CAE PT-100 Vs. Bogner 20th XTC

Nico

Active member
Has anyone compared these amps side by side?

I've heard nothing but perfect reviews from both heads... What are the differences, which one would you buy if you coulp pick 1?
 
Haven't A/B'd them, but man, I'm 100% SOLD on the 20thA with EL34's... It's over the top. Bloody masterpiece man, I am not joking. Check the Bogner thread for the review "...20 hours in". This rig blows SO many other set up's clean out of the water - but it's got to be the tone you love, cuz if you don't love the tone, there's no getting around it. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I can NOT make my 20thA sound anything less than awesome. It drips with incredible tone, and the adjustments on the 20thA are incredible. Swiss Army Knife amp for sure.

Put that in yer pipe and smoke it :LOL: :LOL:

V.
 
I played a 20th Anniversary the other day at Tone Merchants.

It was a pretty nice amp... I'm partial to the PT 100 though :) Predictable, I know. The Bogner's ch3 was nice- aggressive, nice to solo on. Ch2 aaaah I dunno. Was ok. Plexi mode wasn't as nice as I remember my old 100B sounding (It's been over 10 years since I had that amp though).

I think Ch1 on the PT is hands down the best clean on any channel switcher out there. It's just awesome. Ch1 on the Bogner was ok, a good tone to be sure. I think the PT's clean is better.
 
Got a loaner of the Bogner Anniv 101A
traded the PT100 temporarily so we could both check out 2 top amps

Cleans: the PT is all a clean channel needs to be. Same across the OD range. Best clean channel on the market IMO.
Bogner really sorted out the clean on this amp. It has warmth and power and kept me playing. Much to like here.

Drive channels: The PT snarls, has a high mid dominance and spits at you in true modded Marshall fashion.
there is a steel wool fur to the attack, so not super tight and won't suit the modern ultra high gain freaks (said with respect).
it suits aggressive, knarly stand-out tracks
The Bogner has huge low-end, not so much in the way of mids, and a rasp to the top, much higher than the majority of the fundamental sound, that I couldn't dial out
Even with the plethora of options (which are now perfect), it didn't work for me at all.
The strangest thing about the amp is the sound on chs 2/3 gives the impression that it is the greatest tone, but is coming from 3ft behind the speaker cab - the clips on James Lugo's High Gain Amp Shootout confirm this. I mistakenly thought it was a more ambient recording than the others. That cool sound you hear you cannot get to, it just won't come forward into the room, or to the mic.

I have called the PT back as the Bogner is off never to be turned on again.
The 101B sounds much better for drive, with a smoother top, although still light in the mids.
the 100A I recently tried at volume slayed them both with thick mids and no rasp. Make that again Rheinhold, and I will wait in line.

I much prefer the OD-100 Classic+ for that middle ground from. It is warmer and thicker than the PT with less rough edges.

Picture analogy for fun
Bogner:
Cave_troll.jpg


PT100:
orc.jpg


Classic+:
picstoppic.jpg
 
Big Jazzer":85oc6j7d said:
Got a loaner of the Bogner Anniv 101A
traded the PT100 temporarily so we could both check out 2 top amps

Cleans: the PT is all a clean channel needs to be. Same across the OD range. Best clean channel on the market IMO.
Bogner really sorted out the clean on this amp. It has warmth and power and kept me playing. Much to like here.

Drive channels: The PT snarls, has a high mid dominance and spits at you in true modded Marshall fashion.
there is a steel wool fur to the attack, so not super tight and won't suit the modern ultra high gain freaks (said with respect).
it suits aggressive, knarly stand-out tracks
The Bogner has huge low-end, not so much in the way of mids, and a rasp to the top, much higher than the majority of the fundamental sound, that I couldn't dial out
Even with the plethora of options (which are now perfect), it didn't work for me at all.
The strangest thing about the amp is the sound on chs 2/3 gives the impression that it is the greatest tone, but is coming from 3ft behind the speaker cab - the clips on James Lugo's High Gain Amp Shootout confirm this. I mistakenly thought it was a more ambient recording than the others. That cool sound you hear you cannot get to, it just won't come forward into the room, or to the mic.

I have called the PT back as the Bogner is off never to be turned on again.
The 101B sounds much better for drive, with a smoother top, although still light in the mids.
the 100A I recently tried at volume slayed them both with thick mids and no rasp. Make that again Rheinhold, and I will wait in line.

I much prefer the OD-100 Classic+ for that middle ground from. It is warmer and thicker than the PT with less rough edges.

Picture analogy for fun
Bogner:
Cave_troll.jpg


PT100:
orc.jpg


Classic+:
picstoppic.jpg



hahahahahahah
 
Nice pictures LOL!!! that is funny!!!! Great description, I haven't really played the amps but I get the point exactly!!
 
Apples and Oranges spring to mind and if you visit the Bogner page for feedback it is quite different. they are both o/s amps however for me there is a fizz to Suhr voiced amps that i can never get away from. Some may call it kerrang (or insert your own terminology here!) but to me the Bogner has the lower mid chewiness that i like. Other's will prefer the upper mid bite. I did find that i was looking to add more ambient fx in the Suhr whereas I would happily gig the Bogner bone dry to hear that woodiness that i like. On a relatively large gig (for me) I missed my big old chewy sound, but certainally the Suhr gave me nice cut..but it was just that fizz I couldn't get away from.

Both great amps though and you really need to try them out before deciding.

Big Jazzer":2b0608cw said:
Got a loaner of the Bogner Anniv 101A
traded the PT100 temporarily so we could both check out 2 top amps

Cleans: the PT is all a clean channel needs to be. Same across the OD range. Best clean channel on the market IMO.
Bogner really sorted out the clean on this amp. It has warmth and power and kept me playing. Much to like here.

Drive channels: The PT snarls, has a high mid dominance and spits at you in true modded Marshall fashion.
there is a steel wool fur to the attack, so not super tight and won't suit the modern ultra high gain freaks (said with respect).
it suits aggressive, knarly stand-out tracks
The Bogner has huge low-end, not so much in the way of mids, and a rasp to the top, much higher than the majority of the fundamental sound, that I couldn't dial out
Even with the plethora of options (which are now perfect), it didn't work for me at all.
The strangest thing about the amp is the sound on chs 2/3 gives the impression that it is the greatest tone, but is coming from 3ft behind the speaker cab - the clips on James Lugo's High Gain Amp Shootout confirm this. I mistakenly thought it was a more ambient recording than the others. That cool sound you hear you cannot get to, it just won't come forward into the room, or to the mic.

I have called the PT back as the Bogner is off never to be turned on again.
The 101B sounds much better for drive, with a smoother top, although still light in the mids.
the 100A I recently tried at volume slayed them both with thick mids and no rasp. Make that again Rheinhold, and I will wait in line.

I much prefer the OD-100 Classic+ for that middle ground from. It is warmer and thicker than the PT with less rough edges.

Picture analogy for fun
Bogner:
Cave_troll.jpg


PT100:
orc.jpg


Classic+:
picstoppic.jpg
 
MantraSky":26ba4i2y said:
I've owned about all of the XTC's 100b, 101b & Classic. I've had on loan a 20th that I tried out and it was very nice, although I had an older EL-34 Shiva (modified) that I liked a lot more than any of the XTC models. I recently received my CAA PT100 and I just love it! There were some modifications that Chris did for me but overall very similar to the general PT100 specifications. I think the first thing to decide is weather you prefer a "Low-mid" or "High-mid" tonality that does make a difference in how your going to hear the amp. I remember my first impression when I got my first XTC 100b, and this is coming from years of modified Marshall's & Soldano SLO's, I thought "why is my XTC so dead sounding?" The next thing I remember was when I was in a rehearsal studio, the manager and engineer came up to me after and asked why does it sound a little "Muffled?" That was my experience with Low-mid emphasized amps, and personally I felt "Live" the SLO smoked any XTC! The 20th is probably the best balanced of all the XTC's. 100b open sounding and not to compressed, Efx-loop was so so. 101b has the most compression of all the XTC's, I think it's better for players that use more "Legato" where you dig-into the notes, Efx-loop is very good. The Classic has the least compression, a little more open, but similar tonality and of all the XTC's (a little sterile sounding) that's where a little more compression would help, there are excursion switches and so on, but they don't really do much. I judge an amp by the way it plays live and in the studio, although sometimes that "One" special amp that does one thing great, might be what I need. My PT100 is just the greatest! It has that modified Marshall Plexi/JCM800 that I gravitate to, and with an Awesome Fender Twin/Deluxe Clean it's the best of both worlds! I love the fact that you can still have the PT100 modified to your needs, whereas the XTC there's not much that you can do. I prefer the "High-mid" tone over the XTC because in a band mix, it just feels right and with the PT100's "Feedback" control, you can set the amount of attack & feel so that in itself is way more versatile. The PT100 "Solid-State" EFX-loop is absolutely awesome! I personally like Effects loops, where a little reverb and more can be inserted into the signal (TC Electronics & Lexicon etc.) but I also believe pedals sound better in the front and the PT100 is very pedal friendly, again very versatile. Live the PT100 is fantastic, it can be very loud but controlled with a wonderful Organic tone, aggressive & articulative. I love the fact that it follows the way that I play, a lot of the tone aspect comes from my fingers, whereas many amps I have to change a little of my technique. Extremely well thought out piece of equipment, that is so inspiring to play, that even hardcore Marshall players come up to me after a show, to ask me question about my amp? Overall this is one of "THE" best amplifiers that I've had, I can get any amp (I've had most), the PT100 has worked out perfectly in all aspect of music. John, Chris and the rest of the Suhr team are wonderful to work with, great company of musicians :)

You say you've owned a 100B and call it low mid focus? I'm sorry but my 100B screams upper mids from A to Z, on all 3 channels, not sure if yours was properly set up.

Anyways, I love the 100B, but I've been craving for an SLO all my life, it's about time I get one. By the way someone offered me a PT100 for my 100B, but I am not into the Suhr amps (though I haven't played a PT one yet).
 
MantraSky":3011w1be said:
hunter, your very mistaken about the 100b as "Not" being Lower-Mid focused! I've known Reinhold for many years and he would be the first to say "ABSOLUTELY". Players such as Vai & Lynch, got Rid of there 100b's because of tone issues! (along with many others) The 100b is a good amp, but live or in the studio the PT100 smokes it! Reinhold told me there were to many discrepancies with the 100b PC board and components, that he felt wasn't really up to par of what he thought as being good, so he discontinued that model, for a completely new PCB and component choice. If it was the best of his capability, he would have never stopped production, he would have kept building them like the SLO! That's why he doesn't ever plan to build the 100b again! To make a statement that you don't like the PT100, although you've NEVER played one, you based this on "Internet Clips?" I make my living as a studio musician, with top professionals. If the 100b was a great amp, why are more people selling them, than people with PT100's? (but then Who Cares) Many professional guitarists in fact have John Suhr completely gut-out and rebuild there Marshall's & Fender's, and keep them looking "Stock" (endorsement agreements, when performing live), this is also the same with Michael Soldano. To reference if my 100b was setup properly?? I sat with Reinhold and tweaked the amp, while it was hooked up to Oscilloscopes and Fluke Meters, if Reinhold didn't like a preamp or power tube, he would replace them all. My appreciation for the PT100, of course is my opinion, but if it wasn't for the fact that so many engineers, producers & musicians (along with guitarists) that love the tone and versatility (which I don't care if they like it or not), I can only go from my experience and those of friends and professionals. Bogner makes wonderful products, I liked the 100b more than the other XTC's, again my modified (Cameron) Shiva would kill the 100b! Recently I saw a 100b for sale on "The Gear Page" emporium, where the seller wants X amount for sale, or his first choice was to trade for a PT100 and his second was the SLO. It doesn't really matter, you like what you like. But before I claim to not like an amp and to state it on a forum, I would have to have full experience with it, because other than that I would be speaking from ignorance, enjoy what you have :)

I didn't say I don't like the PT100, I said I didn't like the other Suhr amps I heard/played (OD100 /SE/+/etc).

And as a matter of fact, my 100B is still upper mid focussed, although you say it wasn't, I've owned a few amps too. My Shiva was lower mid focused for sure, but the 100B is bright.
 
hunter, the 100b might have a little more treble than other XTC's, in comparison to Marshall, SLO & PT100 it's low-mid emphasize!
 
For a rock sound, the Bogner 101B on its own in a room has you believing that you have the sound you need.
put that sound near your drummer and you wonder where your cutting tone went.
I found it (strangely) was the best Robben Ford tone I've ever had when in a blues trio using the blue channel and
a healthy amount of gain, and that was with relatively high gain pick-ups on an Ernie Ball EVH.
in the room, the PT will have you at first trying to dial out the rasp, but you get it in the mix with the band,
and that melts away to leave you sitting out front with your more robust mids
 
Big Jazzer":18p8vmi5 said:
For a rock sound, the Bogner 101B on its own in a room has you believing that you have the sound you need.
put that sound near your drummer and you wonder where your cutting tone went.
I found it (strangely) was the best Robben Ford tone I've ever had when in a blues trio using the blue channel and
a healthy amount of gain, and that was with relatively high gain pick-ups on an Ernie Ball EVH.
in the room, the PT will have you at first trying to dial out the rasp, but you get it in the mix with the band,
and that melts away to leave you sitting out front with your more robust mids
The guitarist in Rascal Flats uses 2 white Bogners 20th A XTC on stage and for a Country Rock band sounds great and cuts through.

edit: I am not really much on Country music at all either. Went to see them with sum women. :doh:
 
jlbaxe":1uav8s2v said:
The guitarist in Rascal Flats uses 2 white Bogners 20th A XTC on stage and for a Country Rock band sounds great and cuts through.

edit: I am not really much on Country music at all either. Went to see them with sum women. :doh:
they have a solid groove and righteous guitar tones
my guess would be he uses either the clean or the plexi mode with pedals for the cut
 
Back
Top