Tone King Imperial MK 2

[teleblueman]

In my search for a small to mid size "do it all" home and gigging amp, I've run across a Tone king MK2 that , based on reviews and videos, appears that it will make me want to ditch my pedal board based on the lead/ rhythm channel switching, on board reverb and tremolo, built in attenuator, lovely clean Blackface sounds and Tweed "Gainey" sounds.
Can anyone attest to this? Anyone have one? Any cons (other than the price)?

Thanks in advance

 

[MickM]

I have a very early Imperial (#006) and a Sky King but no MKII. These amps in my opinion do everything they're supposed to do and are built like tanks. Worth every penny.

 

[teleconvertMij]

There is a Toneking owners club on here. You will find loads of raving reviews i got a Metropolitan which i think is just outstanding

 

[Wally]

I don’t have one but had one for my use for a few weeks. Magnificent amp, ime and imho. As noted.."worth every penny”. It is one of the few new amps I have played that I desire....and I have no need for one. LOL....

 

[Mike Simpson]

In researching amps I thought I wanted an Imperial but there is a guy that started bringing one to the Wednesday jam and maybe it is the way he sets it or something else but it does not sound anywhere near as good as my 72 Deluxe Reverb. I was really disappointed in the sound because I had wanted one really bad but just couldn't justify the $2500 cost. I have bought 5 vintage amps for that amount of money. People love them and maybe the guy I know does not set it right.

Also for what it is worth the construction inside has been done two different ways and I think the first one is the older style of construction.

 

[Joe M]

I kinda agree with what Mike said. I had one for a while and, even though I thought the sound was great, the more I played it, the more I realized that my DRRI could sound pretty much the same for less than half the cost. Tone King is gone. DRRI is still here. One thing that the Tone King had that the DRRI doesn't is the weight, or lack of weight. The Tone King had to be close to 10 pounds lighter than the Fender. Granted, mine was the older Mark I version which was without the built-in attenuator. I'm pretty sure the newer, Mark II, is quite a bit heavier, since the attenuator was installed, probably closer in weight to the DRRI.

 

[mgreene]

In my search for a small to mid size "do it all" home and gigging amp, I've run across a Tone king MK2 that , based on reviews and videos, appears that it will make me want to ditch my pedal board based on the lead/ rhythm channel switching, on board reverb and tremolo, built in attenuator, lovely clean Blackface sounds and Tweed "Gainey" sounds.
Can anyone attest to this? Anyone have one? Any cons (other than the price)?

Thanks in advance

I played one several times and came close to pulling the trigger. I was looking for a used one and it never showed up. Then in the mean time I discovered the Silverface pull boost Princeton. As someone above opined, I agree that the clean channel in my Princeton and Silver Deluxe are at least as good as the Tone king.

What the Tone king can do that the Fenders cant is the footswitchable tweed channel. The Tone King also has one of the best tremolo circuits Ive heard.

In my search I decided that the Mk II sounds better than the previous versions - enough so that I had to turn down good deals on the original versions.

 

[Wally]

In researching amps I thought I wanted an Imperial but there is a guy that started bringing one to the Wednesday jam and maybe it is the way he sets it or something else but it does not sound anywhere near as good as my 72 Deluxe Reverb. I was really disappointed in the sound because I had wanted one really bad but just couldn't justify the $2500 cost. I have bought 5 vintage amps for that amount of money. People love them and maybe the guy I know does not set it right.

Also for what it is worth the construction inside has been done two different ways and I think the first one is the older style of construction.

View attachment 519882 View attachment 519883 View attachment 519884 View attachment 519885 View attachment 519886

Actually, there are three versions of the Imperial. Mike shows us the first handwired version and the 20th Anniversary handwired version...which is the second version of the MKII. The first version of the MKII is a very well done PCB amp.
As for sounding like a DR, imho the Imperial doesn’t quite do that..especiallly if one pushes the Clean channel, which is the BF channel. Why not??? The answer to that question lies in the fact that the Imperial is cathode biased. That doesn’t particularly bother me because I like what goes on with the MKII...in both channels. I like the attenuator, which is assignable to work only on the tweed channel if wanted. That is how I would run the amp if I had one. The tweed channel can be run as hot as one wants at any volume level when run this way and The channels can be easily balanced in output.
Tremolo....I found it to be a very good trem as well. That effect is done in the solid state domain, if I am not mistaken.

 

[mgreene]

Tremolo....I found it to be a very good trem as well. That effect is done in the solid state domain, if I am not mistaken.

Ok, it was my impression that the 20th anniversary was before the PCB MK II. I recall the maker saying in an interview that the PCB version was the best sounding. I didnt want to agree, because I wanted the one with the triangular tag boards to be the best; but he was right IMO.

As to the tremolo being solid state - I would LOVE to hear more about this.

I had a long thread when I was modding my first pull boost princeton hoping that somebody could tell me how he was doing it. I ended up adding capacitance on one princeton and using a led as the cathode resistor on vibrato tube in the other.

 

[LookerBob]

From the MkII manual:

"The Imperial’s tremolo circuit is a modified form of the old-fashioned “bias modulation” tremolo circuit. This circuit achieves the tremolo effect by varying the bias of the output tubes."

I agree it's an unreal sounding trem.

I played a Tone King Galaxy (same pre-amp circuit as the Imperial) for several years, and absolutely loved it, but it became a lot of amp to haul around, so I sold it off, and went through a series of other amps - a Falcon Grande, a Princeton Reverb, and a DRRI that I eventually had hand-wired by George Alessandro. I eventually sold it all and bought the Imperial MkII, missing that circuit.

I do not miss the other amps. For my main band I almost entirely use the BF-ish channel and pedals, but for my old school country band I use the footswitch and both channels. Everything it does it does very, very well. Having the Ironman II built in is really great - I can get exactly the amount of breakup I want in the BF channel at whatever volume I need. To me it has a warmer, fuller tone than the Deluxe Reverb. Maybe a smidge more compressed on the edge of breakup.

 

[bcorig]

In my search for a small to mid size "do it all" home and gigging amp, I've run across a Tone king MK2 that , based on reviews and videos, appears that it will make me want to ditch my pedal board based on the lead/ rhythm channel switching, on board reverb and tremolo, built in attenuator, lovely clean Blackface sounds and Tweed "Gainey" sounds.
Can anyone attest to this? Anyone have one? Any cons (other than the price)?

Thanks in advance

Worth every penny.

 

[Wally]

Yes, the trem is a bias vary trem that acts on the output tubes. The trem circuit itself is a solid state affair rather than being a tube circuit. You can see the trem circuit on the right side here....no tubes. IT works very well though, imho. A trem circuit does not processing toen signal anyway...so imho it doesn't matter if there is not a tube there. All else in all three models is in the tube domain. great amps, ime.

 

[neonjohn23]

I have to say, I've owned two mk1 Imperials (not at the same time), a 2006 and a 2010- both made by Mark in Baltimore. These are PCBs but I much preferred them to the Mk2. In fact, I had recently purchased a mk2 with the plan of selling a mk1 and just couldn't do it. The mk1 just had that beautiful deep bottom punch and sweet high jangle that the mk2 didn't quite have. After a week or two I returned it. It had much more mid in the sound, which it seems most people prefer, but I do not. Which is fine- different strokes for different folks. But if you're like me, that makes the original mk1 a super bargain. The PCB thing doesn't bother me. I know they're tougher to service, but they're just not the same. Mark has said he has had no reliability issues over many years, so they must be very well made (hard to imagine him doing otherwise). However, the mk1s are getting up in years now. Well see if I cry (rather than play) the blues in a few years! I have faith . . .

 

[mgreene]

I have to say, I've owned two mk1 Imperials (not at the same time), a 2006 and a 2010- both made by Mark in Baltimore. These are PCBs but I much preferred them to the Mk2. In fact, I had recently purchased a mk2 with the plan of selling a mk1 and just couldn't do it. The mk1 just had that beautiful deep bottom punch and sweet high jangle that the mk2 didn't quite have. After a week or two I returned it. It had much more mid in the sound, which it seems most people prefer, but I do not. Which is fine- different strokes for different folks. But if you're like me, that makes the original mk1 a super bargain. The PCB thing doesn't bother me. I know they're tougher to service, but they're just not the same. Mark has said he has had no reliability issues over many years, so they must be very well made (hard to imagine him doing otherwise). However, the mk1s are getting up in years now. Well see if I cry (rather than play) the blues in a few years! I have faith . . .

How much might that have to do with the speaker? I eventually noticed that the speaker had changed over the years - the MKII and the 20th anniversary (that I wanted to like) had different speakers - IIRC the 2oth Anniversary had a Celestion.

Dont know re the MK1 vs the MKII.

 

[Paul in Colorado]

How does the Sky King differ from the Imperial?

 

[chris bolen]

In researching amps I thought I wanted an Imperial but there is a guy that started bringing one to the Wednesday jam and maybe it is the way he sets it or something else but it does not sound anywhere near as good as my 72 Deluxe Reverb. I was really disappointed in the sound because I had wanted one really bad but just couldn't justify the $2500 cost. I have bought 5 vintage amps for that amount of money. People love them and maybe the guy I know does not set it right.

Also for what it is worth the construction inside has been done two different ways and I think the first one is the older style of construction.

View attachment 519882 View attachment 519883 View attachment 519884 View attachment 519885 View attachment 519886

How do the new ones look inside?