Aceldama Posted May 5, 2008 Posted May 5, 2008 Hey guys. Have a line on a Studio 22 with EQ from 1988. Per the seller, the EQ was an option when he bought the amp and they didn't have a 22+ back then.What's the difference between this amp and the Studio 22+? Was the + just to signify the EQ? Also, what's a good price on these?
Lockbody Posted May 5, 2008 Posted May 5, 2008 Hey guys. Have a line on a Studio 22 with EQ from 1988. Per the seller, the EQ was an option when he bought the amp and they didn't have a 22+ back then.What's the difference between this amp and the Studio 22+? Was the + just to signify the EQ? Also, what's a good price on these?The big difference is the + has a Lead Master volume control to balance between the channels. I don't know about the regular 22, but a + just recently went for $575 on ebay which is right there for what they normally go for.I've been doing a lot of reading about Boogie combos lately, and some people say the non + sounds better.
cmatthes Posted May 5, 2008 Posted May 5, 2008 Mine is an '89 (I pretty sure - that's when it was ordered, and I've had it since it was new). It is the .22+ (w/Master Vol and EQ). I don't know that there is any sound difference between the regular .22 and the .22+, but I found the M.V. made it a lot more usable for me. It's a helluva lot of amp for $600!
Boogie1 Posted May 5, 2008 Posted May 5, 2008 All I know is, I have been talking to more and more people that have these Studio 22's, and heard a great one live this weekend. I have determined that I must have one immediately! (Whenever I find a spare $5-600 bucks laying around, that is!)That will be my next piece of GAS!
Aceldama Posted May 5, 2008 Author Posted May 5, 2008 All I know is, I have been talking to more and more people that have these Studio 22's, and heard a great one live this weekend. I have determined that I must have one immediately! (Whenever I find a spare $5-600 bucks laying around, that is!)That will be my next piece of GAS!Boogie1, fellow Arizonite, please see your PM box...
harry65 Posted May 5, 2008 Posted May 5, 2008 i had one up til a few months ago, it was the absolute warmest amp i've ever owned, real earthy tones, the difference between the 22 and the 22+ is the 22 you have to have the footswitch to access the lead channel,can't access it without the pedal, the + had a pull lead volume on the amp, great amp, you should be able to pick a nice one up for $450 - $550, imho the nicest small amp they ever made was a dc-3 for what it's worth..................................
Jorge Posted May 6, 2008 Posted May 6, 2008 I had a sour experience buying one from a guy here in the HFC (first time this happened to me in about 10 years of hanging out in the HFC), can be seen here..That series had different versions, and I certainly have not tried all the others, but, to me, the amp was nice, but...not "that" nice. Certainly not at Mesa DC-3 levels, which can be had for a little more (and is much heavier, as well), but are, IMHO, much better amps.
Caddie Posted May 6, 2008 Posted May 6, 2008 Hey guys. Have a line on a Studio 22 with EQ from 1988. Per the seller, the EQ was an option when he bought the amp and they didn't have a 22+ back then. What's the difference between this amp and the Studio 22+? Was the + just to signify the EQ? Also, what's a good price on these? Not casting any doubt on the sincerity or good intentions of the preceding respondents, but call or email Mesa re the confusing evolution of the 22+ . It gets weird; 22, 22 w/MV, 22 w or w/o EQ, 22+ w or w/o EQ, Whopper w or w/o cheese & hold the mayo......contact Mesa. You can also go to the Mesa website to get the manuals. http://www.mesaboogie.com/manuals/user_manuals.htmfwiw I own this 22+ and this DC-3 . The control setup is a little easier to deal with on the DC-3 (no pot sharing), but IMHO the 22+, once you dial it in to your taste its a touch more rich in the tone category. That being said, maybe a tube upgrade on my DC-3 would change the outcome. Either way, the diff in tone between the 2 amps is waaaayyyysmall. Unless I A/B them, I cannot hear a diff. Yeah, they are in the "small, lo watt" category. Uh huh, Mesa knows how to squeeze lotsa volume out. These little beasts are LOUD! You really can't go wrong with either one.
serial Posted May 6, 2008 Posted May 6, 2008 fwiw I own this 22+ I'm not usually prone to AAS, but this one's got me GASSing! Beautiful.
stonge Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 raising this one back up from the dead for a question or two to those who own(ed) one of these:I just got back from roadtesting a clean 22+ (non-EQ) from 1990 - all stock in good working order with a fresh set of EH EL84s. I used my 96 Daytona (alder, all stock) and it sounded great for clean sounds to just-starting-to-grind-a-little-bit. The lead sound was good for that over-the-top Santana sound (you could hear the harmonic feedback starting at conversational volumes), but I just could not dial in anything between the clean and Santana sounds - nothing remotely resembling crunchy goodness. I'll admit that a Daytona is not a crunchberry beast by a long shot, but there really wasn't anything between slightly angry SRV and Carlos. Even rolling off the gains and volume pot on the guitar didn't really tame the lead channel (or provide something with punch).To those of you who own(ed) these, whaddaya do for crunch sound? Pedals? I tried working through the recommended settings from the downloadable manual for the 22+, but nothing really seemed to change the basic nature of the lead channel. Was the Daytona just the wrong guitar for this amp?For reference, I use a Mark IIB and a Quadpreamp/stereo 2:90 rig and these have the full range covered (although both are a little loud for living room practice levels). I've played Boogies for years, so I like the basic tone but this amp just didn't quite get me (it was a good deal, and I almost bought it just for the clean sounds but I just couldn't pull the trigger on this one). mrs stonge sure was confused when I walked back in the house and handed her the money for the stash fund ("you didn't buy it?")
Punkavenger Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 raising this one back up from the dead for a question or two to those who own(ed) one of these: I just got back from roadtesting a clean 22+ (non-EQ) from 1990 - all stock in good working order with a fresh set of EH EL84s. I used my 96 Daytona (alder, all stock) and it sounded great for clean sounds to just-starting-to-grind-a-little-bit. The lead sound was good for that over-the-top Santana sound (you could hear the harmonic feedback starting at conversational volumes), but I just could not dial in anything between the clean and Santana sounds - nothing remotely resembling crunchy goodness. I'll admit that a Daytona is not a crunchberry beast by a long shot, but there really wasn't anything between slightly angry SRV and Carlos. Even rolling off the gains and volume pot on the guitar didn't really tame the lead channel (or provide something with punch). To those of you who own(ed) these, whaddaya do for crunch sound? Pedals? I tried working through the recommended settings from the downloadable manual for the 22+, but nothing really seemed to change the basic nature of the lead channel. Was the Daytona just the wrong guitar for this amp? For reference, I use a Mark IIB and a Quadpreamp/stereo 2:90 rig and these have the full range covered (although both are a little loud for living room practice levels). I've played Boogies for years, so I like the basic tone but this amp just didn't quite get me (it was a good deal, and I almost bought it just for the clean sounds but I just couldn't pull the trigger on this one). mrs stonge sure was confused when I walked back in the house and handed her the money for the stash fund ("you didn't buy it?") I own Caddies (the one that was above I believe). From what I've gathered the 22+ is the one to have ... and the EQ is indispensable for getting the sound right. master volume is important too. I had a milder preamp tube installed in the A1 position ... it sounded a little too harsh otherwise ... A quarter turn on any of the controls will make a difference in sound so you have to be crafty. My FM special sounds insanely good through this amp (the fillmore bridge is working really well in this combo) ... Daytona sounds good too but you have to tweak the controls a bit. This could be difficult for a quick guitar change in between songs on stage if you were so inclined. Caddie said the hardwood cabinet made this particular amp sound warmer and I have no reason not to believe him. Pedals arent working for me in this instance ... too much gain/feedback. What I do is put the lead master on 0 or 1 and then use the pedal to switch over to rock out ... any more and its just too much. Insanely great sounding amp ... you just have to be patient and be willing to work with the controls. And since my amp tech went through it and cleaned everything and replaced a few tubes ... absolutely rock solid. no weird noises or anything unpleasant whatsoever. (except my playing ) Someday I'll pick up a matchless or soldano ... but until I have an extra two grand lying around this will be more than fine make sure you get the pedals with the amp ... they are important! Caddie sent me a diagram for a mod but my amp guy didn't recommend doing it ... didn't want to be responsible if it didn't work out. Sounds like it would work though and maybe someday I'll try it.
Steve Haynie Posted July 22, 2009 Posted July 22, 2009 I bought my Studio 22 with the EQ option in December of 1986. It has been a good amp, but it seems to eat tubes faster than other amps.
cmatthes Posted July 22, 2009 Posted July 22, 2009 Mine's been pretty good - only had it re-tubed once (by BCR Greg) about 10 years ago. It sounded fantastic afterwards and ever since.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.