• 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.

Comparisons: Mesa Boogie M6 Carbine to Thunderfunk TFB-750A and/or Markbass SD800

John D Harris

John D Harris

aka UFO
Jan 19, 2003
10,725
4,312
SW, OK
www.bandmix.com
#1
I'm interested in the M6 and was hoping some of you have compared it to either or both of the TFB-750A and SD800.

I know the other two have a bit more power (on paper) and the SD800 has a minimum 4ohm impedence restriction.

I'm also curious about each one's performance into 8ohm cabs.

I really like the tone of the Markbass F1, but most of the time I use an 8 ohm cab.
I also occasionally do outdoor gigs with no PA support, so I need a bit more power/headroom than the F1 gives.

Basically, any input you can give will help and will be appreciated.
 
#4
I suspect that not a lot of people have compared these...but hopefully some (Sun.AM bump).

While we're waiting for some to chime in on the main topic, which cabs sound best to you folks with the M6 (from what I've read, a lot seem to be liking the Mesa cabs in various forms)?
 
#6
lo-freq said:
I'm not sure if TomBowlus has a TFB-750A or not.

If not, let's all urge him to get ahold of one just on general principles (underlying ulterior motive: so he can help a bro. out).

[It would be hard to believe that the BBB has not assimilated one of these yet.]


:bassist:
Click to expand...

I do not own a Thunderfunk, though I have heard them in all their iterations.

IME/IMHO, the M6 is closer in general tone to the SD800 than it is to the Thunderfunk, but it's still has its own tonal signature, which I happen to like very, very much, BTW.

Edit: IME/IMHO, the M6 has more usable volume/headroom than my SD800 did.

Tom.
 
#7
tombowlus said:
I do not own a Thunderfunk, though I have heard them in all their iterations.

IME/IMHO, the M6 is closer in general tone to the SD800 than it is to the Thunderfunk, but it's still has its own tonal signature, which I happen to like very, very much, BTW.

Tom.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Tom.
In general terms, how would you describe how the M6 and TFB-750A differ in their tone?

[The only one of the three that I've heard to this point is the SD800 (spent maybe 5 min. on one at a GC).]
 
#8
lo-freq said:
Thanks, Tom.
In general terms, how would you describe how the M6 and TFB-750A differ in their tone?
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, I do not have a TFB-750A, so take this for what it's worth (with is not a lot). But, the Thunderfunk has this solid, even response that seems to be focused on the meat of the frequency response curve, but it doesn't feel like it extends to the highest highs or lowest lows. You can dial some of this in, but especially in the high end, it doesn't seem to have as much to offer up high as some other heads.

The M6 makes no bones about trying to be ruler-flat in its response - and it certainly isn't. Rather, they specifically voiced the M6 for a very aggressively articulate, quick, tone, and it certainly delivers.

And again, that power stage is conservatively rated, and from a volume/headroom perspective, the M6 is a beast.

Tom.
 
#9
tombowlus said:
Edit: IME/IMHO, the M6 has more usable volume/headroom than my SD800 did.
Tom.
Click to expand...

As I really love the M6 but own the SD800 and I am quite happy with it, this is something I didn't need to read. :hmm:

Well, I can still get along with the weight issue. :)

I have to write 100 times
I don't need a M6
I don't need a M6
I don't need a M6
I don't need a M6
I don't need a M6
(ok, with cut & paste this is not so difficult) :D
 
#10
tombowlus said:
...

Edit: IME/IMHO, the M6 has more usable volume/headroom than my SD800 did.

Tom.
Click to expand...


Wow!


tombowlus said:
Keep in mind, I do not have a TFB-750A, so take this for what it's worth (with is not a lot). But, the Thunderfunk has this solid, even response that seems to be focused on the meat of the frequency response curve, but it doesn't feel like it extends to the highest highs or lowest lows. You can dial some of this in, but especially in the high end, it doesn't seem to have as much to offer up high as some other heads.

The M6 makes no bones about trying to be ruler-flat in its response - and it certainly isn't. Rather, they specifically voiced the M6 for a very aggressively articulate, quick, tone, and it certainly delivers.

And again, that power stage is conservatively rated, and from a volume/headroom perspective, the M6 is a beast.

Tom.
Click to expand...

Thanks again!
 
#12
tombowlus said:
[...]the Thunderfunk has this solid, even response that seems to be focused on the meat of the frequency response curve, but it doesn't feel like it extends to the highest highs or lowest lows. You can dial some of this in, but especially in the high end, it doesn't seem to have as much to offer up high as some other heads [...]
Click to expand...

Hmm. I don't own a 750 (I have the 550, but I'm assuming that they have the same tone-shaping circuit, just different power ratings/sections) but I can't really understand why there seems to be this consensus that the TFunks don't have "the highest highs or lowest lows." My 550 certainly does.

I have a theory that someone, somewhere along the line in these forums heard a more hyped high end from another brand of amp & deduced that the 550 is lacking in high end.

I have another theory that some on these forums have become indoctrinated to this "my amp goes from 20Hz-20kHz! It must be the best!" mantra, although for a bass amp, in a real-world gigging situation, it simply isn't true.
 
#13
klorence said:
Hmm. I don't own a 750 (I have the 550, but I'm assuming that they have the same tone-shaping circuit, just different power ratings/sections) but I can't really understand why there seems to be this consensus that the TFunks don't have "the highest highs or lowest lows." My 550 certainly does.

I have a theory that someone, somewhere along the line in these forums heard a more hyped high end from another brand of amp & deduced that the 550 is lacking in high end.

I have another theory that some on these forums have become indoctrinated to this "my amp goes from 20Hz-20kHz! It must be the best!" mantra, although for a bass amp, in a real-world gigging situation, it simply isn't true.
Click to expand...

I also find my 550b to be quite compressed in the deep low end, and to also be attenuated in the highest range of the treble region for bass. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and I believe gives the TF its 'warm and punchy' signature tone that many love and that others find a little to constrained.

However, to your point, whether you consider heads with a wider frequency range as 'hyped' in the highs and lows, or rather you hear the TF550 as 'compressed' is a moot point. It just depends on your preference, but the TF really does have a unique, tight, punchy, warm, mid present tone signature IMO that I totally dig in some playing contexts. I understand the TF750a is much bigger down low (I assume due to the increase in power along with some revoicing). Interestingly, some 550 users say they prefer the tighter low end of the 550! It's all about what you are looking for.
 
#14
KJung said:
I also find my 550b to be quite compressed in the deep low end, and to also be attenuated in the highest range of the treble region for bass. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and I believe gives the TF its 'warm and punchy' signature tone that many love and that others find a little to constrained.
Click to expand...

Well, I certainly respect everyone's opinions. Everyone is different/hears things differently, which can make these forums quite subjective. That doesn't render them useless, and in fact they are quite useful to me. I just don't hear the "quite compressed" deep low end, or attenuation in the high end. I hear plenty of both. But that's just me I guess.

Sorry for any derailment! ;)

EDIT: would love to hear a 750!
 
#15
klorence said:
Well, I certainly respect everyone's opinions. Everyone is different/hears things differently, which can make these forums quite subjective. That doesn't render them useless, and in fact they are quite useful to me. I just don't hear the "quite compressed" deep low end, or attenuation in the high end. I hear plenty of both. But that's just me I guess.

Sorry for any derailment! ;)

EDIT: would love to hear a 750!
Click to expand...

It is all so very subjective when talking about tone.
As the new Bass Gear Magazine tests more equipment it should help illuminate some of the underlying tech specs behind what we are trying to convey through the weird menagerie that is the English language.
Should be very interesting to see what different implementations that target a flat frequency response sound like and look like in graphs (plus all the various 'brand' tone signatures).

P.S. Derailments welcomed in this thread!
-- I think I just did one myself.
 
#16
tombowlus said:
I do not own a Thunderfunk, though I have heard them in all their iterations.

IME/IMHO, the M6 is closer in general tone to the SD800 than it is to the Thunderfunk, but it's still has its own tonal signature, which I happen to like very, very much, BTW.

Edit: IME/IMHO, the M6 has more usable volume/headroom than my SD800 did.

Tom.
Click to expand...

Hi guys, I'm out shopping for a powerfull funk/rock amp for my Hartke Hydrive 810 cab (2000 watts , 99 db/1 watt sensitivity).
I've tested the M6 Carbine, and will do so with the SD800..
Do you have any preferences/advice regarding performance and sound at 4 Ohm loads. I think the M6 looses a bit of punch when I push it. On Paper the SD produces 150 watts more, but Mesa certainly kicks for a 550-600 watt amp.
The two cost the same in Denmark and I really can't decide
:-)..

Hope you have some good advice.
Sincerely
Jon
 
#17
Jpold said:
Hi guys, I'm out shopping for a powerfull funk/rock amp for my Hartke Hydrive 810 cab (2000 watts , 99 db/1 watt sensitivity).
I've tested the M6 Carbine, and will do so with the SD800..
Do you have any preferences/advice regarding performance and sound at 4 Ohm loads. I think the M6 looses a bit of punch when I push it. On Paper the SD produces 150 watts more, but Mesa certainly kicks for a 550-600 watt amp.
The two cost the same in Denmark and I really can't decide
:-)..

Hope you have some good advice.
Sincerely
Jon
Click to expand...

I'd say it's a matter of personal preference. For my tone and style of playing, I actually get a good bit more punch and headroom than I got from my SD800 (which I have since sold).

Have you considered the Hartke LH1000? That's a different beast, with more of a traditional "tube preamp" kinda tone, but IME/IMHO, the LH1000 pairs up well with the sealed HyDrive cabs.

Tom.
 
#18
Hi Tom
I've not yet tried the LH-1000 and It takes a long time to get it over here...:-(
Of course the LH is a bit cheaper, but I really like the sound of both the Carbine & Markbass digitalamps, so I really need the most powerfull/clear at high levels-amp.

Thx for the reply, Think I'll go for the Carbine...

What kind of sound do you go for ??

Sincerely

Jon Pold
 
#19
Jpold said:
Hi Tom
I've not yet tried the LH-1000 and It takes a long time to get it over here...:-(
Of course the LH is a bit cheaper, but I really like the sound of both the Carbine & Markbass digitalamps, so I really need the most powerfull/clear at high levels-amp.

Thx for the reply, Think I'll go for the Carbine...

What kind of sound do you go for ??

Sincerely

Jon Pold
Click to expand...

Where are you located (you should fill in your profile:)). I thought the Mesa stuff was 110 only?

Regarding the SD800 (which I owned in the past) and the M6 (which I've now played a couple of times in a solo setting), the absolute volume seems pretty similar to me, and the upper mid and treble aggressiveness are in the same tone universe for both of these amps.

I think the main difference to my ear is the more forceful upper bass and low mid punch of the Mesa versus the very wide, deep low end response and slight lower mid scoop of the SD800.

I found the SD800 to sound fantastic through cabs with a tighter, mid punchy voicing like the Bergantino AE410. However, even with the semi-parametric low mid control, similar to Tom B., I never could achieve an even, punchy tone through wider voiced cabs like the Epi410UL with that head.

So, I don't think it's a 'headroom' difference so much between these two as a voicing difference, with the SD800 being all about deep, wide lows and quite aggressive upper mids, and the Mesa M6, while having just as much deep low end extension, having a more complex, punchy voicing in the low mids and upper bass, which gives the impression of more force.

Both are great heads. The SD800 can be stunning with the right cab (just like the Walter Woods IMO and IME). I would assume, just like the MB LMII and F1, that the M6 would sound pretty wonderful through just about anything.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back