Laney LX65R
Laney LX65R

Solid-State Combo Guitar Amp of the LX series

User Reviews: 41
    • Increase or decrease font size
    • Print
Keuck 06/02/2011

Laney LX65R : Keuck's user review

" Good enough amps to the stage"
4

65W transistor amp has

Connectivity:
At the front:
- Guitar input
- Entry 2 way footswitch (channel and reverb controls)
- Effects loop
- Auxiliary input (CD, MP3 ,...)
At the rear:
- Headphones ('ve never run with me but I do not use it)
- 8 Ohm speaker output

The amp has 2 channels (Clean and Drive)
The clean channel includes the usual setting (volume, bass, middle and treble.
The drive channel has the same EQ setting and more crunch.
An additional button called XTS provides a higher gain on the drive channel.
The amp also has a reverb

UTILIZATION

The configuration is very simple, you plug the guitar, the amp is turned and it went away.

The manual (which is not very useful to kind of amp) gives the use of each knob, qq explanation of the speaker output etqq example settings.

SOUNDS

I play punk rock, rock and occasionally a bit of metal, it is very suitable to style of play

The clean is very good I find, by setting the range of sounds is quite important.

At the channel distortion, it is very good as I used during my first year utilastion but after the amp for simplicity of wiring (1 cable coming to the amp instead of 2), j 'I opted for the use of pedal dist and I found the same sound with my pedals Fame Metal Massacre.

OVERALL OPINION

J'uilise this amp now for about 1 ½ years
Before that, I try an amp is brand fame who at the time seem to me not too bad. After having had this one, I realized that the clean sound of fame really was not terrible.
I now use the enclosure as mona mpli Fame 2nd speaker for this amp.

What I like most is its simplicity of use and simplicity to find the right sound, which certainly will not appeal to everyone but good sound even qd.

What I like least, not much, I find this amp very obviously it is not for every style, but is versatile enough for me.

The value for money seems to me correct.