Question for GB ShuttleMax 9.2 owners/users

[Tugboat]

Hey guys......I'm running a 9.2 through a GB NeoX 212T....I also use an Aggie TH 500. My problem is when I use the 9.2 I can't seem to get a "richness" to the sound. Richness is the best way to describe it I guess, maybe warmth. I've heard so much praise on this head and I've tried a bunch of different settings. Maybe someone has thoughts? Maybe it's the NeoX 212 with the head? The Aggie sounds good, thick and rich but still punchy, so I'm thinking maybe it's just me. I had a Streamliner 900 which I got rid of but I'm thinking it may be a better match with the neo 212. I didn't have the 212 when I had the 900. Ah, I don't know....any thoughts we can discuss?

I should have added...I'm getting the same results using either a Peavey Cirrus or a USA Lakland JO.

[j0616bass]

I have basically the same setup, although my Lakland JO is a Skyline. I tend to run the bass and treble EQ flat, and bump the low and high mids a bit. I also rarely ever use the solid state section of the amp. I turn the gain up so I get a little breakup only if I'm playing hard. I played my old Ibanez Blazer (P copy) last night with these settings and it sounded tasty as well.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Tugboat

Hey guys......I'm running a 9.2 through a GB NeoX 212T....I also use an Aggie TH 500. My problem is when I use the 9.2 I can't seem to get a "richness" to the sound. Richness is the best way to describe it I guess, maybe warmth. I've heard so much praise on this head and I've tried a bunch of different settings. Maybe someone has thoughts? Maybe it's the NeoX 212 with the head? The Aggie sounds good, thick and rich but still punchy, so I'm thinking maybe it's just me. I had a Streamliner 900 which I got rid of but I'm thinking it may be a better match with the neo 212. I didn't have the 212 when I had the 900. Ah, I don't know....any thoughts we can discuss?

I should have added...I'm getting the same results using either a Peavey Cirrus or a USA Lakland JO.

The Max 9.2 is 'tight and bright' inherently. TOTALLY different from the Aggie, which has a dip in the upper mids, and a much deeper low end extension.

If you want to get some of that 'Aguilar fat' out of the Max 9.2, especially with the punchy cab you have, IME try this, using the FET channel.

1) Engage the lo boost knob, and set at around noon on the level control.... keep the other voicing filters off

2) Bump the bass control up to between 1 and 2 o'clock (use your ears.... LOTS of low mid punch in that control, with its high shelving start point).

3) Here is the big one... SIGNIFICANTLY cut the upper mids... set the upper mid frequency control to between 1K and 2K.. can't remember the exact frequency knob positon, but start at around 1 o'clock (play around with it between 1 and 2 o'clock). Cut back quite a bit... 10 o'clock or even 9 o'clock.

That should give you quite a bit of the Aguilar type fatness down low, and organic smoothness up top. If you want to emulate a bit of the drive control, or cranking the gain on the Aguilar, you can try similar settings on the Tube channel of the Max 9.2, with the boost in and the gain cranked a bit.

[HolmeBass]

KJung knows his stuff! I too find the amp tight, quick, and bright. I am using bassier cabinets with mine, previously a GB Uber 212T, and now a fEARful 15/6 (no tweeter) and it works for me with active basses, but so far not so good with my J bass. I am switching to flats on the J to see what I can get.

When I tried in the music store, the Streamliner sounded *so good* with my J, but a bit lifeless with my active SSD. Since I use the SSD most of the time, I went with the SM 9.2. I agree, the FET channel will sound a bit richer and mellower, the tube channel is super clear and glassy, even with the high-gain engaged for some grit (and I love that sound- but it's no Ampeg clone, that's for sure!).

[KJung]

Originally Posted by HolmeBass

KJung knows his stuff! I too find the amp tight, quick, and bright. I am using bassier cabinets with mine, previously a GB Uber 212T, and now a fEARful 15/6 (no tweeter) and it works for me with active basses, but so far not so good with my J bass. I am switching to flats on the J to see what I can get.

When I tried in the music store, the Streamliner sounded *so good* with my J, but a bit lifeless with my active SSD. Since I use the SSD most of the time, I went with the SM 9.2. I agree, the FET channel will sound a bit richer and mellower, the tube channel is super clear and glassy, even with the high-gain engaged for some grit (and I love that sound- but it's no Ampeg clone, that's for sure!).

The Max 9.2 is IMO MADE for the fEARful 15/6. Very nice. That cab can use some 'tighness' down low IMO and IME, and the lo boost control (which has some hi pass variability as part of the circuit) is just perfect for sculpting the big low end of that cab. The upper mid and treble controls are also nice for smoothing the somewhat brittle (IMO) tone of that 18Sound mid driver. REALLY nice matchup, and +1 it is still 'what it is' no matter what you do, and Ampeg is NOT what it is

[j0616bass]

Originally Posted by KJung

The Max 9.2 is 'tight and bright' inherently. TOTALLY different from the Aggie, which has a dip in the upper mids, and a much deeper low end extension.

If you want to get some of that 'Aguilar fat' out of the Max 9.2, especially with the punchy cab you have, IME try this, using the FET channel.

1) Engage the lo boost knob, and set at around noon on the level control.... keep the other voicing filters off

2) Bump the bass control up to between 1 and 2 o'clock (use your ears.... LOTS of low mid punch in that control, with its high shelving start point).

3) Here is the big one... SIGNIFICANTLY cut the upper mids... set the upper mid frequency control to between 1K and 2K.. can't remember the exact frequency knob positon, but start at around 1 o'clock (play around with it between 1 and 2 o'clock). Cut back quite a bit... 10 o'clock or even 9 o'clock.

That should give you quite a bit of the Aguilar type fatness down low, and organic smoothness up top. If you want to emulate a bit of the drive control, or cranking the gain on the Aguilar, you can try similar settings on the Tube channel of the Max 9.2, with the boost in and the gain cranked a bit.

This is why i love this site...totally different approach than mine and I'll definitely be trying it out myself!

[KJung]

Originally Posted by j0616bass

This is why i love this site...totally different approach than mine and I'll definitely be trying it out myself!

Just to be clear, those EQ settings were based on trying to get the OP to where he tonally wants to go, and given the cab he is using. It is in no way any sort of 'general recommendation' for EQing the Max, which has about any sound in it that you would want, and is actually hard to make 'not sound good'

[j0616bass]

Originally Posted by KJung

Just to be clear, those EQ settings were based on trying to get the OP to where he tonally wants to go, and given the cab he is using. It is in no way any sort of 'general recommendation' for EQing the Max, which has about any sound in it that you would want, and is actually hard to make 'not sound good'

Yeah, no doubt! I've just not tried what you suggested before and i don't need much of an excuse to go fiddle with my gear

[poptart]

Originally Posted by KJung

The Max 9.2 is 'tight and bright' inherently. TOTALLY different from the Aggie, which has a dip in the upper mids, and a much deeper low end extension.

If you want to get some of that 'Aguilar fat' out of the Max 9.2, especially with the punchy cab you have, IME try this, using the FET channel.

1) Engage the lo boost knob, and set at around noon on the level control.... keep the other voicing filters off

2) Bump the bass control up to between 1 and 2 o'clock (use your ears.... LOTS of low mid punch in that control, with its high shelving start point).

3) Here is the big one... SIGNIFICANTLY cut the upper mids... set the upper mid frequency control to between 1K and 2K.. can't remember the exact frequency knob positon, but start at around 1 o'clock (play around with it between 1 and 2 o'clock). Cut back quite a bit... 10 o'clock or even 9 o'clock.

That should give you quite a bit of the Aguilar type fatness down low, and organic smoothness up top. If you want to emulate a bit of the drive control, or cranking the gain on the Aguilar, you can try similar settings on the Tube channel of the Max 9.2, with the boost in and the gain cranked a bit.

Ken - a big +1 from me!

[kai_ski]

Originally Posted by KJung

The Max 9.2 is 'tight and bright' inherently. TOTALLY different from the Aggie, which has a dip in the upper mids, and a much deeper low end extension.

If you want to get some of that 'Aguilar fat' out of the Max 9.2, especially with the punchy cab you have, IME try this, using the FET channel.

1) Engage the lo boost knob, and set at around noon on the level control.... keep the other voicing filters off

2) Bump the bass control up to between 1 and 2 o'clock (use your ears.... LOTS of low mid punch in that control, with its high shelving start point).

3) Here is the big one... SIGNIFICANTLY cut the upper mids... set the upper mid frequency control to between 1K and 2K.. can't remember the exact frequency knob positon, but start at around 1 o'clock (play around with it between 1 and 2 o'clock). Cut back quite a bit... 10 o'clock or even 9 o'clock.

That should give you quite a bit of the Aguilar type fatness down low, and organic smoothness up top. If you want to emulate a bit of the drive control, or cranking the gain on the Aguilar, you can try similar settings on the Tube channel of the Max 9.2, with the boost in and the gain cranked a bit.

I took this advice, but I left the Low boost off, and only cut the upper mids to 10 o'clock and it sounds great with my PJ.
In addition I turned the low-mids freq all the way down and boosted them up to between 1 and 2 with the bass knob. Probably one of the best settings I've tried on the FET channel.


btw ken - is your youtube channel gone?

[KJung]

Originally Posted by kai_ski

I took this advice, but I left the Low boost off, and only cut the upper mids to 10 o'clock and it sounds great with my PJ.
In addition I turned the low-mids freq all the way down and boosted them up to between 1 and 2 with the bass knob. Probably one of the best settings I've tried on the FET channel.


btw ken - is your youtube channel gone?

It is a great head. Pretty much any tone you would want (other than pure 'all tube' tone, which is why they have the Streamliner) is in there! That lo boost/hi pass is great, combined with the low mid semi-parametric and the very nicely voiced bass control, since you can really sculpt the low end to match the cab and how much 'burp' versus 'big' you want, and pretty much get any low end voicing you want with most cabs.

Yes, I retired from the 'clip' world and took the channel down a while ago. I hit 200,000 views, and am not buying as much stuff, nor do I live in Detroit anymore, which was a great place for having a constant amount of new gear coming through my house to review from all the GTG's we did, etc. Just felt like a nice time to put it to rest!

[Tugboat]

THANK YOU Ken and everyone else. Sorry it took me so long to respond, but all my good equipment is in my rehearsal room at my office so I didn't get to it until today. I have four kids four and under. Yes, four, four and under; so I don't keep my good stuff at my house. Anyway, after your advice I did some more tweaking and I started to figure it out. Thank you again. (And if you're interested there is a nice TH500 for sale in the classifieds)

Now what's next? Streamliner? Not sure of the pairing with the NeoX 212 though. I actually used to have a SL900 but got rid of it before the 212. Missing it's creamy goodness. The GAS never ends.