Ampeg PF-500 vs GK MB500 vs GB Shuttle 6.0

335guy · #1 09-03-2011, 09:49 PM

Having just ordered a GK NEO 212 cab from Amazon, I now need an amp head. These three stand out as handling my needs, being powerful enough and light weight. The Ampeg beats the other two on price, and I tried one at GC and it sounded good to me. I can get a new GB 6.0 for a little over 5 bills, and the GK is at 5 bills. So, which would be your preference ? I'm leaning toward the Ampeg, but the GB's overall satisfaction record is impressive, plus, it does have a tube pre, whereas, the Ampeg has adjustable compression. The GK seems to have iffy reliability issues ? Which would any of you recommend and why ?

JimmyM · #2 09-04-2011, 02:40 AM

All very good heads, but the PF500 is the only one that sounds like Ampeg.

mikkejohansson · #3 09-04-2011, 02:47 AM

Not to make an argument with you Jimmy, but the OP doesn't state that an Ampeg sound is a criteria

However, you make a point - what is the sound the OP is after. My experience of the gK and GB is that they sound VERY different. Not necessarily better/worse, but definitely different.

The 1st gen MB500 did have a lot of quality issues, but the newer versions don't seem to suffer from them.

Another contender could be the GK MB Fusion, a lot like the MB500 but with a tube pre. Doesn't sound like an Ampeg either (

), but sure sounds good to me (I have one).

JimmyM · #4 09-04-2011, 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikkejohansson

Not to make an argument with you Jimmy, but the OP doesn't state that an Ampeg sound is a criteria

Maybe not, but it's a nice bonus.

jelwood · #5 09-04-2011, 03:19 AM

All very good heads, but the MB500 is the only one that sounds like a GK.

Come on, I couldn't resist.

Musicman20 · #6 09-04-2011, 05:13 AM

Depends on tone goals. For me id go for GB or GK.

ButtUglyJeff · #7 09-04-2011, 07:00 AM

Get the GB or GK. I'm trying to keep the Ampeg a secret...

335guy · #8 09-04-2011, 07:20 AM

Okay, thanks gents. Having only played the Ampeg ( which I liked btw ), can anyone describe what the differences in sound are? The best I can describe what I'm wanting in terms of tone/sound is fat, clean but not sterile. I play what some would call "old school" Jamerson style: no slapping or snapping much, with the highs rolled back somewhat. More low and mid punchy tone, if that makes any sense. Thanks again.

JimmyM · #9 09-04-2011, 01:10 PM

Honestly, you should be able to get a good sound out of anything you plug into. They all have tone knobs and a level of versatility. Others have different opinions and that's why other companies exist. But I like the same thing you do, and for me, nothing makes it easy to cop that vibe like the Ampeg stuff, especially the low mid punch.

335guy · #10 09-04-2011, 06:55 PM

Thanks Jimmy. Then the Ampeg PF-500 it is then. Doesn't hurt that I can get one from GC for 15% off, making it the best small amp deal out there, all things considered. One more question, IF I get the PF-350 instead of the 500, is the 250 watts enough to drive the GK Neo 212 well ( the 212 is 8 ohms ) ?

**B-string** · #11 09-04-2011, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 335guy

Thanks Jimmy. Then the Ampeg PF-500 it is then. Doesn't hurt that I can get one from GC for 15% off, making it the best small amp deal out there, all things considered. One more question, IF I get the PF-350 instead of the 500, is the 250 watts enough to drive the GK Neo 212 well ( the 212 is 8 ohms ) ?

The G-K NEO cabs are efficient cabs and will be driven well, but why not buy the wattage once and get the PF500? I would myself have gone with the MB Fusion (three tube high voltage pre section).

335guy · #12 09-04-2011, 07:09 PM

, just looked at the GC "exclusion" list, and Ampeg is on there.

I guess I can still try.

stflbn · #13 09-04-2011, 07:13 PM

You can get the 15% off of a GK MBFusion. Did it Friday and it's on it's way.

JimmyM · #14 09-04-2011, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 335guy

Thanks Jimmy. Then the Ampeg PF-500 it is then. Doesn't hurt that I can get one from GC for 15% off, making it the best small amp deal out there, all things considered. One more question, IF I get the PF-350 instead of the 500, is the 250 watts enough to drive the GK Neo 212 well ( the 212 is 8 ohms ) ?

Certainly. You don't need a lot of wattage to drive a big cab. That's a myth. I've run a 25w B-15 head into my 810 and it'll get quite loud.

So that Ampeg exclusion...try it anyway. Usually they'll give it to you anyway just to make the sale.

335guy · #15 09-04-2011, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-string

The G-K NEO cabs are efficient cabs and will be driven well, but why not buy the wattage once and get the PF500? I would myself have gone with the MB Fusion (three tube high voltage pre section).

That is a very cool amp, no doubt. It's just way more than I need really. And tube pre's aren't a requirement of mine. Also, cost is a factor as well. That's why I was considering the 350. But I don't want to come up short on power either. So, I guess I'll go with the 500. I was hoping for the 15% off from GC. I'll swing by tonight and see if they'll honor that.

Jeff Scott · #16 09-04-2011, 08:44 PM

You should add the Aguilar Tone Hammer 500 to your short list.

pbass888 · #17 09-04-2011, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Scott

You should add the Aguilar Tone Hammer 500 to your short list.

maybe the tone hammer and a used streamliner by genz benz

Orpheus55 · #18 09-17-2011, 12:08 PM

I've been debating these heads as well, one day thinking GK and then Ampeg. I have an Avatar 2x10 cab and also wonder if the PF350 would be enough to drive it at PA supported gigs. If it'll drive a GK 2x12, it should be fine with 2 10s. I have the GK700RBII now, and it's had issues over the years (as did the early GK micro amps). I have to think Ampeg is a more solid buy at this point in that price range.

shoot-r · #19 09-17-2011, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 335guy

Having just ordered a GK NEO 212 cab from Amazon, I now need an amp head. These three stand out as handling my needs, being powerful enough and light weight. The Ampeg beats the other two on price, and I tried one at GC and it sounded good to me. I can get a new GB 6.0 for a little over 5 bills, and the GK is at 5 bills. So, which would be your preference ? I'm leaning toward the Ampeg, but the GB's overall satisfaction record is impressive, plus, it does have a tube pre, whereas, the Ampeg has adjustable compression. The GK seems to have iffy reliability issues ? Which would any of you recommend and why ?

I own and gig a GK MB2-500 head and a Ampeg PF-500 head.

Keeping things simple:
The GK MB500 has a VAST tonal range, (maybe to much as I'm constantly tweaking knobs.)
By todays standards it's a true micro head, (small and light.)
It seems to have "HUGE" power into either a 8 ohm or 4 ohm load.
To my ears it's a over-all bright sounding head with the trade-mark GK growl.

The Ampeg PF500 is to my ears a warmer sounding amp.
I love the compressor and freq. knob. I can set and forget the knobs and be happy with the tone, and it's easy to dial in a pleasing sound.
I don't think of it as a true micro head by todays standards of size and weight.
In a 8 ohm load it isn't as loud as the GK.
It has a great Ampeg sound and at $399.00 new I don't think there's a better bargain on the market.

I've been a GK head user for many, many years but I'm taking the PF head out on jobs more and more.
The more I play the PF the more impressed I am with it.

DavePlaysBass · #20 09-17-2011, 05:59 PM

I love the GK MB500 with my Sadowsky. Its is punchy and articulate. With my passive Fenders I turn off the boost channel and throw a VT Bass out front. Gives it a different vibe but a great one. The EQ on the MB500 is powerful. And the head is loud.