I played the Walkabout into the ML-112 a little bit before hooking up the Reeves. They are in the same ballpark. The mid-range of the Reeves is smoother and the highs are "sweeter" (as Tom Bowlus observed). I found the low end response easier to control on the Reeves. I backed the Bass knob back to 11:00 and it was tight and full. I like having a standby control again after all these years. Because the D.I. is tapped off of the output transformer, the speaker and D.I. signal are both muted in standby mode. There are tonal differences between the two but it's hard to put into words. For lack of a better descriptor, the Reeves sounds more organic to me. The Walkabout is about as close to sounding "all-tube" with its MOSFET output section as I have experienced. The Reeves brings the subtle heft and roundness of a good all-tube amp. Those huge Heyboer transformers give the Reeves a built-in advantage in dynamics. Ready to go from a whisper to a roar in a millisecond, and provide a
serious reservoir of power. If the Walkabout is a cantaloupe, the Reeves is a watermelon. The watermelon is bigger and sweeter, but both are tasty and satisfying.

The Walkabout's EQ section is more flexible and powerful, so it would be easier to get a harsh response from it. I don't know if you could make the Reeves sound bad. Having the parametric EQ of the Walkabout would be an advantage in a sonically tough room. I hope this helps.