Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: braintheory on July 23, 2013, 11:25:14 AM
-
So I currently have a Bogner XTC 101B (and a bunch of other amps). I've had this amp now for 4 years and I find the red channel to be too dark, way too compressed, and not enough aggression, and the blue channel to also be too compressed and also not nearly enough aggression. I've tried the XTC Classic and thought it was much better and fixed many of my complaints about the 101B (and had a way better clean channel), but am still not sure if it was aggressive enough for my tastes. My first question is how does the 20th anniversary model compare and will it satisfy my needs? A lot of people say that the 20th anniversary model is the best XTC ever.
My second question is if there are basic mods I could do to make the 101B sound like the 20th Anniversary. And when I say basic I mean something like change tubes, capacitors, or resistors, etc. (Nothing more involved than that) I've heard that the 101B with kt88's actually sounds very similar to the 20th Anniversary and also addresses most of my complaints.
My last question is why do some say that the blue channel on the 101B is the best blue channel of all XTC's? I thought the blue channel on the Classic was much better (more open, aggressive, organic, and nuanced).
-
Maybe Bogners aren't for you? sorry, i know thats not helpful.. but if you been through a bunch of iterations and its still not doing what you want maybe it's time to change up?
Also, on the subject of what people say, you nailed it exactly with "some say". Some do, but others wouldn't, tonal requirements are a highly subjective and personal thing. what works for them might not work for you, and you have to be wary of what some say because some people convince themselves to buy stuff based on what others tell them they should..
I've never got along with Bogners. For a hot rodded marshall sound I've always liked, well, a Marshall thats been hotrodded, or a splawn. The ultimate Marshall type (for me) is a Friedman HBE, and my own personal fave (not necessarily Marshall type) is Soldano. then there's the Uber gain amps like Krank and Diezel which don't appeal to me but extreme gain guys like.
-
You're right Bogners may not be for me, but I wanna at least try the 20th Anniversary model or at least learn more about it before coming to that conclusion. Also, I really liked the Ecstasy Classic it just needed more aggression and rawness for my tastes. Also, to my ears the Bogners don't really sound marshally.
Also, as far as Marshally amps go, the only ones that really impressed me were the Mesa/Boogie Stiletto Duece and a Marshall JMP 2203 from 1979 (although I've still never tried Wizards or Fortins or Reeves Super 78). I've tried Splawns (too boxy/bloated and not nuanced), Friedmans (Brown Eye, Dirty Shirley, and the Metro Model)(The Friedmans were too refined and lacked the rawness and aggression of the 1979 JMP 2203), Mojaves (again too polished), Cameron Atomica (Nice, but again lacks the rawness and aggression of the JMP 2203), and none of the Marshalls after 1980 that I've played sounded nearly as good as that '79 JMP 2203.
It seems to me that most makers of marshally amps make them too polite compared to real good marshalls, but the Mesa/Boogie Stiletto's didn't have that problem and based on my research I bet the Wizards and Reeves 78 won't either. As for the Fortins I really have no idea, but one thing that makes me concerned is that in an interview with Ola Englund he said something about the Fortin Natas sounding ilke a recording of an amp (he said this as if it it were a good thing :lol:) I hope the Fortins don't sound processed like most Engls :lol:.
Anyways, sorry for the long post. I got too sidetracked. Back to my Bogner question.
-
The 20th Anniversary XTC will be very similar to the other Bogners you've tried. They are much smoother and darker than an old Marshall, as that's the Bogner sound.
Sounds to me like you should just buy an old JMP?
-
The 20th Anniversary XTC will be very similar to the other Bogners you've tried. They are much smoother and darker than an old Marshall, as that's the Bogner sound.
Sounds to me like you should just buy an old JMP?
Have you compared the 20th anniversary side by side with the other XTC's?
Also, I modified my post while you were making yours, and I love the old JMP's. But, like I said in the last post, to my ears the Bogner's don't really sound that Marshally to me, so to me it's not really like I'm going to choose between one or the other.
Also, I really liked the Ecstasy Classic overall, I was just wondering if the 20th Anniversary would give me the extra openess and aggression that I'd like and if putting kt88's in my 101B will suffice.
-
I've played a 101B and owned a Classic for several years. I've not played the 20th but the circuit isn't very much different by all accounts.
I've never heard XTCs described as aggressive, which is why I don't think they're for you. It sounds like you want something screaming in the upper mids, not the lower mids like Bogners do.
tekbow is on the money when he talks about Splawns and SLOs - they're brighter and have more of that Marshall-ish bite.
-
tekbow is on the money when he talks about Splawns and SLOs - they're brighter and have more of that Marshall-ish bite.
I'm actually going to try a SLO sometime within the next few days. I've played the SLO in the past and again thought it was very smooth rather than very aggressive, but it did have a lot of upper mids. It was very well suited for leads. But after I try it again my opinion might change.
As for the Splawns, they just weren't for me (too boxy/bloated/congested). The Splawn Quick Rod actually reminded me a little of the painkiller pickup :lol: (which also wasn't for me)
-
I have to ask and it's a stupid question, but always worth asking, because when it clicked with me, tone stacks and amps were forever changed.
It sounds like you're getting similar results with lots of amps. Are you sure you're not just EQing them to what you're used to? or setting the EQ to about the same physical settings on the amps you've tried?
Every amps tone stack is different, Soldano's are known for being smooth, but they can bark as well, it's all a matter of closing your eye's and turning the knobs until what you hear is right rather than what you're eyes are telling you is right.
Marshalls can be smooth to and they can scream too, it's all about EQ. with Soldano's and Splawns you have to crank the mids a bit, because thats where the bark lives. In fact it's where the guitar lives full stop. Also, Soldano's in Isolation are a weird beast (although i love mine), they were designed to cut thru a live mix, when you have a bass player and a drummer beating all hell out of their instruments, all of a sudden the Soldano makes more sense.
You're cranking these amps right? because yes a Splawn can sound boxy at low levels, but so do most amps.
Like i said, dumb question but worth asking
-
here's a bunch of soldanos doing metal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS8glIrZqlc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS8glIrZqlc)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXHv6aW2m-c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXHv6aW2m-c)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akrMM0eewB4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akrMM0eewB4)
Splawn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmkjkarGTQ4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmkjkarGTQ4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsoAKtFPgdg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsoAKtFPgdg)
one of the guys here did some awesome friedman demos.
everything sound plenty aggressive to me ;)
and my own personal favourite for barking aggressive tone.. can't beat a JCM 800
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6xk8T87tSE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6xk8T87tSE)
-
I will sit and sing the praises of the SLO all day long.
After wasting a lot of time trying various other amps out and going for what people kept telling me was a good metal amp only for me to find it a horrible fizzy bloated mess. (i'm looking at you peavey!)
When i built my clone i knew it was my sound and since spending a year or so with it now and gradually refining it more to fit my purposes i couldn't be happier.
In regards to your bogner issues check out the sloclone forums. There are loads of posts regarding the XTC series and modding them.
-
I have to ask and it's a stupid question, but always worth asking, because when it clicked with me, tone stacks and amps were forever changed.
It sounds like you're getting similar results with lots of amps. Are you sure you're not just EQing them to what you're used to? or setting the EQ to about the same physical settings on the amps you've tried?
Every amps tone stack is different, Soldano's are known for being smooth, but they can bark as well, it's all a matter of closing your eye's and turning the knobs until what you hear is right rather than what you're eyes are telling you is right.
Marshalls can be smooth to and they can scream too, it's all about EQ. with Soldano's and Splawns you have to crank the mids a bit, because thats where the bark lives. In fact it's where the guitar lives full stop. Also, Soldano's in Isolation are a weird beast (although i love mine), they were designed to cut thru a live mix, when you have a bass player and a drummer beating all hell out of their instruments, all of a sudden the Soldano makes more sense.
You're cranking these amps right? because yes a Splawn can sound boxy at low levels, but so do most amps.
Like i said, dumb question but worth asking
Yes, I got to crank all the amps and yes knew what I was doing when it came to EQing (I also used my ears rather than eyes). It's not that the other amps I mentioned like the Splawns, Soldano, and Friedman couldn't get aggressive, but the 1979 JMP 2203 and Mesa/Boogie Stiletto Duece were just inherently more aggressive. The Friedman and Mojaves both naturally had this politeness to them compared to real Marshalls that I couldn't dial out. What's also great about the Stiletto and JMP 2203 is (like you said) they can both also be dialed in to be very smooth and deliver excellent lead tones (I'm also really gassing for those Wizard amps). Also, I'm going to try a Soldano SLO in a few hours, so I'll let you guys know what I think after playing it again.
But again we're getting sidetracked. It's very interesting to talk about different Marshally amps since I want one of those in the future too, but right now I'm more interested in which XTC is best for me (if any at all), and how kt88's would effect my 101B.
-
well thats the thing, I'm not sure we really understand what it is you're looking for, I always though Bogners where Marshall influenced amps, and you've tried Just about every Bogner XTC there is and find them all to smooth, which Twinfan confirmed. So therefore a Bogner isn't really doing it for you, because the signature sound of them in the vast majority of permutations isn't what you're looking for. We've triued to recommend stuff based on what you say you want.
The Bogners seem like flogging a dead horse in the minute. It kinda sounds like you want the Bogner XTC to be something it isn't, what other models do they have? is there something they do thats closer to what you want?
-
So I just played the Soldano SLO and it was great. I might sell my 101B and get the SLO. Again the SLO was smooth and the bottom end wasn't very tight or percussive by modern standards, but I still really enjoyed it. Awesome for leads, strong upper mid presence, and a growl that vaguely reminded me of some of the orange amps. Like last time I tried it though, I still didn't like the crunch mode. It was nice but, but felt like a tamed, overly-polite version of vintage marshalls.
Also, I agree that the XTC's are obviously Marshall influenced and probably have similarities in there designs, but to me ultimately don't sound very marshally.
-
The XTC is Marshall influenced, but smoothed and has an extra gain stage here and there. This makes it less ragged and aggressive, but more polished.
The Ubershall might be worth a look if you like modern heavy gain.
-
I'm not a fan of Uberschalls either (for modern high gain the diezels, engls, and fryettes are my favorites). Anyway I ended up buying the SLO for $2400 USD and it sounds phenomenal. I think I like it for leads even more than the mark iv and my mark v. It feels very fluid for leads. It is plenty raw and aggressive, but still has a smoothness to it, which I can't seem to dial out, but for now I'll deal with it. That smoothness is probably why its so wonderful for soloing. The SLO is also one of my favorite amps for single note riffage.
I'm going to sell my 101B, but I'm still very curious about the 20th Anniversary Ecstasy and will definitely check it out if I get a chance.
Also, I noticed that the clean channel (which is decent but not great) seems to be much lower in volume than the crunch and lead mode. Is this normal?
-
I'm not a fan of Uberschalls either (for modern high gain the diezels, engls, and fryettes are my favorites). Anyway I ended up buying the SLO for $2400 USD and it sounds phenomenal. I think I like it for leads even more than the mark iv and my mark v. It feels very fluid for leads. It is plenty raw and aggressive, but still has a smoothness to it, which I can't seem to dial out, but for now I'll deal with it. That smoothness is probably why its so wonderful for soloing. The SLO is also one of my favorite amps for single note riffage.
I'm going to sell my 101B, but I'm still very curious about the 20th Anniversary Ecstasy and will definitely check it out if I get a chance.
Also, I noticed that the clean channel (which is decent but not great) seems to be much lower in volume than the crunch and lead mode. Is this normal?
Good choice on the SLO! Regarding the smoothness that can easily be adressed by swapping the first two preamp valves for tung sol 12ax7 & a JJ Ecc832. I believe the SLO now comes stock with EHX 12ax7 and sovtek 5881 in the power amp (these power valves really let the amp down imho)
Regarding the clean volume it is normal that its significantly lower due to the clean and crunch being the same channel the clean is just the crunch padded down. Originally the SLO just had the crunch & lead.
-
Good choice on the SLO! Regarding the smoothness that can easily be adressed by swapping the first two preamp valves for tung sol 12ax7 & a JJ Ecc832. I believe the SLO now comes stock with EHX 12ax7 and sovtek 5881 in the power amp (these power valves really let the amp down imho)
Regarding the clean volume it is normal that its significantly lower due to the clean and crunch being the same channel the clean is just the crunch padded down. Originally the SLO just had the crunch & lead.
Thanks for the advice. The SLO I bought has serial number: 001367 and there is also a sticker on the top part of the tolex and the footswitch that says "#109" (I wonder if this means this was 109th SLO made, or maybe because of the serial number it could be the 1367th?) and next to the standby switch there's a sticker with the number 3 on it. Apparently this amp used to belong to the band No Doubt and I think the guy who sold it to me kept those stickers as evidence. So, obviously I have no idea what year my SLO is from, and therefore no idea what tubes are in the amp, but I'll try to check later. The amp sounds great as is, but if changing tubes can make my SLO sound even better and make it a bit edgier, I'll try to get around to it in the future. In the mean time I'll keep playing this monster amp :lol: Based on this information does anyone have an idea what year this amp is from and what tubes it could have? Also, what powertubes would you recommend instead of the sovtek's (assuming that's what it has now)?
-
Good choice on the SLO! Regarding the smoothness that can easily be adressed by swapping the first two preamp valves for tung sol 12ax7 & a JJ Ecc832. I believe the SLO now comes stock with EHX 12ax7 and sovtek 5881 in the power amp (these power valves really let the amp down imho)
Regarding the clean volume it is normal that its significantly lower due to the clean and crunch being the same channel the clean is just the crunch padded down. Originally the SLO just had the crunch & lead.
Thanks for the advice. The SLO I bought has serial number: 001367 and there is also a sticker on the top part of the tolex and the footswitch that says "#109" (I wonder if this means this was 109th SLO made, or maybe because of the serial number it could be the 1367th?) and next to the standby switch there's a sticker with the number 3 on it. Apparently this amp used to belong to the band No Doubt and I think the guy who sold it to me kept those stickers as evidence. So, obviously I have no idea what year my SLO is from, and therefore no idea what tubes are in the amp, but I'll try to check later. The amp sounds great as is, but if changing tubes can make my SLO sound even better and make it a bit edgier, I'll try to get around to it in the future. In the mean time I'll keep playing this monster amp :lol: Based on this information does anyone have an idea what year this amp is from and what tubes it could have?
I'm not sure to be honest but a quick email to Soldano will give you the into that you need. If you want it even edgier and dont mind soldering in such an expensive amp PM me I have some good mods :D
-
Would these mods that make the SLO edgier compromise it liquidy lead tone?
-
Phone Soldano, Mike is a very approachable guy, and you'll either get him or Bill Sundt (Right Hand Dude) on the phone. They keep good records and will be able to tell you your amps history. Ask them about the factory mods as well and see if anything will help.
But i'll say this, Mikes preferred version of the SLO is bone stock. not even an FX loop. For all the mods they offer, he'll tell you it sounds best with nothing in it.
There's something about that No Doubt SLO though.. sure i saw it on ebay or it was mentioned on the Soldano Forum a while back..
-
Also, I noticed that the clean channel (which is decent but not great) seems to be much lower in volume than the crunch and lead mode. Is this normal?
It is if you're using the Master Volume and the amp is running fairly low.
-
Also, I noticed that the clean channel (which is decent but not great) seems to be much lower in volume than the crunch and lead mode. Is this normal?
It is if you're using the Master Volume and the amp is running fairly low.
It is full stop. Each channel has its own master volume. It's just the nature of the beast with the clean & crunch being the exact same channel.
-
Would these mods that make the SLO edgier compromise it liquidy lead tone?
Nope. If anything it will make it more fluid.
There are a few different approaches that you can take with it all relatively simple.
-
Would these mods that make the SLO edgier compromise it liquidy lead tone?
Nope. If anything it will make it more fluid.
There are a few different approaches that you can take with it all relatively simple.
How could it be more fluid and more edgy at the same time?
-
Would these mods that make the SLO edgier compromise it liquidy lead tone?
Nope. If anything it will make it more fluid.
There are a few different approaches that you can take with it all relatively simple.
How could it be more fluid and more edgy at the same time?
It's hard to explain. It makes the gain structure more aggressive but legato and general lead work flows better due to the slight variation in the voicing. The aggressiveness is due to raising the lower mids and gain a tiny bit. The tiny bit of extra gain also makes leadwork more fluid.
-
Would these mods that make the SLO edgier compromise it liquidy lead tone?
Nope. If anything it will make it more fluid.
There are a few different approaches that you can take with it all relatively simple.
How could it be more fluid and more edgy at the same time?
It's hard to explain. It makes the gain structure more aggressive but legato and general lead work flows better due to the slight variation in the voicing. The aggressiveness is due to raising the lower mids and gain a tiny bit. The tiny bit of extra gain also makes leadwork more fluid.
But my SLO already has more than enough gain and I don't think it needs more low-mids (or lows). Also, I don't want to do anything that will add more compression to the SLO.
Also, in case anyone is curious I asked Soldano about my amp and it's from the year 2000, no mods (but it does have an fx loop), and sovtek 5881 and chinese preamp tubes of some sort.
-
I wonder if those are the ORIGINAL 5881's from 2000?
I don't mind those valves, but lots of people use JJ 6L6GC. I've had good results with the TungSol 7581 reissue, although I won't be getting them again since TAD (Tube Amp Doctor) are the only place that seem to stock them here and they are complete scumbag ripoff merchants. The other nice choice is KT66's, but if you go that route it's best getting some nice ones like the Gold Lion's, rather than JJ's which seem to be 6L6's in a KT66 bottle. Groove Tubes 6L6GE might be another option.
The Sovtek button base 5881 is a reliable valve due to a high maximum plate voltage rating (although it's hard to find a spec sheet).
Original 7581A valves might give you a bit more headroom in the power stage, but those are expensive now and I've never read mention of them being used. Same deal with 6N3C-E's.
Depends on what you're after. They don't make as much of a difference as changing speakers but they make a little difference and rolling valves costs a lot less. Anything will probably make a big difference if you valves in there at the moment are 13 years old, both in the preamp and power amp.
What Tony says about the level of the channel's is also correct. It's also normal to get some channel bleed from the clean channel into the gain channel, although it's usually swamped. It's also out of phase with the lead channel I think. Anyway, there is a argument that it contributes to the sound of the SLO lead channel.
-
I don't know whether they are the original tubes or not, but I checked and they definitely are Sovtek 5881's.
-
If it was a touring amp or even slightly looked after then the 5881's probably got swapped with like for like.
Soldano use those valves because they are tough. Likewise with their choice to go with JJ ECC83S'. Those are a tough preamp valve, mechanically sturdy and not prone to going harmonic. Some people might think that extra reliability is worth the slight trade off in tone.
I like to use JJ ECC83S with a Tungsram 12AX7 in V1, which to me makes the amp a bit more aggressive. My SLO currently has TungSol 7581's in the power section, but I might try KT66's next time. I've used JJ 6L6GC's with good results in a bunch of amps but they recently seem to be less reliable. I don't mind the stock 5881WGC's though.
It's hard to know what to recommend. I usually just swap thing around every so often and stick with what I like. I don't think of it in terms of "This sounds more richly 3D and harmonic in the low organic overtonal touch sensitive area extended bandwidth"... If something sounds better I just go with it. I might change my mind a few months down the line. I chose the Tungsram over a Mullard, Brimar, RFT, Philips 5751, Sovtek 5751, JJ ECC83S, JJ ECC803S, some EHX valves, and some long plate Sovteks, and a Ruby 12AX7. You don't have to go NOS to find nice sounding valves in my opinion.
-
Funny that we should mention headroom in an SLO, because i was looking at an interview with Mike Soldano a couple days ago and he was talking about how he has always designed his powerstages to be as "Hifi" as possible. Basically all the breakup/grit comes from the preamp. possibly the reason they get compared to Hiwatts a lot.
This isn't to say that the amp doesn't "open up" past a certain point on the master volume.
The only exception to this (he says) is the new HR25 (which i want). It was inspired by.. You know what, here's the interview, it's actually really entertaining, there's some anecodotes about EVH about halfway through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBIcicqIfCM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBIcicqIfCM)
-
I wonder if those are the ORIGINAL 5881's from 2000?
I don't mind those valves, but lots of people use JJ 6L6GC. I've had good results with the TungSol 7581 reissue, although I won't be getting them again since TAD (Tube Amp Doctor) are the only place that seem to stock them here and they are complete scumbag ripoff merchants. The other nice choice is KT66's, but if you go that route it's best getting some nice ones like the Gold Lion's, rather than JJ's which seem to be 6L6's in a KT66 bottle. Groove Tubes 6L6GE might be another option.
The Sovtek button base 5881 is a reliable valve due to a high maximum plate voltage rating (although it's hard to find a spec sheet).
Original 7581A valves might give you a bit more headroom in the power stage, but those are expensive now and I've never read mention of them being used. Same deal with 6N3C-E's.
Depends on what you're after. They don't make as much of a difference as changing speakers but they make a little difference and rolling valves costs a lot less. Anything will probably make a big difference if you valves in there at the moment are 13 years old, both in the preamp and power amp.
What Tony says about the level of the channel's is also correct. It's also normal to get some channel bleed from the clean channel into the gain channel, although it's usually swamped. It's also out of phase with the lead channel I think. Anyway, there is a argument that it contributes to the sound of the SLO lead channel.
It's very very subtle but really helps making it edgier. But I also use JJ E34L which make the amp a lot edgier but you can't run them in your SLO being a soldano.
The tungsol 12ax7 in V1 & V2 really makes a big difference too.