No difference between a MKII and a .50 cal amp, just cost?

Mark I's, II's, III's and the almight IV

Moderators: Guitarzan, Grandor, ned, Platypus

Post Reply
jamme61
Donating Member
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:26 am

No difference between a MKII and a .50 cal amp, just cost?

Post by jamme61 » Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:09 am

The .50 cal amps go a lot cheaper used. Is there a big difference between the models?
Last edited by jamme61 on Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MrMarkIII
Dual Recto
Posts: 2828
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:01 am
Location: SoCal

Re: No difference between a MKII and a .50 cal amp just cost

Post by MrMarkIII » Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:42 pm

The chassis is a cheaper, thinner stamping, fewer parts, so fewer options, two channels, not three, tiny 6 inch reverb tank mounted inside the chassis (it goes "BOI-I-I-ING"), two vs. four power tubes (fewer parts again), smaller OT, fewer controls (only one gain control) so not as adjustable (the more you dirty up the clean sound, the more outrageously dirty the lead channel gets), 50 watts vs. 60 (or 75 Simul-Class).
They do sound great, tho'. Lighter to carry and easier to dial in, if you can live with the fewer options. Maybe even a better metal amp. To me, the gain at max is tighter than a Mark, if less complex. Suum quique!

Dasein
Mark II
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:32 pm

Re: No difference between a MKII and a .50 cal amp just cost

Post by Dasein » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:47 pm

How about you edit the title of this thread and phrase it as a question: As in - "Is there a difference, outside of cost, between a MKII and a .50 cal amp?"

jamme61
Donating Member
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:26 am

Re: No difference between a MKII and a .50 cal amp just cost

Post by jamme61 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:12 pm

Hey thanks for the info. Also I will add a ? OK?

Post Reply