GK 1001RB-II to lightweight amp?

jjl5590 · #1 03-18-2010, 04:26 AM

Hi guys,

I currently use a GK 1001RB-II, but its too heavy to carry around in my bag all the time, as it weighs around 11kg.

I love the sound, and the 700W power is pretty much ok for my situations, but I wouldn't want anything less than this.

So my question is, are there any lightweight amps that are like the GK 1001RB-II in sound/power? Preferably not more expensive?

Cheers for any help!

Ozzey · #2 03-18-2010, 07:19 AM

I just got one of these heads from metallicafan, and while I agree that it is heavy (it weighs as much as the combo amp I have in my dorm room), it's light compared to some other heads you could get. As far as lighter heads, you could look at the GK MB series or the Genz-Benz Shuttle Series.

chiplexic · #3 03-18-2010, 07:46 AM

Lighter and same or more power is the easy part. There's lots to choose from. Keeping the same sound may be difficult depending on just how particular you are. The GK tone is somewhat unique.

Same or more watts with less weight. Look at the Markbass stuff like the SD800 maybe.
http://www.markbass.it/products.php?...&cat=1&vedi=70
Also the Carvin amps.
Or a power amp with foot pedal as a pre amp.

jjl5590 · #4 03-18-2010, 11:58 AM

thanks for the replies. I'm looking for something in the same price range. at 500W, I'm not sure if the GK MB series or the Markbass will be as loud as the 1001RB.

That Markbass head still weighs like 3kg, so it's not as light as I would have thought.

jjl5590 · #5 03-19-2010, 05:18 AM

any more amps i should look into?

thanks

Wes Whitmore · #6 03-19-2010, 05:58 AM

You seemed to be hungup on power as a major requirement. The 1001 is fantastic, and small. It's just not an ultralite, but it's half the weight of most 2U heads, and it's shallow. Are you diming the Gk1001's volume now? What cab are you running? Is that 500watts in 8 or 4 ohm?
Wes

chiplexic · #7 03-19-2010, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjl5590

thanks for the replies. I'm looking for something in the same price range. at 500W, I'm not sure if the GK MB series or the Markbass will be as loud as the 1001RB.
That Markbass head still weighs like 3kg, so it's not as light as I would have thought.

The MarkBass SD800 is 1/3rd the weight of the 1001rb which is 9.9kg. vs 3.4kg. That's a big weight reduction. But I can see a problem if you were trying to keep within the same price range. The SD800 is $1199 new.

Thinking on a budget you should look at the Carvin web site.
http://www.carvinguitars.com/product...?product=B2000

This B2000 is super powerful but it weighs 5.8 kg. So there you have your price and power but gain in weight verse the SD800. Still lighter than the GK. But if you thought the SD800 was still a bit heavy then you probably don't like the weight of the Carvin either.

High power,low price and light weight is a tough one.
I think you need to look at the light weight power amps for the power. And use a foot pedal as the pre amp.

banditcosmo · #8 03-19-2010, 07:18 AM

what about the G-K MB2-500 ? I know some folks have compared these to the 1000rb amps and said they sound similar. Just make sure you get a A07 revision.

Blues Bass 2 · #9 03-19-2010, 07:32 AM

Do you have other stuff in your rack with the GK1001 ? I had one before I got my Markbass LMII in a shallow 2 space rack and it was very small and lightweight . If the tone would have worked for me I'd still have it instead of the LMII , the 1001 was considerably louder and still pretty easy to haul around .

ljazz · #10 03-20-2010, 02:46 AM

What are we coming to when a <20 lb head weighs too much?

jjl5590 · #11 03-20-2010, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljazz

What are we coming to when a <20 lb head weighs too much?

haha, its just that i'm 17 and pretty skinny, and when i'm travelling on the tube and buses carrying my bass, bag of effects and cables, and a 12kg amp on my back, it all gets a bit much!

I'm not hugely bothered about keeping the GK sound, I can usually dial in any sound I want with my effects pedal.

I heard there were problems with the GK MB2-500, and its also 500W so it will be quieter. I play in a loud black metal band and so loudness is a priority.

I don't use a rack, just the amp itself.

chiplexic, you suggested the Carvin B2000. WOW, OH MY GOD!
I wish I had seen that amp before I bought the GK! I mean just WOW! 2000W and 5.5kg?! Madness!

The only problem is, and its a big problem, I live in the UK and I can't find anywhere selling them. I cannot find hardly any reviews, any prices, or any videos/sound clips on youtube. So thats kind of a big problem! I'd probably want to buy second-hand, so that makes it even harder to find one.

Is the B2000 an updated version of the BX1500? I've heard good things about that amp, but again, no where selling it.

also, at 1200W @ 4ohms, it will probably blow my 600W speakers in no time, and i'd have to spend a lot of money on more powerful speakers.

Damn you carvin, your amp is too good!

capnsandwich · #12 03-21-2010, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljazz

What are we coming to when a <20 lb head weighs too much?

Our "golden years".

jjl5590 · #13 03-31-2010, 01:44 PM

I think i've decided on getting the Genz Benz Shuttle 9.0. It should be louder than my GK, but probably more tinny sounding... nothing a pedal cant fix!

rpsands · #14 03-31-2010, 01:45 PM

I would lay some serious doubts on getting any noticeable volume difference out of the Shuttle 9.0 vs. the 1001 rb II. The difference should be negligible.

jjl5590 · #15 03-31-2010, 01:58 PM

apparently they are 900 overrated watts, so it should probably be about the same volume as the GK, which has 700 underrated watts

rpsands · #16 03-31-2010, 02:01 PM

My point is that unless you're using an 8x10 or a really high end cabinet like a Barefaced big one, telling the difference between 700 and 900 watts is going to be nearly impossible.

Like I said in the other thread, I also find the claim that Shuttle watts are "overrated" to be somewhat suspicious. I owned a shuttle 6.0 and it was quite ridiculously loud if you cranked it up.

The interesting thing about the shuttles is you can literally dime the master volume; nothing wrong with it. It isn't maxed out by 12 o'clock like many amps.

The only problem I have with the Shuttles is that you have to use a lot of gain to get all that volume it feels like which makes it a little dirty. I wish they had a FET preamp option.

agedhorse · #17 03-31-2010, 08:26 PM

I personally assure you that the Shuttles are accurately rated.

rpsands · #18 03-31-2010, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agedhorse

I personally assure you that the Shuttles are accurately rated.

It has been my impression for a long time that the volume comparisons from Shuttle 6.0 to Little Mark II are skewed somehow but I can't figure it out. Do you have any thoughts, while you're here?

My opinion has been that the LM2 seems to compress the low end quite a lot, which makes me think that there might be some apparent gain from compression that makes the volume difference to people's ears.

I own an F1 and have owned a Shuttle, and the F1 seems a little louder just going off my memory, but also more compressed.

agedhorse · #19 03-31-2010, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpsands

It has been my impression for a long time that the volume comparisons from Shuttle 6.0 to Little Mark II are skewed somehow but I can't figure it out. Do you have any thoughts, while you're here?

My opinion has been that the LM2 seems to compress the low end quite a lot, which makes me think that there might be some apparent gain from compression that makes the volume difference to people's ears.

I own an F1 and have owned a Shuttle, and the F1 seems a little louder just going off my memory, but also more compressed.

Internal dynamics control can indeed change the perceived volume of an amp (by quite a bit actually) but for many players, the dynamics modification gets into the way of the feel of the amp and for others it's a welcome addition for their playing style and may even benefit their choice of bass and cabinets.

The Shuttles may appear a bit brighter and more "articulate" but part of this is perhaps because there is not any behind the scenes compression happening which CAN cause a darkening artifact due to the ear's sensitivity between low and high frequencies. If you compress the lows, the higher frequencies track accordingly, for every dB of compression of the lows will reduce the corresponding level of the highs by the same dB. If this was done with multi-band compression (very uncommon), then the highs would remain uncompressed and the overall sound would be brighter and this darkening artifact would not be (as) audible. When no compression is used, the darkening artifact just doesn't get generated to begin with.

This is a concept first developed in the pro audio industry, and it's present on every PA that has active crossovers and limiters on each band. It's also used in the radio and recording industries, to increase % modulation and perceived volume over the air and when mastering vinyl records to prevent overmodulation on the lows (to keep the cuttingstylus in the groove) while not affecting the highs.

All of this compression stuff serves to increase the AVERAGE volume at the expense of the peak levels or reducing the dynamic range. Important note... once a signal has been compressed, that's it. If your amp compresses and you need the dynamics, you are pretty much stuck.

This is important stuff to a player, even if it is going on behind the scenes. If you need dynamics, then choose an amp that doesn't compress them. If your style needs compression, then either pick an amp that has the right feel for you or pick up a suitable outboard compressor. You can always compress a dynamic signal but it doesn't work well to expand an already compressed signal.