If you had to pick a Mesa...?

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by MrFortuneCookie, Dec 20, 2001.

  1. If you had to choose between the M-Pulse, the Bass 400+, or the Basis M2000, which one would it be and why?
  2. fast slapper

    fast slapper

    Dec 11, 2001
    Fresno, CA
    I would choose the M-Pulse 600 because it's loud,easy to use,and flexible(sound).It's also cheaper in the long run than the other two.
  3. slacker


    Nov 27, 2001
    Portland Oregon
    I would go with the 400+.

    I have owned both the M-2000 (2 yrs) and the older Bass 400 (8 yrs). The 400 just plain killed the M-2000 in the tone department. The 400+ is just a slight improvement on that design.

    I found the M-2000 to be way to complicated. Too many bells and whistles. 30+ knobs, sliders, and switches. More than a few people have complained that they spent more time dialing in a tone, than actually playing through the thing!!! I found it very difficult to balance the volumes of the various channels. One would always be way to loud or soft.

    The M-2000 is also scarily close to the $2000 mark.

    The M-Pulse left me rather cold. It sounded like the FET channel on the M-2000, had little headroom, and seems like it is a little too close to the Eden WT-300/400 (in design concept/form factor anyway).
  4. seamus


    Feb 8, 2001

    That's a biased opinion though, it's the only Mesa bass amp I've tried. It was easy to use and I liked the sound. Other than the potential for maintenance costs (lots of tubes), seemed like a nice amp.

    I agree on the M-2000, there's a lot going on with the front panel. I never tried one, but I would be afraid to try one in a store because I might lose patience messing around with the controls. :)
  5. jasonbraatz


    Oct 18, 2000
    Oakland, CA
    i too would go for the 400+.

    mesa's non tube stuff never impressed me, but the 400+ is pretty ridiculous.

    and slacker - i haven't seen many topless women around these parts...maybe i'm not looking in the right place? :D

  6. Munjibunga

    Munjibunga Total Hyper-Elite Member Gold Supporting Member

    May 6, 2000
    San Diego (when not at Groom Lake)
    Independent Contractor to Bass San Diego
    I'd go for the WT-800.
  7. slacker


    Nov 27, 2001
    Portland Oregon
    Me either, but it *is* legal here. Women marched (toplessly) on the capitol a few years ago to gain that right. But if someone is offended, the offending party must put their top back on!

    Strange law. Strange town.

    P.S. Would you know where to score an old folded bass horn locally? Need one badly. Please see my Cerwin/Vega B-36 post for more info. Thanks.
  8. I own a M-2000 and think the design to be a very creative one in terms of combining SS+Tube. As far as "hybrid" amps go, this is the most "natural" and "breathy" of all I've owned (Eden, SWR..etc.) That said....my old 400+ sounded way better. I pine away for it often. The M-2000 has consistency of tone at any volume (the 400+ sounds best at about 4-5; stupid loud) and lots of cool features; that compressor is worth the price alone. All in all the 400+ is a "plug n'play" rig that weighs a ton but will keep you happy tone-wise for as long as your back will stand.
    That comment about M-2000 owners spending way more time looking for their sound than playing is unfortunetly true BTW....still, a far better amp than most!
  9. boogiebass


    Aug 16, 2000
    400+. Because it sounds better.
  10. progplayer


    Nov 7, 2001
    Eden WT-600 :D

    no but really, if I HAD TO, it would be the M-Pulse 600. I did try that one out and it sounded pretty good (but I went with the Eden).

    I once knew a kid in a band that had the M-2000, and yes it looks impressive but the kid had NO IDEA how to use it. He had the EQ all over the place (granted I'm no EQ genius) and knobs flipped here and there. He told me he had no idea how to use the head and asked if I could help him make it sound good. I was like, "No idea dood". I'm the kind of guy that likes to KeepItSimpleStupid...plug in and play.

    I haven't had the pleasure to play the 400+. Besides, I think they make better guitar gear...
  11. Barring that new stuff Mesa is flogging I'd have to say that Mesa's approach to bass gear has been a refreshing combination of old an new designs. That "simulstate" thing of theirs is VERY cool. The M-2000 is a wicked bass head with some very progressive ideas incoporated.....just way too many at once! I get a headache everytime we jam.
  12. Steven Green

    Steven Green

    Jul 25, 2001
    Pacific NW
    I personally love the M-2000 for these reasons:

    1) I dig the tone I finally was able to get after a lot of tweaking

    2) It is quite possibly the most versitile amp out there

    3) It weighs less than the 400+

    4) It can do a good imitation of the 400+ (but if you want one that bad, get a 400+)

    5) The compressor is KILLER

    6) The effects loop is very well-designed

    7) It's only 2 rack-spaces; 400+ is 4

    8) No re-tubing! (well, not very often; 3 x 12ax7's)

    I don't have the channel volume match problem because I always run mine in MIX MODE so I get the nice tube tone with the FAT FET sound blended in. I owned the 400+ at one time and it was awesome, but not enough to make me give up my M-2000. Although, if I played a more standard rock music (bordering on classic), I might switch. Okay...I'm done!:D
  13. Steven Green

    Steven Green

    Jul 25, 2001
    Pacific NW
    I thought I'd also say that I have played the M-Pulse 600. While the compressor is nice and it is loud and smooth, I didn't really dig the tone all that much...and I played it for like 45 min. YMMV, but I would say get either the 400+ or M-2000. Also, I played the Walkabout. Good idea (considering they stole it from Eden), but if you want an amp with semi-parametric controls of that size and wattage, get a WT-400! Okay, I'm really done!;)
  14. What sort of dialin' did you do to get you close to "that 400+ sound?"
  15. 400+ No question. I've played all three and the 400+ is the only one I'd consider buying. The other two are nice, and do sound good but there's something that I don't like about them and I'm not sure what it is. I got the sense that the M-2000 was a bit underpowered. Maybe I'm just insane.:p For sheer volume, the 400+ slays the others. Great deal, too. $1299 for a monster tube amp like that:D. The only amp I've liked better so far is mine, a '76 SVT.
  16. BigBohn


    Sep 29, 2001
    WPB, Florida
    SWR IOD with a Carvin DCM2000
  17. Steven Green

    Steven Green

    Jul 25, 2001
    Pacific NW
    I would agree the M-2000 could use more power! I think I may grab a QSC PLX-2402 one of these days....

    Madsubwoofer - I don't recall the settings, it was too long ago. Sorry! The 400+ did have a super deep headache-inducing low end that just was missing compared to the M-2000.
  18. The Buster 200 is a pretty good amp, very simple and you can get nice tone without having to go to ear-bleed levels.