Suhr Badger vs. Marshall 2061x

Messages
16
I've compared the two and I have nothing bad to say about either one. they're both great, little tone monsters and very close in sound. the Badger of course has more gain and is also louder than 18 watts and alot louder than the Marshall. They both sound about the same..great but you have to blast them. The Badger's power scaling didn't seem that usable to me for example my Einstein 100's Master stomped the Badger's power scaling feature badly. I can play my Einstein at any time, LOWER than normal talking levels and still sounds like a monster, it's just incredible.

With the Badger even at 0 power I had to crank the drive to get any decent tone out of it and it was still very weak. Blast the Badger and it kills though, a great little amp. Just louder than what people think.
 

beej

Member
Messages
862
FWIW, I use the Badger at very low power (just keep the drive two notches above) and it sounds exactly the same as it does at louder volumes. Same thing in the Peter Thorn YouTube video- you can hear the tone is pretty damn consistent as the power is lowered.
 
Messages
16
FWIW, I use the Badger at very low power (just keep the drive two notches above) and it sounds exactly the same as it does at louder volumes. Same thing in the Peter Thorn YouTube video- you can hear the tone is pretty damn consistent as the power is lowered.

That's what I was trying to get with mine but never happened. I tried power at 0 and drive at 2 and also power 2 drive at 4 which sounded killer but was loud there.
 

Mondoslug

Member
Messages
3,711
My Badger has a really, really great clean sound...if you want that and of course it does the othe other things also.
 

Dave_C

Member
Messages
14,095
Haven't compared the amps, but I set my Badger up for a clean tone which is just below preamp and power amp clipping (Power is 2-3 notches above Drive, Gain at '3') and then whack it with pedals for all dirt needs. Sounds amazing...in the same league as my $3-$4K boutique channel switchers. The Power Scaling works extremely well to cover my quietest gigs, but EQ needs adjusting at super quiet levels to compensate for Fletcher-Munson. I do find my Engl SE 6L6 master volumes to work better though. But, I really don't care too much about bedroom levels. My goal is the best feel/tone possible at quiet gigs...where having great tone really matters!
 

farlowhigh

Member
Messages
1,186
fwiw I will agree with the post that the Badger sounds basically the same at almost every volume. I think the powerscaling works amazingly well and does exactly what I hoped it would do. The Pete Thorn demo and the other clips on suhrguitars.com are quite representative and I don't find the amp weak at all at very low volume...any tube amp I've ever heard will start to sound thin at super low volume such as quiet conversation levels but that is partly about the Fletcher Munson thing and the way our ears hear different frequencies differently at different volumes. You can adjust the very interactive and sensitive EQ to make up perceived losses of this or that part of the sound.

The amp was designed with powerscaling in mind and I think Suhr did a great job getting the amp to sound basically the same at most volumes. I would advise the OP to check out the Thorn demo and the Landau clips--Landau plays the same riff 4 times at various levels of power and it sounds really similar at radically different volume levels. I think that is accurate and representative of the amp. Those clips are the best way to hear specifically the powerscaling and how it sounds at different volumes. Pete Thorn does a brief demo of the powerscaling but he is mostly demonstrating the range of sounds you can get out of the amp. If you are considering the Badger at all, definitely watch the Thorn demo and listen to the Landau clips.

I also love the Badger clean sound and there is a really really nice clip by Andy Most showcasing the Badger clean. It is also on suhrguitars.com. Isn't that you, Mondoslug? Great playing and the amp sounds great to my ears as well. It really helped me decide on getting the Badger (I had to buy it without hearing it in person--not ideal but I have never regretted my purchase for a second)


There is obviously some subjective element to this but I find power scaling more effective than any master volume set up. OTOH, the master volume on the Fargen Miniplex II is unusually effective and some people have apparently gotten the powerscaling taken out as the master volume is so good as to make the power scaling seem less necessary. I personally like having the powerscaling on the Miniplex II and the Badger and I find them incredibly effective ways to get the full range of tube amp sounds at whatever volume you want...it is a godsend for people playing at home or any space on the smaller side...I agree that Badger sounds amazing cranked but I would say it sounds great at low volume as well.

There are clearly better and worse master volumes...I do think the master volumes on Top Hat amps (the Vanderbilt for instance) are unusually effective and maybe a good master volume is all you need but I think powerscaling offers something new and to my ears better in what is preserved and what is lost when playing at very low volume. Apparently powerscaling can be implemented in different ways and it is not always equally suited to every type of amp.

Remember that with the power and drive controls around noon, the Badger is only putting out about 4 watts and so anything below that is less than 4 watts. I think the Badger sounds amazing down to about what sounds like maybe half a watt...below that level, it is hard to get a tube amp to sound like itself, although I think the Badger does as well as any of them. I find the Miniplex II also does the very low volume thing incredibly well and you can really get those low volume saturated sounds that Ben Fargen so ably demonstrates on his youtube demos.

I haven't heard the Einstein and so I can't really compare it to the Badger...I guess I would just say that most people I know have been really impressed with the powerscaling on the Badger and this is the first time I have ever heard anyone suggest it doesn't work well at all. Of course this is just my opinion and you are completely entitled to your opinion but I wanted to put in a word for all the happy Badger owners who find the powerscaling to be as effective as the Pete Thorn demo (and the Landau clips are equally impressive and accurate) led us to think it was. I don't want the OP to get the idea that this is a common complaint for the Badger.
 

JohnM

Member
Messages
706
We have both of them at the studio and each has it's own thing. The Badger gets a more grainy, distorted overdrive sound and the Marshall has a cleaner, more traditional overdrive sound. The Marshall has an ok clean sound, but not much headroom. The strong suit of that amp is def overdrive.
The Badger will get a more modern sounding gain, and generally a more aggressive sound. IMO the Marshall records better, but that's totally opinion.
 

jhansenku

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
964
Just curious what you badger owners are using for overdrive pedals. Any one using the Lovepedal Eternity?
 

Dave

Member
Messages
3,547
Just curious what you badger owners are using for overdrive pedals. Any one using the Lovepedal Eternity?
This is where the Badger really excels. It takes pedals better than any amp I've ever owned. I like the Badger set on the edge of breakup and hit it with an OD for more distortion or roll back the guitar volume for cleans.

The Eternity wasn't my cup-o-tea, but I've never heard an OD that didn't work well with the Badger. I like the Timmy, Barber Direct Drive and Keeley Rat, but whatever OD pedal you prefer should work great.
 

jhansenku

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
964
Which one is your preferred pedal with the Badger, Timmy, Barber Direct or Keely Rat?
 

Dave

Member
Messages
3,547
If I had to choose just one I'd go with the Timmy, but finding the right dirt pedal is a very personal choice. The Badger is a great platform for pedals IMO.
 

tonecrazy

Member
Messages
117
If I had to choose just one I'd go with the Timmy, but finding the right dirt pedal is a very personal choice. The Badger is a great platform for pedals IMO.

The right pedal is a personal choice. It also depends a lot on your speakers. I love the eternity with my Badger. I use scumback m75's so the additional treble boost and slight mid scoop of the E really is amazing. I tried the same setup with H speakers and didn't like the E as much as say a BB preamp. Tone is often like old people on meds. You take one to solve one problem, then you have take another to solve a problem the first pill caused, etc. The key is to get the order right. Pick out the amp you love the most, then speakers, then your drive. Good luck!!
 

Moods

Member
Messages
993
I've owned and really enjoyed both. They are similar but the character is different. The Badger is more harmonic and the Marshall is more fundemental or drier sounding IMO. The Badger tends to get grainy when pushed real hard. The Marshall sounds more defined with a nice percussive pick attack.

For cleaner sounds I would have to give the edge to the Badger. It really cleans up nice rolling back the volume on your guitar and it takes to pedals really well.

I prefer the Marshall for heavy riffin' and full up leads. It has a very traditional sound that just loves to be pushed.

The Badger definitely has a more modern vibe and the Marshall is, well, a Marshall. Both are great. If you had one amp I'd probably pick the Badger... otherwise it would be the Marshall.

<M
 

Sniper-V

Member
Messages
3,530
I've owned both of them at the same times and both are great. I sold the Badger because it was pretty similar to the 2061x and not enough to justify keeping both.

The Badger had some great tones but didn't feel right in my hands as it felt soft and compressed to much. Felt very saggy with not enough percussive-ness. I like my Marshall tones to sound tight and have attack with dynamics. With that said, the Badger did plenty of things better than the 2061x such as power scaling and unique low gained and high gained tones.

In the end the Marshall sounded more Marshall and I preferred that going through my little 18-watt amp phase. GAS has now led me into other ventures and my 2061x is now FS in the emporium. As well as my Budda TwinMaster, another killer HW 18-watt monster!
 

mooreamps

Senior Member
Messages
372
The Badger had some great tones but didn't feel right in my hands as it felt soft and compressed to much. Felt very saggy with not enough percussive-ness. I like my Marshall tones to sound tight and have attack with dynamics.

Ya, that was sort of my first impression as well. I'm sure it's probably a fine amp for any other aspects. I would expect a little more touch responce, and just wasn't hearing it. But, it would not be hard to tighten one up if that was the only thing.

-g
 

Supasso

Member
Messages
269
The Badger had some great tones but didn't feel right in my hands as it felt soft and compressed to much. Felt very saggy with not enough percussive-ness. I like my Marshall tones to sound tight and have attack with dynamics.
Funny, that's exactly why I like Badger so much.
 

tonecrazy

Member
Messages
117
EL34 instead of EL84.

Should have a lot more head room. Be a little less "fizzy". Have a more pronouced upper mid range. Lowend should be tighter and bigger. Will not be as chimey, less compressed, harder sounding. More Marshall less Vox qualities.

I will have to hear both side by side to determine which one I will like better. My gut says I will like the 18. You just can't beat the clean tones from that amp, at least not yet?
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom