PT 100 vs. Bogner Ecstasy

heatpad

Active Member
Messages
47
When comparing amps, statements like "X amp blows Y amp out of the water" are not particularly helpful. It only has meaning if we have a sense of what you are looking for in an amp. If what you like differs significantly from what I like the statement may be meaningless but if we look for the same thing in an amp it may be more informative.

In my experience regarding amps on this level, none get blown out of the water, it's just a matter of what you like personally. If everybody was looking for the same thing out of an amp there would only be one amp design with very slight variations on the theme, but clearly people have different tastes.

Saying what you like and don't like specifically about an amp is much more helpful than statements like "blows it out of the water". Who the hell even knows what that means anyway?
In my experience, based on amps of this level, one should do proper research, rather then get a bunch of opinions thrown at them from every direction, mine included.
I like amps that tend to be "in your face". IMO the Ecstasy does not have that quality. I liked the amp when I had it, dialed it in to what I liked, but in the end, it was too much low-mids based and too far-away sounding.
The SLO is the opposite of that and so is the PT100.....IMO

Depends what you wanna hear. I was just offered up a friend's new 101b. He decided his Mesa MK-V suited his needs better and put the Bogner for sale.
All these amps are excellent, it just depends on your application.
Sorry for the short "blow it out of the water" description.

As to YT vids, some are recorded very good. I can usually get a read on an amps tonality using YT as a research tool.

Good luck on whatever amp, they all rock-

 

stratzrus

Philadelphia Jazz, Funk, and R&B
Silver Supporting Member
Messages
20,871
As to YT vids, some are recorded very good. I can usually get a read on an amps tonality using YT as a research tool.
In my opinion, good YouTube clips beat the pants off biased descriptions on intarwebz message boards.
The key being "well recorded" YT clips. Pete Thorn makes some great ones. Others who only use a camera mike can be pretty useless.

Even when the clips are well recorded, how the player decides to dial in the amp is extremely subjective and what you think is a crappy sounding amp may just be an amp dialed in far from what you would ever consider.

I like to listen to clips and read people's opinions in forums, but nothing beats playing through the amp, both at home and with a group, but when you can't do that, chewing the fat with your TGp buds can be entertaining and even informative once you read enough of their posts that you understand the personal bias of the poster.

By the way Thump, I can finally read your posts without wincing. It killed me that I missed the sale of your Deliverance 4x12 by a few hours and had to wait until last week to find one at the same price (how long has it been?). Every time I saw your name I thought of missing that cab. My dream finally came true on Wednesday. Joy. :banana
 

sinasl1

Supporting Member
Messages
8,663
In my opinion, good YouTube clips beat the pants off biased descriptions on intarwebz message boards.
yes, this-

"good" meaning mic the thing and record it properly

For instance, I guarantee you, if you get a PT100 based on my demo vid, you aren't going to say "geez I couldn't make it sound like that video". It sounds exactly like it sounds in the video. If you dig that tone, cool, if not, that's ok too. There's no mystery when you put a 57 in front of an amp and hit an A chord. At least with the same speaker, That's the way it sounds! Period!
 

Melodyman

Member
Messages
2,341
When listening to clips a good player can be distracting (in a good way) to the point of having trouble separating the great technique from the tone. I know for me I tend to focus on the playing and the tone takes a backseat and is harder for me to focus on. They really are quite intertwined imo.

Which is why when listening to clips I prefer average simple playing, it's easier to focus on the tone and not be so dazzled by the playing, lol.

Having said that I've been burned by some great clips in the past, not because the tone itself was so completely different once I had the amp at home, but because it was me playing through it.
 

SReynolds

Supporting Member
Messages
1,650
I was able to hit every single tone Pete got in his video, which had me smiling from ear to ear. Now Pete was hittin on all my favorite stuff as well. Petes video is dead on accurate, as the amp is to the music it was designed to reproduce. Pete is a monster player and knows all the stuff needed to make an amp extremly versatile, and cover so many generations of music with this kind of accuratcy is still leaving me somewhat baffled. Pete should be proud of his self, hell I'm proud of him. And very appreciative!:bow
 

sinasl1

Supporting Member
Messages
8,663
When listening to clips a good player can be distracting (in a good way) to the point of having trouble separating the great technique from the tone. I know for me I tend to focus on the playing and the tone takes a backseat and is harder for me to focus on. They really are quite intertwined imo.

Which is why when listening to clips I prefer average simple playing, it's easier to focus on the tone and not be so dazzled by the playing, lol.

Having said that I've been burned by some great clips in the past, not because the tone itself was so completely different once I had the amp at home, but because it was me playing through it.
I think the key is good, straightforward, simple playing, with 70/30 rhythm to lead ratio, or something like that. Just real world playing. This is what I try and do. Nothing I play in those demos is that extraordinary, just basic riffs executed with some feel, dynamics and clean technique, that's my goal.
 

troykennedy

Member
Messages
1,693
And we love that you do that Pete. It is so very helpful! I have spent a bunch of money on gear and not been disappointed or felt misled from your demo's. Kudo's bro!

I think the key is good, straightforward, simple playing, with 70/30 rhythm to lead ratio, or something like that. Just real world playing. This is what I try and do. Nothing I play in those demos is that extraordinary, just basic riffs executed with some feel, dynamics and clean technique, that's my goal.
 

SgtThump

Member
Messages
7,835
I think the key is good, straightforward, simple playing, with 70/30 rhythm to lead ratio, or something like that. Just real world playing. This is what I try and do. Nothing I play in those demos is that extraordinary, just basic riffs executed with some feel, dynamics and clean technique, that's my goal.
I totally agree with you and I try to do that same thing when I make demo videos.

I'm actually using a Zoom Q3 recorder, instead of close-mic'ing and I find that it does a pretty darn good job for being such an easy setup!
 

se7en

Senior Member
Messages
366
For me the 20th Ann. Ecstasy is the best amp I've heard or played. It is actually easy to dial in and the switches are much more effective, whereas the 101b took some serious tweaking. It has more of a Marshall bite than other Ecstasy's and is tighter and more open sounding.

If I had to choose between a 101b or the PT100, I'd go with the PT. Although, I hear something in the high end that I can't bond with and couldn't seem to dial out. It sounds too fuzzy/grainy to me. I'd probably go with an SLO instead...which I used to own. Ultimately, it didn't have the wideness and raunch that I get out of my XTC.

To me, what Bogner does is much more original than Suhr and I like playing something with a unique character. If I wanted a Marshall, I'd buy one.

Just my honest, 2 c.
 

Smokin

Active Member
Messages
82
To me, what Bogner does is much more original than Suhr and I like playing something with a unique character. If I wanted a Marshall, I'd buy one.

Just my honest, 2 c.
+1. I had a PT100, but sold it after getting a modded JCM 800. I agree about the grainy high end. The clean channel was very nice, though. The Bogner 20th X is a fantastic amp and about as good as it gets for an all-in-one. It's the one amp I'd choose to keep if I had to narrow it down to just one. If you can't get one, an X Classic would be my choice.
 

sinasl1

Supporting Member
Messages
8,663
Ya, you know, I think it comes down to: if you dig the Bogner voicing, great, and if you dig the CAA PT voicing, great. They are quite different. Different strokes.
 

iggs

Member
Messages
2,615
Ya, you know, I think it comes down to: if you dig the Bogner voicing, great, and if you dig the CAA PT voicing, great. They are quite different. Different strokes.
:aok ... that's the beauty of it, there's something for everyone!
 

In Absentia

Member
Messages
7,193
I played an Xtc and it was a great amp, but too dark and distant sounding for me. Thought the low end was really soft as well. Probably one of the best amps I have played but didnz't fit my playing style.

I want a PT in the worst way. Suhr is putting out some great amps*

*not suggesting the other builders aren't putting out incredible products, as both Soldano and Bogner are BOTH doing.
 

Wolf Child

Member
Messages
673
I'm biased... :)

But I think the PT kicks the Ecstacy's ass. And I think the bogner is pretty good. But the PT is more "real" Marshall sounding (in the upper mids it has that kerrang!! That s Marshall is supposed to have) and at the same time the clean is more "real" Fender sounding. Best Clean on the market in a channel switcher IMHO.
I love KERRANG!!
 

lifeson1

Supporting Member
Messages
2,774
I went head to head with a 101b and CAA for over an hour on each, and CAA won, hands down. I came in with the intent on running rampant with the Bogner, it looked sexier and had that 'mystique' around it. The CAA just happened to be sitting right across from it and I decided to give it a whirl. The CAA ended it for me, end of story.
 

Dave_C

Member
Messages
14,114
Ya, you know, I think it comes down to: if you dig the Bogner voicing, great, and if you dig the CAA PT voicing, great. They are quite different. Different strokes.
That's what I was going to say. My impression just from clips is that they're really apples and oranges. I also hear a graininess in the PT-100 top end that I don't hear in the XTC, but the 70s and 80s Marshalls I grew up with had that too. That's really just a part of that era of Marshall's evolution and shows up in a lot of popular music which used those amps.
 

Bucktone

Member
Messages
98
I am also looking at the Splawn Nitro and SLO, but the Nitro is not the most versatile from what I've heard. Thanks!
If you are looking for good cleans stay away form anything that says splawn. I owned a nitro and loved it, but the cleans were horrid.
 

suparsonic

Member
Messages
2,793
Maybe the OP needs to decide on a prefered voicing. How many channels etc. As mentioned th PT has a killer clean, which could be the decider.
 




Trending Topics

Top