UberMetalDood
New member
The first thing people probably question about an amp like this is whether it's worth the extra $$ or if it's actually better than the standard model. You don't spend this kind of money on an amp with the intention of bringing it home and comparing it with your kick-around Bugera combo. That thought doesn't even cross your mind because you firmly believe that the amp is superior in every way. When you're purchasing an amp of this caliber, it boils down to is whether it meets expectations or lives up to the hype. I'll tell you straight out that it meets expectation and lives up to the hype. The next thing you probably want to know is whether it exceeds expectations. You already know that it has the superior tone, build quality and features that you expect, but is it better than expected? That is a much harder question to answer and is one that I'll leave up to interpretation.
My first interaction with the XTC 20th ann. was that it had a better clean channel and a slightly improved red channel, but that the blue channel, as awesome as it is, doesn't quite have the same magic as the 101b blue channel. Well after buying the amp and playing it for hours on end, I would say that my initial impressions haven't changed much. Unfortunately, my fear was that I would get the 20th and be happy with everything except still miss the 101b blue channel, and that feeling persists.
Let me be clear that the 20th ann. blue channel is in no way inferior to the 101b blue channel. It's incredibly similar in fact. The thing is that the overall feel and openness of the 20th takes away something from what I personally love about the 101b blue channel. It's hard to explain, but I'll start with an overview of the basic differences between the 20th and 101B.
In a nutshell, the 20th XTC is a tweaked 101B. The overall compression is lightened and the amp is a bit more open. There is less congestion in the mid range which reduced a bit of the honk. That vowel-like "wah" thing you get with high gain isn't as present in the 20th anniversary. The low end isn't as tight because the low end seems a bit wider, but it's really kind of a subtle difference. The high end is stronger on the 20th, and I suppose it could be attributed to the differences between 6L6's and EL34's, or perhaps the openness and slightly reduced mids make it seem that way. When we're talking about mids, keep in mind that the 20th ann XTC doesn't lack any mids. It has plenty of mid range and the mid control takes it a long way, so you probably won't be missing anything.
The 20th is more unforgiving. It feels dryer, more precise, and less spongy than the 101B. The feel of it kind of reminds me of the Shiva 20th with KT88's. When set the 20th and 101B side by side, setting them with the exact same amount of gain, the 101B felt like it was playing with more gain. The 20th ann. has a true and natural gain structure.
The red channel is slightly more versatile on the 20th ann in my opinion. That might be due to the fact that it's not necessarily as compressed as the 101B.
At this point, it is far too soon to consider keeping it or going back to the 101B. The 20th ann model has not satisfied my craving for the 101B blue channel, but I may change my mind in a couple of weeks. I don't really have any reservations or criticisms. This amp is so well-made that it would be extremely difficult to find a real criticism. Although Bogner designed this amp with a 6L6 power section, at times I feel like this amp sounds like a 6L6 amp kind of trying to sound like an EL34 amp. I don't really think that, but I tend to favor EL34's. If someone didn't know it had 6L6's in it, they probably wouldn't know the difference.
By the way, the 20th anniversary head is HUGE! It's about 4-5" wider than my Goldfinger 90 head. I used to think the 101B head was kind of big compared to the Shiva, but the 20th Ann. is even bigger.
Tried it with EL34's: I'm not sure if I did it correctly, but I ran the send out to my Goldfinger 90 which has an EL34 power section. I noticed a subtle difference. It became a little crunchier and just a little bit spongier. According to the manual, the send output is preamp-out only. I didn't use line-out because it comes after the power section. If what I did was correct, and it seems to sound like it is, then there is barely a difference between EL34's and 6L6's... not enough difference to make me want the EL34 version.
However, compared to my Goldfinger 90, the XTC is much, much more unforgiving. It's very precise. Then I discovered one of the most special things about the XTC and that's how it sits in a mix. When you play the XTC, it sounds warm and almost as if it couldn't cut through. However, the way Bogner voiced the XTC makes it sit perfectly in the mix. Compared to my GF90, the XTC 20th cuts through exactly the same way except it has this warm kind of midrange that just sits on top of everything just the way you want a solo to. It's very interesting.
Furthermore, I have compared the Loud 69 setting on my GF90 to the blue channel of the XTC and it's very similar in my opinion. It might not sound exactly the same, but there is more similarities than differences.
The XTC 20th compared to the 101B yields another interesting find. To my ears, the 3 channels of the 20th ann. XTC are more similar to each other than the 3 channels of the 101B. One thing I love about the XTC is that all three channels sound unique. Unlike most amps which have clean channels that sound like clean versions of the overdrive channels, the XTC channels are quite distinctive in tone and in feel too. I'm not 100% certain of everything at this point because these are my initial impressions.
Also, I don't know if it's because my amp is new or something, but the 101B seems to be a little better at getting a low volume sound. The 20th needs just a little more volume. It's still pretty darn good for bedroom levels, especially if you use vintage mode. However, vintage mode makes you sacrifice gain so there's a bit of a trade-off. One thing I noticed that I haven't tried on other amps yet is that after letting it sit and warm up, if I turn the volume up and then down again, it sounds better at low volumes. How this be explained?
That's all for now. I'll return with some pics and hopefully good audio.
My first interaction with the XTC 20th ann. was that it had a better clean channel and a slightly improved red channel, but that the blue channel, as awesome as it is, doesn't quite have the same magic as the 101b blue channel. Well after buying the amp and playing it for hours on end, I would say that my initial impressions haven't changed much. Unfortunately, my fear was that I would get the 20th and be happy with everything except still miss the 101b blue channel, and that feeling persists.
Let me be clear that the 20th ann. blue channel is in no way inferior to the 101b blue channel. It's incredibly similar in fact. The thing is that the overall feel and openness of the 20th takes away something from what I personally love about the 101b blue channel. It's hard to explain, but I'll start with an overview of the basic differences between the 20th and 101B.
In a nutshell, the 20th XTC is a tweaked 101B. The overall compression is lightened and the amp is a bit more open. There is less congestion in the mid range which reduced a bit of the honk. That vowel-like "wah" thing you get with high gain isn't as present in the 20th anniversary. The low end isn't as tight because the low end seems a bit wider, but it's really kind of a subtle difference. The high end is stronger on the 20th, and I suppose it could be attributed to the differences between 6L6's and EL34's, or perhaps the openness and slightly reduced mids make it seem that way. When we're talking about mids, keep in mind that the 20th ann XTC doesn't lack any mids. It has plenty of mid range and the mid control takes it a long way, so you probably won't be missing anything.
The 20th is more unforgiving. It feels dryer, more precise, and less spongy than the 101B. The feel of it kind of reminds me of the Shiva 20th with KT88's. When set the 20th and 101B side by side, setting them with the exact same amount of gain, the 101B felt like it was playing with more gain. The 20th ann. has a true and natural gain structure.
The red channel is slightly more versatile on the 20th ann in my opinion. That might be due to the fact that it's not necessarily as compressed as the 101B.
At this point, it is far too soon to consider keeping it or going back to the 101B. The 20th ann model has not satisfied my craving for the 101B blue channel, but I may change my mind in a couple of weeks. I don't really have any reservations or criticisms. This amp is so well-made that it would be extremely difficult to find a real criticism. Although Bogner designed this amp with a 6L6 power section, at times I feel like this amp sounds like a 6L6 amp kind of trying to sound like an EL34 amp. I don't really think that, but I tend to favor EL34's. If someone didn't know it had 6L6's in it, they probably wouldn't know the difference.
By the way, the 20th anniversary head is HUGE! It's about 4-5" wider than my Goldfinger 90 head. I used to think the 101B head was kind of big compared to the Shiva, but the 20th Ann. is even bigger.
Tried it with EL34's: I'm not sure if I did it correctly, but I ran the send out to my Goldfinger 90 which has an EL34 power section. I noticed a subtle difference. It became a little crunchier and just a little bit spongier. According to the manual, the send output is preamp-out only. I didn't use line-out because it comes after the power section. If what I did was correct, and it seems to sound like it is, then there is barely a difference between EL34's and 6L6's... not enough difference to make me want the EL34 version.
However, compared to my Goldfinger 90, the XTC is much, much more unforgiving. It's very precise. Then I discovered one of the most special things about the XTC and that's how it sits in a mix. When you play the XTC, it sounds warm and almost as if it couldn't cut through. However, the way Bogner voiced the XTC makes it sit perfectly in the mix. Compared to my GF90, the XTC 20th cuts through exactly the same way except it has this warm kind of midrange that just sits on top of everything just the way you want a solo to. It's very interesting.
Furthermore, I have compared the Loud 69 setting on my GF90 to the blue channel of the XTC and it's very similar in my opinion. It might not sound exactly the same, but there is more similarities than differences.
The XTC 20th compared to the 101B yields another interesting find. To my ears, the 3 channels of the 20th ann. XTC are more similar to each other than the 3 channels of the 101B. One thing I love about the XTC is that all three channels sound unique. Unlike most amps which have clean channels that sound like clean versions of the overdrive channels, the XTC channels are quite distinctive in tone and in feel too. I'm not 100% certain of everything at this point because these are my initial impressions.
Also, I don't know if it's because my amp is new or something, but the 101B seems to be a little better at getting a low volume sound. The 20th needs just a little more volume. It's still pretty darn good for bedroom levels, especially if you use vintage mode. However, vintage mode makes you sacrifice gain so there's a bit of a trade-off. One thing I noticed that I haven't tried on other amps yet is that after letting it sit and warm up, if I turn the volume up and then down again, it sounds better at low volumes. How this be explained?
That's all for now. I'll return with some pics and hopefully good audio.
Last edited:
