• 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.

Got my GK MB Fusion today!!!!

#621
Interesting how many of us on this thread have switched from WT550 to MB Fusion! I agree with Chef re. the differences between the two. The MB is cleaner and clearer with more top end as a whole and a better-focussed bottom end IMO.

Looking forward to my gig on Friday as our crew guy for that gig is an awesome bassist himself so I can get a great honest opinion from him but also get him to play a tune so I can listen ;)
 
#622
how does the G&K 500 and/or fusion sound with effect-pedals (envelope filter, fuzz, octaver, you name it, ...)? most reviews here are based on clean sounds and i remember one posting in the first pages that someone had sound-"problems" with his 3Leaf Groove Regulator.
 
#623
fasto said:
how does the G&K 500 and/or fusion sound with effect-pedals (envelope filter, fuzz, octaver, you name it, ...)? most reviews here are based on clean sounds and i remember one posting in the first pages that someone had sound-"problems" with his 3Leaf Groove Regulator.
Click to expand...

I haven't noticed any issues with effects. I don't have a groove regulator but my MXR filter has had no problems.
 
#624
Well, the other day I bought a GK 212MBE/4 cabinet to use it with my GK MB Fusion.
I played a couple of nights ago in a thrash metal gig with my band.
All I can say is that every guy in the crowd came to me and asked me what was I using, that made my bass sound so good (and loud).
 
#625
Reading some of these comments about focused lows, prominent midrange etc... I'm thinking this is quite different from the streamliner 900? I got rid of that because it sounded too boomy with my AE212, anyone have an opinion of the MB fusion with this cab. I have seen a few quick mentions when searching but haven't seen a bi write up either here or in the AE212 thread.

I will be trying before I buy, but curious about e-pinions.
 
#626
can you hear me said:
Reading some of these comments about focused lows, prominent midrange etc... I'm thinking this is quite different from the streamliner 900? I got rid of that because it sounded too boomy with my AE212, anyone have an opinion of the MB fusion with this cab. I have seen a few quick mentions when searching but haven't seen a bi write up either here or in the AE212 thread.

I will be trying before I buy, but curious about e-pinions.
Click to expand...

I just picked up a AE212 and did a gig with it using the Fusion. It sounded great, but the room was pretty tough. The low end boom from the PA made it pretty tough to hear exactly what was going on. (it wasn't the bass cab) I have 3 gigs this week with very little time to experiment, so I'm going to use my UL310. I want to spend a little more time with the 212 at home getting to know what it can do with the Fusion. I also want to try it with my MB500. It's a wonderful box, but I've read several posts where it doesn't play well with a Streamliner.
 
#627
can you hear me said:
Reading some of these comments about focused lows, prominent midrange etc... I'm thinking this is quite different from the streamliner 900? I got rid of that because it sounded too boomy with my AE212, anyone have an opinion of the MB fusion with this cab. I have seen a few quick mentions when searching but haven't seen a bi write up either here or in the AE212 thread.

I will be trying before I buy, but curious about e-pinions.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is a huge difference in tone between the MB Fusion and the Streamliner. I have driven my AE212 with my MB Fusion, and IME/IMHO it is a very good pairing, and the low end, while plenty full, is quite controlled.
 
#628
tombowlus said:
Yes, there is a huge difference in tone between the MB Fusion and the Streamliner. I have driven my AE212 with my MB Fusion, and IME/IMHO it is a very good pairing, and the low end, while plenty full, is quite controlled.
Click to expand...

+1 Even though IMO the Streamliner low end is MUCH more controlled that the very open, deep low end of the Fusion IMO (you can see this by cranking both amps and watching the amount of speaker pistoning at the same volume), the Fusion is MUCH brighter up top, and has much more midrange presence in general. That would be a nice match-up with the AE212, which is a bit too smooth for the Streamliner, or for that matter, most all tube amps (which the Streamliner kind of vibes). You really need to view the Streamliner as behaving more like an all tube amp with cab matching, while to my ear, the MBFusion is a more 'typical' hybrid (i.e., more solid state sounding with a nice 'tube sweetening' in the pre).

For the AE212, any of the little GK micro's sound good, the Markbass heads sound fabulous, and the Genz Shuttle amps sound amazing.
 
#629
KJung said:
+1 Even though IMO the Streamliner low end is MUCH more controlled that the very open, deep low end of the Fusion IMO (you can see this by cranking both amps and watching the amount of speaker pistoning at the same volume), the Fusion is MUCH brighter up top, and has much more midrange presence in general. That would be a nice match-up with the AE212, which is a bit too smooth for the Streamliner, or for that matter, most all tube amps (which the Streamliner kind of vibes). You really need to view the Streamliner as behaving more like an all tube amp with cab matching, while to my ear, the MBFusion is a more 'typical' hybrid (i.e., more solid state sounding with a nice 'tube sweetening' in the pre).

For the AE212, any of the little GK micro's sound good, the Markbass heads sound fabulous, and the Genz Shuttle amps sound amazing.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I have used my MB Fusion (and MB500) with a wide variety of cabs, and I have never had an issue with excessive "pistoning." They will move some air, for sure, and they have a very stout response down low. But in any "intelligent usage" situation where I have used the GK micro heads, they have performed great, sounded great, and did not present any quirky issues. If you are pushing the cab close to its limits, I find that GK's limiter does and excellent job of... well, limiting.

YMMV, though, I suppose.
 
#630
tombowlus said:
FWIW, I have used my MB Fusion (and MB500) with a wide variety of cabs, and I have never had an issue with excessive "pistoning." They will move some air, for sure, and they have a very stout response down low. But in any "intelligent usage" situation where I have used the GK micro heads, they have performed great, sounded great, and did not present any quirky issues. If you are pushing the cab close to its limits, I find that GK's limiter does and excellent job of... well, limiting.

YMMV, though, I suppose.
Click to expand...

+1 Not so much a problem as 'it is what it is'. My comment was in comparison to the Streamliner, which has exceptional control of the sub frequencies due to the hi pass filtering design of the amp.

Not sure how a power limiting circuit would help a cab that is reaching its limits... kind of a different issue there.

However, the point I was making to the OP is that the Streamliner issue he is having doesn't have as much to do with the low end control of the amp (which is amazingly wonderful with the STreamliner IMO and IME), but rather the mix and match of that particular cab with that particular head, which is voiced and behaves a bit more like an all tube head than the vast majority of hybrids out there.

Quite frankly, almost any other head will work better with that particular cab (IMO and IME) than the Streamliner. The Markbass F500, the MB Fusion (didn't really like the MB500 much though), and the Shuttle 9.2 are all great options to push that cab nicely, and give it the little kick in the mid mids and upper mids that many would like.
 
#631
KJung said:
+1 Not so much a problem as 'it is what it is'. My comment was in comparison to the Streamliner, which has exceptional control of the sub frequencies due to the hi pass filtering design of the amp.

Not sure how a power limiting circuit would help a cab that is reaching its limits... kind of a different issue there.

However, the point I was making to the OP is that the Streamliner issue he is having doesn't have as much to do with the low end control of the amp (which is amazingly wonderful with the STreamliner IMO and IME), but rather the mix and match of that particular cab with that particular head, which is voiced and behaves a bit more like an all tube head than the vast majority of hybrids out there.

Quite frankly, almost any other head will work better with that particular cab (IMO and IME) than the Streamliner. The Markbass F500, the MB Fusion (didn't really like the MB500 much though), and the Shuttle 9.2 are all great options to push that cab nicely, and give it the little kick in the mid mids and upper mids that many would like.
Click to expand...

Even though the Streamliner uses a high-pass filter to cut out the very lowest frequencies (say, under 60Hz or so), it sounds to me like he may be having problems with the exaggerated low end of the Streamliner above the frequency of their high-pass filter. "Boomy" is of course a subjective term, but even if you filter out the frequencies below 60Hz or so, if there is more going on than you'd like between 80 and 160Hz, that could still sound "boomy" to some.
 
#632
tombowlus said:
Even though the Streamliner uses a high-pass filter to cut out the very lowest frequencies (say, under 60Hz or so), it sounds to me like he may be having problems with the exaggerated low end of the Streamliner above the frequency of their high-pass filter. "Boomy" is of course a subjective term, but even if you filter out the frequencies below 60Hz or so, if there is more going on than you'd like between 80 and 160Hz, that could still sound "boomy" to some.
Click to expand...

From my experience with that combination (spent a lot of time with it), it is more of an issue in voicing of the midrange. The low end cab be controlled quite nicely by a slight attenuation of the bass control and a slight boost in the low mids. The downside with this head and that cab is that leaves you very little (well, actually no) EQ power to brighten up and articulate the upper mids.

It just isn't a particularly good match. Two great pieces of gear that just don't play that well together. With the AE410, just turn it on and it sounds stunningly good.

I would think the MBFusion would be great for the OP... still a bit of tube complexity, and a much more appropriate voicing for that cab. And, the AE212 can handle the bit more extended low end of that head with no problem at all.
 
#633
I'm gonna' have to have a GTG with Saluki so we can compare the Fusion to the Streamliner. I always felt the Streamliner had a much bigger and harder to control low end than the Fusion... but it's been a while, and I didn't specifically look for "pistoning".
 
#634
Vic said:
I'm gonna' have to have a GTG with Saluki so we can compare the Fusion to the Streamliner. I always felt the Streamliner had a much bigger and harder to control low end than the Fusion... but it's been a while, and I didn't specifically look for "pistoning".
Click to expand...

It is easy to confuse 'low end boost' (which the Streamliner does have, and that is easy to control) with 'low end extension'. The Streamliner low end is a bit boosted, but amazingly controlled in the sub bass region. The GK MBFusion's low end is 'flatter' regarding boost, but does seem to extend quite a bit lower. The issue IMO with the Streamliner low end is that if you have a cab that needs some sculpting in the low end with the Streamliner, like the AE212, while that can be accomplished quite nicely, there is little EQ control left to address the polite, smooth upper mid response of the AE212 if you really like it to bite.


Neither is a 'good versus bad' thing.

Whatever Genz did to the Streamliner low end, it does seem to mimic the low end of at least some of the tube amps I've played, and just like those tube amps, seems to work better with some cabs than others (more 'picky' than the more 'standard' voicing of most other hybrids I've played, including the GK stuff).

All good stuff, just depends what you want! With the AE212, it would be the MBFusion (or almost any other micro) over the Streamliner for me. However, you would not get that 'all tube' amp flavor IMO and IME.
 
#635
KJung said:
It is easy to confuse 'low end boost' (which the Streamliner does have, and that is easy to control) with 'low end extension'. The Streamliner low end is a bit boosted, but amazingly controlled in the sub bass region. The GK MBFusion's low end is 'flatter' regarding boost, but does seem to extend quite a bit lower.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know the difference and what you're saying, so I'm not confused. I simply don't recall hearing things that way. Again, I need to listen again. I'll get back to the thread on this after I've had a chance to do so.
 
#638
Vic said:
Yeah, I know the difference and what you're saying, so I'm not confused. I simply don't recall hearing things that way. Again, I need to listen again. I'll get back to the thread on this after I've had a chance to do so.
Click to expand...

+1 You know me... I was 'waxing poetic'. I've become very sensitive to/interested in the low end/hi passing differences among amps since I've taken the plunge into the recent 'super cabs'. You can really hear the difference down there with some of these boxes.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back