Dragonlord said:
What about the MB TA503? It's more expensive, but it has much more EQ control, simmilar to the TF, and some tubey goodness and is under 10lbs.
I've never tried one, so I can't compare it to a TF.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Thunderfunk VS. Markbass
- Thread starter kas_lar
- Start date
What about the MB TA503? It's more expensive, but it has much more EQ control, simmilar to the TF, and some tubey goodness and is under 10lbs.
I've never tried one, so I can't compare it to a TF.
When I turn up the bass control on my LMII it adds lots more bass without affecting the middle or treble and still remains tight sounding. I don't use the Eq section on the MB though because there's no need (I just roll the VPF off a little).
I've owned Eden and what I liked about that sound the Markbass has too. The Markbass just does it better IMO.
I've owned Eden and what I liked about that sound the Markbass has too. The Markbass just does it better IMO.
hi kas_lar
i too have a gk neo 112, and i use it with a markbass lmk f1.
with this setup i play in a pop/jazz-band (git,key,dr, voc, db) with my doublebass.
for me this is what you write in your gaslist: "A nice little portable setup". with more than enough power for my needs, and a simple but very effective eq, wich i usually set almost flat to get the best and loudest db-sound i ever had.
hope this helps.
bassist14
i too have a gk neo 112, and i use it with a markbass lmk f1.
with this setup i play in a pop/jazz-band (git,key,dr, voc, db) with my doublebass.
for me this is what you write in your gaslist: "A nice little portable setup". with more than enough power for my needs, and a simple but very effective eq, wich i usually set almost flat to get the best and loudest db-sound i ever had.
hope this helps.
bassist14
Thanks guys for posting!
Something new just popping out of my inbox! A guy I mailed with just send me an offer for his SWR California blonde! At a very very good price. I know that this combo is far from the GK /Markbass thing, but I've got to check this combo out. Then I'll diffenetly try the GK neo12/ Markbass setup in the summer, if the SWR sucks big ass...
Thanks for all the advice, I'm going to the guy with the SWR tomorrow or Friday to buy it. I'm planning to use it on gigs this saturday and the next weekends throughout march.... Then you'll get a review if ya wanna
Something new just popping out of my inbox! A guy I mailed with just send me an offer for his SWR California blonde! At a very very good price. I know that this combo is far from the GK /Markbass thing, but I've got to check this combo out. Then I'll diffenetly try the GK neo12/ Markbass setup in the summer, if the SWR sucks big ass...
Thanks for all the advice, I'm going to the guy with the SWR tomorrow or Friday to buy it. I'm planning to use it on gigs this saturday and the next weekends throughout march.... Then you'll get a review if ya wanna
kas_lar said:Thanks guys for posting!
Something new just popping out of my inbox! A guy I mailed with just send me an offer for his SWR California blonde! At a very very good price. I know that this combo is far from the GK /Markbass thing, but I've got to check this combo out. Then I'll diffenetly try the GK neo12/ Markbass setup in the summer, if the SWR sucks big ass...
Thanks for all the advice, I'm going to the guy with the SWR tomorrow or Friday to buy it. I'm planning to use it on gigs this saturday and the next weekends throughout march.... Then you'll get a review if ya wanna
Isn't the California Blonde SWR an acoustic guitar amp? I could be wrong, but I didn't think this was a bass amp. I thought they marketed it as an 'acoustic amplification system'.
I only got to try an older model, T501 IIRC. I liked it much better than the LMII. Anyway, I'm not much into transparent sound so if all you want is something to amplify your bass sound and not alter the tone much then I guess the LMII is great.stedtale said:
KJung said:
Me too.
As to the Markbass, my curiosity was seriously piqued at Winter NAMM when I got a chance to talk to Marco and check out his amps. I was very impressed, for as much as I could hear in that environment. I'd like to hear how it would do on a gig, I'm a long-time Amplified Music Products (BH-420) and Thunderfunk user (TFB420) and also have a Gibson GB440. Still don't use the EQ on any of them... no need
Markbass still hasn't announced their US dealers AFAIK. I'm waiting.
Brad Johnson said:Me too.
As to the Markbass, my curiosity was seriously piqued at Winter NAMM when I got a chance to talk to Marco and check out his amps. I was very impressed, for as much as I could hear in that environment. I'd like to hear how it would do on a gig, I'm a long-time Amplified Music Products (BH-420) and Thunderfunk user (TFB420) and also have a Gibson GB440. Still don't use the EQ on any of them... no need
Markbass still hasn't announced their US dealers AFAIK. I'm waiting.
They announced that Guitar Centre will be their US distributor. They should have product in the next few weeks.
)
I just tried out the LMII and A/Bed it with the Thunderfunk TFB420... Now, take this with a grain of salt because I'm still a novice player, I played them for only a half hour or so, and the room isn't the greatest (high ceilings but narrow).
The Markbass just blew me away. Very nice. Deep and tight bass, and all the notes kept weight and solidity through the higher frets on the GString. The Thunderfunk sounds more airy, but I'm sure you can fix any of the tone difference with the EQ.
As for power, well, that's a different story. The Markbass input was at 2 or so, master was at 2 or 3, and it was noticably louder than the Thunderfunk, whose input was at 4 it's master at 3 or 4. I wondered afterwards, however, if that truly means that the Thunderfunk is less loud? Are the volume dials linear, and do they go to ten without distortion? So I'm not sure which one is tuly louder, other than what I described above.
The Markbass just blew me away. Very nice. Deep and tight bass, and all the notes kept weight and solidity through the higher frets on the GString. The Thunderfunk sounds more airy, but I'm sure you can fix any of the tone difference with the EQ.
As for power, well, that's a different story. The Markbass input was at 2 or so, master was at 2 or 3, and it was noticably louder than the Thunderfunk, whose input was at 4 it's master at 3 or 4. I wondered afterwards, however, if that truly means that the Thunderfunk is less loud? Are the volume dials linear, and do they go to ten without distortion? So I'm not sure which one is tuly louder, other than what I described above.
You totally can't go by knob position. You have to actually do the loud test someplace... usually live or in a bunker somewhere.Kurisu said:
Exactly.Vic said:You totally can't go by knob position. You have to actually do the loud test someplace... usually live or in a bunker somewhere.
Can i just add, ive just posted elsewhere about my first gig with a LMII and 1210. it was fantastic but the LMII is on loan untill my SA450 arrives.
I would suggest the SA450 over the LMII unless small size is the main reason for getting it.
The SA450 has better EQ and a few extras like pre or post on the DI but the sweepable mid is the reason i went of it over the LMII. it makes a huge difference in tweakability and it doesnt cost that much more over the LMII
I would suggest the SA450 over the LMII unless small size is the main reason for getting it.
The SA450 has better EQ and a few extras like pre or post on the DI but the sweepable mid is the reason i went of it over the LMII. it makes a huge difference in tweakability and it doesnt cost that much more over the LMII
Reviving this old thread to see if anyone has new or current thoughts regarding these two heads.
I know the TFB cost about twice as much as the LMII. I'm trying to make a decision whether to hold out and save or go ahead and take the plunge.
I'm starting to think the 10lb difference isn't such a big deal. Especially when comparing the quick schlepp to the 2-3 hr gig.
Need versatility.
I know the TFB cost about twice as much as the LMII. I'm trying to make a decision whether to hold out and save or go ahead and take the plunge.
I'm starting to think the 10lb difference isn't such a big deal. Especially when comparing the quick schlepp to the 2-3 hr gig.
Need versatility.
- Mar 11, 2005
- 2,541
- 7
- 41
- Disclosures
- Employee - Basscentre Melbourne
I've tried a few of the different markbass heads in music shops and i own a thunderfunk 550B.
I've found the thunderfunk really doesn't show how good it is till you get it out on a gig. its awesome punchy tight but buttery low end, volume, flexible eq and handy timbre control are great. i also like the added hi end sheen of the SS/tube switch. it gets very loud.
I'm sure the Markbass stuff gets loud. i've been very impressed by their 112 and 115 combos. I found the markbass is also very quick and punchy but it is a bit different. Overall i found the tone a little sterile and the treble a little harsh IMO of course. and i haven't used it on a gig so it isn't a really fair test. The thunderfunk is a little more 'old school' solid state and feels and responds more like my old GK but is more powerful, flexible and has a sweeter tone. The Markbass is more modern and 'new school' in its very quick and even response, but slightly harsh treble.
I tried these heads with my own sadowskys and also fender js and ps. i don't really play 'modern' style soapbar basses so i haven't tried them with them. IMHO as always.
EDIT: also while i think of it, as others have said - the thunderfunks seem to work well with nearly any cab - it just seems to respond well to different situations and set ups, using different backline cabs, etc. I haven't had that sort of experience with the markbass because i don't own one...
cheers, dave
I've found the thunderfunk really doesn't show how good it is till you get it out on a gig. its awesome punchy tight but buttery low end, volume, flexible eq and handy timbre control are great. i also like the added hi end sheen of the SS/tube switch. it gets very loud.
I'm sure the Markbass stuff gets loud. i've been very impressed by their 112 and 115 combos. I found the markbass is also very quick and punchy but it is a bit different. Overall i found the tone a little sterile and the treble a little harsh IMO of course. and i haven't used it on a gig so it isn't a really fair test. The thunderfunk is a little more 'old school' solid state and feels and responds more like my old GK but is more powerful, flexible and has a sweeter tone. The Markbass is more modern and 'new school' in its very quick and even response, but slightly harsh treble.
I tried these heads with my own sadowskys and also fender js and ps. i don't really play 'modern' style soapbar basses so i haven't tried them with them. IMHO as always.
EDIT: also while i think of it, as others have said - the thunderfunks seem to work well with nearly any cab - it just seems to respond well to different situations and set ups, using different backline cabs, etc. I haven't had that sort of experience with the markbass because i don't own one...
cheers, dave
Quadzilla
Supporting Member
Agree on all the T-Funk comments above. As for Mark Bass. I have to admit, they have great tone also as I just saw Jeff Berlin with his on the Bx3 Tour in a small room. I still prefer the T-Funk tone (ever so slightly). One thing worth noting, Jeff was using two Mark combos and one failed at the show. I guess it could happen to any amp, but seeing it in person at a show soured my opinion of Mark Bass a bit...
What REALLY surpirsed me is how damn great Stu Hamm's tone was thru a full Hartke rig. I've never cared for Hartke tone at all (used to own a couple a while back and could not wait to get rid of them), but man, Stu sounded amazing that night. I guess the bass and the bassist have as much to do with tone as the amp and cabs (if not more)....
What REALLY surpirsed me is how damn great Stu Hamm's tone was thru a full Hartke rig. I've never cared for Hartke tone at all (used to own a couple a while back and could not wait to get rid of them), but man, Stu sounded amazing that night. I guess the bass and the bassist have as much to do with tone as the amp and cabs (if not more)....
Another very happy LMII owner here. Do not miss my Eden for a second. As for the EQ on the LMII, yes it works, but I never found the use for it live. I just use the filters, if I use anything at all.
I absolutely do not find the treble harsh, just neutral.
I have never played an amp that go so well with so many cabs, probably because of the uncolored sound of the amp.
This amp is very loud for a 300/500 w. The quickness, clearness and punch of this amp makes me hear myself very good on a lower volume than before.
And as always, do not judge this amp(or any other) bu just playing it in the store. This amp really shines when you gig with it, then you will know why so many likes this amp.
Never played the TF, but I´m shure that´s a killer amp too.
PS! I can`t barely wait till the F1 arrives!
I absolutely do not find the treble harsh, just neutral.
I have never played an amp that go so well with so many cabs, probably because of the uncolored sound of the amp.
This amp is very loud for a 300/500 w. The quickness, clearness and punch of this amp makes me hear myself very good on a lower volume than before.
And as always, do not judge this amp(or any other) bu just playing it in the store. This amp really shines when you gig with it, then you will know why so many likes this amp.
Never played the TF, but I´m shure that´s a killer amp too.
PS! I can`t barely wait till the F1 arrives!
