• 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 M6 Carbine Mega-Thread Pt Deux

Status
Not open for further replies.
#901
SMASH said:
"Mesa Boggie" and "economic" are not words that go together in my mind. basically we're left to guess, as I understand it - no reason/excuse has been provded for this gaffe?

I might consider these amps someday, but for now I prefer the Walkabout/Scout when it comes to Boogie. Put up with enough quirks with those over the years, and yeah it's worth the sound & volume, but I'm not going to go through all that again with a new am. I'm haappy going with my B1500 when I need more power, which sounds great and works as it's supposed to.
Click to expand...
BTW, the DI is after the master control on the Walkabout as well. :)

On the "oops vs economics" issue, I submit it could also be neither.

Case in point, the Walkabout's putting the master control in front of the DI bothered me a lot because I couldn't adjust my stage volume without affecting front of house. However, it was neither an oops nor a cost saving measure. It was done for specific technical and tonal reasons.

Bottom line is, on the M6, there could also simply be a reason for this design we aren't yet aware of. At least on the M6, if I put the DI mode to PRE, the master doesn't affect the DI, so I'm happy. :)
 
#903
SMASH said:
Like I said, I've put up with enough quirks on the Walkabout and am sticking with "the devil I know".

Honestly, I have my doubts about their reasons and whether it was truly necessary to do it that way even if the reasons are true.
Click to expand...
If you care, I can tell you why, as I've actually looked into this specific case, and the reason is genuine, and it does make sense. It just boils down to if the benefit is worth the related inconvenience, and that's where it's different for everyone.

...I'm still hung up on the "passive boost".
Click to expand...
I take a more practical approach... I really don't care about the terminology or the specific technology behind a control as long as it does what I want it to do, and at least in my case, the mid control on the M6 works great. Yeah, the tech dweeb in me still wants to know if it's a typo or if there's a reason they describe it this way, but it won't affect my purchasing decision.
 
#905
Chef said:
yes, please;)

thx-alan
Click to expand...
There are two actual tubes in the WA. One drives the preamp, and one drives the power amp. The one that drives the power amp is there instead of a FET to give it more of a genuine tube tone through the power section. They wanted the DI sound to carry this same tube tone, so they tapped the DI after the power amp driver tube. Since this tube drives the power section, it's gain level is controlled by the master control.

So the basic design goal is for the tone coming from the DI to sound as tubey as possible, like your "live stage sound". They definitely achieved that, but it also makes the DI master-relevant.

In fact, I just went to the website to check the manual, and they've documented this as well. I don't remember it documented in my older manual, but I could be wrong. Here's their direct quote:

NOTE: The DIRECT OUTPUT signal is derived from the driver stage and the MASTER
control is active at this point, affecting the overall signal strength available from the DI LEVEL
control. While this may, at times present an inconvenience under certain live performance
applications, the added tonal benefi ts of this toneful stage at the DIRECT OUTPUT are well
worth the occasional compromise. If you must have true independence between these two
controls - and cannot learn to work with the stock scheme, contact us directly and we can
fax you a simple modifi cation you can do that will remove the MASTER and its associated
stage from the DIRECT signal path. However, this will result in degradation of the sweet tube
character and while you will gain independence of the controls...you will trade a substantial
measure of tone.
Click to expand...

At this point, I think I might actually like to try a WA again, but with this mod in place. I don't mind the board having a dryer sound, especially since I was using an outboard DI when I had the WA anyway.
 
#906
As a loooong term Walkabout lover....
I just very seldom use mine anymore since I M6'd.

I think I'll take it to work tomorrow night and see if we become friends again.
I'm gonna try to leave the M6 at home, and not have it as "a set change parachute."
 
#907
Chef said:
As a loooong term Walkabout lover....
I just very seldom use mine anymore since I M6'd.

I think I'll take it to work tomorrow night and see if we become friends again.
I'm gonna try to leave the M6 at home, and not have it as "a set change parachute."
Click to expand...
Well, FWIW, from the first day, I liked my M6 better than I ever liked the WA. :)
 
#908
Maybe it's just me, but I like the DI after the tubes and eq.
I spent significant time coming to certain eq "conclusions," and I'd just as soon send those to the board.
I've never had anyone ever say anything other than variants of "dang that sounds great" out of either the M6 or Walkabout post everything DI. It doesn't bother me that a volume change effects the DI level as I'm very much a "set it and leave it for the night" player.

YMMV, etc.
 
#909
SMASH said:
I still suspect it was a clever answer after the fact rather than a deliberate design feature they truly thought had to be there against all standard convention.
Click to expand...
I've personally spoken to the design engineer, and it was not a clever answer after the fact. It truly was a deliberate design feature.

They knew when they designed it that it broke convention, but they felt the tonal benefits were worth it. It was a calculated thing, not accidental. You and I generally agree we'd prefer it the other way, but I don't know if that represents the minority or majority on that. I can tell you the DI tone on the WA is particularly "tubey" sounding, so if that sound is highly desired in FOH, it's a great way to get it cleanly... much more cleanly than having to mic a cab.

Anyway, FWIW. I still think the WA is a really great amp. :)
 
#910
I take it the other Mesa models like the Mpulse600 and Big Block don't have the same type of setup where the second tube powers works in the power section? or maybe they do. I'm interested in the differences in tone between these models.
 
#911
Crabby said:
I take it the other Mesa models like the Mpulse600 and Big Block don't have the same type of setup where the second tube powers works in the power section? or maybe they do. I'm interested in the differences in tone between these models.
Click to expand...

No, they do. All of the M-Pulse line use the tube driver, and Mesa/Boogie refers to this technology as Simul-State. The M6/M9 use a solid state driver, and they refer to this technology as Trans-Class.

Tom.
 
#912
SMASH said:
It does sound great, no issue there. I try to be "set & forget", but in some situations it ain't so simple.

We can all agree Mesa makes a lot of excellent-sounding and fairly sturdy products at least. So getting back to the M6 (and M9 ?), has there ever been reasoning offered by Mesa for the effects loop being post-master? Is it just the case that most effects wouldn't suffer or cause prolems in this config and it's only an issue with compression?
Click to expand...

I have talked to CS about a year ago now when I first discovered this and at first the guy at CS did not even understand what I was talking about. Like it wasn't true. I called back saying yip it is verified (guys at TB) and I stated the BB750 did not have the same signal path (ie the FX loop is not post master). I ran my nice rane compressor in the FX loop without any problems. A lot of this stuff is already talked about in this thread from about a year ago if anyone cares to read it. I still do think this was just an oops or economic decision because IMO there is no good reason for the FX loop to be post master (maybe someone can elighten me).

I love Mesa products and I would love them more if they were a little more responsive to some of our suggestions here on TB. After several dealings with Mesa CS, I just get this feeling that they have a bit of a "chip", and really will never cater to any specific needs. IMO, they believe they are going to continue to do their thing (with any quirks) and their products will continue to sell. Again, this is just the feeling I get and I may be completely off base, but if I were selling a product I would do what it takes to consider what the end users really want, instead of saying you may want, but you are going to sacrifice tone for it. In this day and age, why can't I have my cake and eat it too. I want tone, with these features, if you can't do it someone else will eventually. Stepping down now:hiding:.
 
#913
I love the sound of the M6/ Fathom.. I see your point on the Effect loop... I dont really use effects so i would never have known the issue if i did not read it here.. But the one thing that i hate about the M6 is that the MUTE is on the Master Volume knob.
Slight movements of that knob can increase volume alot and very quickly... And when engaging it you have to be very careful to not move your VOL setting.. Especially if you ever used the DI out in POST EQ setting.. its just a PITA... but the amp does sound pretty good...
 
#914
Well I am waiting for the Phantom M6 to arrive so I can A/B it against my TF550B. I have already posted the funk on the classifieds here, I have the TF and a QSC power amp with a couple different pre-amps, and honestly just looking for something a bit different from the what the TF brings to the table although I have been very happy with over the last three years. A fellow TB'er has bought my 550B and I don't know if I am going to have the opportunity to A/B these two before I have to ship it.
Are there any of you here that opted for the M6 over the Thunderfunk and can explain why you made that choice.
 
#915
Yes; I owned both TFB420 and TFB500b for some years.
The M6 will sound like you just pulled the blanket off your amp compared to the TFB.
Much more top end extension and clarity. Much more horsepower too.
If you want something more modern, cleaner, clearer, more headroom, the M6 is that.
 
#916
Chef said:
Yes; I owned both TFB420 and TFB500b for some years.
The M6 will sound like you just pulled the blanket off your amp compared to the TFB.
Much more top end extension and clarity. Much more horsepower too.
If you want something more modern, cleaner, clearer, more headroom, the M6 is that.
Click to expand...
+1

I liked the mid punch of the TFB, but eventually I got tired of "fighting" its apparent focus on that in lieu of also having bigger lows and clearer highs to go with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back