Markbass Megathread PART 2

[KJung]

Hi Dominic54321,

Your description of the 502's sonic attributes sounds like what I hear in my 902C. I've been doing quite a little of that A/B-ing between my 902C and LMII. Both of these amps are great, and I don't know that I would have been willing to pay the premium for a 902C if I already owned an LMII. But I acquired them in the other order! After several gigs and even more full-band rehearsals, I'm satisfied that I like the sound of the 902C better. But figuring out exactly WHY I prefer the Epi -- and finding a way to describe it -- has taken me a while. Here's my best shot ...

When I play the 902C through my Epi cabinets, the sound is sweet and full in the way that so many others have described the Epi amp/cabinet sound. This amp seems to amplify all of the best characteristics of each of my basses, producing a sound that is clear, distinct and exceptionally well-defined. When I'm playing in the band setting (with some very talented but loud musicians), I can always hear my bass's "sonic envelope" in the mix. (By "sonic envelope," I mean the total sound that emerges when I pluck/pick/slap or pop a note -- the pitch of the note, the effect of particular tone control settings and volume settings, the result of changes in my attack and dynamics, the rise and decay of each note -- in short, all the pieces I expect--or hope--to "be there" when I play).

With the LMII, many of the sonic characteristics of the 902C are there: clarity (in abundance), quick attack, amply power, ample bottom, sweet top, etc. But my notes don't emerge from the cabinets with the same "authority" that they do with the Epi. Pitch is slightly less distinct, tonal variations seem more subtle, and I don't hear each note as "fully-formed" as I do with the 902C. The effect for me is almost like the difference between a power amp with a traditional lead sled power supply v. one with a switching power supply.

It's important for me to note: 1) I love the LMII -- I think that it's a modern-miracle at its weight and price, and I think it sounds great; 2) The differences I'm hearing are truly subtle -- these amps are more alike than different; 3) I don't have a 502 to compare with the LMII, so some or all of what I'm hearing may be due to the Epi's larger power amp section.

So, if forced to choose, it'd have to be the 902C. It's as close as perfect as I've found after playing LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of amps. And, as a bonus, it'll drive my Acme Low B2's, which the LMII can't do without breaking up! (And those cabinets do things in the low end that my UL 410 and UL 112's can't touch).

The 502 versus the LMII is a better comparison. I would hope that an amp with virtually double the wattage (out of one side!!!!) and about four times the cost would sound at least a touch better than the LMII

While I was reasonably impressed with the 502, I find the price point ridiculous for that amp, and the low end a little too extended. Nice $1,200 amp IMO (i.e., the used prices around $1K are a good deal for that amp). However, given the rather hefty weight (it's much heavier than the switching power supply 902), and the extremely high price point versus other similarly rated heads, it does not surprise me that you don't see many of the 502's being played (at least I haven't).

As I always post (hoping that Nick might eventually pay attention), if he came out with a 902SC.... basically 1/2 the 902... 900 watts into 4ohms, 10 pounds, and at about the same price point as the current 502, I think he would sell a zillion of them.

At this point, the 902 is a niche product (not many of us need two non-bridging 900 watt power amps!), and the 502.. well... close but no cigar on the price value and weight/power ratio.

IMO as always.

 

[gregbackstrom]

The 502 versus the LMII is a better comparison.* I would hope that an amp with virtually double the wattage (out of one side!!!!) and about four times the cost would sound at least a touch better than the LMIIWhile I was reasonably impressed with the 502, I find the price point ridiculous for that amp, and the low end a little too extended.* Nice $1,200 amp IMO (i.e., the used prices around $1K are a good deal for that amp).* However, given the rather hefty weight (it's much heavier than the switching power supply 902), and the extremely high price point versus other similarly rated heads, it does not surprise me that you don't see many of the 502's being played (at least I haven't).As I always post (hoping that Nick might eventually pay attention), if he came out with a 902SC.... basically 1/2 the 902... 900 watts into 4ohms, 10 pounds, and at about the same price point as the current 502, I think he would sell a zillion of them.At this point, the 902 is a niche product (not many of us need two non-bridging 900 watt power amps!), and the 502.. well... close but no cigar on the price value and weight/power ratio.IMO as always.

I agree that the 502 is more directly comparable to the LMII on a strictly per-watt basis, but the preamps are less alike, with dual channels -- a feature I use a lot -- footswitch capability, and greater flexibility in the effects loop and DI, etc. all adding to the 502's cost (not to mention styling -- although I'm sure there are many folks that are completely satisfied with the "project box" appearance of the LMII). IMO, the best comparison is the PS 600, rather than the 502.

I think that on strictly "dollar for watt" basis, the 902C is a better buy than the 502. I felt the same way as you at first about the two power amp feature of the 902C, but as a long-time Acme owner, I didn't want to risk buying too little power for those speakers (or any others that might come along).

Since buying the 902C, I've treated it like an amp with 2 ohm output capability. It's great for driving my two Low B2's, but it also smokes (not literally, of course) with my 4 ohm UL 410 II / dual 8 ohm UL 112 II stack on the occasions that I need to be "loud" but with more dispersion and/or greater definition at ear-level (large venues with shallow stages, for instance).

But for small gigs, rehearsals, musical theatre and church, I love the portability and musicality of the LMII! And, if Nick is reading this, I wouldn't mind independent master volume controls for the 902C's two power amps!

 

[dominic54321]

And, if Nick is reading this, I wouldn't mind independent master volume controls for the 902C's two power amps!

+1 Independent controls would be sweet.

I feel the ul502 is my "amp of choice" because it pairs so well with the ul410. Once again, brand on brand seems to always win the day. The markbass LMII is on my wishlist regardless!

 

[KJung]

I agree that the 502 is more directly comparable to the LMII on a strictly per-watt basis, but the preamps are less alike, with dual channels -- a feature I use a lot -- footswitch capability, and greater flexibility in the effects loop and DI, etc. all adding to the 502's cost (not to mention styling -- although I'm sure there are many folks that are completely satisfied with the "project box" appearance of the LMII). IMO, the best comparison is the PS 600, rather than the 502.

I think that on strictly "dollar for watt" basis, the 902C is a better buy than the 502. I felt the same way as you at first about the two power amp feature of the 902C, but as a long-time Acme owner, I didn't want to risk buying too little power for those speakers (or any others that might come along).

Since buying the 902C, I've treated it like an amp with 2 ohm output capability. It's great for driving my two Low B2's, but it also smokes (not literally, of course) with my 4 ohm UL 410 II / dual 8 ohm UL 112 II stack on the occasions that I need to be "loud" but with more dispersion and/or greater definition at ear-level (large venues with shallow stages, for instance).

But for small gigs, rehearsals, musical theatre and church, I love the portability and musicality of the LMII! And, if Nick is reading this, I wouldn't mind independent master volume controls for the 902C's two power amps!

+1 on the PS600. I've never heard one of those. If my ears were serving me correctly, I hear a difference in the two channels of the 502 when each is set flat. I preferred the bottom channel for the 502. It seems the 600 has the equivalent of the 502's 'top' channel. However, I'm not really sure about that.

+1 on the the 'blend' control for the 902's power amp... very strange for that to not be included. I understand that the 902 was designed to be used with identical 4ohm cabs, but it seems that it would be a very good option to allow for control when using different cabs.

Nice option. I've heard rumblings that the PS600's are getting ready to be blown out. Maybe something new coming from Nick at NAMM?

Edit: Also, the MB SD800 is somewhat closer to at least one side of the 902. It's a class D amp like the 902, and has roughly the same wattage at 4ohms. Pretty killer at around $1,200 or so... 8 pounds, 800 watts into 4ohms, and two bands of semi-parametric mids.

 

[Tony G]

+1 Independent controls would be sweet.

I feel the ul502 is my "amp of choice" because it pairs so well with the ul410. Once again, brand on brand seems to always win the day. The markbass LMII is on my wishlist regardless!

That was my case as well, and when I had other basses like my Roscoe and Skjold, the UL502/UL410 sounded great. But when I got my MTD 635, something didn't sound right. It sounded way too open. The MTD just sounded massive from deep lows to sweet highs, but with the UL502 in the mix, something just sounded off to me and was a frustration untill I tried the LMII. The slightly less wide frequency dispersement of the LMII seemed to click with my MTD 635. That cutting mid that I had with the Roscoe and especially the Skjold came rushing back, and I had a bass once more that sounded killer in the mix, but plays better, feels better, and overall sounds better to me than those previous two favorites of mine. Ken and many others have said it plenty of times. The right combo of bass/amp/cab will really shine, whereas the wrong combo will seem to lack something. Untill I got the LMII, I was complaining all the time that something wasn't quite right. When I finally gave in and picked up an LMII, my tone complaints decreased drastically. Add to the equation my "rediscovery" of MTD brand strings, and I have the equation for tone that I have been seeking for months.

 

[steve21]

A bit late... but I tried an F1 at Guitar Center a while ago. Wow, that thing sounds so good. I prefer the tone to the LM2, personally.

 

[gregbackstrom]

Also, the MB SD800 is somewhat closer to at least one side of the 902. It's a class D amp like the 902, and has roughly the same wattage at 4ohms. Pretty killer at around $1,200 or so... 8 pounds, 800 watts into 4ohms, and two bands of semi-parametric mids.

I think these European amp manufacturers must be in cahoots with each other. On a dollar-per-watt basis, the SD800 costs just about the same as the 902C.

Hey, I just realized something. On a per-watt basis, the 902C is cheaper, lighter and smaller than a LMII!

 

[Tony G]

Hey, I just realized something. On a per-watt basis, the 902C is cheaper, lighter and smaller than a LMII!

I don't see it. Can you explain your math on that one?

 

[gregbackstrom]

I don't see it. Can you explain your math on that one?

Sure!

At 500 watts into 4 ohms, the LMII costs about $1.20 per watt and weighs about 0.0135 lbs. per watt.

The 902C costs (at street price) about $1.17 per watt and at 14 lbs weighs about 0.008 lbs per watt. I'm not energetic enough to measure both, but the 902C at 1,800 watts into 4 ohms has 3.6 times the power of the LMII, and I'm sure the 902C isn't 3.6 times larger

 

[Tony G]

Sure!

At 500 watts into 4 ohms, the LMII costs about $1.20 per watt and weighs about 0.0135 lbs. per watt.

The 902C costs (at street price) about $1.17 per watt and at 14 lbs weighs about 0.008 lbs per watt. I'm not energetic enough to measure both, but the 902C at 1,800 watts into 4 ohms has 3.6 times the power of the LMII, and I'm sure the 902C isn't 3.6 times larger

The only problem I see with this is that the UL902C isn't 1800watts into 4 ohms. It is 900watts into 4 ohms, and 900 watts into 4 ohms. If I own only one 4 ohm UL410, and had no need to run dual 4 ohm setups, only one side of the UL902C is utilized giving me 900watts at 4 ohms. This leaves one of the amps in the head unused, which drastically raises the cost per watt. To utilize the full potential of the UL902C and get the best ratio of "cost and weight per watt", you need at least two 4ohm cabinet configurations, and use them regularly. To utilize the full potential of the LMII, you only need one 4 ohm cabinet configuration. This is where the largest difference lies, and we are comparing two very different amps that are good for two entirely different things. As mentioned, a more appriopriate comparison would be between the similarly powered UL502 and LMII, where the LMII would take top honors in calculations such as this. However, we are talking about the UL902C, so I submit the following math:

UL902c = $2100 street price
Power = 900 watts into 4ohms, 900 watts into 4ohms.
Cost per watt: $1050/900watts = $1.17 per side = $2.34 total
Weight (14lbs total)/Power: 7lbs/900watts = .008 lbs per watt per side = .016 lbs per watt total

LMII = $600 street price
Power = 500 Watts into 4ohms
Cost per watt = $1.20
Weight (6.5lbs)/power = .013 lbs per watt

So, I submit to you, that the LMII costs less per watt, and is lighter per watt as a single unit in comparison to the UL902C. Yes, the UL902c is lighter than the LMII per watt, and more cost efficient when considering only one side (and assuming each side costs approximately half the total cost of the full package). However the fact is that the UL902C as a package contains two power amps and that needs to be taken into consideration in the calculations. The ratios per side on the UL902c are impressive, and still pretty darn good when you put them together. I submit that if you did need to run dual 4 ohm loads, and did so regularly, you get more watts per cost and it is lighter per watt than if you were to run two LMII's for dual 4 ohm loads. This is where the UL902c comes out on top when compared to the LMII. However, there is just not many people with the need to run dual 4 ohm loads.

Now, if the UL902C could be bridged into 1800 watts at 4ohms, instead of housing two power amps that cannot be bridged, or, if it was a UL900 with only one 900 watt power amp, cost about half, and weighed about half of the UL902c, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.


EDIT: I can admit when I am wrong. This time, I am wrong.

 

[gregbackstrom]

The only problem I see with this is that the UL902C isn't 1800watts into 4 ohms. It is 900watts into 4 ohms, and 900 watts into 4 ohms. If I own only one 4 ohm UL410, and had no need to run dual 4 ohm setups, only one side of the UL902C is utilized giving me 900watts at 4 ohms. This leaves one of the amps in the head unused, which drastically raises the cost per watt. To utilize the full potential of the UL902C and get the best ratio of "cost and weight per watt", you need at least two 4ohm cabinet configurations, and use them regularly. To utilize the full potential of the LMII, you only need one 4 ohm cabinet configuration. This is where the largest difference lies, and we are comparing two very different amps that are good for two entirely different things. As mentioned, a more appriopriate comparison would be between the similarly powered UL502 and LMII, where the LMII would take top honors in calculations such as this. However, we are talking about the UL902C, so I submit the following math:

UL902c = $2100 street price
Power = 900 watts into 4ohms, 900 watts into 4ohms.
Cost per watt: $1050/900watts = $1.17 per side = $2.34 total
Weight (14lbs total)/Power: 7lbs/900watts = .008 lbs per watt per side = .016 lbs per watt total

LMII = $600 street price
Power = 500 Watts into 4ohms
Cost per watt = $1.20
Weight (6.5lbs)/power = .013 lbs per watt

So, I submit to you, that the LMII costs less per watt, and is lighter per watt as a single unit in comparison to the UL902C. Yes, the UL902c is lighter than the LMII per watt, and more cost efficient when considering only one side (and assuming each side costs approximately half the total cost of the full package). However the fact is that the UL902C as a package contains two power amps and that needs to be taken into consideration in the calculations. The ratios per side on the UL902c are impressive, and still pretty darn good when you put them together. I submit that if you did need to run dual 4 ohm loads, and did so regularly, you get more watts per cost and it is lighter per watt than if you were to run two LMII's for dual 4 ohm loads. This is where the UL902c comes out on top when compared to the LMII. However, there is just not many people with the need to run dual 4 ohm loads.

Now, if the UL902C could be bridged into 1800 watts at 4ohms, instead of housing two power amps that cannot be bridged, or, if it was a UL900 with only one 900 watt power amp, cost about half, and weighed about half of the UL902c, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

+1 on your personal assessment of amp value -- that's what the marketplace is all about! In my world though, the LMII is generally too limiting to use as more than a practice rig because it won't adequately drive even one of my Acme Low B2's, let alone two, and it won't drive more than just my two UL 112's OR my UL 410. I could, of course, add my Crest CA-9, but no one in his right mind would carry all that extra weight, huh? With my 902C, I'm using all 1,800 watts and I really paid only $1.17 per watt to get them. (And that's ignoring the many features other than watts that make this such a great amp).

Since I'm an accountant, I feel duty-bound to point out that if you spend $1,050 for one 900 watt amp and another $1,050 for another 900 watt amp, you've still only paid $117 per watt (and it'll stay that way no matter how many more you buy)! The weight works the same way. It only doubles if you pay all the money (or haul all the weight) and don't use half of it

One other thought -- I've read lots of posts from people who are expressing concern that certain amps can't be driven below 4 ohms. (I've seen this previously in Mesa threads and more recently in one of the Thunderfunk threads). So I suspect that there may be more than just a couple of us that have use for an amp that can handle multiple 4 ohm cabinets / loads!

 

[Beskyd]

UL902c = $2100 street price
Power = 900 watts into 4ohms, 900 watts into 4ohms.
Cost per watt: $1050/900watts = $1.17 per side = $2.34 total
Weight (14lbs total)/Power: 7lbs/900watts = .008 lbs per watt per side = .016 lbs per watt total

According to the info at Epifani offsite UL902 is 18lbs

http://www.epifani.com/products/ul902.php

 

[Vic]

Wow. I can't believe we're talking about this.

 

[gregbackstrom]

According to the info at Epifani offsite UL902 is 18lbs

http://www.epifani.com/products/ul902.php

That's actually an error on the Epifani website (I think that's the weight of the older 902).

 

[gregbackstrom]

Wow. I can't believe we're talking about this.

Oop! I guess we forgot to read the rules!

 

[Tony G]

Wow. I can't believe we're talking about this.

Why? Just some friendly conversation....

 

[Tony G]

+1 on your personal assessment of amp value -- that's what the marketplace is all about! In my world though, the LMII is generally too limiting to use as more than a practice rig because it won't adequately drive even one of my Acme Low B2's, let alone two, and it won't drive more than just my two UL 112's OR my UL 410. I could, of course, add my Crest CA-9, but no one in his right mind would carry all that extra weight, huh? With my 902C, I'm using all 1,800 watts and I really paid only $1.17 per watt to get them. (And that's ignoring the many features other than watts that make this such a great amp).

Since I'm an accountant, I feel duty-bound to point out that if you spend $1,050 for one 900 watt amp and another $1,050 for another 900 watt amp, you've still only paid $117 per watt (and it'll stay that way no matter how many more you buy)! The weight works the same way. It only doubles if you pay all the money (or haul all the weight) and don't use half of it

One other thought -- I've read lots of posts from people who are expressing concern that certain amps can't be driven below 4 ohms. (I've seen this previously in Mesa threads and more recently in one of the Thunderfunk threads). So I suspect that there may be more than just a couple of us that have use for an amp that can handle multiple 4 ohm cabinets / loads!

Right, I totally understand what you are saying about your needs to run dual 4 ohm loads, or to run your power hungry Acme's, and I tried to make that clear in my post that the UL902C is actually a pretty reasonable value if doing this is a serious need.

However, I don't agree that by using both sides of the amp regularly, you are only paying $1.17 per watt in total. As shown in my calculations above, You are paying $1.17 per watt per 900 watt side. Think of it as if I had two LMII's to run dual 4 ohm loads. From what you are saying, I am now getting 1000watts, but only paying $1.20 per watt in total. How does this makes sense? I can't combine the two LMII's to get 1000 watts (just like you can't combine to two 900 watt amps of the UL902 to get 1800 watts), they have to be run separately at 500 watts each, so really I'm paying $1.20 per watt, per head, for a total of $2.40 for both heads. The way the UL902C is designed, it is almost like two separate heads in one. Yes, they share the preamp, and it is contained in one package, and these are two important variables. But because the two power amps cannot be bridged, I personally refuse to go along with the idea that you get 1800 watts for $2100. You don't. You get two 900 watt amps for $2100.

I understand your an accountant (My wife is an accountant as well, and I'm a mechanical technician for the Department of Defense that specializes in large caliber launcher design, though I really don't see how careers matter in this conversation), but I stand by my calculations on this. However, if I really am wrong, and you have the math to back it up, please correct me as I really want to understand my mistake (if I am truly mistaken that is ). However, maybe we should move this conversation to pm's so we don't clutter up this thread and upset Vic.



EDIT: I can admit when I am wrong. This time, I am wrong.

 

[Tony G]

Now back to your regularly scheduled Markbass Thread

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Vic]

Why? Just some friendly conversation....

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not upset. I just think the whole watts per ounce thing is a bit much in the silly direction. After reading the posts I had to quick run upstairs, drink a beer, and listen to some metal.

 

[Tony G]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not upset. I just think the whole watts per ounce thing is a bit much in the silly direction. After reading the posts I had to quick run upstairs, drink a beer, and listen to some metal.

Yes, I would agree. There is no good reason to have this conversation, except for the sake of having the conversation. I'm sure the UL902C is a killer amp and does what it does well. I personally have no need for what it does, but that doesn't mean that somebody else wouldn't. The LMII suits what I do just fine.