The Lunchbox Amp Poll

[Zachman]

I don't have the amp in front of me but trust me it's a "lunch box" It's light and it's sitting on a 4x12 in the video so you can figure out scale. I remember when I shipped it, it was around 24 pounds and Marshalls that I ship tend to be around 50 pounds. I am going by shipping weight with box not actual amp weight.

Ah, that's a good size. And to mention that it has 6L6s as power tubes is cool.

Solid state amps are generally lighter than their tube counter-parts, as well.

Moving Trucks, Cargo Vans, Dollys, Carts, helpful band members and Roadies make things easier to transport too.

True, but i'm not too fond of them Solid states. I would like to be able to carry an amp on my backpack in future, while still having them bigger tubes like EL34, 6L6 on it.

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

 

[Zachman]

I probably ought to stay out of this, but I can't..

What exactly is the point of a 'lunch box' amp if you need a 2x12 or 4x10 cab to make it sound decent? Way back in the day, we called them 'Practice Amps'...Portability was the virtue

There is something to be said for head room..and with the amazing choices of OD pedals we have now, It seems silly (IMHO) to use the power of your amp as the limiting means for control of volume...a 40-50 watt tube amp is ideal for me...many people can pull it off low volume gigs with 100 watts or more

And then there is the amp simulator/IR stuff that already kicks the shit out of a cranked 'wittle' Princeton and this stuff is just gonna keep getting better and better

That's how I see it too.

When I was doing Vegas Casino gigs and they didn't want loud sound coming off the stage, I was using a 180 Watt Mesa/Boogie MKIII Coliseum through a 1x12 cab that I would face backwards and mic it. NO, problem. I did that for years

 

[Zachman]

i always base my current opinions on an experience 20 years ago.

i played an atari once in the 80s and swore off video games forever. fucking pong are kidding me... complete bullshit.

Well that's the only time I owned a low wattage amp and it suck for band use.

Then don't say 'They suck balls', present tense.

@sleewell, nailed it.

Ya, but the ones he used back then probably still suck balls, in the present... so there's that angle

 

[Racerxrated]

To each their own, etc etc, yada yada....but...

My biggest point, with these small wattage amps is COST!!!! They aren't cheap...and approach or tower over a good used JCM 800 in cost! Well, maybe not these days as much as a couple yrs back when JCMs were 1K or even less in some cases. So, I don't see the point of buying one since I've NEVER had a problem getting great sounds at low volumes with 50/100/180w amps! Yep, even my C+ Coli is AMAZING at low volumes, as is my 800.

Now, I do understand if your physical condition just doesn't allow you to shlep big heavy gear around, IE your back or whatever. I can tell you that at 53, if I were still playing out(last one was 3 yrs ago) I probably would choose my 2204 since my 1x15 Coli Combo is 117 lbs. And, yes I'd have to bring my halfback 4x12 with C90s/EVs to the gig. Which is another 90lbs. So I'd probably choose the Marshall rig. But when these small amps cost literally the same as a good used vintage Marshall, or even a few hundred less, it's easy to choose the big amp. They just plain sound better. Even at low volumes.

 

[Zachman]

To each their own, etc etc, yada yada....but...

My biggest point, with these small wattage amps is COST!!!! They aren't cheap...and approach or tower over a good used JCM 800 in cost! Well, maybe not these days as much as a couple yrs back when JCMs were 1K or even less in some cases. So, I don't see the point of buying one since I've NEVER had a problem getting great sounds at low volumes with 50/100/180w amps! Yep, even my C+ Coli is AMAZING at low volumes, as is my 800.

Now, I do understand if your physical condition just doesn't allow you to shlep big heavy gear around, IE your back or whatever. I can tell you that at 53, if I were still playing out(last one was 3 yrs ago) I probably would choose my 2204 since my 1x15 Coli Combo is 117 lbs. And, yes I'd have to bring my halfback 4x12 with C90s/EVs to the gig. Which is another 90lbs. So I'd probably choose the Marshall rig. But when these small amps cost literally the same as a good used vintage Marshall, or even a few hundred less, it's easy to choose the big amp. They just plain sound better. Even at low volumes.

 

[Goat]

Although I dig smaller amplifiers these days, a great sounding 4x12 is key to getting that 'big rig' sound. That's been my experience anyway.

 

[Zachman]

Although I dig smaller amplifiers these days, a great sounding 4x12 is key to getting that 'big rig' sound. That's been my experience anyway.

You got that right!

 

[thrashinbatman]

I'm not a fan of EL84s at all, which removes me from much of the lunchbox amp market. Also, I'm either fullbore show volume or playing through a loadbox, so low volume playing is 100% irrelevant to me. They have their place, I guess, but not for me at all.

 

[Rex Rocker]

I have an EVH LBX, and I used to have a Krank Rev Jr. and an EVH LBX II.

The LBX mk.1 sounds pretty great at low volumes. The LBX II and the Krank didn't. The Krank was just plain unusable when quiet.

The EVH's struggle with low-end. There's not a lot on tap. I have to run the resonance cranked at all times. It is arguably "enough" at low to moderate volumes, but it would be nice to have the option of dialing more in. In a full band setting, nope. Not even through a 4x12. Granted I don't have a Rectifier or a Mode Four 4x12 or some of those low-end monsters, but my 1960 is still a 4x12.

The Krank had enough low-end at any volume, but it got farty pretty fast as you turned it up to band levels. The Krank ran full-size 6L6's... the low-end was there, but the headroom wasn't.

They were all loud enough to hang with a full loud band, IME, but how they handled the low-end is where they all fell apart.

Lunchbox amps are fun and all, but they're not a substitute for a full-size amp, IME.

 

[Zachman]

I have an EVH LBX, and I used to have a Krank Rev Jr. and an EVH LBX II.

The LBX mk.1 sounds pretty great at low volumes. The LBX II and the Krank didn't. The Krank was just plain unusable when quiet.

The EVH's struggle with low-end. There's not a lot on tap. I have to run the resonance cranked at all times. It is arguably "enough" at low to moderate volumes, but it would be nice to have the option of dialing more in. In a full band setting, nope. Not even through a 4x12. Granted I don't have a Rectifier or a Mode Four 4x12 or some of those low-end monsters, but my 1960 is still a 4x12.

The Krank had enough low-end at any volume, but it got farty pretty fast as you turned it up to band levels. The Krank ran full-size 6L6's... the low-end was there, but the headroom wasn't.

They were all loud enough to hang with a full loud band, IME, but how they handled the low-end is where they all fell apart.

Lunchbox amps are fun and all, but they're not a substitute for a full-size amp, IME.

Whisper volumes w/LOUD amps

 

[Kyss]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

 

[Zachman]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

Best of luck... Did you have particular specs, and features you're aiming for? Budget?

 

[panhead]

yeah i always say something sucks balls when i mean to say it sounds good.

bro how fucking high are you right now?

Im talking function wise and go dissect something else Jesus

Dude, you're the one dismissing a whole array of amps -some of which with quite a big feature/function set- based on a single bad experience 20 years ago!
You're just trying to wiggle your way out of your own blunt statement, by suddenly applying new, previously unmentioned rules.
"They suck". That's all you said. Not "The single one I tried aeons ago suckED", but "they suck". Present tense, whole group, nothing about needing specific functions.

You think amp technology didn't do anything in the past 20 years? Internal loadboxes, IR support, multi-channel switchers under 16lbs...

If you're miffed that we're the ones being semantic about this, perhaps try to formulate your broad-strokes statements better.

Why the hell are you so worried about it.

I'm not worried at all, bro.
This is still a discussion forum, right? And in this topic we're discussing the merits of lunchbox amps.

As I said earlier, I prefer big glass/big iron for tone as well and that's why I'm focussing on that middle ground, where the heads are a smidge smaller (20 to 24" wide) and lighter (sub 32lbs), but still 2x EL34 or 2x 6L6 with big iron.
And believe me, my DC-5 has plenty of clean headroom and gets loud AF, yet it's far more manageable (weight wise) than my Mark IV was.

Hey man its all good

 

[Kyss]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

Best of luck... Did you have particular specs, and features you're aiming for? Budget?

I'm thinking about a single channel amp with a hot rodded marshall style sound. Weight could be around 5-10kg and would be cool if the amp was around 40cm wide. Nothing spectacular.

 

[Zachman]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

Best of luck... Did you have particular specs, and features you're aiming for? Budget?

I'm thinking about a single channel amp with a hot rodded marshall style sound. Weight could be around 5-10kg and would be cool if the amp was around 40cm wide. Nothing spectacular.

Ya, uh huh and around $50. Should be easy

 

[Kyss]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

Best of luck... Did you have particular specs, and features you're aiming for? Budget?

I'm thinking about a single channel amp with a hot rodded marshall style sound. Weight could be around 5-10kg and would be cool if the amp was around 40cm wide. Nothing spectacular.

Ya, uh huh and around $50. Should be easy

I'm ready to spend a bigger buck on it if it meets my criteria. But i'm pretty sure a smaller amp will be less expensive than a bigger one.

 

[blackba]

I probably ought to stay out of this, but I can't..

What exactly is the point of a 'lunch box' amp if you need a 2x12 or 4x10 cab to make it sound decent? Way back in the day, we called them 'Practice Amps'...Portability was the virtue

There is something to be said for head room..and with the amazing choices of OD pedals we have now, It seems silly (IMHO) to use the power of your amp as the limiting means for control of volume...a 40-50 watt tube amp is ideal for me...many people can pull it off low volume gigs with 100 watts or more

And then there is the amp simulator/IR stuff that already kicks the shit out of a cranked 'wittle' Princeton and this stuff is just gonna keep getting better and better

For me when I use my Mesa TA15 it saves me a trip back to the car. With my larger amp heads I am usually carrying them with two hands. So even using a a 212 cab, its saves a trip to the car. I am also able to control the volume on my TA15 better at low volumes than my bigger amps in general. Doesn't mean that the TA15 sounds better than the bigger amps, but its easier to keep it at the volume I need it. I am talking less than 80dBA here.

Its no surprise to me that this thread is not pro-lunchbox amps. We have mostly hard rock and metal players here where punch is important and bigger amps just have more punch in my experience.

In the end its really about how much of a compromise you are willing to take versus what you are willing to carry. With lunch box amps you are generally giving up something, to some that is unacceptable, to others not. One just has to look at the success of the fender tonemaster amps to see how much people want light weight options.

At the present time we have many options to get things done, whether it be with a big tube amps, lunchbox amps, and the many ampless solutions. Use what works for you, but I certainly wouldn't limit myself to lunchbox amps when shopping.

 

[Zachman]

Go try the Yamaha G100-112 or G100-210. Throw a Dyna Comp on it on the lead channel and adjust the onboard parametric eq and I can get it really close to my MKIII Boogie. They're light and inexpensive. Great Clean channel too 100 watts but SS.

Horses for courses

I have a '65 Fender Super Reverb head, that I put an OT with a 16, 8, and 4 Ohm tap so I could use it with a variety of speaker cabs. Very light, compared to my Boogie MKIII 1x12 combo. The Super and a 1x12 are not a burden. I have done gigs with a Boogie 1x12 w/ a JBL K120, I had an old Pearce Engineering 1x12 w/ an EV and My MKIII Coliseum.

I have lots of little amps: Fender Pro juniors, Tweed amps, Champs, Princeton Reverbs, Pro Reverb, hell I have a little Mooer tube amp so I have the little amps covered, not a Big gear or nothing guy-- as some might have you believe.

That said, I have never, EVER, when wanting a BIG sound and using my Big Rig and amps thought that the lunch box solution would be better.

When I want a smaller sound, I use smaller gear

My Rule is simple:

Use the best gear you can afford, and If possible, NO compromises is BEST--But it ain't without it's cost. Nothing worthwhile is...
If one is forced to compromise then, Use whatever it takes to get it done.

Good points. I might actually ask a local amp builder that if he could come up with something.

Best of luck... Did you have particular specs, and features you're aiming for? Budget?

I'm thinking about a single channel amp with a hot rodded marshall style sound. Weight could be around 5-10kg and would be cool if the amp was around 40cm wide. Nothing spectacular.

Ya, uh huh and around $50. Should be easy

I'm ready to spend a bigger buck on it if it meets my criteria. But i'm pretty sure a smaller amp will be less expensive than a bigger one.

Have them make it the size of an iPod or an AppleTV remote and 1 watt, w/ KT88's and a celestion speakerphone sized speaker, solar powered, w/ the ability to ad an extension cab via Bluetooth

Or

Carry a laptop in your backpack loaded w/ guitar amp plugins, and your interface. *MUCH easier than trying to invent the wheel (or amp), in this case.

Or

Get a Battery powered Roland Micro Amp, or a Pignose Amp (those will fit in your backpack) and they 'Actually' exist

Some people...

 

[Kyss]

Have them make it the size of an iPod or an AppleTV remote and 1 watt, w/ KT88's and a celestion speakerphone sized speaker, solar powered, w/ the ability to ad an extension cab via Bluetooth

Or

Carry a laptop in your backpack loaded w/ guitar amp plugins, and your interface. *MUCH easier than trying to invent the wheel (or amp), in this case.

Or

Get a Battery powered Roland Micro Amp, or a Pignose Amp (those will fit in your backpack) and they 'Actually' exist

Some people...

Some 1 watt amps sound actually pretty nice(Blackstar HT-1 comes to mind) , but personally i think that i would look more into 15-20 watt range.

Also i've tried few plugins, modelers etc. And they never really worked for me. I'd rather stay with the real thing.

I still remember when i had a Roland Cube as my first amp. I got a Line 6 UX later and thought that was really something. Now i prefer actual tube amps.

 

[Zachman]

Have them make it the size of an iPod or an AppleTV remote and 1 watt, w/ KT88's and a celestion speakerphone sized speaker, solar powered, w/ the ability to ad an extension cab via Bluetooth

Or

Carry a laptop in your backpack loaded w/ guitar amp plugins, and your interface. *MUCH easier than trying to invent the wheel (or amp), in this case.

Or

Get a Battery powered Roland Micro Amp, or a Pignose Amp (those will fit in your backpack) and they 'Actually' exist

Some people...

Some 1 watt amps sound actually pretty nice(Blackstar HT-1 comes to mind) , but personally i think that i would look more into 15-20 watt range.

Also i've tried few plugins, modelers etc. And they never really worked for me. I'd rather stay with the real thing.

I still remember when i had a Roland Cube as my first amp. I got a Line 6 UX later and thought that was really something. Now i prefer actual tube amps.

Are you mentally impaired in some way that I should be aware of, or just the self-appointed resident clown?

From where I am sitting, it looks like your biggest obstacle is, not being able to get out of your own way.

When Unrealistic expectations and limited budgets collide, generally nothing AMAZING gets accomplished-- Mostly what you find is compromise and it's usually not good