Can anybody compare these two GK models? I´ve heard the older one - 200MB - has better voicing and so it is rated higher then 150E (or 150S)...Is that true? Is 100W RMS (75W into internal speaker) of 200MB still loud enough for gigs?
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.
Double Bass GK 150E vs. 200MB
- Thread starter carved czech
- Start date
I've used a 200mb for over 20 years, well, 3 or 4 or them - I buy them used as they wear out. For upright, or elec. playing in not-very-loud situations, they do fine - even some big band gigs. I've borrowed a 150 model and it just doesn't sound as natural for upright to me, I don't know the technical reasons why. I can run the tones flat(or nearly) on the 200 and it's what I want.
Ike
Ike
I owned both amplifiers and actually preferred the 200 MB because IMHO the tone controls were more useful with the Acoustic Bass. It has a lot simpler EQ than the newer amps. That said, the newer amp has a lot more to offer in the additional features it has, and my guess is that it would be easier to repair.
Ric
Ric
I think that generally the older version is concidered to be superior for upright. The newer one is though a better allround player for those who also do electric bass. I own the never model, but has never really liked it - beside its portability.
Ike Harris said:
Like Ike said, I have had 3 but have 2 right now, one for parts. Great for upright, really portable. And, with a good upright, minimal apmplification is always the best thing. If the whole band is being put through the PA, you can use the xlr out. They also made an extension powered speaker (200MP) which I have. I use it in a stereo setup with the 200MB driving the Aux. channel.
BTW, I'm kind of particular about my sound investments. I have liked these amps for 20 years, replacement speakers and all. They are prone to speaker failure over a long period of playing time (like any speaker). Check out my contribution to the thread in electric bass on 150MB speaker replacement.
It's funny how these little combo amps are just the right thing for the right player and the right place. You see a lot of them in NYC.
The best of everything with all your endeavors
I don't have experience with the MB200, but does everyone agree that the weak link with the MB150 is the speaker they put in there? To me it's awful sounding, especially at higher volume with some treble on the eq.
musicman5string said:
I would say so. It's very non-linear. As we discussed, there's a big hump in the response at 100 Hz that leads to a sort of boombox one-note bass. DB players have always liked them for their portability, and they way they can help cut through at loud volumes, but they're definitley not hi-fi.
When I had one I tried running it through various cabs, and it was like night and day. Adding an SWR WM10 cab really smoothed it out.
After purchased GK 200MB and reconed the speaker, I recently sold my 150MBE,´cause I had enough time to compare both. 200MB is definately the winner. Now I can play my Underwood pu directly through 200MB´s input (without any external preamp running into Return input like I had to with MBE, to get better sound) with EQ flat, filters, compressor off, and my sound is O.K.
Anyone have experience trying out different 12's in their 200MB? Just curious if there's a great after-market replacement that matches well.
carved czech: congrats on your new solution!
carved czech: congrats on your new solution!
Hi Larry,
The speaker used in the GK Micro Bass series is designed to work in a very small sealed enclosure. I don't think most other musical instrument and professional audio speakers would work very well in this type of cabinet. I have heard of people using other speakers such car audio subwoofers (Pyle, Pyramid, MTX, etc.), but I think the results are unpredictable.
I studied this situation for the MB150, and have found that the answer is no. The MB150 speaker must have an unusually high cone mass compared to a typical musical driver. But not so massive as a car sub.
The deal is that with the small cab, compliance (the spring force counteracting cone motion) is almost entirely due to the box. The system resonance is determined by cone mass and spring constant, so the only other number at your disposal to play with is the cone mass.
GK basically defined an engineering problem to get gig-worthy tone and volume out of a very small box, and solved it in an elegant way. The more I learn about speakers, the more I realize that the MB150 design is damn clever.
I understand that the replacement driver from GK is reasonably priced. Also, if the only problem with an older driver is the foam surround, those can be fixed with a kit from Parts Express.
- May 6, 2003
- 5,272
- 160
- 64
- Disclosures
- Proprietor Fifth Avenue Fret Shop. Technical Editor Bass Gear Magazine
FYI the GK MB200 used a speaker made by Pyle, which is no longer available. The newer GK MB amps and 112MBX use a speaker made by Eminence, which is essentially the same as the original Pyle speaker (same size magnet, similar cone and suspension). Replacement drivers are available directly from GK for about $100.
I tried a few speakers when my speaker pooped out.
The original speaker is still the best fit. For size and
weight, the 150mbe is a remarkable feat of enginering. jmho
I've gone through 2 200MBs and 2 150Es. The 200MBs were vastly superior for upright. Both were purchased when the amps came out (the 200 in the mid '80s and the 150 in the early '90s). I talked to the guys at GK at one point and they said that the speaker is the only thing that remained constant between the two amps.
I had problems with the 150's dying on me. The amps just stop working. I had them repaired a few times but it kept happening. The speakers on the 200s eventually went and I moved the ones from the dead 150s over to the 200s. I still have the 200s but I've since moved on to AI stuff. I loved the portability but the sound of the AI is just so much better that I don't have a lot of use for them anymore.
mark
I had problems with the 150's dying on me. The amps just stop working. I had them repaired a few times but it kept happening. The speakers on the 200s eventually went and I moved the ones from the dead 150s over to the 200s. I still have the 200s but I've since moved on to AI stuff. I loved the portability but the sound of the AI is just so much better that I don't have a lot of use for them anymore.
mark
I never had a MBE 150 actually stop working, but I was never that fond of the EQ section on the E's. I believe (Help Rob) that the power supply in the 200 MB's was a Torriodal that was mounted in the bottom of the cabinet below the speaker. But I could be wrong. Regardless, they had a much warmer sound for Double Bass. When I stopped using the MBE went back to my Walter Woods I couldn't believe what I'd been missing
Ric
The GK MB200 used a conventional iron power transformer mounted in the cabinet. There are a few series of the MB150. The most recent version uses a toroidal power transformer that is mounted in the top of the amp along with all the other electronics. I'm not sure about the series I and II versions, but I think at least the series I used similar construction to the MB200.
