Bxlxaxkxe
Amp ho
Had the rare chance to A/B the shit out of these amps. Seems like every answer you get on the differences between these two amps is “the 100B is in another league, more open, aggressive, and Marshally”. There’s a lot more to it. Feel like posting some thoughts could help anyone whos curious about these two. You’re welcome, people of the future searching the internet for 100b vs 101b. My two subjects are a 100B serial in the 60’s and a 101S (no A/AB switch) from 1996. Both loaded with Chinese preamp tubes. Winged C EL34 for the 100B, JJEL34 for the 101. Played through Vintage 30s, Greenbacks, and a mix of both…many times. Played with a Les Paul, Tele, and Super strat.
The biggest thing to note is this: they’re not worlds apart. Different, yes. But both are XTC’s and in a blind test I could easily trick just about anyone. In person, the differences are more apparent but nothing massive.
100B:
I’m not a tech guy, but it really sounds like less preamp filtering happening on this amp. The low end is a little more open and looser. Consequently, the feel is a little more greasy- it’s easier to play fast compared to the somewhat sticky feel of the 101. With a lot of gain, it can get somewhat tubby and undefined because of this, especially in L excursion. Pretty easy to just lower the bass control and fix that though. The 100 leans slightly more “vintage” sounding in its breakup and voicing. T excursion mode works really nicely with this amp because of that looser low end. There’s a distinct upper mid notch in the 100 that isn’t there on the 101. Not in a modern aggressive way so much, but noticeable. The variac is actually a cool feature that softens things a touch. Wish the 101 had it too.
101:
I’m guessing, but it sounds and feels like slightly higher filtering compared to the 100. The low end is tighter, and the crunchy gain tones are a touch more focused and compact. Holds together slightly better for the super high gain stuff. I’d say this amp is the slightly more aggressive one. Doesn’t have that upper mid notch that I hear in the 100. Not as much low end as the 100. Overall, slightly more “modern” sounding but nowhere near sterile like a lot of contemporary amps.
The less gain you’re using, the more apparent the differences are between these amps. The clean channels sound the most different to me. The 100 clean is very chimey and fendery, airy. Doesn’t have much low end, all the focus seems to be on the highs. It’s really damn nice. The 101 clean is fuller sounding, but not quite as chimey. I can max the bass on the 100 to equal about noon on the 101 bass knob.
They’re both great amps and if you hated one, you’d probably hate the other. Then again, small tweaks can make all the difference in player satisfaction. Definitely cut from the same cloth. The 100B is a really cool piece of history and I can certainly see why guys love them.
I will post up some A/B clips in this thread when I get some time.
The biggest thing to note is this: they’re not worlds apart. Different, yes. But both are XTC’s and in a blind test I could easily trick just about anyone. In person, the differences are more apparent but nothing massive.
100B:
I’m not a tech guy, but it really sounds like less preamp filtering happening on this amp. The low end is a little more open and looser. Consequently, the feel is a little more greasy- it’s easier to play fast compared to the somewhat sticky feel of the 101. With a lot of gain, it can get somewhat tubby and undefined because of this, especially in L excursion. Pretty easy to just lower the bass control and fix that though. The 100 leans slightly more “vintage” sounding in its breakup and voicing. T excursion mode works really nicely with this amp because of that looser low end. There’s a distinct upper mid notch in the 100 that isn’t there on the 101. Not in a modern aggressive way so much, but noticeable. The variac is actually a cool feature that softens things a touch. Wish the 101 had it too.
101:
I’m guessing, but it sounds and feels like slightly higher filtering compared to the 100. The low end is tighter, and the crunchy gain tones are a touch more focused and compact. Holds together slightly better for the super high gain stuff. I’d say this amp is the slightly more aggressive one. Doesn’t have that upper mid notch that I hear in the 100. Not as much low end as the 100. Overall, slightly more “modern” sounding but nowhere near sterile like a lot of contemporary amps.
The less gain you’re using, the more apparent the differences are between these amps. The clean channels sound the most different to me. The 100 clean is very chimey and fendery, airy. Doesn’t have much low end, all the focus seems to be on the highs. It’s really damn nice. The 101 clean is fuller sounding, but not quite as chimey. I can max the bass on the 100 to equal about noon on the 101 bass knob.
They’re both great amps and if you hated one, you’d probably hate the other. Then again, small tweaks can make all the difference in player satisfaction. Definitely cut from the same cloth. The 100B is a really cool piece of history and I can certainly see why guys love them.
I will post up some A/B clips in this thread when I get some time.
Last edited:
