NAD: Bogner Snorkler 50

  • Thread starter Thread starter braintheory
  • Start date Start date
braintheory said:
I agree on Fortin, but that’s not a very high bar lol. I agree the cleans were among the best I’ve heard in a high gain. If it weren’t for that super filtered/clinical/cardboard-y quality it had across the board on every mode and setting I probably would’ve loved it. In some ways that may be subtle, but once I heard it I couldn’t unhear it and the feel was too disconnected (opposite of say a iic+ or Rev 1 Uber). It took away my enjoyment from what I think otherwise could’ve been a great amp. Would it kill the amp to have at least an ounce of richness or warmth to it? Even the Hermansson’s have a little bit of that, while also being tighter and sharper, but I digress

The UU also had almost great mid gain rock tones in there, but for that in particular (as well as for bluesy stuff) is where it’s imo especially not acceptable to have such a filtered/synthetic sound to be appropriate at least for what I’d want in those styles. In modern metal it’s become normal, but still never liked it
Click to expand...

I can understand your thoughts regarding the UU not being the most organic amp and to some extent I can agree that it is a bit synthetic sounding but not near as processed/synthetic/filtered sounding as something like Engl, KSR(Orion), Diezel. Next to a Wizard, old Marshall, Naylor, Peters, list goes on-on-on-sure, not gonna be near as open/organic...but I don't think it was meant to be that. What is does is modern hyper aggressive balls out metal and it does that in spades IMHO. As far as lacking richness/warmth...I'm lost with your feelings on that aspect, maybe the EL34 version is that different from the KT88.

The KT88 HPV UU I have is one of the most rich/thick/juicy/meaty saturated gain structures I've heard with great warmth while being insanely cutting with wicked attack. Can get that wicked low mid chew Bogner's known for the way I set it but also has a unique upper mid grind/attack. Is it modern sounding...well...it's named the Uber Ultra...LOL! But for being such an insanely modern, aggressive, cutting, thick, saturated amp, I feel it still offers great warmth for the amount of growl/grind/attack it gives up while remaining crazy articulate.
 
Last edited:
Been watching a lot more videos on this and damn, I don't typically check out these types of amps but it's got every classic tone in there. From Rhodes to Cantrell, AC DC and all that.
 
OldGtrGuy said:
Been watching a lot more videos on this and damn, I don't typically check out these types of amps but it's got every classic tone in there. From Rhodes to Cantrell, AC DC and all that.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Of course it can nail Cantrell, but surprisingly do so much more including what you said. It’s honestly one of my favorite classic rock amps too. Some may disagree with me here, but I’d rank it just one spot higher than my ‘69 plexi for classic rock and I love that amp a lot. The only things I wouldn’t choose it for would be a lot of modern metal scenarios, which this wasn’t meant for or cleans, but it can even get decent enough cleans on the blue gain mode. I can’t say enough good things about it
 
Last edited:
MrWoodchuck said:
Agreed, the Uber Ultra has been the amp I have been most disappointed with in the last few years. I had so much excitement when I bought it but then was just too filtered sounding.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Seems we have similar taste
 
MrWoodchuck said:
Agreed, the Uber Ultra has been the amp I have been most disappointed with in the last few years. I had so much excitement when I bought it but then was just too filtered sounding.
Click to expand...
Same with me. I will certainly say it was a super tight, aggressive and punchy modern metal beast. But gone, in my opinion, were most of the elements that made me love the older Ubers and Bogners in general.
 
MetalHeadMike said:
I can understand your thoughts regarding the UU not being the most organic amp and to some extent I can agree that it is a bit synthetic sounding but near as processed/synthetic/filtered sounding as something like Engl, KSR(Orion), Diezel. Next to a Wizard, old Marshall, Naylor, Peters, list goes on-on-on-sure, not gonna be near as open/organic...but I don't think it was meant to be that. What is does is modern hyper aggressive balls out metal and it does that in spades IMHO. As far as lacking richness/warmth...I'm lost with your feelings on that aspect, maybe the EL34 version is that different from the KT88.

The KT88 HPV UU I have is one of the most rich/thick/juicy/meaty saturated gain structures I've heard with great warmth while being insanely cutting with wicked attack. Can get that wicked low mid chew Bogner's known for the way I set it but also has a unique upper mid grind/attack. Is it modern sounding...well...it's named the Uber Ultra...LOL! But for being such an insanely modern, aggressive, cutting, thick, saturated amp, I feel it still offers great warmth for the amount of growl/grind/attack it gives up while remaining crazy articulate.
Click to expand...
I guess we just disagree here. I agree on the UU being plenty thick in the low mids as all Uber's are and being very cutting and tight (if dialed in to be), but it is to me about as far away from warm, rich or juicy as it gets, especially when it was directly compared to my Rev 1 Uber and didn't have the Rev 1's chewiness at all and the Rev 1 Uber honestly, as much as I still love it to death, actually lacks chewiness and some of that type of good stuff vs this Snorkler (all relative based on these AB comparisons). I think it's partly the lack of some overtones maybe that results in such lack of warmth/richenss, there was just a lack of interesting stuff going on around the notes as they ring out that you'd hear in top tier amps that creates that tonal complexity and magic that really inspires me to listen. It was actually kind of amazing to me that an amp that is so high gain and compressed can somehow still feel so disconnected to play/lacking that liquid connection like say a iic+ (mainly for leads), but at the same type definitely not a dry amp either like a VH4 or most Fryette's. Guys I know who had both a KT88 and EL34 version didn't seem to think they differed that much. I'd imagine liking a KT88 one a bit less even with higher PV being a nice plus, but who knows

I think really though I just can't stand the sound of those really filtered sounding amps. I won't mention it publicly here, but there's other filtered sounding amps I hate that others here love. I love a good modern, tight, cutting, aggressive amp, especially for how I typically play, but my favorites can do it without being filtered, clinical/sterile, cardboard-y or lacking that nuance or complexity in tone I like such as the Hell Razor, Hermansson's, Dino, Rev 1 Uber or Lenz High Octane (at least modern enough to me). A Klon boosted IIC+ or Rev C also are up there for that to me. I don't interpret those as modern sounding, but imo still can work plenty well for it
 
Last edited:
VHTStark said:
Same with me. I will certainly say it was a super tight, aggressive and punchy modern metal beast. But gone, in my opinion, were most of the elements that made me love the older Ubers and Bogners in general.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Sorta like how from concentrate oj has the oj flavor, but not what actually makes the fresh squeezed one taste better. It's like the chewiness, richness, warmth and greasy feel were the pulp/remnants so to speak that were filtered out in the UU. I appreciated how it could get so tight, punchy, modern and cutting, but then the Hell Razor was so much better in those departments (I know it's overpriced blah blah) and was wondering why keep it. Also, kind of like with the iic+ vs the mark 7 when I AB'ed them, although it was much tighter sounding than my Rev 1 Uber, somehow it didn't track very fast palm mutes as well or with as much distinction to individual notes despite the Rev 1 being looser and bouncier
 
B. Ste said:
Any pictures of the back of the amp?? Sooooo tempted
Click to expand...
braintheory said:
Exactly! Of course it can nail Cantrell, but surprisingly do so much more including what you said. It’s honestly one of my favorite classic rock amps too. Some may disagree with me here, but I’d rank it just one spot higher than my ‘69 plexi for classic rock and I love that amp a lot. The only things I wouldn’t choose it for would be a lot of modern metal scenarios, which this wasn’t meant for or cleans, but it can even get decent enough cleans on the blue gain mode. I can’t say enough good things about it
Click to expand...
I am surprised by the blue mode as well. Wasn’t expecting much out of it. It actually has a really soulful sound and is versatile enough to cover classic Marshall tones
 
braintheory said:
I guess we just disagree here. I agree on the UU being plenty thick in the low mids as all Uber's are and being very cutting and tight (if dialed in to be), but it is to me about as far away from warm, rich or juicy as it gets, especially when it was directly compared to my Rev 1 Uber and didn't have the Rev 1's chewiness at all and the Rev 1 Uber honestly, as much as I still love it to death, actually lacks chewiness and some of that type of good stuff vs this Snorkler (all relative based on these AB comparisons). I think it's partly the lack of some overtones maybe that results in such lack of warmth/richenss, there was just a lack of interesting stuff going on around the notes as they ring out that you'd hear in top tier amps that creates that tonal complexity and magic that really inspires me to listen. It was actually kind of amazing to me that an amp that is so high gain and compressed can somehow still feel so disconnected to play/lacking that liquid connection like say a iic+ (mainly for leads), but at the same type definitely not a dry amp either like a VH4 or most Fryette's. Guys I know who had both a KT88 and EL34 version didn't seem to think they differed that much. I'd imagine liking a KT88 one a bit less even with higher PV being a nice plus, but who knows

I think really though I just can't stand the sound of those really filtered sounding amps. I won't mention it publicly here, but there's other filtered sounding amps I hate that others here love. I love a good modern, tight, cutting, aggressive amp, especially for how I typically play, but my favorites can do it without being filtered, clinical/sterile, cardboard-y or lacking that nuance or complexity in tone I like such as the Hell Razor, Hermansson's, Dino, Rev 1 Uber or Lenz High Octane (at least modern enough to me). A Klon boosted IIC+ or Rev C also are up there for that to me. I don't interpret those as modern sounding, but imo still can work plenty well for it
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong at all with disagreeing, we all hear/experience things differently. You and I have similar thoughts in some respects to gear but here we clearly have different opinions on other things. I have to wonder if you played mine the way I have it set up with pretty unconventional settings if your opinion would change. I honestly don't care a lick and I'm not some UU fanboy in the least. In fact, when I first got mine I hated it, like listed it the very next day hated it, but after some bias adjust (which was grossly off), and tweaking of settings and chain, I found some settings that really impress me.

The way I have it setup and boosted, its juicy as hell, like really juicy and it has that Bogner chewiness with a little bit of bloom going on in power chords. The warmth part is where we likely perceive things most differently and that could also be due to the variation in setup/signal chain but it could also be we just perceive that aspect that differently.

I know your opinions and preferences and you very much prefer all things vintage which by nature is gonna have a "woodiness" a "roundness" that can translate to "warmth". Guitars, amps, pedals, speakers...you are very vocal about how much you prefer vintage attributes of all gear. So it would make sense you find modern gear "cardboardy" "plastic" "synthetic", "processed" "filtered". You also apparently have an exceptionally keen ear and must detect things that many of us just don't hear. I hear these things too and can pick these attributes out but I guess when it comes to more modern metal tones, I've learned to accept some degree of "synthetic" "filtered" nature of a lot of modern gear. Some gear has way too much of that "filtered" thing going and I can think of several amps and OD pedals I owned that didn't last long especially when AB'd against something like a Wizard, Naylor, or TC1140, or SD-1.
 
Last edited:
MetalHeadMike said:
Nothing wrong at all with disagreeing, we all hear/experience things differently. You and I have similar thoughts in some respects to gear but here we clearly have different opinions on other things. I have to wonder if you played mine the way I have it set up with pretty unconventional settings if your opinion would change. I honestly don't care a lick and not some some UU fanboy in the least. In fact, when I first got mine I hated it, like listed it the very next day hated it, but after some bias adjust (which was grossly off), and tweaking of settings and chain, I found some settings that really impress me.

The way I have it setup and boosted, its juicy as hell, like really juicy and it has that Bogner chewiness with a little bit of bloom going on in power chords. The warmth part is where we likely perceive things most differently and that could also be due to the variation in setup/signal chain but it could also just be we just perceive that aspect that differently.

I know your opinions and preferences and you very much prefer all things vintage which by nature is gonna have a "woodiness" a "roundness" that can translate to "warmth". Guitars, amps, pedals, speakers...you are very vocal about how much you prefer vintage attributes of all gear. So it would make sense you find modern gear "cardboardy" "plastic" "synthetic", "processed" "filtered". You also apparently have an exceptionally keen ear and must detect things that many of us just don't hear. I hear these things too and can pick these attributes out but I guess when it comes to more modern metal tones, I've learned to accept some degree of "synthetic" "filtered" nature of a lot of modern gear. Some gear has way too much of that "filtered" thing going and I can think of several amps and OD pedals I owned that didn't last long especially when AB'd against something like a Wizard, Naylor, or TC1140, or SD-1.
Click to expand...
Interesting that your UU was severely underbiased....if that's the case for those amps in general, that would explain the reason why many of the owners returned the amp.
Speaking from experience, if I receive an amp that sounds terrible I immediately check the bias and 100% of the time it's WAAY underbiased. Typically manufacturers would do that to protect against warranty claims as these modern tubes are shit and test at barely 80% on my tube tester, when I've bought any new amps(MT100, EVH stuff).
 
braintheory said:
Exactly! Of course it can nail Cantrell, but surprisingly do so much more including what you said. It’s honestly one of my favorite classic rock amps too. Some may disagree with me here, but I’d rank it just one spot higher than my ‘69 plexi for classic rock and I love that amp a lot. The only things I wouldn’t choose it for would be a lot of modern metal scenarios, which this wasn’t meant for or cleans, but it can even get decent enough cleans on the blue gain mode. I can’t say enough good things about it
Click to expand...
Honestly when I heard the Blizzard of Ozz tone I was pretty surprised. Definitely a badass amp for those tones, obviously as we can all agree not everyone likes the same cup of tea but there's definitely a Bogner for everyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top