GK Neo 410 or RBX 410 to go with a GK Neo 212?

Murph_Orpheus · #1 07-15-2010, 10:01 PM

I recently bought the 700RBII and it's sounding quite good through my Neo 212, although I do find it to be quite bright and a little too trebley at times. However, I'm looking to get a 2nd cab to pair with it now. I've played the RBX 410 and found it to be quite nice, very full low end which is more what I'm after. Would I get that nice low end from the Neo 410? Or is it quite bright sounding like the 212? The other worry is if I'd be pumping enough juice into the Neo 410 seeing as it's rated at 800 watts and running the 700RBII at 4 ohms into 2 cabs would mean I'd be pushing 240 watts to each cab.

Murph_Orpheus · #2 07-16-2010, 07:24 PM

Any opinions?

**B-string** · #3 07-16-2010, 07:52 PM

First, don't worry if the 700RB II has enough power. It does, unless you are the type that always has to have a full fuel tank or thinks that volume knobs should always be fully clockwise at all times (even then the cabs will be just fine). It sounds like the RBX may take some edge off for you. The NEO 410 is deeper sounding than the 212 but still prominent mids and high mids, so the RBX may be your ticket.

**lowendfriend** · #4 07-16-2010, 07:52 PM

I have your rig. I would never use the term "bright", though. What is your bass?

I run a Warwick $$ 5 string thru it and it has got plenty of BOMP.

What are your 700RBII settings?

I tend to boost low and mid highs a bit over the manual's settings baseline for Rock. I actually dial down a bit on bass and a good bit on treble to flatten things out a little across the strings. I play mostly Blues.

Have you considered an MBE or MBX 115 Neo? this is the new light weight series with no horns due out from GK soon.

Murph_Orpheus · #5 07-16-2010, 08:40 PM

I run a Warwick $$ 5 string through it as well. On the 700RB I have the bass around 1 o' clock, treble at 11 and have the low and high mids cut slightly. I've played about with the EQ quite a bit but I still find the 212 to be a bit sharp on the high end to my ear. I'd love to try out a Neo 410 but there's no GK dealers over here

**B-string** · #6 07-16-2010, 09:12 PM

Are you using the G-K speakon cable between the amp head and cab? If you are turnning down the "tweeter" control may help a lot and use the "Hi-Cut" switch.

Murph_Orpheus · #7 07-16-2010, 09:19 PM

Aye I've tried it with the tweeter control fully turned down as well. I think maybe it's just a case that this cab simply isn't for me? I'm going to hang onto it for a while anyway and pair it with a 410 and see how my overall sound is then.

B-string, you reckon the RBX has more low end than the Neo 410?

**B-string** · #8 07-16-2010, 09:26 PM

More "traditional" low end and not as much mid range with the RBX. Have you cut back the highs and mid-highs on the amp? Maybe you need to be playing half-rounds or flat wound strings?

Murph_Orpheus · #9 07-16-2010, 09:29 PM

Yeah I've cut the highs and mid-highs when playing about with the EQ. I haven't tried a new string setup with it yet, may give that a shot.

**B-string** · #10 07-16-2010, 09:35 PM

Sounds like half-rounds or flats will fit your sound better! They are cheaper than a new cab also

Murph_Orpheus · #11 07-16-2010, 09:37 PM

I'll be getting a 2nd cab to use for bigger venues anyway

But cheers for the advice on the strings, will give it a shot. Now to find some decent taperwound flats for my Warwick!

**B-string** · #12 07-16-2010, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murph_Orpheus

I'll be getting a 2nd cab to use for bigger venues anyway

But cheers for the advice on the strings, will give it a shot. Now to find some decent taperwound flats for my Warwick!

Why did I just get hungry???? Sounds like candy

Murph_Orpheus · #13 07-21-2010, 11:53 AM

Just to go back to the power issue, with 240 watts each into the 600 watt 212 and the 800 watt 410, is underpowering an issue?

**B-string** · #14 07-21-2010, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murph_Orpheus

Just to go back to the power issue, with 240 watts each into the 600 watt 212 and the 800 watt 410, is underpowering an issue?

There is NO such thing as underpowering. If it existed we would not have volume controls!

**lowendfriend** · #15 07-21-2010, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murph_Orpheus

I run a Warwick $$ 5 string through it as well. On the 700RB I have the bass around 1 o' clock, treble at 11 and have the low and high mids cut slightly. I've played about with the EQ quite a bit but I still find the 212 to be a bit sharp on the high end to my ear. I'd love to try out a Neo 410 but there's no GK dealers over here

Go with flats, man.

I use the Sadowsky Black Labels with tapered B....BOMP

I actually run my bass eq more around 10/11. Running the $$ with switches up makes the sound a little more muted. I run the low mids and high mids up, striving for a little more uniformity across the strings. I usually run active and tend to bias toward the neck pickup. I think I run the 4/5 switch on the amp in the 4 position despite the 5 strings.

If you have not gigged a lot with the Neo212, they are purported to break in and get a little deeper after say 10 hours at fairly high power.

Good luck finding that sound but with a $$ 5-er and the 700RBII, it pays to experiment a lot and then mark dial positions, including the 'wick's. Extreme flexibility means you can get lost in the choices.

Murph_Orpheus · #16 07-21-2010, 08:29 PM

Yeah I'm finding my Warwick to be quite fussy with this rig. I played my Spector through it and it sounds beautiful. But the fact that I can't find the sound I want with the Warwick bothers me, so I'm not letting go of the issue until I resolve it