I've owned both, a JSX will eat a Ironheart alive, especially for hard rock and metal playing. I had the IRT60, Which couldn't even hang with my 92' Peavey Ultra 120 teal stripe head. Which the JSX is from the same lineage just tweaked circuit design with resonance and Presence knobs.
@@untoldguitarist So the Iron heart is biased extremely cold from factory. Experimenting with tubes and having it biased hotter wakes it up a lot. Also, I'm not surprised your 60 watt didn't keep up with your 120 watt..... I bet you try the 120 watt Iron Heart, with a set of JJ and biased a bit hotter, and the outcome would be different.
@@JC-nu5io Even if it's set cold 🥶 I was still putting it up against a 1992 fixed biased Ultra teal stripe, that is set fixed bias is cold, from Peavey. That still out mixes that Laney. The Peavey will have more head room for sure, but also doesn't have depth and presence knobs either. People that think a JSX head sounds thin doesn't know how to dial in a active EQ amplifier. The original poster, literally had each knob set to lows 6, mids 6, highs 6, resonance 6 and Presence 6 🤦. Lack of knowledge of how to dial in a active EQ amplifier.
@untoldguitarist Most people do not know how to EQ and Amp. I'm telling you an Ironheart 120 properly biased and EQed will keep right up with that teal stripe. The 120 sits very well in a mix, from factory.
They all sounded good but the archon really shines here. The jsx definitely was the most fizzy/harsh, but I expected that. I have a decent amount of experience with it and it s a good amp. Never played the ironheart, but the Archon is more my cup of tea from the comparison I’ve heard. I own an Archon 100, myself.
I just got a JSX for a good price but I feel like it's missing something, does the Archon just have an overall better gain structure and easier to tweak? My EVH EL34 and PRS MT15 sound enormous compared to my JSX which makes no sense since 120w should have far more headroom
Because the OP dialed in awful. You have to turn on the efx loop and run the send and return volume levels wide open. Run the active EQ controls the mid range around 2 o clock, Resonance and Presence fairly high as well as the low end and highs. It will cut through like a knife and sound full and thick.
CatchiestAlarm working on it! Hoping to upload a ton more videos of all sorts of things once I finish my home studio after moving at the end of the month! Thanks for the kind words\m/
cool comaprison...i recommend you to turn the presence and resonance all the way down on the peavey jsx. it has active eq preamp section...so turn the bass and treble up instead pres and res and you will get the best results ;)
TheSoulflytriber Cool man! I would have loved to spend more time with the JSX. Belongs to a buddy of mine, very cool amp for sure. Thanks for checking it out.
The Laney sounded the most sludgey and muffled out of the 3....It's lower frequencies need a little help..The Archon is the definate winner here...Great demo Tom !
François-Joseph Guillaume I'm also thinking about buying a studio 15 later this year. I was considering the 60 watt but people have said that it is too loud for bedroom volume. If you get the studio please post how it's working out for you.
strangerhythm I'm trying to decide between an Ironheart and a H&K Tubemeister 36 or 40 but there is no place around here that has them. Whichever one I get I'll have to order it without playing it. Have you tried the Tubemeister amps and how would you compare them to the Laney stuff?
This is a comparison on the Ultra/ Lead channel of the JSX, the Crunch channel is warmer to my ears. With the built in noise gate set right and a good OD pedal the JSX owns at high volumes all day. The PRS gets thin at high volumes, The Laney is the only real contender to my ears.
The Archon is awesome. The Laney sounded sweet too. I was disappointed with JSX though. I have a chance to pick up a JSX half stack for $600 but it sounded so thin.
Steve L I just couldn't get anything I was super stoked on out of the JSX. I tweaked it for a day and this was about the best I could do haha. The other two I absolutely love. Thanks for the comment!
@@TomMcCormickGuitar You have to run a JSX head through Darker speakers. Eminence V12 Legends, Celestion K100's etc. They sound like absolute shit with V30's
Ah man I wish you would have used the Crunch channel on the JSX. I have the XXX II variant (pretty much the same amp) and I never use the Ultra channel for rythm, the Crunch channel is just better in all thinkable ways in my opinion. As for the comparison I think the Archon had the best sound, more organic and alive than JSX and Laney :)
Jonas Hjälmén the crunch channel on this just isn't bad at all, its just much more thin sounding than the Laney and Archon. Had to dime the gain to get it to sound close to these two. JSX definitely isn't my cup of tea..but it is a monster for lead stuff that's for sure! The XXX II is the newer model after satriani left Peavey Right?
That is correct. Joe Satriani left for Marshall and now Peavey still sells the amp as " Peavey XXX II" Although the amp is not at all like the original XXX so it's a bit confusing. About the crunch channel I myself don't find it thin but maybe that is the case when you compare it to other amps. But compared to the Ultra channel the highs are much less pronounced and I actually think it has a fuller tone and of course more "crunchy" and less saturated. Combine it with a distortion pedal and I get all the modern metal tones I need :)
Jonas Hjälmén hell yeah! I really wasn't a fan of the mid-range of the ultra channel. I wish I would have had more time to play around with the amp for sure.
Aah the midrange.. There is certainly a "mid-honk" going on that many people speak of and it is especially noticeable on the Ultra channel. The crunch is fine but on the ultra you really cant remove it which is annoying. One must learn to live with imperfections..
Great job done here on this comparison..I have an Archon 50 watt head and just ordered the Ironheart 60 head and matching cab..if I can get mine to sound how you have yours set here that would be awesome !
How's the Archon compared to the Ironheart? I see Archon 50s on reverb for under $1200 but have a chance to pick up an Ironheart 60 for $500 brand new locally.
I'm always surprised that people say the JSX sounds thin, it's a ballsy amp, the difference is in the cabinet, each amp needs a certain cabinet, the peavey cab with the 80 watt Celestions roars ! Plug into a greenback loaded cab and of course it sounds thin. Great sound is all about having all the right pieces. guitar, amp, and cabinet have to match up, otherwise, it's going to sound like shit
Thanks for this video dude. Why did you not use the Ironheart with the wattage on maximum? It will be squashing the signal and meaning the valves aren't opening right up. Sounds cool but just curious as to why for a sound comparison you chose to have it this way.
@@TomMcCormickGuitar yes I agree with that, sounds better at lower volumes with wattage down. Not sure why, maybe more saturation as the valves are still running hot.
@@TomMcCormickGuitar absolutely, for gigging when it's opened up it sounds excellent and better at louder volumes. Very versatile amp. Having a lead / rhythm/ clean mega useful too.
Hey great stuff! I just got my IRT60h delivered yesterday. The way you have yours sounds great. Are the knobs shown set how you recorded this? Are you running any boost through it in the recording? Thanks!
wow my laney ironheart doesnt even sound close to this without bass cut before the input. maybe because im using seymour duncan JB. but with my setup i need to cut the bass before it enters the amp, if not i will get fuzzy less defined fizzy distortion.
thanks for your prompt reply sir. Noted with thanks. mine still comes with stock Ruby tubes. i also found out that the amp will sound more "open up" with added clarity and pick attack at volume 8-10. I'm glad that the amp didn't turns muddy at high volume.
Ironheart sounds more mix friendly than others but overall it sounds boring. I think it's one of those amps which is built to sound good in the mix and perform consistently in live and studio environment instead of being interesting. It sounds good and balanced across all frequencies but has no standout character or trait to its tonality. The Archon has a nice sound signature. It's like a tamer and tighter take on the classic 5150 tone. Its tonality doesn't sit as perfectly in the mix as the Ironheart but it sounds more interesting. As for JSX, it sounds too ratty and harsh.
The shootout is great, but here again i notice why I sold the Laney , the jsx, and will never get an Archon. I really dont like amps that have this rough topend gainstructure while you play palm muted. But the comparison is great 🤙🤙🤙
Sounds like you need a different amp. Plenty of other videos with lots more gain than this. Learn how to use your equipment or get a fresh set of ears.
The Ironheart ALL DAY LONG Y'ALL******
*This is an unbiased opinion. ;-)
Laney Amplification 🤘🤘🤘
Laney Amplification thanks for checking it out fellas
amazing how good the laney sounds with a lower price. it is also the warmest amp of the three.
As a jsx3 owner I can tell you he had the presence and resonance dialed back, mids down , and treble up. That Amp really is a beasty tone machine.
I've owned both, a JSX will eat a Ironheart alive, especially for hard rock and metal playing. I had the IRT60, Which couldn't even hang with my 92' Peavey Ultra 120 teal stripe head. Which the JSX is from the same lineage just tweaked circuit design with resonance and Presence knobs.
@@untoldguitarist So the Iron heart is biased extremely cold from factory. Experimenting with tubes and having it biased hotter wakes it up a lot. Also, I'm not surprised your 60 watt didn't keep up with your 120 watt..... I bet you try the 120 watt Iron Heart, with a set of JJ and biased a bit hotter, and the outcome would be different.
@@JC-nu5io Even if it's set cold 🥶 I was still putting it up against a 1992 fixed biased Ultra teal stripe, that is set fixed bias is cold, from Peavey. That still out mixes that Laney. The Peavey will have more head room for sure, but also doesn't have depth and presence knobs either. People that think a JSX head sounds thin doesn't know how to dial in a active EQ amplifier. The original poster, literally had each knob set to lows 6, mids 6, highs 6, resonance 6 and Presence 6 🤦. Lack of knowledge of how to dial in a active EQ amplifier.
@untoldguitarist Most people do not know how to EQ and Amp. I'm telling you an Ironheart 120 properly biased and EQed will keep right up with that teal stripe. The 120 sits very well in a mix, from factory.
They all sounded good but the archon really shines here. The jsx definitely was the most fizzy/harsh, but I expected that. I have a decent amount of experience with it and it s a good amp. Never played the ironheart, but the Archon is more my cup of tea from the comparison I’ve heard. I own an Archon 100, myself.
Brandon Bryson I agree man. I own the Ironheart and archon..the Archon just has a really unique and special sound.
I just got a JSX for a good price but I feel like it's missing something, does the Archon just have an overall better gain structure and easier to tweak? My EVH EL34 and PRS MT15 sound enormous compared to my JSX which makes no sense since 120w should have far more headroom
Because the OP dialed in awful. You have to turn on the efx loop and run the send and return volume levels wide open. Run the active EQ controls the mid range around 2 o clock, Resonance and Presence fairly high as well as the low end and highs. It will cut through like a knife and sound full and thick.
You have really good content I don’t understand how your channel is so small!
CatchiestAlarm working on it! Hoping to upload a ton more videos of all sorts of things once I finish my home studio after moving at the end of the month! Thanks for the kind words\m/
dude thats my favorite thrash rhythm ive ever heard
No doubt,I have ben humming it since i have heard it.
I
Sokos Dimitris me too man!
cool comaprison...i recommend you to turn the presence and resonance all the way down on the peavey jsx. it has active eq preamp section...so turn the bass and treble up instead pres and res and you will get the best results ;)
TheSoulflytriber Cool man! I would have loved to spend more time with the JSX. Belongs to a buddy of mine, very cool amp for sure. Thanks for checking it out.
PRS > Peavey > Laney but boy oh boy does that JSX sound soooo good
PRS sounds best to my ears in this demo 👍🏻
I am starting to like Ironheart more and more. The price is great. The sound is great. I also like that PRS sound.
Dude your videos are so good sounding.
Thanks! Need to get back at it and post some more.
Great Demo !
Cool riff'n too
The archon seems just a little muddy. The Peavy is the thinnest sounding. The laney I personally think sounds the best from the other two.
These clips I like the JSX for sure. Archon is a little too dark
Was thinking the same thing
The Laney sounded the most sludgey and muffled out of the 3....It's lower frequencies need a little help..The Archon is the definate winner here...Great demo Tom !
For the price, the irt is just unbeatable
François-Joseph Guillaume they are great amps. Never had an issue with mine.
Tom McCormick thanks for sharing your expérience, i was actually thinking of buying the irt studio
François-Joseph Guillaume I'm also thinking about buying a studio 15 later this year. I was considering the 60 watt but people have said that it is too loud for bedroom volume. If you get the studio please post how it's working out for you.
We love you ;-)
strangerhythm I'm trying to decide between an Ironheart and a H&K Tubemeister 36 or 40 but there is no place around here that has them. Whichever one I get I'll have to order it without playing it. Have you tried the Tubemeister amps and how would you compare them to the Laney stuff?
This is a comparison on the Ultra/ Lead channel of the JSX, the Crunch channel is warmer to my ears. With the built in noise gate set right and a good OD pedal the JSX owns at high volumes all day. The PRS gets thin at high volumes, The Laney is the only real contender to my ears.
The Archon is awesome. The Laney sounded sweet too. I was disappointed with JSX though. I have a chance to pick up a JSX half stack for $600 but it sounded so thin.
Steve L I just couldn't get anything I was super stoked on out of the JSX. I tweaked it for a day and this was about the best I could do haha. The other two I absolutely love. Thanks for the comment!
Jsx sounds like trash through v30s it's very speaker picky
@@TomMcCormickGuitar You have to run a JSX head through Darker speakers. Eminence V12 Legends, Celestion K100's etc. They sound like absolute shit with V30's
Ironheart.. I have it, and it is the 120. Perfect metal amp - although it is going in the shop tomorrow. Stopped working after three months. : (
Sadly I've never plugged into the 120. The 60 never felt fat enough for my tastes, I gotta try it sometime!
Good comparison and video Subbed
love it
Ah man I wish you would have used the Crunch channel on the JSX. I have the XXX II variant (pretty much the same amp) and I never use the Ultra channel for rythm, the Crunch channel is just better in all thinkable ways in my opinion. As for the comparison I think the Archon had the best sound, more organic and alive than JSX and Laney :)
Jonas Hjälmén the crunch channel on this just isn't bad at all, its just much more thin sounding than the Laney and Archon. Had to dime the gain to get it to sound close to these two. JSX definitely isn't my cup of tea..but it is a monster for lead stuff that's for sure! The XXX II is the newer model after satriani left Peavey Right?
***but shortly after this video two preamp tubes we're replaced. So I dont think this is the best sound I could have gotten out of the JSX
That is correct. Joe Satriani left for Marshall and now Peavey still sells the amp as " Peavey XXX II" Although the amp is not at all like the original XXX so it's a bit confusing.
About the crunch channel I myself don't find it thin but maybe that is the case when you compare it to other amps. But compared to the Ultra channel the highs are much less pronounced and I actually think it has a fuller tone and of course more "crunchy" and less saturated. Combine it with a distortion pedal and I get all the modern metal tones I need :)
Jonas Hjälmén hell yeah! I really wasn't a fan of the mid-range of the ultra channel. I wish I would have had more time to play around with the amp for sure.
Aah the midrange.. There is certainly a "mid-honk" going on that many people speak of and it is especially noticeable on the Ultra channel. The crunch is fine but on the ultra you really cant remove it which is annoying.
One must learn to live with imperfections..
Great job done here on this comparison..I have an Archon 50 watt head and just ordered the Ironheart 60 head and matching cab..if I can get mine to sound how you have yours set here that would be awesome !
How's the Archon compared to the Ironheart? I see Archon 50s on reverb for under $1200 but have a chance to pick up an Ironheart 60 for $500 brand new locally.
Good job man!
Iron Heat and Archon sounded cleaner to me. I just prefered the Archon, it sounds more round, wider and the botton end is killer.
Got ironheart, awesome :)
Laney sounds great
its all about personal taste
The ironheart wins all day long
Ironheart for me
Ironheart surprised me, but I liked the JSX the most. Liked all 3, though
Laney and PRS, both sounded equally great for me. Peavey is a bit too skoopy.
I'm always surprised that people say the JSX sounds thin, it's a ballsy amp, the difference is in the cabinet, each amp needs a certain cabinet, the peavey cab with the 80 watt Celestions roars ! Plug into a greenback loaded cab and of course it sounds thin. Great sound is all about having all the right pieces. guitar, amp, and cabinet have to match up, otherwise, it's going to sound like shit
Yeah they are definitely cool amps, my least favorite out of this bunch for sure.
Archon, baby
I agree 😀
Laney ftw
They all sound good chuggin. But which one cuts through the mix better during some solos
3. Peavey
2. PRS
1. Laney
Archon for the win. Easily.
Thanks for this video dude. Why did you not use the Ironheart with the wattage on maximum? It will be squashing the signal and meaning the valves aren't opening right up. Sounds cool but just curious as to why for a sound comparison you chose to have it this way.
Sounds better at lower volumes this way
@@TomMcCormickGuitar yes I agree with that, sounds better at lower volumes with wattage down. Not sure why, maybe more saturation as the valves are still running hot.
@@trislineker it's one of those amps that needs to be CRANKED at full wattage to sound great. I'm glad they included the attenuation knob.
@@TomMcCormickGuitar absolutely, for gigging when it's opened up it sounds excellent and better at louder volumes. Very versatile amp. Having a lead / rhythm/ clean mega useful too.
Hey great stuff! I just got my IRT60h delivered yesterday. The way you have yours sounds great. Are the knobs shown set how you recorded this? Are you running any boost through it in the recording? Thanks!
I also have a laney ironheart, I recommend that you use it with an overdrive as a booster in front
So the JSX or a vacuum cleaner...... tough choice, they sound so close.
🤣
Laney for me
Im pretty sure you could have dialed the jsx better -maybe some more bass
Archon all day. Night and day difference. A lot more full sound and the lows are very rich.
every clip I've heard of the Archon makes it sound a notch higher than either of the other two.
wow my laney ironheart doesnt even sound close to this without bass cut before the input. maybe because im using seymour duncan JB. but with my setup i need to cut the bass before it enters the amp, if not i will get fuzzy less defined fizzy distortion.
MIRAGE FR hmm that's very interesting. This one has JJ tubes across-the-board, that could also be a part of it.
thanks for your prompt reply sir. Noted with thanks. mine still comes with stock Ruby tubes. i also found out that the amp will sound more "open up" with added clarity and pick attack at volume 8-10. I'm glad that the amp didn't turns muddy at high volume.
MIRAGE FR in my experience also, they just sound best when you push the shit out of them. Cranked it really opens up and sounds great.
Ironheart sounds more mix friendly than others but overall it sounds boring. I think it's one of those amps which is built to sound good in the mix and perform consistently in live and studio environment instead of being interesting. It sounds good and balanced across all frequencies but has no standout character or trait to its tonality.
The Archon has a nice sound signature. It's like a tamer and tighter take on the classic 5150 tone. Its tonality doesn't sit as perfectly in the mix as the Ironheart but it sounds more interesting. As for JSX, it sounds too ratty and harsh.
Laney!
The shootout is great, but here again i notice why I sold the Laney , the jsx, and will never get an Archon. I really dont like amps that have this rough topend gainstructure while you play palm muted. But the comparison is great 🤙🤙🤙
The Laney is alright, the PRS is boxy and dark, the JSX is the best of the lot.
Tom , I can't get that sound from Laney when I put same settings as shown. Any secrets please?
What cabinet are you using? What speakers are in it?
Pick like a man ;)
@@TomMcCormickGuitar hey Tom :) what speakers are you using in the PRS cab?
@@TomMcCormickGuitar nice demo! I like the Ironheart most!
@@krissymf v30s
JSX all the way!
archon
#teamirt
JSX ❤
Laney
Laney
Laney, then PRS,
JSX sounds weird here but its actually the tittiest amp of the 3
peavey more bass and sharper high and mid scooped laney and prs very similar tone with mid emphasis tone
Iron heart...
PRS>Laney>Peavey
Low wattage AMP peavey>prs>laney
Laney>PRS>Peavey
Peavey les rompe el culo..!!!!
ARCHON>IRHT>JSX
my laney at this lvl of gain boosted by maxon dont have this amount of gain.please stop fooling people around
Sounds like you need a different amp. Plenty of other videos with lots more gain than this. Learn how to use your equipment or get a fresh set of ears.