• 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.

112 Decision Time: Bergantino, Epifani, GK

#81
On the odd occasion when I've thought about going with 12s, the ideal setup for me would be a good pre with a Berg IP112 (I've tried one of these, it's stunning for its size) and then an EX112 added for bigger gigs. The cost and the fact that I like my current rig so much (MB 210 +115) has stopped me so far, thankfully. :D

But if didn't like what I already have, this would be the way I'd go, for sure.
 
#82
Virgil said:
I feel as though I am Tom Bowlus Jr., in that I have the GK Neo 2x12's, the Bergantino HT 112 er and the Epi UL112, and I love them all. Since you have decided which cabs you want, no need in voicing my opinion, so enjoy.
Click to expand...

Virgil, I'd love to hear your take and I'm sure some others are reading this to consider their own 112 decisions. Besides, G.A.S. never ends!!!!
 
#83
Well guys, got home from my business trip and finally had a chance to fire up my NEO112 (the second cab arrives tomorrow). Hooked it up with my GK MB2-500. My friend, a local bassist who plays in a myriad of bands and gigs constantly, came by to check it out too. We used a Spector NS4 (walnut/buckeye wings), Sadowsky NYC Vintage 4 with singles, and a Lakland Skyline Hollowbody strung with flats. That is a pretty good range of sounds if you ask me.

We started with the Spector. I turned the horn off at first based on my preconceived notions and experience with the cab. I immediately noticed how much more I liked this cab than when I tried one at a local music store. It is a very clear cabinet, and not the warmest sound. However, it really is a full sounding little box. I thought the low end was really strong for a neo cab and that it did not have that upper mid bump alot of them have. When the horn is off, the top end is still quite clear. Adding the horn really adds a crispy (though not overtly sizzly if that makes sense) treble to the cab. Actually, it sounded good, but I prefer the horn off. In fairness, I just barely dial in a touch of horn on my Epi PS series cabs, so I'm not a big horn guy to begin with. Anyway, the rig was killing with the Spector, just killing. Loud, smooth, fat, round and clear. It really was great. Next, we plugged in the hollowbody with flats, about as far as you can get from a Spector strung with Blue Steels! Once again, it sounded really nice. I wouldn't say vintage of course. This rig does not do that. I guess that is only a drawback if you want that sound. Finally, we hooked up the Sadowsky (strung with nickels). My buddy is a j bass guy, so he gave it a good run through in passive mode first. He plays a 1001RBII into 2 Ampeg 112's and was really digging it. Nice j tone, quick, fat, responsive. It sounded really good in active mode as well, although I found myself touching just a bit more bass boost on the Sad and rolling the VTC down a bit to find the sound I liked best.

We also hooked up my pedal board and had the MXR Bass Octave Deluxe and Bass Envelope Filters going. The cab was handling it all without a sweat. Really impressive for a single 12.

Honestly, this cab has won me over. I guess I'd love the ability to get a tad warmer/vintage sounding, but honestly the MB2500 may be just as much to blame. I'd love to try the cabs with some tube pre heads.

Once I return from vacation, we are going to bring over his 1001RBII and 2x Ampeg 112's and set the rigs up side by side (trying both with both heads). I'm curious to hear the GK's using biamp feature of the RB. Also can't wait to hear them next to the Ampegs. I also have a gig on the 28th that I'll use this rig at, so I should be able to add to my review after that.
 
#85
Thanks for the review, NOLA. Gotta say I've been skeptical of GK for quite awhile, having never before associated it with "round" and "fat". But the consensus seems to be that this GK Neo line is different. Glad to hear it. Count me interested... :hmm:

MM
 
#86
MysticMichael said:
Thanks for the review, NOLA. Gotta say I've been skeptical of GK for quite awhile, having never before associated it with "round" and "fat". But the consensus seems to be that this GK Neo line is different. Glad to hear it. Count me interested... :hmm:

MM
Click to expand...

To be honest, I would have to say that "round" and "fat" are not the first two words that I would associate with the new Neo line ("articulate" and "clear" are probably the two I would reach for first), but they do not sound thin or anemic, either, and with a little EQ, they can do the "round and fat thing" (even tough I believe some other cabs would hit that tone goal more easily).

As I mentioned, based purely on sound/performance, I would probably rate the Bergantinos slightly ahead of the Neo112-II, but the GK gives them a run for the money (where you really hear the difference is in the tweeter/crossover), and comes in at a far lower price tag. You really have to give props to GK for making a relatively affordable cab (line of cabs, really) that can compete with the top portion of the market. :cool:

Tom.
 
#87
tombowlus said:
To be honest, I would have to say that "round" and "fat" are not the first two words that I would associate with the new Neo line ("articulate" and "clear" are probably the two I would reach for first), but they do not sound thin or anemic, either, and with a little EQ, they can do the "round and fat thing" (even tough I believe some other cabs would hit that tone goal more easily).

As I mentioned, based purely on sound/performance, I would probably rate the Bergantinos slightly ahead of the Neo112-II, but the GK gives them a run for the money (where you really hear the difference is in the tweeter/crossover), and comes in at a far lower price tag. You really have to give props to GK for making a relatively affordable cab (line of cabs, really) that can compete with the top portion of the market. :cool:

Tom.
Click to expand...


I agree,
FWIW, the AE line is quite focused, but rich... IMO. Aggressive to a degree, but can be tamed to the point of achieving a nice rich, focused, meaty tone.....not really fat, but authoritative..at least down to a point....IMHO, it sort of puts the meat in the registers that you hear more than feel...more punchy in the chest and ears, not so much punch that destructs walls......if this makes sense
I guess this is kind of why I like the AE line quite a bit as its not really "thin" or "anemic" (as Tom states) but articulate" and "clear (as Tom states)......it can be bright sounding, but also does a nice job at being articulate and meaty, with just enough edge taken off to give a really nice finger style tone :bassist::bassist:

focus and clarity while having enough meat and character...

I have to give the GK Neo a listen.......given the price range, I just need to hear to appreciate at least........
 
#89
RHCP250 said:
So for someone like me that doesn't use a tweeter, would I notice a huge difference?
Click to expand...

I do think that you would still hear a difference, but I think it'd be an even closer shave.

If you are not a fan of tweeters, I would also consider some of the cabs designed to be tweeterless, like the EA Wizzy (both "regular" and M-line), the EX112 (both "older" and "ER"), the new Acme Flatwound, Bag End, or even some 1x15's (again, Bag End, Orange, or older Trace Elliot 1153).
 
#91
I am right on the verge of ordering a pair of GK Neo112's but am a bit torn as the Mesa ph112's are only about $100 more per cab and they seem like possibly a better cab. The Mesa cabs come with covers but weigh about 20 pounds more per cab. I have a Walkabout and a spanking new GK MB500 so I am having a real tough time deciding.
 
#94
looking for opinion.....recently picked up the Berg HT210. want to pair it with a 12. leaning to AE112. Saw threads early on that were not in favor of pairing HT112 and AE112, but what about HT210 with AE112? I am favoring AE112 vs. HT112 purely due to weight. If the resounding opinion is that HT112 would give profoundly more of what I seek, I would go that route.
 
#95
I own an HT112ER and have played a pair of AE112s. To be honest the weight difference is not really noticeable when schlepping - about 30 pounds compared to fourty odd pounds. The natural sound of the HT is more "vintage" to my ears and flat it goes lower with a smoother top as many have said, while the natural tone of the AE is more open and transparent due I would assume to a different tweeter/crossover. With my Markbass head I can tweak the HT so that it sounds pretty similar to an AE. That said, I find the AE tone more appealing by itself, but prefer the HT in a live band situation. If I had to pick one or the other to go under an HT210 I would probably go with the HT as it is part of the same series and since it sounds fatter would more suit the tradidional role of a bottom cabinet for a 210.
As an aside, just for fun I plugged my recently acquired Orange AD200 into the HT112 today and it sounded great, fat and really handled those tube watts at reasonable levels - must try the same thing with the SVT VR :D
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back