1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

M-Pulse 600 vs. Mesa M-2000

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Mad Subwoofer, Sep 30, 2002.

  1. Well...I think the time has possibly come for me to part with my trusty M2000. I am tired of trying to find a "perfect" tone outta this puppie. It is a wonderful amp with many options but I am starting to wonder if it is just not better suited to a thumb-style or pick player. I just can't get that deep throated tone that I used to have with my 400+ out of it (duh.)
    I would love to hear folks opinions on the new M-Pulse line? Mesa has told me that they are defintely voiced to be "deeper" than the M2000 but I have also seen a few TB'ers post that they found it "harsh" sounding. Frankly, I am a little very skeptical of this...? What are the main differences in overall tone between an M-Pulse and the M2000? I really love the frequecny-specific compressor on the M2000; I will hate to lose that. I only use the tube side on mine and EQ it very minimally. An amp should have a good basic tone to start with w/o a whole bunch of knob twiddeling. I unfortunetly just haven't found that with my M2000.
    Are the M-Pulse's "similar" in tone to any others? like...what other rigs could you compare them too? SVT grind meets GK clarity..etc, etc? Any experiances you might share, even with your Walk-a-bout's, would be most helpful.

  2. Oh come on guys....? Some one throw me a bone here....pretty please?
    What does the M-Pulse line "sound like?" I know at least a few of you must have plugged into one. Any observations....?
  3. thelastofus

    thelastofus Guest

    Jul 3, 2002
    Bakersfield, Ca
    The one that I played (600) sounded great (IMO) it was very powerfull and matched with the new 2x15 cab it sounded very well rounded and articulate. It was very loud and i couldn't do much with it because I didn't want to knock the guitars off the walls but it seemed very impressive and I'm going back to play one on wednesday because i love the balls of my 400+ but i can't get a good "grind" out of it and it just lacks some charecter by itself. Sounds great in the mix but I spend more time playing by myself at home and I'm just not completly thrilled with it. Besides, 500 tube watts. It's kinda overkill. Not saying I don't love it or anything but to me (at the time) the impulse sounded just as good with more charecter
  4. LarryJ

    LarryJ banned

    Dec 12, 1999
    Encino, CA (LA)
    Giving up your 2000 huh?
    I had a WalkAbout- I rate it VERY high- I used it with a Hartke 2.5XL, it sounded great. I wouldn't hesitate for a second in obtaining the big brother
    The M-2000 IMO is a really impressive unit-ahead of its time and still relevant. I think it intimidated a lot of players due to all the eq & voicing possibilities. I think that once you start tweaking it, you only need to kick it & enjoy the possibilities.
    You probably know that.
    The M-Pulse keeps the same hybrid concept the 2000 started, but brings it to a more basic approach, with 5-band parametric mids, 3 in the case of the WalkAbout. Mesa's dual 12AX7 pre-amp adds a lot of warmth, and the tones range from a rich dark tone to killer brittle highs, depending on what you want.
    So- I kinda think that in order to appeal to a larger market, and take it down a notch or two, Mesa is pushing the M-Pulse to supercede their "OG" hybrid.
    If you feel like donating your M-2000 to me, I will
    gladly accept it.
  5. Thanks for the feedback guys; I appreciate it? Well..I do know that Mesa designed the newer M-Pulse series partly in response to longtime Mesa-dudes like myself complaining about their various personal "challenges" with the M2000. So much about the amp I dig; the frequency-specific compression, the three tube preamp and simulstate power (not the same in the MPulse.) The good looks aside, the M2000 just fell short in allot of ways. I have had mine for like 5 years or something? I traded my old 400+ in for the "new modern Mesa toy" and have spent the last five trying to replicate that deeeeep tone of my 16 tube baby (This has NOT happened of course!) It has mostly just been a real headache. I wanna love it, but.....
    LarryJ; You say that you HAD a Walk-a-bout..gone now? Sure I'll donate..shipping will be about $1000 tho'...
    thelastofus; Please keep me updated on your experiance on Wednesday? Tell me if you can about how "deep" you find the rig sounding? And how easily it grinds up as well? Also..how good you can get the overall tone w/o having to resort to the parametric; this is a true test of a head I would guess. my old 400+ sounded brilliant w/o any help from the graphic. You might also try running into BOTH channels on your 400+? Pull out the "pull shifts" run it flat and check out the massive tone...you'll be very happy I promise.
  6. thelastofus

    thelastofus Guest

    Jul 3, 2002
    Bakersfield, Ca
    how do you split your signal into both channels? an a&b box? Yea I really love the depth of the 400+ but I guess I'm just a new school kid raised on svt's and I just keep relating it back to that but whenever we play a show I love it how it fits in, it's whenever i set in my room is when i start to pick at it.
  7. Yes, i used to split mine with a DOD Meatbox but anything with two outputs should do it...? Chorus pedal, etc? You can get a whole heck of a lotta punch and grind if you drive both channels simultaneously, engage all pull shifts and run it all basically flat. I used the graphic for room EQ only but work with it..see what happens?
    Please let me know what happens for you when you try the MPulse 600 again eh?
  8. I think it is very deep, round and ballsy (that was my first impression). I think it is more ballsier and deeper than the Eden stuff (definatley more so than GK, peavey, Trace, ampeg and SWR) IMHO.

    I was recording a friend, who likes a thin high tone. While playing with the amp he couldn't loose as much bottom as he wanted, until he went to the second stage EQ, and continued to cut lows.
    It's natural tone is pretty big sounding!

    It's not so fat that there is no clarity either. I find it very clear (second impression). I found myself having to play more precise in certain parts of songs, and it really cuts through the mix due to it's clean tone. I find the highs very clear and i think soft, somewere between Eden or SWR would describe the highs (I haven't A/B'd it just trying to remember tones). Not harsh at all! IMHO. But I think the tubes have allot to do with the highs.

    The power section is really loud. I think you can drive it a bit like tube power, and get a really nice tone. Tube driven mosfets! It still sounds clean loud. (M-pulse 360 is what I'm useing).

    You can get good rock, dub, old school, metal and
    Funk sounds, not to mention others. I think I wouldn't recomend it if you like a really trebley sound, unless you like the earnie ball string treble sound with balls (does anybody know what sound I'm talking about?)

    Seriously, It is a very nice amp, and I'm not yet disapointed with my purchase. I think you should try it out.

    All this beeing said, I have yet to try a 2000, or a 400+.:D
  9. That is VERY helpful thanks! Kinda what I was hoping for..? I play dub currently, also prog-jazz-punk and don't crave that creepy hifi-top. I go for more of a "rootsy" tone.
    How well does your current 360 grind up when you turn up the preamp? It sounds as though your ovrall tone is very fat and round...? Perfect, if this is true. Easy to dial up atone you think? I have run through my M2000 for years and think it to be a marvelous rig but I am sooo tired of trying to make it sound like something it isn't. More SVT than GK you think....? deeper than an Eden..? This is good.
  10. I also own a m-pulse 600(for about a year now)and I really like this amp...I was going to get a m-2000..but there were too many options(knobs)..I'm a plug and play kinda guy and the m-pulse is very straightfoward.the semi-para e.q. (when you need it) is more versatile than a graphic(because you can choose the freq's...BE CAREFUL WITH THE LOWS!!!!!!!!).the 3 band e.q. is all I really ever use and its usually to dial in (or out)some mids.I also like the compresser with the thresh. and ratio controll...mine runs a mesa 2x15rd.rdy.and I run the slave out to another amp powering a mesa rd.rdy.2x10(the 2x10 is now a 4ohm cab..but thats another story)and I've even run the amp at 2ohms,powering both cabs by itself(not for a long period of time)and it handels well!!it's plenty loud enough for just about ANY gig, and IMO does NOT sound "harsh" or "sterile". go check one out,it might surprise ya
  11. yes more SVT than GK in some ways, I think.

    I love the grind, even though it's not my thing, but it is very tasteful.

    If you play flats, this amp loves my p-bass and Jazz flats!:cool:

    When I got this amp, my bandmates thought I was actually playing better :rolleyes: . Later on our singer then commented on how he really loved the sound we had been getting lately. Later yet, when we did some live recordings (2 mics in a room) my bandmates half seriously said "the only good sound was my bass tone".

    I also noticed I play at half the volume (or it's twice as pleasing) and can be heard twice as well (I did play through a peavey mega bass 1x15, 2x10 setup:rolleyes: )

    Same setup, only it's all mesa now!
  12. I had the same experiance when I started running through my new EB-MM Hd212's; played quieter while being heard more. In your case, I'd definitely say that there is something to be said for using matching manufacturers heads+cabs. What head did you use previous?
  13. I had all peavey,
    head-mega bass
    cabs-1x15, 2x10

    I then searched for about a year, and decided to go with the mesa head, and ditched the 1x15, and mega bass on trade. The mesa head through he peavey 2x10 wasn't cuting it. So I tried numerous cabinets, and decided the 2x10 sucked. Then I tried a 1x15 powerhouse cab, and it was awesome! So I bought it. Later on I found a 2x10 powerhouse cab that sounded like the 1x15, only a little tighter, I thought I would add that so I could run at 4 ohms, and use the amps potential. It was worth it. I found the eden cabs to be a little better for volume, but i decided to go for tone. It's all about tone. The edens were to dark, reminded me of my peavey days :rolleyes:

    Now I have all Mesa/Boogie
    head-M-Pulse 360
    cab-powerhouse 1x15, and 2x10

    I did find you get the best volume out of the peavey cabs with the peavey head, but not clarity or definition.
  14. I am actually NOW looking to trade my M2000 for a M-Pulse 600. My mind's made up..
    The M-2000 is a terrific rig but I just crave the simplicity of the M-Pulse. No more knob-twiddling for this guy; I'm through.
  15. there ya go!,Mad Sub. thats what I said a little over a year ago.......NO MORE TIWDDLIN !!!!!
  16. Yup. Saturation point has been reached. No more.
  17. yes, I like the switch that turns off the parametric EQ.
  18. yes, I like the switch that turns off the parametric EQ, but it's still there if I need it!

Share This Page