ozbilbass Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Hello there, I'm playing bass guitar for 4 years and my Marshall MB60 Amp finally broken down and I would like to buy new set-up .First of all I'm playing (mostly) metal-rock-ish genres.And I'm performing to nearly 200 people at the concerts.So I think I dont need 410 cabs . So here is the options Heads; GK MB 500 / Markbass LM3 / Tc Electronic RH450 Cabs; GK CX210/ GK NEO112 - Markbass Traveller 102P I do not know if there is huge difference between 1x12 or 2x10 speakers Please help me guys ! And if there is any other brand that you can advise please do so. Thanks ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismuzz Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I would say if you're playing rock and metal, 2x10 might cut it but I'd feel much more comfortable with a 2x12 at the very least. Sound wise there isn't much difference, but they might seem "fuller" and depending on the quality of the cab it's likely to be a little louder. As for the head, all three have their characteristics. Markbass Sounds very warm but very clean and clear. If you want a bit of dirt you'll need to get a pedal. GK and TC have the option of adding some grit without needing pedals, but it depends if you like the tones they're capable of. All three are very good choices but it's best to try them out yourself, or at the very least check out some video demos online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 (edited) My 2p: GK MB500 for sure, but get the Fusion. And out of those three cabs I'd go for the GK NEO112, but you'd be better served with the NEO212 imho. You may also like to consider Barefaced or Schroeder cabs... having used both recently I'd say they are more than worth trying, if possible. Edit: D'oh! Beaten to it by Santa. Thpp! Edited September 16, 2014 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 GK and MB are in a different league from TC. GK are generally 'rockier' than MB and the latest models are all made in USA and good quality too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolo Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 +1 for a 212 GK is well known for rock/metal bass. The only 'right' thing to do is take a day off and play what they have in the music shops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgsjx Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I've gigged a Markbass 2x10 to @ 300 people a few times & never been let down. Though I would probably choose a 2x12 just for the extra height. If going for the MB, I'd choose the STD over the Traveller too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Any of the three mentioned will do a fine job for rock - playing in music shops a great idea, as is seeing a few bands, and checking out the bassists gear when you like the sound they`re making - that`s how I ended up using Markbass, just loved the sound in the mix. Agree re a 212 as well. If I recall correctly the surface area of a 2 x 12s is virtually the same as 3 x 10 inch speakers, so a lot more depth available for a cab not too much bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepbass5 Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Agree with all above as with Lozz I feel in a live band situation i head for the Markbass most gigs ( function band and rock n roll stuff) it cuts and has a air to it that lets the harmonic content breath. MB500 fusion gets used a lot for practice and jazz gigs spade loads of warmth with the three valves you can get glass too but easy to loose your mids and over scoop it. I Find it more difficult to plug and play with the GK at volume but could just be me messing. Molan hasn't mentioned the Carvin class D amp. worth checking at the price. has graphic and comp and valve and para and yes i am still very tempted to give up my GK for the extra Para and graphic oh and 2 x 12 as well from me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiegrungesound Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1410873722' post='2554139'] GK and MB are in a different league from TC. GK are generally 'rockier' than MB and the latest models are all made in USA and good quality too. [/quote] For the sake of parity, I'm going to give a "+1" for the TC Electronic heads. Never had a chance to try any the MB500 or Fusion heads. I myself am not that keen on Markbass amps. That said, getting a matching GK cab & head will allow you use the Bi-amp/Horn feature that is Gallien Kruger's USP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsgbass Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 2, TC Electronic BC212's are my choice, with a Fender Super Bassman head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrammeFriday Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Another thumbs up for TC here - although this is based on a somewhat different rig to what you are contemplating. (mine is an RH750 into 2 TC cabs - an RS212 and an RS210). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffyspliff Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 Yes TC head with RS 210 and Rs212 cabs .... I believe are the way to go .... Much better in my opinion than the Markbass gear I have owned in the past ... Namely CMD 102P combo and NY ext cab . Haven't tried the GK stuff though. TC just sounds better in our band situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 [quote name='deepbass5' timestamp='1410884459' post='2554320'] Agree with all above as with Lozz I feel in a live band situation i head for the Markbass most gigs ( function band and rock n roll stuff) it cuts and has a air to it that lets the harmonic content breath. MB500 fusion gets used a lot for practice and jazz gigs spade loads of warmth with the three valves you can get glass too but easy to loose your mids and over scoop it. I Find it more difficult to plug and play with the GK at volume but could just be me messing. Molan hasn't mentioned the Carvin class D amp. worth checking at the price. has graphic and comp and valve and para and yes i am still very tempted to give up my GK for the extra Para and graphic oh and 2 x 12 as well from me [/quote] Oh Ok then, it's worth looking at Carvin as well. The BX700 has a lot of fans and the B1000 is really nice for big clean power. Both are really well priced for USA made heads. If you do decide to try TC and are tempted by the RH450 then make sure you try one in a band situation and not just a shop demo. There's something in the circuitry that makes these sound good in low volume demo situations (or at bedroom volume) but they can be absolute tone suckers live. Simply the worst live amp I've ever used Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixingwithtom Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 ^ That's interesting Molan, have you had chance to try the RH750 at higher volumes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobystig Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1411035940' post='2555750'] If you do decide to try TC and are tempted by the RH450 then make sure you try one in a band situation and not just a shop demo. There's something in the circuitry that makes these sound good in low volume demo situations (or at bedroom volume) but they can be absolute tone suckers live. Simply the worst live amp I've ever used [/quote] Absolutely I was speaking to mark at bass direct about this, it's something to do with a filter they have In The circuitry that cuts the highs The 750 does not have the same circuitry I too want to try some GK heads on the neo 112 cabs, but can't seem to find anyone with it is stock Molan do you have one in at bass gear ? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 [quote name='scoobystig' timestamp='1411044761' post='2555868'] Absolutely I was speaking to mark at bass direct about this, it's something to do with a filter they have In The circuitry that cuts the highs The 750 does not have the same circuitry I too want to try some GK heads on the neo 112 cabs, but can't seem to find anyone with it is stock Molan do you have one in at bass gear ? Thanks [/quote] I think there's even more to it than just the lack of sparkly highs. The signal seems to be really squashed and compressed (even with the compressor off) and this seems to kill tone live. There are people out there that like these though so it's obviously just a subjective view and prices on the 450's went through the floor for a while (£385 new!) so they're relatively low cost to experiment with. I have heard much better things about the 750 but haven't wanted to try one live after my experience with the 450. We've had GK Neos in but sold quite quickly. New order will go in today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 It`s funny, although my vote is for Markbass, re the TC gear, I found I didn`t like it at quiet volumes but did in a band mix. Just goes to show we`re all individuals, except me of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1411035940' post='2555750'] There's something in the circuitry that makes these sound good in low volume demo situations (or at bedroom volume) but they can be absolute tone suckers live. [/quote] I found the same - couldn't get any proper definition with it live for some reason, though to be fair it was the first time I'd used one so had no time to get familiar with it. And other people seem to rate them, so there's nowt as queer as folk, each to his own, one man's meat, etc. etc. and so on and so forth... Intended purpose is also a factor. I'd use Markbass every day of the week if I was in a function band - and indeed did so - but for what I will call 'rock' applications, I think GK or GB generally more suitable... again that's just my opinion, yadda yadda. Then there's the cab, the bass, the strings, pick or fingers, weather conditions, planetary aspects... is Jupiter in conjunction with Uranus? So many variables... [quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1411055420' post='2556037'] Just goes to show we`re all individuals, except me of course. [/quote] No, me! And so's my wife, or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 [quote name='scoobystig' timestamp='1411044761' post='2555868'] Absolutely I was speaking to mark at bass direct about this, it's something to do with a filter they have In The circuitry that cuts the highs The 750 does not have the same circuitry I too want to try some GK heads on the neo 112 cabs, but can't seem to find anyone with it is stock Molan do you have one in at bass gear ? Thanks [/quote] the power specs tc provide for the rh line are quite interesting - the 750 is more powerful but not really in a conventional sense. If you look it up the figures they give go part the way of explaining how they perform Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 (edited) [quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1411082120' post='2556411'] the power specs tc provide for the rh line are quite interesting - the 750 is more powerful but not really in a conventional sense. If you look it up the figures they give go part the way of explaining how they perform [/quote] What output does it have if measured 'conventionally'? I seem to remember the 450 being about 235w but just assumed the 750 was proportionately higher and around 400w. EDIT - just looked it up and the RH750 appears to be 236w as well if measured by standard means! Or maybe I'm reading the spec sheets incorrectly? Edited September 19, 2014 by molan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1411113388' post='2556510'] What output does it have if measured 'conventionally'? I seem to remember the 450 being about 235w but just assumed the 750 was proportionately higher and around 400w. EDIT - just looked it up and the RH750 appears to be 236w as well if measured by standard means! Or maybe I'm reading the spec sheets incorrectly? [/quote] that's what I saw too... But if you look at the specs that are different you can see what they changed. While i'm happy to point to the document I've not enough knowledge of amps to publicly pontificate on what it means ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 [quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1411123760' post='2556658'] that's what I saw too... But if you look at the specs that are different you can see what they changed. While i'm happy to point to the document I've not enough knowledge of amps to publicly pontificate on what it means ! [/quote] I agree - I think the summary was something along the lines of "our watts are different to other people's watts' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiegrungesound Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1411123883' post='2556662'] I agree - I think the summary was something along the lines of "our watts are different to other people's watts' [/quote] Oh. It's that old marketing ploy again, is it? ;-) I've heard this before about all sorts of amps, from Ampeg & Orange valve amps to old '80s Trace Elliot & Peavey S/S heads. I'm sure plenty of Basschaters have heard and/or said the same too. So far, I've had no problems tone wise with my TC head. It isn't the RH450, but it's "cousin"(I hope that's a suitable comparison!) head the BH500. The extra 50 watts billed might make a difference-Or maybe not considering how TC seem to be using "Magic" wattage! ;-)-but it has worked brilliantly in rehearsal situation with three different types of bands. At most, it was going up against 2 electric guitars, 1 acoustic, drums and keyboards and it handled the situation perfectly. I will keep the comments about the potential pratfalls that come in live situations in mind though. I'm due to run it live in November for my first gig since January. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Not sure it's a marketing ploy, its fairly clever technology going on. Effectively they are saying that the peak at the front of a note is important so you get a 500w or 700w or whatever peak, and then they blend a compressed feed in with your dry signal - which makes the whole thing sound louder. My guess would be live that the sound in the audience or to the desk would be quote good/ok, but for the player I personally need to hear the high transients of the notes in order to lock in with the drummer, I've played other setups where I've heard a very compressed foldback sound with no amp sound and I struggled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.