• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

gig review: Genz Benz NeoPak 3.5 and Neox112t cab

L

Lia_G

Oct 27, 2005
3,074
199
#1
I originally posted this in another thread, but the thread was supposed to be about the Neox212t cab, and I don't want this review of the 112 cab to be lost. Reposting as a separate thread. Mods, if this is a no-no, I apologize!

Here's some pics from a recent fusion trio gig here in Nashville, at the grand opening of the East Nashville School of Music:

hugepedullaraptureandgenzben.gif


eastnashvilleschoolofmusic4.gif


As you can see, I ended up just using the Neox112t cab, rather than the 212. The drummer isn't that loud, and Andy Gurley was playing his quiet rig, a Fender Blues Junior. At one point, though, things did get louder, when another guitarist (Danny Ray Martin) brought out a Fender Super Reverb and jammed with us. Andy turned up as well, so I had to crank the NeoPak a bit ... to 5 on the master! The little rig, even with just the 112, is loud and full. I had the eq set almost flat, with just a bit of mid boost at around 200hz, which I like for fretless, and no presets engaged. The eq on my bass was dead flat. When Danny plugged in, I cut the bass and treble just a tad as I boosted the master to 5.

I was using the BBE OptoComp pedal for some compression (you can see it sitting on top of the NeoPak), and I really love it. I had a bit of tube warmth dialed up in the pre section, and I was not using the active setting on the head, since I've found that I like the tone better without it, at least with this Pedulla fretless.

The rig just rocked. Andy hadn't noticed what I was playing through, and he was shocked when I told him it was a single 12. It's just so much deeper than any other 112 I've played. It really does remind me of a 15" cab. There were some places where I just dropped down and played some heavy grooves low on the b string, and I couldn't believe the bass that was cranking out of this setup ... and that was with a bit of bass cut on the amp eq, and the Pedulla eq flat! I really felt like I had a 15 or an 18 behind me, with the thump and volume I was getting in the lows.

So I'll still have to wait a bit longer to try out the Neox212t live, but I was really impressed with how the 112 did.

This was supposed to also be my first gig playing my Pedulla Hexabuzz, but you may have noticed that I'm not playing it in the pics. I had some string issues, and ended up having to use my fretless Rapture 5 instead. It served me very well indeed, and sounds great through the Genz Benz gear.

One final note. I got to hear a player I idolized when I was first starting to play. Stan Lassiter played a bit before us (Link Removed, and vids at http://www.youtube.com/55goldtop). If you're ever in Nashville and find yourself wondering "Hmm, wonder what it would be like if John McLaughlin lived here?" ... just go see Stan play. He's pretty astonishing. The scary part is that I introduced myself, and he asked me to get in touch with him about subbing with him sometime ...

Okay, enough for now. Great gear, and a super gig.

Liam
 
#2
Nice review! I'm halfway there with my Neo-Pak. So far, I'm really impressed with this little thing. Trying to decide whether or not I want to take the plunge on the GB neo's but, the more I hear about their performance, the less I'm able to justify not doing it.

Cool about the Stan Lassiter thing too! I think that I would have put on a pair of Depends before going up to shake his hand. :D
 
#3
Cool.
I'm "warming up" my Neo-Pak 3.5 now. After about 3 weeks, 2 rehearsals, and 5 gigs, it STILL impresses.
The GB Neo 12 Cab was a front-runner to match it to, but in the end, I chose an EA Wizzy M-Line, mainly due to the 4-Ohm load, to max out the Neo-Pak.
No doubt either way, it produces.
The "other" small amp is getting all the attention, and it deserves all the good things players say about it.
But the Neo-Pak is getting short shrift. I like it better than the MarkBass, for a number of reasons. Good to have choices.
I'll be sure to check out Mr. Lassiter's work, I'm not familiar with him, but I have seen McLaughlin live, with the Mahavishnu Orchestra, complete with Billy Cobham. It was, ummmm-
Pretty damn amazing, actually!:D
Have fun with the rig.

'Deal.
 
#4
Emprov said:
Nice review! I'm halfway there with my Neo-Pak. So far, I'm really impressed with this little thing. Trying to decide whether or not I want to take the plunge on the GB neo's but, the more I hear about their performance, the less I'm able to justify not doing it.
Click to expand...

Thanks! The Neox series is pretty darn amazing. The more I play them, the more I'm impressed.

Cool about the Stan Lassiter thing too! I think that I would have put on a pair of Depends before going up to shake his hand. :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was scary! Not as scary as having to FOLLOW HIM on stage though! Fortunately, Andy is an amazing guitarist in his own right, and we were doing stuff more along the lines of Scofield and Medeski, Martin and Wood. Actually, with Stan's "McLaughlinism" and Andy's "Scofieldism" it made for a really ultra-cool fusion show. I wish it had been recorded.

Liam
 
#5
And I'm continuing to enjoy my Neo-Pak as well. It sounds sensational either through the EA M-Line Wizzy 12 or through one or both of the Bag End S15's.

The Neo-Pak has a really dynamic tone played live. I've noticed a definite fluidity of sound, and the tube coloration is very noticeable. As mentioned in a post I made in the thread about 15" cabinets, there is a sweet spot of sound with the master volume past about 9 o'clock. This is with tube preamp at 3 o'clock, channel volume at 12, with my main 4-string, the Spirit outfitted with EMG HBCS pickups and BTC system.

The GB engineers did a great job designing both the tube circuit and the power amp. This head definitely does not sound like it has a switching power supply!
 
#6
That's cool about Stan. If you get a chance to play with him I'll be so jealous I may never talk to you again! :D

By the way, it looks like you had it kicked back a bit. Where you using the kick-back handle or something else? What kind of stage were you on?

As for the SMPS, it seems to perform flawlessly. The output limiter on the head is the coolest part to me. In fact, I like pushing the Neo-Pak so that the clip light is flashing pretty regularly, causing the output limiter to kick in. It really does cause the head to resemble an all-tube sound. It's one of my favorite features. I'd probably like it on the 1200 as well, but I haven't had a gig where I've been able to turn the thing up loud enough yet to make it kick in.
 
#7
Yeah, it's kicked back using the little handle. Just about perfect ... enough to reduce floor coupling and aim the sound up a bit, but not so much that the amp head slides off ... ;)

This was outdoors, on a cement patio beside a restaurant, with a cement block wall behind us.

Liam
 
#9
Hey man,

No DI. No FOH. The pa gear in the background was for vocals, but we did all instrumentals, and just used our amps. It wasn't a huge place, so it all worked. It was very cool to discover that this little rig will work very well for these fusion trio gigs with drummer, with no PA support. Awesome! :D

Now when Andy breaks out his Marshall half stack, or his THD Univalve, I'll definitely need to use the 212 cab!

Liam
 
#11
MichaelVee said:
This head definitely does not sound like it has a switching power supply!
Click to expand...

The SMPS emulates the linear supplies in it's response and performance. The idea was to maintain the more traditional feel but without the weight. Had we gone with a tightly regulated switcher, the numerical power output might have been greater but the feel (in part the dynamic headroom) as the amp slides around the limiter's threshold would be lost. It's one of the necessary tradeoffs any dsigner must address.
 
#12
agedhorse said:
The SMPS emulates the linear supplies in it's response and performance. The idea was to maintain the more traditional feel but without the weight. Had we gone with a tightly regulated switcher, the numerical power output might have been greater but the feel (in part the dynamic headroom) as the amp slides around the limiter's threshold would be lost. It's one of the necessary tradeoffs any dsigner must address.
Click to expand...
+1 on the decision to do that (although I have no idea what you're talking about :D ). This little head is perfect for jazz and acoustic gigs because of it's tone and weight. It's nice and warm so that you don't have to sacrifice having that feel by brining many of the more "sterile" sounding lightweight SS heads out there, yet's it's still powerful enough to handle medium sized gigs as well.
 
#15
MichaelVee said:
What, then, is the maximum output of the 3.5 at the different ohmages?
Click to expand...

Eublet's post has the numbers.

Had I chosen to stiffen up the way the SMPS operated, the 2 ohm and 4 ohm numbers would have been higher but in the real world there wouldn't have been much if any additional volume and it would have sacraficed the feel as it is run up against the output limiter.

This is the big marketing quandry every manufacturer faces. Do you go for the marketing numbers or do you go for the real world performance. Many buyers won't even look at an amp unless it has "XXX watts". Unfortunately, they may overlook some very appropriate amps for their playing style.
 
#16
liam_g said:
At one point, though, things did get louder, when another guitarist (Danny Ray Martin) brought out a Fender Super Reverb and jammed with us. Andy turned up as well, so I had to crank the NeoPak a bit ... to 5 on the master! The little rig, even with just the 112, is loud and full. I had the eq set almost flat, with just a bit of mid boost at around 200hz, which I like for fretless, and no presets engaged. The eq on my bass was dead flat. When Danny plugged in, I cut the bass and treble just a tad as I boosted the master to 5.
Click to expand...

This thread was too old for me to edit, but I was just rereading it and thought I should clarify: when I said I cranked the master to 5, I meant 5 on a scale of 1 to 10, not 5 o'clock! In other words, I had the master at noon, straight up.

Cheers
 
#17
Interesting bit about the sagging action of the SMPS as the amp approaches the output limit. I wonder if this might help explain why some find the NEO-PAK 3.5 a bit soft when pushed as compared to the LMII?

BTW, your Rapture 5 looks similar to mine.... except mine has frets and a Q-tuner.
 
#19
The Neo-pak doesn't "sag" when it's pushed, or at least it shouldn't be described as such IMO. I think you're misinterpreting the posts above. The output limiter is designed to emulate what a more traditional head does when it reaches it's peak. If anything, it's a very musical thing. The difference people notice with the LMII is probably related to two things. First it has more power, second, it tops out in a fashion more typical of a SS head with VI limiting. Neither is right or wrong, just different. I prefer the Neo-pak because to me it sounds best when I'm driving it a good bit, a lot like a tube head. It sounds awesome to me.
 
#20
lo-freq said:
I'd love to hear the Neox112, 212, and both cabs together with a good lower impedence-capable amp.

I bet they sound good.
Click to expand...

Oh, they do, yes, they do. :D Either or both sound amazing. My NeoPak doesn't have the 2 ohm mod, but runs either cab amazingly well. My GBE600 runs both cabs together, and makes a very loud stack with truly great and versatile tone.

Cheers
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back