Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'eBay Deals' started by Sigs, Jan 15, 2022.
Yikes. That's quite expensive. However it might be a while before another one like that come along. They could upload some clips....
Wow that is one ugly amp. I would not give over $5000
As of this morning there are 60 people watching it. I can only assume that’s to see if some joker actually buys it.
Yeah, out of 60 watchers, there's got to be some serious potential buyers. It is a museum piece.
if you´re rich and can spare it, buy it and take very good care of it !!
Agree! Can you do anything with it? If it's all original, can you plug it in at all? If it's all original, and in that condition, would you do any maintenance to put into safe working order?
That’s what I’m thinking, it’s god-awful ugly imo!
I would give you $500 for it, but that’s about it afaic.
There are so many red flags inside that amp.
He claims that it is all original. It is absolutely not.
The board is a complete mishmash o components, typical of the early music-ground offereings. None of the coupling caps are original:
Usually this era there are Cinch white ceramic output and rectifier sockets
The Radiospares PT is never mounted this way, the heaters (black/green in parallel) are from the front of the amp. It would also have the hook up writing on the PT under the lacquer (you can see how the heater wires were spiced and lengthened:
Ken Underwood will also tell you that those preamp heaters are very messy and not original.
The jack sockets are not of the correct type.
Caveat emptor, I think it is a lash up but other experts will know better than me.
There's a patina that happens with anything that's old, even if it's extremely well looked after, the covering should show some signs of fading/marks, this is just too good to be true... then there's the inside of the cab; perfect, foam shows no sign of aging BUT the speaker labels are ripped and a couple of the frames so signs of marks.
@neikeel ~ assessed it very well !
My favorite Marshall. It kills me that I can't buy it. Please pray for me.
*Update - Red flags? Good - that's easing.
Don't even think about it!
Agreed IMHO ~ early MG parts together offering ~ red flags
No fx loop....Im out.
In the ad, the guy say something like - if he say "mint", consider the age...
Am I alone in thinking age has no bearing on condition? What I mean is, if it's in mint condition, it should look like it's in mint condition regardless of the age. If it's got duct tape residue, repairs or scratches and 40+ years old, I don't think it should be listed as mint or excellent condition. If it were 1 year old and looked like that, best description of it would be fair or good, but if it's 60 years old and looks like that, it's "mint"? What do you guys think?
Despite this sellers rep. this is more like a 64 split front although it has had some service things done:
I agree. When I read "mint" I think "as new". To me, that can also include total restoration: repaint, replaced or repaired parts, and in this case re-tolexed.
To me "all original" means nothing except cleaning or replacement of wear parts has been made. "Wear parts" for a car would be oil filter, brake pads, tires, etc. Not sure what that means for an amp, though (maybe fuses).