Mesa 400+ or Carbine M9?!

[Guish]

Hum... I need information! I've tried A LOT of amp latetly!.... a lot! I own an Ampeg SVT 4 Pro, and I don't know! I like it.. but I want more! (don't have any logic reason...) So here's the thing! I play in a cover\original band! We play anything from Metallica, Guns, Ram Jam, Edgar Winter Group and Led Zep to stuff like Limp Bizkit, Billy Talent, Rage Against the Machine and more... In our OWN stuff, it sounds like a mix of musicaly Limp Bizkit and Breaking Benjamin but more ambient! I use a Spector Reebop (which I LOVE)!

I tried the Mesa M9 Carbine and loved it! But now, I have a nice deal on a Mesa 400+! Never tried it.. So I have to know the major differences between them both! (speaking about sound) And what you guys think would fit better in the type of music we do! I like the punch and attack and power of the M9! It's loud and it rocks! But what about the 400+?!

Help me! Thanx guys!

[anonymous101511]

HI, the 400 won't have the punch and attack of the M9, not even close. If you like those qualities(as I do) you will be happier with the M9, I know I am. For me the 400+ is gritty and loose sounding. I bought the M9 just last month.

[themacinator]

I biased...

[JimmyM]

Pile on the tubes!

[K-Funk]

The 400+ is a straight-up rock machine... it seems like it'd handle what you're playing perfectly. I've owned two 400+'s and one 400; all three were fine amps that were surprisingly flexible and never lacking in volume.

For a sound comparison, the 400+ is going to be a bit meaner and gritty sounding, although there are ways of cleaning it up (chiefly the 12AU7 mod). The M9 is going to be very tight with more clean headroom, and will likely be capable of a more nuanced sound.

[JimmyM]

I'll tell you, upon thinking about it, if the punchy attack is what you're after, maybe you should get the M9. OTOH, I can't complain about the punch I've gotten out of a Mesa tube head. Never ran a 400+ but I used a D-180 for a while in the 80's and it had plenty of punch for my tastes. But if you like that solid state attack, tubes don't do that.

Not that I'm complaining

[Caca de Kick]

Only you can decide, they're two different animals, but you can't go wrong withg either...they're Mesa!
I have a Mesa V12 and it sounds good with lots of horsepower. But my 400 is still more rich in tone, and even though there's a big difference in rated wattage, the 400 still pumps and nips on the heels of those bigger heads and keeps up. It would be all-tube for me.

[Killface]

Dude I want that 400+ BAD. If I can't get the 400+ ill get the m6 or the m-pulse. I love the all tube mesa sound and have yet to try the simul-state mesa heads. But Chris Buck uses them and he's sound is mind blowing!

[rockstarbassist]

I sold my 400+ for an M9. It's that good IMO. Especially for cover band stuff, where you want/need different voicings and tones, the M9 with it's GEQ and Voicing feature really helps out a lot.
The 400+ was great except it was just a heavy, cumbersome, yet great sounding monitor amp. If we were running our own sound and I could mic up a cab or if the onboard DI sounded even halfway decent I'd probably still have it.
Another choice from Mesa if you like options is the Titan V12. In my last cover band of about 2 years that was my amp the whole time. Two channels, each w/ OD, solo feature, just flat out ruled.

[Gearhead17]

The 400+ has tube growl and can sound very thick and clean while still growling. It's a great tone, but I got rid of mine mainly because it does not have much low end headroom. The head seemed to growl a lot more on the E and B strings instead of giving me decent low end. I prefer high wattage solid state amps because of this. My Carvin BX1200 works wonders for me.

The M9 is quite gritty and edgy sounding. Very loud head too. You can not go wrong with either. A distortion/overdrive pedal with the M9 could easily give you the best of both worlds. The tube growl from the 400+ is really only useful if the sound guy is miking your cab.

[rockstarbassist]

Originally Posted by Gearhead17

The 400+ has tube growl and can sound very thick and clean while still growling. It's a great tone, but I got rid of mine mainly because it does not have much low end headroom. The head seemed to growl a lot more on the E and B strings instead of giving me decent low end. I prefer high wattage solid state amps because of this. My Carvin BX1200 works wonders for me.

The M9 is quite gritty and edgy sounding. Very loud head too. You can not go wrong with either. A distortion/overdrive pedal with the M9 could easily give you the best of both worlds. The tube growl from the 400+ is really only useful if the sound guy is miking your cab.

That's what it came down to for me, also. On my detuned B and E strings (to A and C, respectively) I got more "grunt" than solid "note" which for our stuff wasn't really what I wanted from the 400+.
The M9 can do the almost subsonic stuff (Spector tuned to F#!) very well and retains the "note" a lot better IMO. I use 3 different dirt/OD pedals in front of it when I want grit or to get nasty and it plays nice w/ them.

Plus like you said, it was just a big, nice sounding monitor amp. Sucked the tone never hardly hit the FOH mix.

[chaosMK]

400+ is great, hard to beat in terms of tone and character. Carbine is killer too... not as awesome, but doesnt require as much maintenance or delicate handling as a tube beast. I'd prob go with the Carbine in your case.

[Alex1984]

Can't speak for the comparison, but I think any bassist owes it to themselves to try a tube amp at some point in their career.

[rayzak]

The 400+ is a great sounding amp, especially right before the breaking point. But at super loud volumes, I never cared for it's tube saturation sound. Too thin sounding, unlike Ampeg for instance. One of the best at medium volume though.