I'm about 3 weeks away from getting myself a Bugera amp. I am wondering what you think would be better. I play Punk/Rock (blink-182, green day, sum 41, offspring etc). Price is not a worry.

I think that the 333Xl is a better idea, but if you decided that you want the 1990, try out a Peavey Windsor aswell.

But, yea, go with the 333XL.
This is a bit loose, but dont alot of punk bands play Mesa type amps as opposed to marshalls?
Might be wrong but that was my reasoning. Also, the 3 channels is a good bonus for punk.
Quote by Ultragoose

Might be wrong but that was my reasoning. Also, the 3 channels is a good bonus for punk.

Most punk is fairly low gain, and three channels isn't even necessary for most guitarists in general.

I'd say the 1990 would suit the OP's needs better, because there's at least a dedicated clean channel which one doesn't have on the 1960. Then again, I suppose clean cleans aren't that necessary for punk, so the 1960 may just be his best bet.
Quote by DeathByDestroyr
What the hell is a G&L.

Quote by Flux'D
Gay & Lesbian I think, the box smelled funny
Greg what did you send me??
Cleans aren't necessary for punk, fair enough. But, you have to assume that at some point your going to want to play clean. Fair enough three channels is slightly excessive, but its also there if your need it. I think that between the 2 amps, that the most versatile amp would be better, not to mention the amp that doesn't have British voicing.

But again, i'm not an expert on amps, so my arguments may be flawed.
Tom Delonge used Marshall JCM900s in the early days of Blink, which is the basis for the 1990 IIRC.
Quote by Cathbard
If all you had to go on was the forum you'd think a Decimator could cure noise caused by dodgey stage lighting and restock the ocean's population of sperm whales