Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by GilGB, Apr 22, 2010.
Need some answers about these amps.
Carbine will be about twice as loud (massively loud amp for its rating), MUCH brighter, with lots more treble response up top... much quicker, more modern feel. It also has 2ohm capability.
The AG500SC is warm and fat, a bit dark, a bit bloomy down low... nice if you are trying to do a sort of 'tube amp vibe' with a smaller SS head. The TC RH450 would be a much better choice than the AG500SC if that's what you are going for though... smaller, louder, more EQ control.. not quite the bloom in the low end, but IMO that is a good thing.
I didn't vote, since these amps are so different, but both high quality and good pieces of gear. Depend what you want... big, wide, super loud, modern, bright,... or more 'warm, fat, tubey'.
I had the Mesa for a while. It was as everyone says, fast, damned loud, very clear and pretty heavy in weight which surprised me. The thing I really disliked was the high-mids which I couldn't dial out with either my Bergantino NV610 or Aguilar DB410. Basically if you do a lot of slides in your playing it's 'finger squeak city' even with Elixirs. Might be fine if you use pretty dead strings.
For me, the Aguilar AG500 is a much better fit. Clear, powerful enough for most gigs with the right cab selection, it can get really warm but with plenty of punch without 'over-enhanced' mids and weighs very little. I dissagree on the 'bloomy' or 'wooly' descriptions that often get used as this is a solid state amp with a great voicing and the e.q. Can easily dial out any fatness in the tone if it's too much for you.
I think in general, the Carbine initially appeals more to those whose ears are tuned to the Hi-fi side of amp tones but it has a sledge-hammer of a poweramp backing it up. While the AG500 is more like a modern tube ampish kind of tone shape without getting mushy.
I'm even letting my DB751 go as it's little brother does everything I need for now, plus it has the fantastic Agro overdrive onboard! (love it!!!)
Anyway, that's my thoughts and both are great for different reasons. So, as always try them out for as long as possible before buying!
OK. What are your questions?
I am looking for a powerful yet clean amp,lightweighted but won't be in place of sound,
sound good with 1 cab of 2x12 or 2 1x12,fat yet versatile,modern but can get those old-school tones and i want it to be MOSFET.
Hope you guys can help me,it is needed.
Thanks in advance,Gil.
KJung's post, (#2), should've answered your question. But nothing can substitute for actually going out and playing through whatever amps you're interested in.
I'm an aggie guy, but if I had to have one of those amps I would go with the Mesa. It's a good combination of warmth and brightness. To my ears, I think the Mesa may be a little bit warmer.
As KJung stated these are two very different pieces of gear that are well made.
Will i be able to add one more cab to the Mesa Carbine M6 If i will use the 2x12?
The M6 is designed to run safely at 2ohms, so no issue there. Of course, if your 212's are 8ohm, then there wouldn't be an issue with any solid state head.
id go mesa, played with one the other day and i really fell in love with it. their quality seems to be mixed on these boards though, so whatever you buy, play it before hand with your instrument and get a 30 day same as cash refund policy.
I had the M9 and agree with not being able to get the mids dialed in to my liking, even with the graphic EQ on the M9. Haven't played through the Aggie.
When KJung says "Carbine will be about twice as loud" I gotta wonder how loud some folks think they have to be?!?! I ran my AG500 into two Berg HT112ER cabs last night and never had the volume past 1/4 and I was playing in an 11-piece R&B band. Sounded great.
To the original posters question: "looking for a powerful yet clean amp, lightweight, sound good with 1 2x12 or 2, fat yet versatile, modern but can get those old-school tones and i want it to be MOSFET" I'd say the AG500 will definitely float your boat.
Discussing volume needs is a bit of a losing game. I just try to describe volume capability. I know guys using 1000+ watts and dual 410's for similar gigs that I (and you do) with a 410 or a couple of 112's and 500 or so watts. I also know guys who think I'm nuts using a 410 with 500 watts and use a small 112 combo for the same type gigs.
It all depends on tone goal (how much low end do you want... which can require a bigger box and more power), what technique you use (it is amazing how slapping or really digging in can really bring a small, moderately powered rig to its knees), and also stage volume (which can vary hugely among bands).
The M6 is just a low end, volume monster though... massively loud and deep for its volume rating. I like a bit more low mid punch to my tone, and never was able to dial that in with this head, so its not really for me. But it kills for what it is... deep, wide, massive headroom, very bright and open up top.... pretty nice if that tone works for you, and just scary loud!
Off topic...sorry But what amp has the low-mid punch/thickness of the RH450 AND the quickness and the upper-mid/highs of the F500?
I'd say the head that most closely sits between those two is the Markbass SA450, which is basically the LMIII with a semi-parametric mid control that allows you to roll in some of that 250 hz chewiness that the RH450 has baked in (and that Markbass Class A/B voicing that is a bit closer to the RH450's chewy lower mids...event though the RH450 is a class D amp), while still having a nice upper treble extension like the F500.
I have not heard the Momark version of the SA450, but that might be the closest thing, if you opt for the tube pre module.
IMO and IME.
Yes, but I need a little more headroom...
Maybe the TF750a... haven't heard one though.
And the SWR SM900 with a little lowmid boost...
I actually used an SM900 bridged into an 8ohm GIII for many years, and it was pretty killer... grindy and punchy and fat. That is pretty much the only SWR head I didn't hate... it was much tighter than the 400/500 SM's, and much louder, punchier that the horrible XM line or whatever those 350/550/750's were called (horrible amps in every way IMO).