Mercuriall 6160III vs Neural DSP Gojira - EVH Stealth Plugins

Ed S
Ed S
4,619
0
Published 2023-10-05
Just a quick one here. They could definitely be dialled in to sound a bit closer but I think its demonstrable enough that they are capable of the same tones. Different prices, different pedals/fx, different IR's, Mercuriall has channel 1, the mode switch, the gain relationship between ch2 and 3 etc.

Will try and do another one soon comparing channel 2

FWIW Gojira is EVH 5150III EL34 and Mercuriall is 6L6, the circuits are slightly different between the 2 amps (besides just the valves).
All Comments (20)
  • @PippPriss
    WAY more prefer the 6160III, the feel is way better.
  • @artean4700
    I actually prefer the 6160. It sounds more open/forward in the mid range and does not have that slight... honky-ness in the low mids that always bothered me with the Gojira.
  • @gabrielavanzi9652
    Nice demo! I have not tried the 6160III yet, but judging by the sound here, I can't pick a favorite. Thanks!
  • @jefflancaster7839
    Well I have to say I am really surprised by this Mercuriall 6160 plugin. Before Tonex and NAM, Gojira was the only plugin I liked because I felt it had more harmonic complexity and a fuller sound than most plugins. After seeing this and a few other recent reviews of this plugin I decided to check it out. I don't know if I am fooling myself...but this is the BEST sounding/feeling plugin I have played. To me, it doesn't matter if it sounds good double-tracked in a metal mix....but actual hands-on playing with single-note riffs using pick articulation and palm muting and dynamics has to sound and feel natural. Bascially it has to pass my old EVH greatest riffs test.😁 I have spent literally hundreds (thousands?) of hours listening to and comparing plugins and machine modeled captures...and unless I am losing my mind (which is entirely possible)...this finally nails the "fully modeled" guitar signal chain for me....giving you full control, and not just a static capture with hybrid control. Gojira sounds fizzy and less "solid" to me when played in isolation. At 8x oversampling, this 6160 model sounds amazing. The weird thing is that it sounds like the EL34 version (which I prefer in the real amp) and not the 6L6 version. Also, the channel volume seems a little aggressive at introducing SAG....which sounds a little unnatural past 10 or 11 o'clock. Other than that...I can't find anything bad to say about it. The number one thing that impressed me the most was how well it reacted to rolling back the guitar volume.....Gojira falls apart, Tonex is OK, NAM is better...but this just sounds solid and natural to me when lowering the guitar volume. I was seriously skeptical before I actually tried this. Somebody please tell me I'm wrong...my left hand is holding my right hand back from clicking that "Buy" button......πŸ€·β€β™‚
  • @filterscape
    Have both. They both kick arse! 🀘🏼
  • @bukowskimoho
    Mercuriall 6160III feels more alive, but i think neural's one could sounds similar if you add a little more presence.
  • @AndresPrass
    Personally, Mercuriall's sounds more open-forward in the mix. Any chance in uploading an isolated comparison?
  • @kibatsu
    The short answer bout the choice is if you have one of this kind of plugin, dont buy another one. Still you can buy it to support the company ❀ These comments are so radical icant πŸ˜‚ Guys, you can take some time for setting up and EQing to get the exact same result, especially if you mastering 😊 The plugin itself is cool and nice to have tho πŸ‘Œ
  • @AlucardXIX
    I've always struggled to get something I like out of the Gojira, and only used it in a few mixes because it normally sounds very "behind the speaker" to me, compared to other amp sims. Looking forward to trying the Mercuriall
  • @amirtak9886
    Having tried both, they sound almost the same through the same IR. I'll stick with my Gojira.
  • @Alexhangman
    It would be cool to comapre without mix as well.
  • @spectre5022
    Both sounds awesome, which one do you prefer?