amp to amp. That led us to develop a top-secret output transformer, made in an undisclosed location to mimic the magical crushing tone of the original series.

These reissues are true to form cosmetically and sonically.”


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 5, 2022)

sevenfoxes said:


> Man, i hate the 6505+.
> 
> The 6505, on the other hand, is one of my all time favorite amps that I’ll never part with.


Shows how tastes differ, because I prefer the 6505+. For my tastes, no boost required. And it's easier to get a clean tone with higher-output pickups.


gunch said:


> I've heard you can get it to sound pretty decent with a EQ infront to scoop the input mids



I think boosting mids would be more effect. Compared to the 6505/5150, it sounds like there's a mid spike going into the amp.


----------



## technomancer (Jul 5, 2022)

Deadpool_25 said:


> They aren’t available yet but they’re supposedly on the way.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe 1992 original’s significant difference is they apparently dug up Eddie’s favorite amp and/or transformers and had the new transformers built to those specs. And then there are a couple of creature comforts like a removable power cable and selectable voltage for the ability to use in varying countries. That’s pretty much it. Here is a portion of the official write up that talks about the amp a little. The info mirrors what I was told by someone at Peavey who would _definitely_ know the details.



Didn't somebody else say they were using the transformers from the Invective on these? If so that would seem to indicate some marketing hype for a simple business decision to lower production costs by making all of the related amps use the same transformers (higher volume of a part = lower costs).


----------



## Deadpool_25 (Jul 5, 2022)

technomancer said:


> Didn't somebody else say they were using the transformers from the Invective on these? If so that would seem to indicate some marketing hype for a simple business decision to lower production costs by making all of the related amps use the same transformers (higher volume of a part = lower costs).


Someone may have said that but I don’t think that’s the case. Unless the Invective transformer is based on that same old one. I don’t think so but I’m certainly not sure. 

With that said it wouldn’t shock me if, assuming the Invective’s OT isn’t currently the same, they start using that same tranny in Invectives moving forward.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 6, 2022)

Deadpool_25 said:


> They aren’t available yet but they’re supposedly on the way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks!
But can they really call it 5150 or will the 1992 Edition still be called 6505?


----------



## Deadpool_25 (Jul 6, 2022)

MatsA said:


> Thanks!
> But can they really call it 5150 or will the 1992 Edition still be called 6505?


It’s the 6505 1992 Original. 

EVH owns the rights to the 5150 name.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 6, 2022)

Deadpool_25 said:


> Someone may have said that but I don’t think that’s the case. Unless the Invective transformer is based on that same old one. I don’t think so but I’m certainly not sure.
> 
> With that said it wouldn’t shock me if, assuming the Invective’s OT isn’t currently the same, they start using that same tranny in Invectives moving forward.


I feel like I saw someone compare their Invective OT to Kyle's pictures and that wasn't the case.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 8, 2022)

Seems they’ve replaced it with the Invective transformer wich was based on what they thought was the best example of an older 5150 transformer.


----------



## Deadpool_25 (Jul 8, 2022)

MatsA said:


> Seems they’ve replaced it with the Invective transformer wich was based on what they thought was the best example of an older 5150 transformer.



Maybe the “tweaks” that came out of the conversations with Misha when building the Invective have been removed? Hmmm. Just a guess. I know the high amount of presence in the Invective can be an issue for some people.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 8, 2022)

Deadpool_25 said:


> Maybe the “tweaks” that came out of the conversations with Misha when building the Invective have been removed? Hmmm. Just a guess. I know the high amount of presence in the Invective can be an issue for some people.


I wouldn't be surprised, given how long it even too for the Invective to hit market.


----------



## MatsA (Jul 9, 2022)

Seems tube supply is what’s holding the new 6505’s release back.


----------

