How does GK's sound compare to Eden's?

[giorob815]

I'm interested in the MB200 specifically. None of my local music stores, including GC, stock it, so I have no way to try one out. I used to have an Eden WT-800 and loved the tone I got from it. I understand the MB200 is a streamlined feature amp, but what is the 'signature tone' of a GK like?

Thanks

[husky123]

To me the signature tone of the GK line is the aggressive and present upper mid grind. They can cover a ton of ground mind you but always have that........that.........GK grind. I know, I'm not that good with words but that's how I hear it.

BTW the newer GK MB's have a much more extended and beefy low end than the RB's IMO. The RB's are all about the mids. My 2....but we all hear things differently.

[the yeti]

Originally Posted by husky123

To me the signature tone of the GK line is the aggressive and present upper mid grind. They can cover a ton of ground mind you but always have that........that.........GK grind. I know, I'm not that good with words but that's how I hear it.

BTW the newer GK MB's have a much more extended and beefy low end than the RB's IMO. The RB's are all about the mids. My 2....but we all hear things differently.

that pretty much nailed it imo. never owned an eden but the ones i've played seemed miles from gk.

as for signature sound, i think flea is a gk guy, also duff mackegan (is/was), geddy was at one point (about 100 years ago, maybe moving pics?). i could be wrong on those though.

[GBassNorth]

Not sure if it's indicative of all GK or Eden products but...
I tried both GK and Eden combos and generally speaking the Eden combos came across a little darker and deeper to me, whereas the GKs had more of a lowmid focus. This was on 210 combos. Both sounded great but of the two I grabbed the GK due to weight, a 250watt (500watt with extension cab) 210 combo weighing only 33 pounds - gotta love that. Again, both sounded great but the Eden did sound darker to me, more along the Ashdown type tone.

[Marty Forrer]

I've had different GKs, and an Eden WT head. I'm a doubler, so they have to work for double bass as well as BG. The Eden was punchier for BG, but not so good for DB. The GK is warmer, more rock n roll, and better for DB. Eden required a fair bit of knob twiddling, whereas GK sounded good mostly set flat. You wont be dissapointed with GK. My opinion.

[giorob815]

Thanks guys. Sounds like good support for GK all around- mid-focused rock'n'roll tone...I likey.

[craig.p]

Watch out. A GK "set flat" is not even close to flat. Mid-focused? No way. "Set for flat" would have controls set for treble cut, mid boost, and bass cut. Totally different. That's what would give you the mids you (apparently) want. Also, the MB200 "set flat" and run within its power limits delivers the thickest, beefiest, bass-heaviest sound I have in my pile of ordnance. So, don't be surprised if you have to set its controls some distance from what you initially thought in order to get the sound you want. Even then, though, a lot of that thickness -- or a veiling effect -- still hangs around.

[mouthmw]

Gk set flat does not boost mids, it cuts them. Flat gk has a bit of a scoop. That said, I get plenty of mids out of it.

Edit: oops, I see what you meant there, how to set it to sound flat. Yup, boost mids.

[craig.p]

Partly my fault for wording it so opaquely. I should've said "all controls at noon" rather than "set flat." Or I could've said "set nominally flat."

But anyway, for the OP: "True flat" is treble at 10 o'clock, high mid at 2 o'clock, low mid at 1 o'clock, and bass at 10 o'clock. (Thanks again to fdeck for this info.) So, when you get your amp, start with the controls there.

[giorob815]

I understand what you're saying. So it seems that the GK's, or at least the MBs, are 'pre-set' to a slap style- bass/treble boost, mid cut. I like thickness on the low end, but am really after some good punch. In your opinion will the MB provide? And sound good doing it?

[SeaBassTheFish]

Yeah I think you can get some good punch. I have the mb 112. It does have a nice warmth and depth to the low end, but the sound is still so crisp and beautiful and sonically layered. The word I keep coming back to is "clean".
Sounds a little contradictory to say that - a warm but clean tone. Maybe it's that the amp/driver deliver a clean sound and the cabinet is what gives it some of that warmth.

Anyway, I'm constantly playing with EQ, but not because I can't find a setting I like. It's because I find too many tasty settings and have issues with commitment.

[husky123]

Originally Posted by giorob815

I understand what you're saying. So it seems that the GK's, or at least the MBs, are 'pre-set' to a slap style- bass/treble boost, mid cut. I like thickness on the low end, but am really after some good punch. In your opinion will the MB provide? And sound good doing it?

Good punch is usually not a problem with any GK products I've ever tried. I have both the MB200 and 800. The 800 will deal with you directly. It has more punch than any other micro I've ever tried. Now with that said, the MB200 is no slouch. At 4 ohms it surprises a lot of people including me when I first plugged it in. The GK EQ center points are in good places. Lows at 60 Hz and the low mids at 250 Hz will provide punch and body (depth) in spades. Add a touch of high mids (1000 Hz) for definition and some GK grind.

So, yes, the little MB will sound good doing it for sure.

[giorob815]

Awesome. Thanks guys!