Bugera 6260 - really as good as a Peavey 5150?

[gwEm]

Straight forward question really :) Too bad the 6260 has a reverb which isn't in the original.

[dheim]

they sound different. i don't know... the bugera is somewhat darker and MAYBE more aggressive.

[hunter]

for broootalzs you should also try the Bugera333

[Dmoney]

i thought the presence and resonance control in the 5150 where a patented peavey design. active controls in the power secton of the amp. not sure if the bugera does that the same way.
my 6505 was a complete TANK of an amp. I've heard the Bugera has some reliability issues, i guess a bit like other behringer clones of stuff. I've never played one, i'd be tempted to try one just to see what its like and fiddle with the inside. no idea how much they cost. to be honest, if i wanted a REALLY low cost tube amp, id consider the valve king. i think thats pretty good value for money

[Dmoney]

i want to know what their definition of 'hand made' is.
i also like the Bugera 1990 120watt hi gain dual reverb head.

[gwEm]

thanks for the replies!

hunter's right, its br00talz i'm interested in - that US tone.

i really like my sansamp still, but also looking at the Peavey Rockmaster pre.. to be honest an axefx would be the thing. a rack thing would be more useful than a head

[dheim]

for broootalzs you should also try the Bugera333

yeah! the 333xl is a great amp. i don't know if it's the clone of anything but it sounds pretty peculiar, at least to me. i didn't buy it just because it was cheap!

[Dmoney]

its at least based on a peavey XXX. with a few more switches. i dont think the xxx has an el34 6l6 bias switch.

[hunter]

its at least based on a peavey XXX. with a few more switches. i dont think the xxx has an el34 6l6 bias switch.

I played the XXX before, but what I heard from the 333 in Frankfurt Musikmesse sounded NOTHING like the peavey. Peavey XXX is thin and brittle, but the 333 was very beefy, too much bottom almost, but can always be dialed out I suppose.

[Dmoney]

ive never played an XXX or a JSX or a Bugera 333.
I have played Peavey 6505, 6505+, 5150 mk1 and mk2,

I haven't seen bugera's anywhere yet to check em out.

i must admit, the naming and the look puts me off.
an amp that looks like any of the peavey's mentioned above and called a 6260? 333?
and i looked at the website and found that 120watt 1990 high gain dual reverb by bugera, which looks like a tweaked and hot rodded JCM900 4100. and then that 150watt superlead looking thing?

i still what to know the bugera version of hand made, if they are indeed hand populated pcbs, or if its just cheap labour and 50 different people are involved in each stage. looking at the price id expect the later.

not saying mass produced amps are bad, just why would anyone band around the term 'hand made' and why would anyone try to make out their amps are amazing when they look like, are named like, and take so much from other amps like marshall and peavey? they'll probably do a dual rec thing soon called a '2 rec'.

why not be more original and let the quality speak for itself? instead of saying "look, im a cheap and possibly better sounding near-clone of a peavey"

if you like em thats cool. i just dont understand the marketing and that means i don't trust the brand.

[dheim]

i think the started with a "cheap clone" approach, even if they didn't really clone amps... they have no name or tradition to speak of, they are based in the country where almost every single piece of gear is phisically made but everyone just closes both eyes just for the fact that the brand is based in england or california of wherever you like. in the world of gear "cheap" means "bad". they tried to appeal to kids that cannot afford any of the "true" and famous amps and, in the process, to make more experienced guitarists curious to try their products... i did and i liked them. hunter did it too.
i understand your point, but i never played an xxx so i didn't try the 333 because i couldn't afford the peavey, i would have even if they called it the xang-qiang metal monzta or something like that...
but if mesa sells a marshall clone for 3000 € why can't bugera do the same for 5 times less the price?
i think that when they'll have a base of customers they'll start to sell more original designs. they're still in a phase in wich people tries their amps and say "uhm... even if it's a bugera it sounds good!".
better than "uhm.. even if it's a marshall it sounds like cr@p"!

[hunter]

i think the started with a "cheap clone" approach, even if they didn't really clone amps... they have no name or tradition to speak of, they are based in the country where almost every single piece of gear is phisically made but everyone just closes both eyes just for the fact that the brand is based in england or california of wherever you like. in the world of gear "cheap" means "bad". they tried to appeal to kids that cannot afford any of the "true" and famous amps and, in the process, to make more experienced guitarists curious to try their products... i did and i liked them. hunter did it too.
i understand your point, but i never played an xxx so i didn't try the 333 because i couldn't afford the peavey, i would have even if they called it the xang-qiang metal monzta or something like that...
but if mesa sells a marshall clone for 3000 € why can't bugera do the same for 5 times less the price?
i think that when they'll have a base of customers they'll start to sell more original designs. they're still in a phase in wich people tries their amps and say "uhm... even if it's a bugera it sounds good!".
better than "uhm.. even if it's a marshall it sounds like cr@p"!

well spoken, D!

[Dmoney]

i think the started with a "cheap clone" approach, even if they didn't really clone amps... they have no name or tradition to speak of, they are based in the country where almost every single piece of gear is phisically made but everyone just closes both eyes just for the fact that the brand is based in england or california of wherever you like. in the world of gear "cheap" means "bad". they tried to appeal to kids that cannot afford any of the "true" and famous amps and, in the process, to make more experienced guitarists curious to try their products... i did and i liked them. hunter did it too.
i understand your point, but i never played an xxx so i didn't try the 333 because i couldn't afford the peavey, i would have even if they called it the xang-qiang metal monzta or something like that...
but if mesa sells a marshall clone for 3000 € why can't bugera do the same for 5 times less the price?
i think that when they'll have a base of customers they'll start to sell more original designs. they're still in a phase in wich people tries their amps and say "uhm... even if it's a bugera it sounds good!".
better than "uhm.. even if it's a marshall it sounds like cr@p"!

Thats all cool. i can't disagree. I find them interesting from the point of view of wanting to look inside them, as a cheap amp thats probably built with a circuit close enough to something else that it might be fun to mod. I've read somewhere that the 6260 is very similar in design to a 5150, but with a few extra bits, bias select, reverb. I think the reverb is there because peavey resonance control is patented, and bias select is easy to put in if the transformers are good. all the bias switch in a mesa does is switch in a resistor across another bias resistor, lowering overall resistance at that point in the bias circuit.

would be good to look inside at the PCB's, see how the tubes are mounted and so on, look at the componants. i tried last night to find some guts images on the net but i couldnt.