5153 revisions

Well, he stated that there were mainly changes in the switching matrix etc, nothing that influences tone.
Jerry (FJA) said he had two different revisions not he table which had major differences in the circuits...
So I'm not entirely sure how much I wanna rely on the "official" statement, after all Mesa kept claiming that the 3 ch and 2ch recs sounded identical and they had the same circuit:)
 
never even knew about different revisions until just now,(I just checked mine is a REV D).... about a year ago we had 3 EVH heads in here side by side for an album and mine sounded different than the other two the band had. We all preferred mine even after a tube change in one of the other ones. We just figured maybe the other two were a little used and abused on the road,Now I'm wondering If they were different revisions.

just talking about the high gain channel
 
the one I had sounded a little beefier in the low end and almost seemed to have more gain. kinda like the tubes were starting to wear out in the older heads (but they still sounded different even after the tube change).....wasn't a super huge difference but enough to where all 3 of us had a clear preference for the one head.
 
Oh god here we go... The beginning of another dramatic soga of an amp that certain "revisions" sound far superior, become legendary, and sought after years down the road... Lol I love it...
 
Interesting. Maybe this is explains why I thought the 100w 5150 III head was amazing when I tried it when it first came out, and the one I played a few weeks ago was kinda boring... Hmmm....
 
Lasse I know, I'm just being sarcastic... With all the amps with this type of saga( 5150 block letter vs sig, recto revisions, bogner ubers, and lets not even dive into fenders or marshalls) I just see the comedy in that, I'm sure you do too... Some of these revisions are much bigger Internet legends than they are reality though. I agree though especially with the rectos, the difference is quite big.