Suhr PT100 Special Edition vs Friedman BE100

[suhrimmetal]

Thanks for this.. hope to hear more. Maybe straight amp/room sound??

Really likin' the Suhr... mids seem much better and amp sounds good Very articulate

 

[Drkorey]

thanks for the post, I'm liking the Suhr more as well.

 

[TX6Strings]

As a BE owner I hate saying this but I think the PT is clearer. The BE is darker and more sluggish.

 

[Lord Toneking]

Another nod for the Suhr, but both sound good

 

[maddnotez]

I'm on the opposite end. You guys are definitely right but I actually prefer the slightly darker, almost beefier Friedman.

 

[jsp]

I like the Friedman better also. It's smooth, but still present enough.

 

[maddnotez]

I think they both sound killer! I only did this A/B after setting the BE to what I thought was an awesome 80's metal type of tone. Then, once I had that all set I just set the PT to how I like it as well and then this is what you get.

I'll be doing more clips of the BE with Dave's suggestions on setting the presence and mids for more of an upfront sound.

I sure ain't complaining.....Smallbox next

Yea you could probably dial them in to be near identical if you wanted to I'm guessing.

 

[maddnotez]

I think regardless of how well you match the EQ, the amps have different characters. The BE has a "gloss" or "polish" to it that the PT does not have.

That's where it's going to come down to personal preference.

Both killer amps, they are both staying in the Mancave.

Well sweet video and amps either way.

Definitely curious to hear the Friedman with more mids/Prescence and Suhr same setting as previous video.

Have you played the double j? That one seems pretty awesome.

 

[lespaul6]

Both sound very good! good job

 

[suhrimmetal]

Look 4ward to hearing the smallbox against these 2.. Can't go wrong with any of them... just personal preference and functionability. Thanks......

 

[TrueTone500]

Friedman

 

[El Mariachi]

Suhr gets my vote!
Nice comparison!

 

[crwnedblasphemy]

Great clip..

Both sound real real good.

I prefer the BE just slightly...but both are more than great.

 

[sixty-niner]

dude I would get the Jerry cantrel model over the small box, I played both at namm and the cantrel was amazing!!! seems right up your alley!

 

[Badronald]

Both sound GREAT!
Different flavors.
I'd use both. One on each side!

 

[mniel8195]

The Be100 sounds more polished. There are no freq's that really jump out and bug me when listening to your clips. But it does not have anything that really jumps out at me. Their are some frequencies that jump out and bug me in the suhr but it is less gainy and more articulate sounding. The suhr is brighter sounding. I feel like the perfect tone is somewhere between the two amps. Im just wondering which one will get closer when dialed in better. I am leaning be100 at the moment but i feel the suhr has some tricks up its sleeves. I would love to here these with real cabs!

 

[luther910]

The BE100 would be my pick. It has that refined quality about it as many point out. Sounds better recorded.

 

[petethorn]

The Be100 sounds more polished. There are no freq's that really jump out and bug me when listening to your clips. But it does not have anything that really jumps out at me. Their are some frequencies that jump out and bug me in the suhr but it is less gainy and more articulate sounding. The suhr is brighter sounding. I feel like the perfect tone is somewhere between the two amps. Im just wondering which one will get closer when dialed in better. I am leaning be100 at the moment but i feel the suhr has some tricks up its sleeves. I would love to here these with real cabs!

Hi guys, these are both terrific amps (I own both) and are highly tweakable, obviously. It's of course impossible to make a blanket decision on what amp you'd prefer, from a clip like this one Alex did, because there's SO many variables.

For those that want that BE thing, on the PT, my guess is raising the mids a hair, backing the feedback down a hair and lowering the treble a hair, possibly taking the bright switch out and messing with the presence too- and it'd sound more like the BE. In this clip. Alex also likes to run the depth off on the PT- I run it on, on the 1st click, I don't usually use as much gain as him. My guess is that the Friedman in the depth dept. would be what the PT is on the 1st click of the switch, at least that's about where Dave fixed the depth on that amp if I remember correctly- my old Marsha had a depth pot, and Dave liked it around 2 or so. YMMV. Anyways.. when i get back to the US from Japan, I'll do a good in-depth vid where I tweak the PT for different tones, more open and raw, more "polished", etc. It's very versatile, because of controls such as the feedback, depth switch, and treble that we designed to have A LOT of action between 5 and 7. Easy to make the amp dark, warm, and "polished", or raw and more wild.

The BE was a benchmark for me as i really liked the tone very much,, and I actually had Marsha #2 and used it extensively on "Guitar Nerd" so it's a sound I knew well. So when doing the new PT I was very adamant that we release an amp that could meet and hopefully in some folks minds exceed the stellar tones the BE was capable of, as well as other great amps on the market. I think John and crew knocked it outta the park Which takes nothing away from Friedman, he's created a modern classic amp that has legions of fans!

I think they both sound great! Hard to go wrong these days.

 

[Browns Fan]

I just wanted to say thank you for doing the demo! This is the only place some of us can get a feel for both. I also wanted to thank Pete for chiming in and sharing his knowledge. I love rig talk!

 

[Wagster]

Nice demo! I like the BE100 best, it's a little chewier if that makes sense.