what do yuo think about G-K MB150E-III head ?

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Seva, Jan 20, 2006.

  1. Seva


    Jan 20, 2006
    what do you think about G-K MB head ?

    whats better MB150E-III or 400RB-IV ?

    Thanks .

    p.s. i use MusicMan StingRay =))
  2. while im not familiar with the MB.... i do own the 400RB-IV.
    Its a great head imo. Plenty of punch, nice and growly too. One thing people dont like about them is they think they sound sterile... but i think thats what most GK heads are like. With some EQing, and a twist of the boost pot, you will get decent growl and punch. I will be adding an aphex bass exciter to my signal chain soon to add just a smidgeon more warmth and depth.

    And its really powerful for what its rated.....

  3. Seva


    Jan 20, 2006
    thanks, man !!!

    i'll try both heads =)))))
  4. I had the mb150II head a while back... the good news... really small, light, great EQ and DI options, etc.

    The bad news... only 100 watts into 8ohms and 150 into 4ohms.... really not enough for even moderate gigs IMO. The combo is awesome though as a practice amp and even for small gigs.... the whole thing is only about 25 pounds. It's pretty 'mid sounding', due to the single 12 in that small sealed cab, but for certain types of gigs (jazz trio playing electric), it sound surprisingly good to me, and I've heard some very nice DB sounds using one.
  5. yesh... the 400rb is 280 watts... i think thats at 8 ohms?...
  6. ps. - it sounds alot louder then that. and soooo much head room. Playing my crappy behringer head at a volume to keep up with drummer and 2 guitars it would clip constantly.

    I havent clipped my 400rb yet
  7. fdeck

    fdeck Supporting Member Commercial User

    Mar 20, 2004
    Madison WI
    HPF Technology LLC
    I am happy with my MB150E combo driving an efficient extension speaker, and I assume that the head has the same sound. These are all great amps that we are talking about here.

    Don't overlook the Backline 600 head, and don't be put off by the low price. It appears to be a minor re-packaging of the 400RB-III design. Read my geeky review at:

  8. fdeck

    fdeck Supporting Member Commercial User

    Mar 20, 2004
    Madison WI
    HPF Technology LLC
    The 400RB-IV is 280 W into 4 Ohms. Note that www.gallien.com has owners manuals for all of their current and past products.
  9. 4 ohms is one cab, right?
    so if i ran a second cab.... what would it be? :meh:
  10. Typically, cabs are 8ohms... so two would be 4ohms. However, some manufacturers have 4ohm options for a single cab with two or more speakers (sometimes even single speaker cabs).
  11. bmc


    Nov 15, 2003
    I had one for a couple of years. It's a very good head. Lots of eq possibilities. I used it for a long time as a preamp only with no speakers attached. Worked fine.

    I powered a Peavey 210TX at 4ohms and it was good set up.
  12. doctec


    Mar 22, 2005
    Beaverton, Oregon
  13. Eric Cioe

    Eric Cioe

    Jun 4, 2001
    Missoula, MT
    Perhaps I can help, as I own both of these amps' predecessors.

    I have a GK 200MB in my dorm room. It's an older combo version of what you're talking about. I also have a GK 400RB-III head.

    I've played both as just heads through my SWR WM1x15 and Avatar 2x10 cabinets. The RB definately has a bit more power (i.e., I've used the RB into one 8 ohm cab, for 150 watts (though I think the power rating is higher now) at band practice with a loud drummer and a Marshall (albiet a bit dimmed)), but the little MB combo is also very, very cool. With its internal speaker, it didn't cut it at band practice, but disabling the internal and using a 1x15 or 2x10 yielded good results, although not as loud as the RB. At 4 ohms on the RB, with the 2x10 and 1x15, I'd probably use it at any gig. Even though 240 watts (the old rating at 4 ohms) isn't that much, with fairly efficient cabinets and a decent eq (i.e., not smily), it was plenty loud for any purpose with that band. With the MB combo's internal speaker on and the 2x10 underneath it, it was also pretty loud, though not as much so as the RB.

    But to me, there is a huge difference in tone between the two. The MB seems to be voiced a bit darker, and not just due to the internal speaker - plugged into a cab that I normally use the RB with, there was a pronounced difference in tone. The small sealed cabinet also makes the combo much, much darker. I'm thinking that perhaps the MB was voiced to suit an upright, whereas the RB is definately an electric-based amp (though both sound good with both types of basses).

    I really like both amps, but they are totally different animals. I guess if I had to pick one, I'd go with the RB, just for the extra power. However, the MB combo is a godsend in a dormroom in an urban area (I'm 6 miles south of Chicago's Loop). I think that if you were going to get the MB, I would get the combo. It's a lot more versatile than most combos are (you can disable the internal speaker and use it as a head, and it still weighs only a bit more than the RB heads).

    Hope this helps!
  14. fdeck

    fdeck Supporting Member Commercial User

    Mar 20, 2004
    Madison WI
    HPF Technology LLC