Schwing!!...I just got a semi!!!!LOL
Nice rig!!...by chance...can a Puma 900 handle two M212??
The black Jag 900 can handle 4, 4ohm M212's.
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.
Schwing!!...I just got a semi!!!!LOL
Nice rig!!...by chance...can a Puma 900 handle two M212??
The black Jag 900 can handle 4, 4ohm M212's.
Tecamp blackcat and two M212. Nothing can beat this or comes even near it in sound and quality


Yes it the Black Cat amp. It is great pure amp, what you feed it is what your getting in the biggest way ;-)
I have got two 4ohm m212 each and can handle 600w given 500w from the Blackcat (1000w 2 channel or bridge mode). The projection of these m212 is really great, like your in the sound.
But I am also looking for a L215 and selling one M212. I wonder how that wil sound![]()
If you are using relatively small, relatively efficient cabs, +1, you won't notice a difference. Tonally, identical into the typical 2 x 112 at 4ohms or 410. However, if you are pushing a large 8ohm cab, or a very large 4 ohm rig at high volumes (like 2 x 212 or whatever), that extra oomph can make a pretty bid difference in handling peaks, etc.
+1 though, for the vast majority of players, the Puma500 is the thing!
I have gone back and forth on the 500 vs the 900 a few times.
I was going to run a Puma with a relatively small Epifani 3x10 @4 ohms, handles 750 watts. I also play relatively polite music (jazz, latin, funk, country, rnb, motown- no metal or hard rock) and have never had to crank my current 600 watt Epi 902 more than a few times in 7 years, and even then I don't think it was close to maxed out.
I'm thinking that even though the 900 is only about $300 more, I'm going to be fine with the 500. Is that pretty much the consensus?
I would be ready to buy- was waiting till the new year for tax reasons- but I still need to part with one of my Foderas.
The 500 should drive the 301UL nicely. I gigged that cab for quite a few years (owned all four versions.... the first two ceramic models... shallow and deep, and then the later UL and UL2... moved away from Epi prior to the UL3 coming out). That was the best 'bang for size and weight' cab for many years, even before the neo's came out.
That being said, at 5.3 ohms, the Puma900 would put out roughly 800 watts, and I've found that the 310UL can actually use that extra few hundred watts of power versus the 500. If you slap a bit or whatever, you would probably notice a bit wider, more open low end, and a touch more maximum volume that would feel a bit more like your 902, which had a big, open low end. Whether that is worth the extra cash only you can decide!
You will find the EQ on either Puma much more powerful than the 902, and the midrange will speak much more clearly IMO and IME.
Is there an easy summary of the three different classes of TecAmp cabs? It looks like there are light, medium, and heavy ones. Are there other characteristics (tonal ones, features, wattage handling) for each of the major product lines? I'd like to see a feature grid, if one existed.
That was really helpful! Maybe I will just spring for the 900.
In the big scheme of my gear arsenal that's not a lot of money if the result will be tangible.
I might be behind the times (since TecAmp changes things up quite a bit, and I guess are now moving away from the neo cabs). If you are talking about XS, S, M, and L, they are just different cab sized and tuning, with the S, M and L using the same drivers and switchable crossover, and the XS using the same drivers with a non-switchable crossover.
To further complicate things, some of the combo's have mid driver loaded cabs versus tweeter loaded cabs.
Actually, the way the cab lineup worked (at least as of a few months ago) was:
XS - 3-way rocker switch for the horn/tweeter, rear ported
S - 6 (7?) position switch for horn/tweeter, rear ported
M - 6 position switch for horn/tweeter, front ported
L - same as M I think.
S and M are different sounding cabs IME. Not sure how much of that is porting vs cab size. The older S cabs were front ported and evidently had a different sound (tighter low, more aggressive) than the newer ones.
They evidently have switched to ceramic drivers and gone from metal grill to cloth, and I don't know if they changed the other aspects of the box.
Pre your comment, yes, the rear ported s212 sounds quite a bit different than the original (not due to the port placement, of course, but rather that they tuned it to go a bit lower and softened the upper mids a bit. I greatly preferred the original (I had both and sent the newer one back).
I tried the newer S212 twice and didn't dig it. The M212 otoh was a great sounding cab but I decided that I wanted to go back to a more modular setup (pair of 112s). Your old original S212 was floating around awhile back but I didn't snatch it up.
Both Glenn and Donovan are great to deal with.
kjung or Nostatic...do either of you have experience with the L215?