Double Bass Markbass Nano

[Bisounourse]

Thread is already opened in the BG section of TB, but it might be interesting for Upright players as well.
Markbass is anouncing the 'Markbass Nano 300'
Invalid Link Removed

It features a 2 Mohm impedance.
They are available to order in Europe, and have a retail price of around 400 € (and if you would buy one on that site to the US, price would be around 400 $).

Any thoughts?

 

[LowNote]

The inability to change the voltage on the amp is a complete showstopper for me. I travel and need at a minimum 110 and 230 on the same amp. Acoustic Image has no problem doing this, and there are other amp manufacturers as well (I think) who can do it. I wonder why they would design an attractively sized amp like this.

Erik Hansen aka Lownote
Scotland

 

[B String]

Marco has always been a clever guy. The makers of the "ICE" power supply have said it wasn't intended for bass, but is so inexpensive that manufacturers use it for many of the popular bass heads. This explains why my old Eden WT400 that puts out 225 (real world) watts smokes all of my class D amps rated at much higher wattage when it comes to low end heft. Normally I'd say that the Nano's 150 watts @ 8ohms isn't close to enough wattage for bass, but if Markbass has found a newer technology power supply, this might be a very cool alternative for a small, lightweight head that could work for upright bass.

 

[bassfiddlesteve]

robgrow posted his review of this head for double bass in this thread.

I'm a Markbass fan and I'm interested in the nano. I currently have a CMD 121P combo and Traveler 102P cabinet, as well as a Markacoustic AC101 and matching extension. The AC 101 is a great little amp for upright bass or doubling. Having the Nano head would give other options and allow me to use the extension cabinets in different way.

- Steve

 

[robgrow]

Great little amp. Truly tiny, and built to a very high standard. Markbass uses a proprietary power module of their own design instead of the typical icepower modules that are used by many other manufactures. Best of all is the sound: Very warm, open and airy. Don't let the simple/basic feature set fool you. This is a professional amp that's capable of some very nice, subtle sound sculpting, with very musical and effective EQ. The only way to tell if it's your kind of sound however, is to play through one. The MB Nano Mark is a real bargain IMO.

 

[Ric Vice]

Great little amp. Truly tiny, and built to a very high standard. Markbass uses a proprietary power module of their own design instead of the typical icepower modules that are used by many other manufactures. Best of all is the sound: Very warm, open and airy. Don't let the simple/basic feature set fool you. This is a professional amp that's capable of some very nice, subtle sound sculpting, with very musical and effective EQ. The only way to tell if it's your kind of sound however, is to play through one. The MB Nano Mark is a real bargain IMO.

Looks to be a really nice, compact head. I tried out the Big Bang (it's bigger brother?) and although I didn't like it for my purposes, I thought it was a well built amp, with plenty of headroom, and a good EQ section. I like the fact that they didn't keep the VLE and VLF controls on the Markbass Nano I don't find those controls useful with a Double Bass, my Ehrlund EAP, and Ehrlund Pre.

Ric

 

[Remyd]

I hate Orange with BG, but I'm willing to try with DB - maybe the next time I'm near a GC with her in the truck...

 

[Marty Forrer]

I borrowed a Nano head for two gigs, but returned it. It was lacking in oomph and the tone was not as clear and defined as my MB200.

 

[robgrow]

I borrowed a Nano head for two gigs, but returned it. It was lacking in oomph and the tone was not as clear and defined as my MB200.

The GK MB200 and the Nano Mark are voiced very differently*. One is not necessarily better than the other, just different.

* with all EQ knobs at 12 o'clock, the MB200 has boosted lows and highs and scooped mids, while the Nano Mark has a much more subtle voicing. The voicing you like and works best for you will depend on a variety of factors.

I had GK MB200 and MB500 amps, but still have the Nano Mark.

 

[robgrow]

An addendum... These days I don't play loud enough most of the time to warrant more than a small combo amp (usually a GK MB150S), so I was really knocked out recently when I used the MB Nano 300 again. Sounded great for DB without much fiddling around needed (I'm using an FC pickup) and equally nice for doubling on BG with more than enough volume available to play a dance set of classic R&B, etc. with just a small 1x15 cab. A wonderful little amp.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

I just bought one and like it for both electric and DB. For the last few years, I’ve used either a GK MB 150S or a first generation Clarus. These amps are both over 20 years old. Although they are reliable, they have played a lot of gigs and I felt it was time to get something newer. Cabinets with the Clarus have been an Acme B1 or the metal GK extension.
With the EQ straight up, the Nano sounds a bit brighter than either of the others. There is an upper midrange thing that will be better with electric bass but it can be tamed. The low end on the Nano is much fuller than the Clarus into the metal cabinet and is more aggressive. The EQ is very effective. The Clarus sounds weak. I owned the GK MB200 head for a bit and remember it sounding weaker than the Clarus so its gone. The Nano seems to have a lot of available power.

I really liked the Little Mark II I owned several years ago and the Nano reminds me of its tonal character. We’ll see how well I like it after a few gigs over the next week but I expect to like using it.

Like Bob, I don’t play many loud gigs anymore. When I go into the PA I use a Countryman 85 with the GK or straight out of the Clarus. That amp is post eq which is a hassle. If the DI on the Nano is good, that will make my life easier too.

I considered buying a new Clarus SL but I hope this Nano will satisfy at a $200 savings.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

After a couple of gigs I have a pretty good handle on this thing’s sonic thumbprint and how it compares to the Clarus. I used my Kay fitted with a Lifeline pickup into an Acme Low B1 on both gigs. One gig I’ve played for years, using a variety of amps, but often the Acme and Clarus. With the Nano I felt like the tone was much more solid with a better low end, deeper but not boomy at all. The Clarus is more midrange focused with a rounder, looser thing, and an often boomy low end. The Nano really controlled the speaker. I used the DI into the house and it worked fine.
The other gig was in a new room so I can’t compare, but the tone with the EQ straight up was really great. Fat, punchy but very clear and still warm and natural. The fan ran some but it is so quiet as to be a non issue on any gig I can invision.
My impression is that it’s a winner for DB for players like me who like the simplicity of a pickup and don’t mess with mics. The power rating seems very conservative. The Acme cabinet was almost worthless when driven by the GK MB200 head I owned years ago because it seemed overly taxed. The Nano head performs well above its size and weight and doesn’t sound at all like a class D micro amp. The EQ on both gigs was used very little but, effectively.

I’m going to try it with the MBX cabinet and compare it to the MB150 in a room that only that amp sounds good in. The Clarus doesn’t seem to be the best match for that cabinet, due to its midrange emphasis.

One note: It lacks a mute switch, but I just pull the cable out halfway. Problem solved.

 

[Ric Vice]

The power rating seems very conservative. The Acme cabinet was almost worthless when driven by the GK MB200 head I owned years ago because it seemed overly taxed. The Nano head performs well above its size and weight and doesn’t sound at all like a class D micro amp. The EQ on both gigs was used very little but, effectively.

One note: It lacks a mute switch, but I just pull the cable out halfway. Problem solved.

The Nano must be rated very conservatively because my experience with Acme's is that. like the older EA cabs, they
need a bit of power to get them to speak. I know some folks love that little MB 200 but it doesn't have a great deal
of headroom to spare. Apparently, the new Trace Elliot Elf is the new "mini" on the block. I've only tried one once
with bass guitar, so that's not much of a workout, it's less expensive than the Markbass but only puts out 200 watts at 8 ohms. One thing I really like about the new Markbass (Red) amps, is that
their input impedance is set at 2 Meg Ohms, which IMO sounds better, than the standard 1 Meg Ohm.

Ric

 

[Karl Kaminski]

+1 what ric said about power, and keep in mind both the Acme AND the AI Clarus are designed "flat" so what you put in is what you get out of it.

i.e. two players with two different basses can plug into the same rig, in the same room and get two different sonic footprints. so... YMMV

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

The Nano must be rated very conservatively because my experience with Acme's is that. like the older EA cabs, they
need a bit of power to get them to speak. I know some folks love that little MB 200 but it doesn't have a great deal
of headroom to spare.

Ric

IIRC, the impedance of the B1 drops to around 3 ohms at the lowest frequencies. Coupled to an ICE powered amplifier which wasn’t designed to work below 4ohms and wasn’t really designed for bass, that speaker presents a problem. The old Clarus isn’t ICE powered. It has a big old transformer and, frankly, it held its own against the newer ICE powered 600 watt version. The GK couldn’t compete so I sold it. The Markbass amp, although not rated below 4 ohms, seems like its power amp section was designed for bass, like it can supply the juice. That’s what I sense anyway.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

+1 what ric said about power, and keep in mind both the Acme AND the AI Clarus are designed "flat" so what you put in is what you get out of it.

i.e. two players with two different basses can plug into the same rig, in the same room and get two different sonic footprints. so... YMMV

That’s their marketing pitch anyway. I have been very satisfied with both products for many years, but have felt the Acme to have a bit too much low end and the AI to have a midrange emphasis and overly veiled top end. I’ve owned several AI heads and a newer Coda combo. As to just how neutral anything is, there is no way for anyone to know for sure.

 

[Ric Vice]

+1 what ric said about power, and keep in mind both the Acme AND the AI Clarus are designed "flat" so what you put in is what you get out of it.

i.e. two players with two different basses can plug into the same rig, in the same room and get two different sonic footprints. so... YMMV

On a similar note John Dong said that the my Walter Woods was a "brighter sounding head" and the EA VL series cabinets were darker sounding which made for a good match

That’s their marketing pitch anyway. I have been very satisfied with both products for many years, but have felt the Acme to have a bit too much low end and the AI to have a midrange emphasis and overly veiled top end. I’ve owned several AI heads and a newer Coda combo. As to just how neutral anything is, there is no way for anyone to know for sure.

"Neutral Sounding" is a pretty subjective sound for sure, Greg!

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

I used the Nano with the GK MBX for one rehearsal and one gig this week. They didn't mess with the sound I want to hear. Not much more I could ask for.
More natural than the MB 150S and actually warmer and punchier than the MBX driven by the Clarus. I like it.

 

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

Still very impressed with this Nano!
Cons:
- The DI volume is affected by the gain control regardless of the pre or post setting, so I use the Countryman 85 when going into the house.
- I use the FDeck Wonderbox to roll off the low end in boomy rooms. This little head could use a built in HPF.

Pros:
- It has plenty of power and presents a very clear, open and airy tone with plenty of weight. It doesn’t sound compressed or stressed as the volume goes up.

Highly recommended!