• 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.

Mesa Basis M-2000 vs Mesa M6 Carbine

Which do you prefer?

  • Total voters
    44
mikenel169

mikenel169

Sep 25, 2011
1,130
40
RI
#1
Hey Guys,

Just seeing what is thought between the two. I own the M2000 now and i do love it. I play a Spector Euro through her and she is supreme, but i tried the M6 out and i was very much pleased with it also. Just didnt have the Spector when i tried it out. I'm basically just trying to hear all of your different views/thoughts on pros/cons. Of course the dumb ol' question. Would it be wise to sell/trade the M2000 for the M6?


attachment.jpg




attachment.gif
 

Attachments

  • 1600-M6CarbRHD_left.jpg
    1600-M6CarbRHD_left.jpg
    10.3 KB · Views: 588
  • m2000hed.gif
    m2000hed.gif
    14.5 KB · Views: 917
#2
I haven't heard or played a 2K, but it obviously offers a lot more tonal flexibility.......so if you use all that capability now you may miss it with a Carbine. I love the sound of the Carbines, however, and don't wanna twiddle knobs all day :-)

Really, only you can answer your question.
 
#4
Yea the M9 is the end all one for me! Unfortunately money is way too tight for me these days :( Has anyone had any issues with the m6? i maybe played around with the carbine for 20 minutes or so. I def need to go back with my bass and really test it out. I love the M2k but i also love the simplicity of the carbine!
 
#6
I love the Carbines....Im able to get everything I need out of my M6 without having to dig around all day....present voicings are awesome. I still have my M2000...and there are a ton of sounds in there... but I seldom use it because its almost overkill and the M6 sounds so great.
 
#8
bassace5 said:
I love the Carbines....Im able to get everything I need out of my M6 without having to dig around all day....present voicings are awesome. I still have my M2000...and there are a ton of sounds in there... but I seldom use it because its almost overkill and the M6 sounds so great.
Click to expand...

Would u say the m6 is as punchy? do u notice a difference between the m6 being solid state vs the preamp tube side of the m2k? Only reason for the questions is that u having both, maybe u tried.a side by side comparrison.
 
#13
Had the 2000 for a while, and very familiar with the M6. VERY different sounding amps. The 2000, for all its tonal control, was quite mid voiced, well controlled down low. The FET channel is VERY mid voiced, with a very attenuated treble response. I was happiest with this head with the channels blended, using the FET channel for punch and the tube channel to widen both the low and high end. While I never had trouble with mine, these heads (unfortunately just like the M9) have a reputation for low reliability.

The M6 and M9 are quite different sounding... WIDE open low end, super bright upper mids and lots of treble sizzle (I describe these heads as the Mesa heads for people who don't like Mesa). They are very 'solid state sounding' and are extremely loud (the M6 output will stand up to heads with twice the volume rating).

Hard to recommend either the M6 and M9 for me, as impressive as they are. The M6 has limited tone controls... hard to control the massive low end with an external hi pass, and hard to control the massive brightness and sizzle without losing definition. The mid boost and cut control is, IMO, too extremely voiced to be particularly useful.

The M9 EQ fixes most of these issues, although an external hi pass to control the massive sub bass is still a good idea, but the reliability issues are pretty over the top with these.

I'd hold on to the 2000 and be happy. The only reason IMO to move to the M6 is if you want a LOT more bass extension, and a much more aggressive top end.

IMO and IME!
 
#14
mikenel169 said:
Would u say the m6 is as punchy? do u notice a difference between the m6 being solid state vs the preamp tube side of the m2k? Only reason for the questions is that u having both, maybe u tried.a side by side comparrison.
Click to expand...

The Carbine stuff to me is definitely the most "punchy" amp they've put out. I really liked the attack of it. I never had a problem with "too much" low end with it either, unlike the M-Pulse 600 which just didn't work for me very well in a rock setting.
I really shouldn't have let my M9 go but I was giving up music for a while and was drug tooth and nail back into my gig, so now I'm without it... :(
 
#15
I agree with KJ that the M9 has had serious reliability issues, but it's my favorite head to play out with, by far. I use the GEQ to limit the some lows and my LDS 15/6 LIKES the massive deep end (as do my ears). It punches like no other head I have played. I assume Mesa has now (finally) fixed the issues, and my current one has never failed (I am the 2nd owner and it's a fairly early one). My last one, however, did develop an issue which was promptly fixed by Mesa.
 
#16
lomo said:
I agree with KJ that the M9 has had serious reliability issues, but it's my favorite head to play out with, by far. I use the GEQ to limit the some lows and my LDS 15/6 LIKES the massive deep end (as do my ears). It punches like no other head I have played. I assume Mesa has now (finally) fixed the issues, and my current one has never failed (I am the 2nd owner and it's a fairly early one). My last one, however, did develop an issue which was promptly fixed by Mesa.
Click to expand...

Mesa service is great. Also, +1 that those 3015LF loaded cabs are among the few that can actually take that sub bass put out by the M6/M9. Truly amazing if you want massive low bass slam. The M9 with a 15/6 or 1515/66 is truly among the most powerful bass rigs ever made. Tonally, not my thing personall (too much of everything:D), but as far as pure performance, I've not experienced anything like it.
 
#17
My current M9 (formally lomo's) has been steady gigging and practicing for countless hours with nary a hiccup. I prevent it failing by always bring my MB800 to every gig it goes on. ;)

I pair the M9 with my Kappalite loaded Dually for tons of destruction. It is another cab that can handle the juice. I can see how the M6/9 would splinter "lesser" cabs.

Kjung is right though....it is as SS sounding as SS gets. Tight and articulate....some would say to a fault but not me. Tight is right.
 
#19
KJung said:
I was happiest with this head with the channels blended, using the FET channel for punch and the tube channel to widen both the low and high end.
Click to expand...

Mine is set up reverse from KJung.

The FET channel handles the lows and highs, the with Bass & Bass frequency @ 5 o'clock and Bass Shift to low. The Highs are at noon-1 and Mids rolled off to 8 o'clock. Bright flipped on.

My tube channel is mids and highs :Gain @ 10 o'clock, Treble 11 o'clock, Middle & Bass @ 4 o'clock.
Hi gain off, bright off, Both EQ's off, Both pre masters at noon. The blend knob @ 2 o'clock. Compressors off.

The M2k power's a Mesa 2x15EV and controls a slave power amp for a Fender 8x10PRO. The 810 is super thick while the 215 has more presence

If I want more mids I turn up the tube channels gain.

That's the beauty of versatile amps, being able to dial it in for you.

Forgive the scratch track, should give an idea of my rock bass tone

[SOUNDCLOUD]http://soundcloud.com/bassplayermykk/killigans-w-bass/s-Fo6ym[/SOUNDCLOUD]
 
#20
Love the M2K...I came to it from a 400+.

I blend the channels... so many tonal variations...some say too many.
10 years running smooth with 1 changing out of the preamp tubes...and 1 fan replacement.
(I run into 2-1x15 Mesa RR cabs loaded w/kappalite 3015s)
It's perfect for me, no need to fix what ain't broken.

(no exp, w/ any of the carbines)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back