#1
Hey Im going to be getting a new amp sometime soon I will be using it for gigs and band practice, I have a Jackson DKMG 81/85 active pups I play Metal(Older Metallica,Maiden, Disturbed) Iv been looking at these two amps B-52 at 112 and the randall rx120rh. I will also be using the amp to record.
Thanks.
#2
Try them out and decide for yourself.
I don't give a shit if you listen to me or not
#3
At-112, no question in my opinion. I've played a couple and think they sound fantastic.
#5
Try them out but off the top of my head, I say take the tube amp.

The B-52 AT112 is a 60 watts tube amp.
60 tube watts is plenty loud for most applications.
Probably as loud as the 120 watt solid state Randall.
It also should have a better tone.
For a 200-400 people venue you're going to need to mic anyway.


But, once again, try them both out.
Randall is a much more established company than B-52.
Last edited by MT in Austin at Feb 7, 2009,
#6
Yea I will try them out but my problem is (I live in Canada) and Most music stores I would have to special order both amps and they usually make you pay the shipping and handling (bastards lol)
#7
I would agree with going tube, but you may want to look into what other people have said about them. If memory serves, some of those b-52 tube amps got some bad reviews.
#8
Quote by assfacethegreat
I would agree with going tube, but you may want to look into what other people have said about them. If memory serves, some of those b-52 tube amps got some bad reviews.



Mainly overheating with the first run, it was sorted out after that. That's just concerning the bad reviews on reliability. Now, I'm sure there are bad reviews on the tone solely because not everyone is gonna like how every amp sounds.
I don't give a shit if you listen to me or not
#9
I would like a tube amp to bring out the emg's but Im leaning more toward the randall unless there are decent tube half stacks for around $600 ish
#10
Quote by jacksonuser123
I would like a tube amp to bring out the emg's but Im leaning more toward the randall unless there are decent tube half stacks for around $600 ish


theres no point in choosing an amp over another because its a halfstack. the randall is a bit too fizzy and cheap sounding compared to the B-52. plus, the b-52 is probably just as loud, if not louder, than the randall, and when turned up it will sound BETTER as opposed to worse.
periphery/bulb!

gear:
Ibanez RG7321 w/ D-sonic in bridge

Peavey 5150 mk ii & b52 4x12 cab

line 6 podxt for recording

Quote by AsOneIStand
Head and Cab for $130? You don't need a head and cabinet, you need a psychological examination.
#11
Peavey Windsor with an OD?
Also, can you look used?
Quote by Cathbard
If all you had to go on was the forum you'd think a Decimator could cure noise caused by dodgey stage lighting and restock the ocean's population of sperm whales
#12
Quote by shadow__666
Peavey Windsor with an OD?
Also, can you look used?


yeah, i saw this peavey ultra head at my used shop for 250 bucks, and if he got his hands on a decent 2x12 under 350, that would be a good quarterstack that blows the randall and the b-52 away
periphery/bulb!

gear:
Ibanez RG7321 w/ D-sonic in bridge

Peavey 5150 mk ii & b52 4x12 cab

line 6 podxt for recording

Quote by AsOneIStand
Head and Cab for $130? You don't need a head and cabinet, you need a psychological examination.
#13
Yea basically im looking for the best (tube or non tube) amp that sounds great loud for gigs it doesnt HAVE to be a half stack
#14
get the peavey ultra 60 head thats on ebay, the bids at 54 bucks and theres a bit less than three days left (i cant post ebay links apparently), plus an avatar 2x12 cabinet.
periphery/bulb!

gear:
Ibanez RG7321 w/ D-sonic in bridge

Peavey 5150 mk ii & b52 4x12 cab

line 6 podxt for recording

Quote by AsOneIStand
Head and Cab for $130? You don't need a head and cabinet, you need a psychological examination.
#15
Quote by nutinpwnsgibson
get the peavey ultra 60 head thats on ebay, the bids at 54 bucks and theres a bit less than three days left (i cant post ebay links apparently), plus an avatar 2x12 cabinet.



I was under the impression you couldn't post your own ebay links, but for the sake of suggesting gear it was fine.

Either way, an ultra would definitely be a good amp for what you're after.
I don't give a shit if you listen to me or not
#18
you wouldnt necessarily need a cab if you got a combo, i was just trying to suggest an ultra. if you cant find an ultra on ebay though, go with the b-52, and maybe later on you could do a little speaker swap.
periphery/bulb!

gear:
Ibanez RG7321 w/ D-sonic in bridge

Peavey 5150 mk ii & b52 4x12 cab

line 6 podxt for recording

Quote by AsOneIStand
Head and Cab for $130? You don't need a head and cabinet, you need a psychological examination.
#19
Quote by jacksonuser123
Hey Im going to be getting a new amp sometime soon I will be using it for gigs and band practice, I have a Jackson DKMG 81/85 active pups I play Metal(Older Metallica,Maiden, Disturbed) Iv been looking at these two amps B-52 at 112 and the randall rx120rh. I will also be using the amp to record.
Thanks.



go with the randall i own its amazing lots of awsome bass and gain should have enough for you espically with 81 85 emg if not simply use a cheap little boss metal zone or something turn the gain off eq flat at 5 and turn the level up it will give you a gain boost which is really nice. but this amp is load and sounds great you can get almost any tone and i havent heard it clip yet but the highest i have had it is 7 which is really really LOUD.
#20
Quote by nutinpwnsgibson
theres no point in choosing an amp over another because its a halfstack. the randall is a bit too fizzy and cheap sounding compared to the B-52. plus, the b-52 is probably just as loud, if not louder, than the randall, and when turned up it will sound BETTER as opposed to worse.



bugera combo perhaps?
Member of The 7 String Legion


Peavey Triple X Head
Mahieu 4x12 Cab (celestion g12t-75)
Gibson Vixen
Schecter C-1 Classic
Various Pedals, and Guitars.