Archon 100 Just Replaced My Other Amps

elvis

Hamfisted String Banger
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
2,254
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, CA
I have been looking for a LONG time for an amp that has that perfect balance of big, tight lows, round highs and lots of midrange harmonics. I finally tried the Archon and it is fantastic. Add to that the fact that you really don't have to dial it in. This is the easiest amp I've ever used. I've been through several along the way, but none of them got me quite where the Archon does. Great for hard rock AND classic rock with a modern feel. My SC245 just thunders through it. Drop D rock has all that great chewiness it's supposed to. The clean channel is super-clean.

I am using it with a G System and also tried an FX8. Works very nicely, no noise from the FX loop.

I am absolutely kicking myself that I didn't try it sooner, or take PRS amps more seriously.
 
Sweet! It's fantastic when you find a great amp, and even sweeter that it's a PRS (I am a huge fan of PRS amps).
 
I was struggling to get my "signature tone" out of my Archon so I was keeping my 100w (brand that shall not be named here) around... until yesterday. I started matching each dial, number for number on each amp and bingo! The Archon is my new #1 amplifier! I still want to get an HXDA but the Archon is a lot more versatile than I thought it was. (Note: In my case, I switched out the 6L6 tubes for some Mullard EL34 tubes.) I've got two more amps for sale, including a 50 version of my former #1 amp.
 
How is the voicing on the clean channel on the Archon? It sounds pretty bright and sparkly to me, even more so than the 2 Channel H/Custom 50. Not that there's anything wrong with either flavor, just curious.
 
So far I have found it to be very clean, but not very sparkly. Compared to my other amps, it's a bit dry. I assume I can dial it better with time, and its certainly good enough.
 
So far I have found it to be very clean, but not very sparkly. Compared to my other amps, it's a bit dry. I assume I can dial it better with time, and its certainly good enough.

It's funny, back in the day -- I'm talkin' late 60s-early 70s here (yes, I'm old) -- we'd pick an amp by going to a store, having them haul out, say, all their Fender Bassman heads, we'd play through them, and they'd all sound just a little different. In my case, I'd pick the one that sounded the best to me, put the cover on it, pay for the amp, and walk out the store with it thinking I'd run the racks and found the "good one."

Of course, with the hand wiring, there were (and are) differences in individual amps, and no two transformers, pots, or tube sets were exactly alike. Over the last 25 years of being a studio rat, one thing I've learned is the difference that the tubes that were, and are, put in the amps can make. You probably know this.

I've done subtle and not-so-subtle changes in the character of my amps with tube selections, so that might be worth trying if you haven't rolled tubes before, and you want a little more sparkle.

My stock PRS preamp tubes have mostly been JJs (I'm an HXDA and DG30 single channel amp guy; the DG30 came with NOS BRIMAR tubes in V1 and V3 because it was an Experience run, but I've had a couple of HXDAs, first the 50, now the 30), and I've found that the JJs have a nice amount of gain and the good ones are relatively noise-free, but they also vary quite a bit from tube to tube. I've gone the NOS route with my amps to varying degrees over the years, and have found the results worthwhile. Sometimes, of course, an amp will sound better with the original tubes, but sometimes there's a real improvement in the tone of the amps with NOS - or at least, the result is closer to what I like.

As an example, changing the preamp tubes in one of my Two-Rocks a few years ago from the stock Chinese NOS that came in the amp to RCAs completely changed the clean tones. And recently, I put an NOS Mullard in the V1 of my HXDA30, and it immediately sounded warmer and more buttery than it did with the stock JJ (I wanted that, as opposed to more brightness). At the same time I also ordered some new JJs that were tested and measured for microphonics, gain, and matched triodes for the other positions, and really, the whole tone of the amp went up a notch -- and it was great to start with.
 
Last edited:
I agree that tubes can make a huge difference. I will likely roll some in this amp eventually for fun, but at the moment my main reason for getting this amp is the lead channel, which I use 95% of the time, and is perfect for what I want. The clean channel sounds very good, so it's good enough.
 
Hey Elvis! Was it my post on the grailtone board about cheating on my rectifiers that got you to try the archon? Lol
 
Hey Elvis! Was it my post on the grailtone board about cheating on my rectifiers that got you to try the archon? Lol

Ha!

No, I've been trying lots of amps. I have a Shiva as well.

I thought the RA was kind of a heavier Shiva, and I was using it that way. I got great tones from it, but I never got it where I really wanted it with my band. Surprisingly, I saw a Journey vid and Neal had a modern tone that I didn't expect. I found a rig rundown and he was playing the Archon. I checked out every vid I could find on the Archon and it sounded like what I wanted, and the claim that everyone uses it with controls at noon intrigued me. I bought one blind, had it shipped from the East Coast, plugged it in and loved it.

In my band we play classic rock like Journey and modern rock like Sixx AM and Halestorm. The Archon does both. It just rips. Sounds huge with my SC245 (though I did put a set of Cold Sweats in it...)
 
Last edited:
Played the Archon with my band for the first time tonight. It sounded pretty good. Then I turned it up and it really opened up. The tone and dynamics were unbelievable. I wish I'd gotten one when they first came out. It is everything I'd hoped it would be.

More news on the clean channel. I had been running it with the mids down, which I am in the habit of for clean channels. They tend to sound a bit too round for me with the mids up. Nonetheless, I wnet back to "everything at noon" and it got a lot chimey-er. I wouldn't call it sparkly, but chimey. Nice. I still need to play with it.

Incidentally, I had read a lot about loop problems. I have found none - no noise, no weirdness. AND, there is very little bleed around the loop. My GS has the built-in tuner in the loop and usually I can't use it because amp bleed means tuning is quiet-ish, but not silent. Using the GS tuner with the Archon works really well.
 
Last edited:
Archons with the noisy loop will be fixed by PRS free of charge and Archons produced after Oct/Nov 2014 already have the "fix" in place. The value of this amp is downright insane! I am honestly surprised how cheap the archon is compared to other PRS amps, but you won't find me complaining about the dollar/value ratio!
 
Elvis, I welcomed you in the other thread, now I come in this one and find out why you are here. Congrats on that Archon. Given what you've had and played, you just trippled my interest in one,and I was already looking everywhere around for one to try. But given that you've recently been through the other 2-3 amps I wanted to compare to the Archon (RA, V, etc.) I think I need to spend more of my efforts finding an Archon to try!
 
Hi DTR! Thanks, man.
I recommend the Archon. After all the experimentation, it turns out that the tone I really wanted was what the Archon gives. The others were all great, but not for me. I was surprised that I couldn't get the V even close to what I wanted, and the RA almost got there, but not quite. Plus the Archon is smaller and a full 10lbs lighter than the RA, so there you go. I do miss having a third channel, but a boost would probably get me there.
Interestingly, I really loved gigging with the Mini Rec, but struggled to get enough low-end from it as my band style evolved. The Archon is pretty much exactly what I wanted 3 years ago. Having gone the brit-flavored-route, it turns out that the modern USA amps are more my taste.
When you do try the Archon, turn it up. It sounds OK at lower volume, but you don't get the crunch and low-end gut punch until you open it up a bit.
 
Couple things I've heard from others who have been through some other great stuff including various Mesa's that I'd like to get your take on, here or on the side.
Several have said that with some of the Mesa's and some others, they'd get great tone with the bridge pickup, and the neck would be too bassy and they'd stuggle with that, adjust bass side of the neck pickup down, etc... but never get a great balance of tones without adjusting the amp. But, when switching to the Archon, dialed in a great bridge tone and flipped the switch and the neck and middle spots sounded killer with no adjustments at all.

Second, several have commented that even gained up, string definition and separation were better with the Archon. Full 6 string chords ring clear and each string clear, even with a lot of gain.

And, you hit on the voicing. Are you taking this as less brit, more American? If so, how would you describe of compare that voicing? To what if anything you've played or heard? Opinions on this seem to be all over. Not exactly like anything, but I've heard it compared to everything from boutique high gain brit stuff like Splawn and Freidman, to Soldano, Mesa... it seems PRS really has come up with a voice of it's own, because there doesn't seem to be a consensus. And I'm cool with that.

Oh, and since I'm wearing you out, which cabs/speakers are you using it with now?

Oh, and stick with that clean channel. Every single review I've heard thought it was GREAT, with many "best clean channel I've ever heard on a high gain amp" type comments.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, lots of questions!

I am not really sure why some people are endlessly tweaking their pickup balance. I'm usually not that particular. I would say that much of the magic of the Archon is that it has a very strong mid focus and what sounds like a recto-style cold clip. It has enough bass, but it's very tight, so the bass does not overwhelm the tone. And I think the scratchy mids make you tend toward less compression/saturation, since even lower gain settings still have some "brown" to them.

The tone is very clear, to the point that some might call it sterile. A little delay and reverb really softens it up, though. If you try, you can get a good bass thump out of it, but mostly it's low mids. So you get the heaviness without any mud at all. As a result, there is not a lot of difference between the bass and treble pickups, except you get a little roll-off of the highs with the bass pickup, but it's still tight. The bass pickup comes out extremely clear. The overdrive doesn't give much compression, it's more crunchy and ragged than smooth. But not mosquito-buzzy like a DSL, which seems to focus at higher frequencies. The highs are rolled off just right, so you get sparkle, but no ice-pick, and notes up high have more fundamental content than harmonics, so they get round when they should.

The character is nothing like my RA or Shiva. Those amps have strong mid crunch, but it's not as pronounced as with the Archon. The Archon has a scratchiness even when you roll back the volume. It cleans up, but still has strong mid rasp. And the lows of the Archon are funny. They are there, so it doesn't sound thin, but they seem to change. When you strum you get a balanced midrange-focus that gives tons of punch and clarity and the strings do all enunciate individually, but then if you chug on the low strings the lows will punch you in the gut, but still be clear and tight. LOTS of transient response.

The closest I could call the voicing is single rectifier or F50 mid crunch, but with much better lows and rounder highs and way easier to set up (everything at noon really is just right). It's a modern rock/metal amp. I'm playing it through a recto vertical 2x12 with V30. It sounds HUGE.

I liked the RA100 clean channel better, I am still trying to get a handle on the Archon clean channel. It's fine, but not quite exactly what I want. It's a little rounder and crisper, where I found my last few amps were a bit glassier and I liked that. I am sure it's partly because I haven't spent the time on the tone controls and partly because it was designed to be super clean and fat sounding. I want it to really bring out the middle position on my tele, for example. To be clear, this is not a downvote on the clean tone. It is awesome, and I am focusing on the subtle aspects of my personal taste.
 
Last edited:
The Archon design to me sounds similar To a DIezel Vh4
If you listen to clips you'll hear it
Where the DZL is very compressed
The Archon is more raw and open sounding but the upper mids the tight
Low resonance and almost hi fi
( sounding like a great produced tone
Are characteristic of that sound
Also another comparison I would make would be A less low punch
More refined Uberscall which again
Is similar to the DZL
 
Back
Top