• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Replacement for GK MB150e 112

The original MB-150E was a pretty expensive combo, a lot of performance is such a small package (with some accepted tradeoffs).
Yes it was somewhat expensive for the time as compared to similar amps, but I don’t know of anything with all the same features that was available at the time (2007). I think mine was about $650-$700 range. I’d like to have it working, but the four failures have been within the last 10 years and have been the same symptom every time; output drops to extremely low and is distorted. This time, both DI outs are extremely hot and distorted. It was last repaired in July 22, but it started acting up in Dec. 2023. I decided not to send it back to CA / GK for repair number four.
 
My MB150E is now my practice amp. Before I got it, I was actually gigging a homemade combo amp, something that I no longer recommend. At one gig, it tripped a GFCI. The sound guy tried to reassure me that it was OK, and every amp trips that particular GFCI. In any event, I mentioned it to my spouse, and it didn't take much convincing that we could afford to have me play through an amp designed by a real engineer. ;)

It weighs 26 pounds. My newer MB200 head and DIY 1x8 weigh 14 pounds together, and may actually be louder. I've written about Bob Gallien's genius in glowing terms. He managed to get gig-worthy bass from a cubic foot of space using the technology available at the time. I think there's even a reason why it's a sealed cab, which would seem counterintuitive today.

But the maker of an "iconic" amp faces a challenge if they want to update the design, which to figure out what's really iconic about it, and what aspects they actually want to reproduce, without turning it into just another amp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agedhorse
Yes it was somewhat expensive for the time as compared to similar amps, but I don’t know of anything with all the same features that was available at the time (2007). I think mine was about $650-$700 range. I’d like to have it working, but the four failures have been within the last 10 years and have been the same symptom every time; output drops to extremely low and is distorted. This time, both DI outs are extremely hot and distorted. It was last repaired in July 22, but it started acting up in Dec. 2023. I decided not to send it back to CA / GK for repair number four.
Understood. Hard to know what the root cause might be, but clearly it hasn't been fully addressed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Skaggs
This would be a huge upgrade to what you have imo:

Golly that's a perfect combo.
 
Yes it was somewhat expensive for the time as compared to similar amps, but I don’t know of anything with all the same features that was available at the time (2007). I think mine was about $650-$700 range. I’d like to have it working, but the four failures have been within the last 10 years and have been the same symptom every time; output drops to extremely low and is distorted. This time, both DI outs are extremely hot and distorted. It was last repaired in July 22, but it started acting up in Dec. 2023. I decided not to send it back to CA / GK for repair number four.

I had one too, loved it for a few years and then it fried. Was told unrepairable by three places. Something to do with how everything is so crammed in to keep the weight and size down (that was 12 years ago so I am sure my memory is a bit fuzzy). I was sad, looked for another but they STILL seem to fetch 500-800 bucks for nice examples on reverb. Eventually I just went with an Ashdown original head and a single cab for those type of things. I'd love a nice genz shuttle someday as well
 
Just to wrap it up, I went with the Peavey MAX 150 1x12 combo due to features for the price. It has most of the features I was after;
>it has a single 12” speaker,
>it has the capability to drive an 8-ohm external speaker.
>it has a DI, but no separate level control for the DI, which was a wish & not a requirement.
> it’s in the 50-150 watt power range although the 150 must be a peak rating since it says “120 RMS” in the specs.
>it’s fairly lightweight at 29 lbs.

Tone wise, it’s very modern-sounding to my ears. It’s not at all like the old Peavey combos that were kinda’ brash & midrange-y. Compared to the GK, it sounds huge, but the GK had a sealed speaker cabinet & the Peavey is ported. I’ve only tested it out to make sure all features worked as designed, no gig’s yet. The amp sounds good with all the tone controls flat and the contour button engaged.
It’s voiced a little like an Ampeg, which is good with me. I haven’t tried it with my upright yet, but it sounds like it will have an agreeable tone, at least for bluegrass. Hopefully it will be reliable…
External speaker jack, w/capability to handle an 8 ohm extension speaker.
-Low impedance DI (separate DI output level control would be great)
-1st choice, 1x12” speaker, 2nd 1x10.
- 50 to 150 watts
-Lightweight!
 
Last edited:
I have fond memories of my MB150s. I got it for $250 at a pawn shop & used it for over 20 years. (Two other local players also got one after seeing & hearing mine on a jazz gig.)
I haven't replaced it with another combo since it finally died a few years ago.
I see the field is nice & crowded now with all kinds of price & feature points. I'm sure I could find something if I really wanted another combo. (I'm not in much of a hurry these days since money is tight – and my Acme Low-B1 cab is sufficiently practical.)
Part of me is waiting for G/K to do an updated MB150 reissue. Pro features, a sound that "just works", reliable & durable, extra compact with a metal cab... I can't be the only one who would be excited to see that!
 
A bit of a review of the Peavey MAX 150 1x12 that will probably be seen only by those of you that responded to my original post.


First of all, I attempted to send the amp back, but it was going to cost me $80 shipping & then I would be back on the hunt for another. It also had all the features I wanted, so I kept it. If I can’t live with it, I’ll give it to my son and spend again later.

Since it’s 120 watts and NOT 150 watts, it’s only about 60 watts alone and not 75 watts as the GK MB150 was (when functioning…). That being said, the MAX 150 definitely sounds bigger and louder alone than the GK did alone. Probably due to the larger, ported, cab.

The MAX 150 has a unique tone to me, very “modern” sounding, but not so much to my liking. Low mids are way to hot / thick and there is no low-mid tone control on the amp. The mid control doesn’t cut low mids enough even at full cut (-15 db). The low tone control does cut it and not at the expense of the low end as would be expected. It’s strange for me to adjust the low tone control to “cut” on an amp, but that’s where it has to be for me, especially with my P-bass. This is with the contour button engaged. I can also get a reasonably good tone with the contour button disengaged and the low tone knob near flat, but I don’t like the mids like that as well because I can’t cut them enough.

The gain section has an overdrive button that’s somewhat useable. It adds some common sounding grit, but still useable.

The contour button next to the low tone knob I’ve covered. It’s useable.

The low control is +or- 15db at 50Hz and is useable, even necessary…

The mid control has a mid-shift button that seems to boost the already-too-hot low mids. It changes the mid-control center frequency from 600Hz to 250Hz, but it sounds more like a boost of low-mids somewhere around 250Hz.

The treble control is +or- 15 db at 6KHz and has a bright button below it that boosts everything above 1KHz by 10db and is also very useable. With no tweeter in the cab, this adds smooth highs in the 12” and there’s no beehive-sounding tweeter if distortion is used.

There is also a Kosmos-C button by the master volume that is somewhat strange. It supposedly generates harmonics of the lowest notes to make the illusion of more low end. I haven’t figured out a way to use it to my liking, but I might.

If I use the external speaker into a 115 cab I have, the amp sounds huge and doesn’t have the ridiculous low-mid thing going on, so I’m guessing the low-mid excess with the amp when used alone is due to the internal 12” speaker. Me figuring out the tone settings has taken care of most of the excessive low-mid problem.

I’m not thrilled with the amp overall, but I like it a lot better once I figured out the tone settings to my liking. I like the weight (29.2 lbs). The physical size is a little larger than I wanted, but not to the extreme.

I wouldn’t enthusiastically recommend the amp, but it’s useable in mid-volume situations. If it holds up, I think I will learn to like it. I’ve only used it for 1 gig, & 1 rehearsal, so there’s more learning required.
 
Nice review of the Peavey. I replaced my MB150 with a GK MB 110. The 110 has the same basic tone with a lot less features and bass response.
What I really miss is the adjustable contour and the 12” speaker…. The 10” lacks the deep lows but is still tight and doesn’t fart out with a 4 string. I like that it doesn’t have a fan and the weight.
The tone controls are super interactive and it gets a woodier tone. It’s built really well.
 
Since it’s 120 watts and NOT 150 watts, it’s only about 60 watts alone and not 75 watts as the GK MB150 was (when functioning…). That being said, the MAX 150 definitely sounds bigger and louder alone than the GK did alone. Probably due to the larger, ported, cab.
The larger cab is probably a factor. The MB150 sacrificed sensitivity in order to achieve its small size. My homemade 1x12 was also bigger and louder than the speaker in the MB150.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agedhorse
The larger cab is probably a factor. The MB150 sacrificed sensitivity in order to achieve its small size. My homemade 1x12 was also bigger and louder than the speaker in the MB150.
Yes, larger and ported both make the Peavey cab sound much deeper and sound somewhat louder although it might not be in measured db.

Within a year or so of getting my MB150e back in 2007, I splurged for the matching MBX 112 extension cab which I still have.

I connected it to a Markbass Little Mark Blackline 250 and sat it beside the Peavey MAX 150 and played a few of my basses through each. There was no comparison with any bass, passive or active, 4 string or 5 string. The Peavey sounded much deeper & louder, as expected by me. The MBX 112 is much smaller and sealed, so it performed as such, even though the Markbass could have deliver up to 125 watts to the 8-ohm MBX 112.
I didn’t get anywhere close to pushing the little cab that much since the 112 is rated somewhere around 75w max.

The magic with the MBX 112 was when it was paired with the MB 150e 112, and I still have its cabinet with the amp removed. Those two aluminum box cabs driven by the aforementioned Markbass head punch in a much higher weight class. That’s what I was kinda’ trying to replace with one combo amp. The Peavey gets close, but can’t overcome the two GK 112s together, but it’s more convenient to move, plug in and play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo Smith

Latest posts