Okay so I know that the BX500 is lighter and newer electronics, but other than that what if anything makes it better than the BX600?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Carvin BX500 or BX600
- Thread starter coastie72
- Start date
I have a B600,, purchased late summer '08, & I like it just fine. It's been flawless, I bought it to be my gigging amp, & its been perfect for that: plenty of power, & great tone thru Carvin 2 x10 & 1 x15 cabs.
I've never tried a BX500 (came out after I bought the BX600) but I would like to. I have an earlier Carvin R1000, with a 12ax7 tube preamp, and the tube preamp, blended with the solid state preamp, give many great tonal variations.
I've never tried a BX500 (came out after I bought the BX600) but I would like to. I have an earlier Carvin R1000, with a 12ax7 tube preamp, and the tube preamp, blended with the solid state preamp, give many great tonal variations.
I have both. The sound is almost identical. The one little tube in the 500 that has gotten lots of press here is almost negligable. Both about the same price, I haven't noticed much of a difference in power output. Take your pick, big or small, you are getting pretty much the same end result either way, which is very good. Between the 500 and my Shuttle 600, I'd take the Carvin ANY day.
Given the choice between the BX500 and BX600, I'd take the BX1200. (Unless I really needed extreme portability, then I'd go for the 500).
Personally I would go for the BX500 for the weight and pre-tube (sound) factors. On the downside I would expect the reliabilty factor (or percentage) to be higher for the BX600 because it's a full size amp with proven, reliable technology.
I own the BX1200 so I'm certain the BX600 performs well, especially for a sick price of only 400 bucks. Ideally you should always have a backup head so for a total of 820.00 bucks you could buy both of them and keep the BX600 in the car for backup. That or you could run stereo (onstage) by splitting your input signal into two stacks via chorus pedal or Sansamp. That would be sick!
I own the BX1200 so I'm certain the BX600 performs well, especially for a sick price of only 400 bucks. Ideally you should always have a backup head so for a total of 820.00 bucks you could buy both of them and keep the BX600 in the car for backup. That or you could run stereo (onstage) by splitting your input signal into two stacks via chorus pedal or Sansamp. That would be sick!
I've got the BX500 and the BX1200, both sound great and can get almost any tone you want. For portability, I'd go with the 500, though I'm sure the 600 is a great purchase too.
I've played a dozen and half gigs with the BX500 and it's worked flawlessly and has plenty of power that I need.
I've played a dozen and half gigs with the BX500 and it's worked flawlessly and has plenty of power that I need.
It simply just sounds alot better. Plus with all the extra knobs and levers you just have more tone to play with.
I been using the BX500 for about two months now and it's a blessing. Great sounding amp for it size and can push a 4/10 cab ez.
