• 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.

New Carvin Micro bass combo amps!

#121
@Kirk62: Great, detailed review! Thanks for sharing the details of your initial impression with us. As I suspected, the MB12 seems to be "tonally aimed" at a more modern style of bass; slapping and such.

OK, we've got an MB15 and an MB12 review...someone's gotta buy the little guy. :D I'm really tempted to just b/c it's so darn small. Not "microscopic" by any means, just way smaller than a 200w amp with this many features has a right to be.
 
#123
I plotted the driver/box response with WinISD. Was careful to use correct units for driver params, and internal box volume. I subtracted a bit from the box volume to account for the amp boards and tweeter horn/driver inside the cab. What I'm hearing pretty much lines up with this, especially around lack of bass peakiness, though my old, worn-out ears would've kneed the response slightly higher than 100.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#125
Hi, Shak. Sorry, I know nothing about Markbass other than what I've read in this forum and in MB's user manuals, so I'm not qualified to do a comparison.

One obvious major difference, though, is that the Carvin is a sealed box while the MB is vented. So, the response curves/down-reach/roll-offs will probably look different. Based on those two different box styles, one could make generalizations regarding what should be the differences, but we all know how dangerous that can be.

One hell of a price point on that little guy, though, huh? Wow.
 
#126
craig.p said:
Hi, Shak. Sorry, I know nothing about Markbass other than what I've read in this forum and in MB's user manuals, so I'm not qualified to do a comparison.

One obvious major difference, though, is that the Carvin is a sealed box while the MB is vented. So, the response curves/down-reach/roll-offs will probably look different. Based on those two different box styles, one could make generalizations regarding what should be the differences, but we all know how dangerous that can be.

One hell of a price point on that little guy, though, huh? Wow.
Click to expand...

Thank you for answering: Yeap, It's kinda expensive ! But may be not... :hmm:
 
#128
Thank you to the 12 and 10 reviewers.

Seems like the impressions of the 10, 12, and 15 follow along the common line of "can get loud" and "sound fairly lean." The former makes sense due to the amp's 8 ohm power rating. The latter makes sense due to the small, sealed box.

To the 12 and 10 owners, try your units with a proper bass cab underneath -- and watch out! :D
 
#129
Thanks for adding your review, Mrpackerguy. Would you happen to have a regular, electric bass that you could try w/the MB10 (as opposed to the EUB)? I'm very curious as to how it would sound w/a normal EB.

I'm back and forth still: MB10 vs. GK112 vs. MB15
GK112 = 200w, free shipping, not as flexible (but maybe doesn't need to be, based on it's sound which is unknown ATM) and cheaper than both Carvins
MB10/MB15 = same wattage, better feature set, sound might be thinner (no direct comparos yet) but much pricer especially when factoring in shipping

Money is always an issue. $300, delivered for the GK112. $370, delivered for the Carvin MB10, $440 for the MB15. I really like the universal voltage capability of the Carvin. I'd need a transformer with the GK. But I already own a beefy 220/110 transformer. But, it would be a PITA to cart that 30-pound brick around with my nice, light GK112. Sorta defeats the purpose. But I'd save a bunch of money.

Where's the "whack head on brick wall" icon?
 
#130
mikeddd said:
Thanks for adding your review, Mrpackerguy. Would you happen to have a regular, electric bass that you could try w/the MB10 (as opposed to the EUB)? I'm very curious as to how it would sound w/a normal EB.

I'm back and forth still: MB10 vs. GK112 vs. MB15
GK112 = 200w, free shipping, not as flexible (but maybe doesn't need to be, based on it's sound which is unknown ATM) and cheaper than both Carvins
MB10/MB15 = same wattage, better feature set, sound might be thinner (no direct comparos yet) but much pricer especially when factoring in shipping

Money is always an issue. $300, delivered for the GK112. $370, delivered for the Carvin MB10, $440 for the MB15. I really like the universal voltage capability of the Carvin. I'd need a transformer with the GK. But I already own a beefy 220/110 transformer. But, it would be a PITA to cart that 30-pound brick around with my nice, light GK112. Sorta defeats the purpose. But I'd save a bunch of money.

Where's the "whack head on brick wall" icon?
Click to expand...
Sure, I can do the "bedroom test" but really won't be using the MB10 on the gig as fr as I can tell. I'll let you know. I have both an active and passive bass I can try it through.
 
#131
Using my trusty Sting Ray 4, I found the following. The MB10 is capable of a wide variety of tones. With everything flat, it's very mid and hi present. Not real usable at all to me. I found the most usable settings with contour toward scooped, low past 12:00, low and hi mids past 1:00 and the hi's dialed down with the tweeter switch in the dim position. From there, I had more control of my Stingray's onboard 3 band pre. You're not going to shake any walls running it at 200W at 8ohms, but I was pleasantly surprised. I could see with PA support and in a small room, tilting it back and filling in adequately as a stage monitor. I seriously doubt it's gonna be enough on it's own, even in a small room situation, unless it's an acoustic duo sort of thing. I just don't see it competing with a moderately loud drummer or guitar player. I prefer simpler pre's, but the MB10, for the price will fill in nicely for practice, and perhaps for the jazz trio on the EUB. However, I have a Wizzy 10 and Micro 550 coming, and I'm going to bet that rig will blow the Carvin out of the water at 7# less. But that's only a guess. I can see keeping the MB10 and having some applications for me. Only time will tell.
 
#132
@Mrpackerguy: Wow, that was fast! Thanks so much for taking the time not only to test it out with a standard EB, but to type up a detailed reply. This is a cross b/t an "Ah hah, just as I thought!" and an "Oh man...what a disappointment!" moment for me. :hmm:

Hoping against hope, I was...hoping that the MB10 had some appreciable amount of actual BASS response. But logic dictated that a cabinet that small just couldn't do it for the frequency/transient response required for bass music reproduction. I.E. there are many home theater subwoofers that are 1 cubic foot in size, have a 1Kw amp and rattle the roof. But special FX subbass IS NOT the same thing as reproducing an electric bass guitar.

I really do appreciate your time, Mrpackerguy. Knowledge is power, and all that. Sure looks like I'm not buying the MB10. :( I guess at this point, I'm wanting a head-to-head b/t the MB15 and the GK MB112.

Before anyone says it: Yes; I am looking for "free lunch" so to speak. I'm well aware that there are small awesome combo amps with real, roof-rattling bass...in the $600+ price range (more like $1K price range...)

Not looking for that. Looking for "close to that" for half the price. Never hurts to dream, right?
 
#133
Got a chance to try the MB15 on top of the Peavey 1x15 this afternoon at an outdoor C&W jam session. It acquitted itself really well. Again, the nature of this little guy changes completely as soon as you put it on top of a proper bass cab. As before, the Peavey cab threw most of the lows while the MB15's driver threw most of the midrange. Truly one hell of a combination. I'd estimate I was using about half the steam available -- plenty left if I'd needed it -- and I was LOUD. It sounded far more authoritative through those two fifteens than the 250-watt rating would suggest, and keep in mind that the Peavey box still contains the original crap square-magnet driver. After today, I can see myself using this combination for lots of the mid-sized clubs, with no need to lug in the 40-pound QSC and the pair of Avatar B212s for those rooms.

The tone was to die for. You put the right bass cab under this amp and the leanness totally disappears; you'll have all the deep/extended bottom end you'll need and more, but it's a tight and controlled bottom end, too. The compressor and the overdrive add tons of character and sustain. So, you get a tubey sound, but without the "slow" feel.

The amp chassis itself handled everything in stride. By the way, it was running off a Honda 6500 watt gas generator along with all the other stuff that was there (other amps, PA mains, PA monitors). Never broke a sweat. So, this thing is generator-friendly.

I spied lots of other players secretly checking out the kit. Most had that "What the heck IS that?!?"-type expression on their faces. You know what I mean.

Had no idea this little guy would be capable of this level of performance outdoors. Glad I bought it.
 
#134
Here are a couple of reviews I found on the Carvin BBS. The first one is from me trying them out at the Carvin store, the second is from an owner of the MB12:

Raymeous said:
Hey all first report in on the micros:

I went to the Carvin HQ showroom the other day and they had the 10" and 15", with the 12" having been sold the day before.

These things have been really popular what with the recent demand for "micro" rigs which I find funny since these are really nothing more than combo amps. Oh well.

Anyway I plugged a HB/J equiped B50 into the 10" and generally speaking it sounds exactly like you would expect your Carvin amp to sound like. It's designed off of the BX500 so no surprises there. I found for me that the 10" had a tighter and slightly more defined sound than the 15". The 15" is not bad, dont get me wrong, we're talking slight differences here, it's just that the 15" version does not have the cabinet size to get that deep 15 sound that you may be used to from a full sized 15" enclosure. The 15 is however a lot smaller than your average Peavey TNT combo and a lot easier to transport. I went from the 10" to the 15" and then back to the 10" so I guess I liked the 10" better over all.

I really wanted to try the 12" since with the multiple speaker assembly I figure it would offer the most complex tonal characteristics and a percieved depth of sound. I think over all any of them would handle a small gig or even a medium sized gig depending on genre with out too much trouble. I would say using an extension speaker or routing through the PA for extra coverage may be a good idea for medium sized rock gigs or any larger gig.

I think I would be comfortable using the 10" as the "throw it in the trunk" quick grab amp for those one off gigs at the coffee shop and such. It sounds like a bass amp but weighs about the same as a dinky Line6 combo. Nice. I would still be interested in trying out the 12" version.

So there's my dos centavos. Good stuff to be had here
Click to expand...

JinPhilly said:
Sorry for the delay- crazy week. So far so good, haven't had it out the basement just yet (where I practice) so volume has been low. But for a small amp, I don't know what else you could want tone-wise. Now, take that with a grain of salt since I haven't played on more than 5 rigs total (only been playing about 4 years and some change).

I don't think it sounds overly "hi-fi" with it's 3 way design- after it's EQ'd that is. Flat, it gives you the signature vanilla Carvin tone that's really focused on hi mids! Cut those hi mids and treble, add low mids, bass, a little drive and contour and you're set. Actually, I would wager that at low volumes, the midrange driver really helps gives you some nice clarity and articulation that you can appreciate since you can't really thump away but so loud in a smaller room. You can really dial in some nice tones from fat motown neck pick-up type of p-bass thump all the way to farty, burpy, bridge J-style funk. I'm sure the versatility of the soaps help but I experimented with my icon in passive with p/u's dead center and also in active with pre-amp set flat. I could still get almost any sound I wanted. The only tone related features it gives up the BX5 is the lack of a tube and the graphic eq although I think the later would be overkill for anyone intermediate like me, lol. The DRIVE really affects the tone more than I originally thought and the CONTOUR gives you easy access to a nice slap sound regardless of the other EQ settings. Can't wait to get my computer gear upgraded so I can record some samples.

As far as power, as I said, I'll have to wait until I get it out in a bigger room with the other fellas. The 12" woofer seems pretty substantial and delivers plenty of rumble at low volumes. Not really sure how the lack of porting will affect things once you pump up that MASTER dial. Also, it's pretty light, well, not as heavy as I anticipated! Overall, as you may be able to tell, I am happy with it and to my somewhat virgin ears, it sounds great. I'll tell you what's most interesting to me, my Icon sounds MUCH better with this rig compared to the Hartke A100. Maybe you need to mate a Carvin with a Carvin! I've been overly critical of my Icon's sound but now, I think I'm in love.
Click to expand...
 
#135
Did MrPackerGuy ever get his Wizzy 10 and Micro 550 amp? We're waiting to find out if it's louder than the Carvin Micro 10. Of course it costs THREE TIMES as much.

Couldn't the Carvin Micro 10 be used with a Sans Amp bass DI or para DI and get not only a boost in volume but better bass tone?

I'm thinking of getting the Micro 10 for use at sandwich shops, libraries and as a stage monitor at festivals with an acoustic band that does old time Appalachian music. I think it would be sufficient for those venues, and with an acoustic band.
 
#136
Based on my MB15 experience, I'd say don't do it. If you start cranking in all kinds of bass EQ not only with the on-board controls but also with external controls, then I think you're asking for trouble. I commented on that earlier. And in their instruction sheet Carvin specifically warns against asking too much of the on-board speaker. Having to add tens of dB of bass boost and (effectively) adding even more with contour knobs should be a wake-up call that you're using the wrong kit for the application. At best you'd be running the amp in survival mode, well outside the perimeter of its design envelope. Consider a proper combo amp instead.
 
#137
Carvin.B4 said:
Did MrPackerGuy ever get his Wizzy 10 and Micro 550 amp? We're waiting to find out if it's louder than the Carvin Micro 10. Of course it costs THREE TIMES as much.

Couldn't the Carvin Micro 10 be used with a Sans Amp bass DI or para DI and get not only a boost in volume but better bass tone?

I'm thinking of getting the Micro 10 for use at sandwich shops, libraries and as a stage monitor at festivals with an acoustic band that does old time Appalachian music. I think it would be sufficient for those venues, and with an acoustic band.
Click to expand...
I did and it's not. However, the Micro is going back to EA for tweaking because I apparently got one of the 1st run Micros which were underpowered and EA is going to do the upgrade and get the output to my liking. However, for my use with my NS WAV4 EUB, the MB10 just won't work, and it is now for sale in the amps GFS here at substantially less than the Carvin price. The Micro is able to dial in the tone I feel I need for the EUB though.
 
#138
Thank you Craig and MrPacker for your input. Having had several back surgeries, I'm looking for a small, light (?) but powerful amp if such a thing exists. Believe it or not, I've used a Peavey Audition 20 (12 watt guitar amp) with my Sans Amp pedal in coffee shops, libraries, etc. and gotten decent bass, although at the low levels required in those situations. I've run an XLR line out of the pedal into PAs and used the Peavey as a monitor. It was acceptable for the situations. I've probably been pushing the limit on the Peavey for at least three years (as you suggest), but have noticed no ill effects on the amp to this point.

My approach has been unorthodox, but I can't show up at a low volume (and mainly acoustic) event with my Carvin PB 100 15. The Carvin MB 10 may be an answer to the problem.
 
#139
Have both a GK-150 & a Carvin MB 15...Love them both...Especially w/an upright...Alone w/electric they both really leave a lot to be desired especially the GK...BUT...On the top of a decent 15" cabinet they both rock...Especially the MB15...&...On smaller "coffeehouse" type semi acoustic blues gigs the Carvin alone is also fine...I originally bought the Carvin to replace the aging GK...But...Of course the GK will never die...Now I use the GK with it's brother 12" extension cab as a subwoofer with my Fender Passport 300 for the smaller trio gigs...Amazing...Both of them...
 
#140
Great reviews Craig!
I'm waiting on my MB15 to be delivered.
I posted this in another thread, as Craig knows. :)


... I just pulled the trigger and ordered a Carvin MB15.
200w and with a plug-in extension speaker 250w.
$399.00.

Reasons:

1. I've been wanting a 15" cab
2. I've been wanting a more powerful small gig amp, my 25w Fender Rumble is good for practice and REALLY small gigs. (church etc.)
3. I'm a geezer so I like 'em light! 32.6 lbs.
4. I've always wanted a tweed amp ($18 extra)

Sooooo, at $399 + $18 (tweed) + $40 shipping + $34.40 CA sales tax ..... $491.40 total.

I hope I like it!
I'll be using it alone for most gigs, and some others I'll plug in my Avatar 2x10 or my 1x12.

*Before ya say it - I gig a lot with my old GK400B head. 250w into two cabs, less into one cab of course. I have my Carvin R1000 if I need MORE power, but rarely do.*
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back