• 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.

Your favorite light amp

#81
For me, it's a toss up between the Genz Benz Shuttle 6.2, and the MarkBass F500, both of which are no longer in production. You can find the GB in the classifieds often; the F500, not so much. Both amps have a nice, low mid thump that I really like, the F500 a tad more than the 6.2. I have tried most of the 5lb, 500 watt lightweight amps out there, but these two get high marks from me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: armybass
#82
Lindex said:
Size is 255 x 80 x 300 mm WxHxD, weight 3.0 Kg
They don't give the RMS value as they think it has no relevance in a typical bass application, all they give is 2000W peak.
Click to expand...
TRANSLATION: High numbers sell, so we'll give the highest number under the most atypical scenario that we can.

I call it "BS."
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbelue, btmpancake, figuredbass and 1 other person
#85
JimmyM said:
TRANSLATION: High numbers sell, so we'll give the highest number under the most atypical scenario that we can.

I call it "BS."
Click to expand...

I guess it's more the combination of high Watt numbers with low dollar numbers that makes people get the first attention.

Yes, it leaves a bad taste for a knowing buyer.
While RMS values may be better for comparison between amps, they don't really seem to tell too much about how capable the amp is when it comes to reproducing a typical bass signal.
Therefore I can kinda understand why Bugera/Behringer gives the peak value.
1st of course it reads better, but second, it gives you a bit of a hint of how dynamic the amp is, how well it can handle short transient signals.

But leaving the whole Watt thing aside - the Veyrons are quite powerful, great sounding amps that also seem to be built quite well.

A big bang for the buck even without Kilowatts, so to speak.

I have yet to find someone who finds that thing being built cheapishly or sounding weak and crappy.

At least I can say that everyone who has seen or heard mine was at least positively surprised, if not impressed.
All price related of course.
You can for sure buy better amps for more money, especially if you replace Watts with Dollars and vice versa.
While this amp gives you 2000W for 400$ the better one might give you 400W for 2000$.

I guess 95% of the people out there would call this a bad deal... :D;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyM
#86
Lindex said:
While RMS values may be better for comparison between amps, they don't really seem to tell too much about how capable the amp is when it comes to reproducing a typical bass signal.
...
1st of course it reads better, but second, it gives you a bit of a hint of how dynamic the amp is, how well it can handle short transient signals.
Click to expand...

But there's already a common, universal set of specifications that convey that info more or less objectively: RMS watts plus Dynamic Headroom (measured in dB) have been employed by the power amp industry for decades. This just comes across as a manufacturer being intentionally evasive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyM
#87
Well, first off, the Prodigy is my favorite "light" tube amp. I don't generally care for tube amps, but this one tastes good to my ears. My favorite solid state light amp is either the GK MB800 or MB Fusion 800. They're very similar. Clean, accurate, good EQ centers, and powerful. I don't need to move knobs much to get a tone I like and one that sits well in the mix. I played the Fusion at rehearsal today, and the drummer's girlfriend said, "You sound good." Well, alrighty then.

I also like my Glockenklang Blue Soul. It's a hefty 11 pounds, but I can still lift that. It's another amp that sounds great without a bunch of EQ twiddling. I'm not too fond of the three-octave gap between high mid and treble, but I don't futz with the EQ that much anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: punchdrunk
#88
Bob_Ross said:
But there's already a common, universal set of specifications that convey that info more or less objectively: RMS watts plus Dynamic Headroom (measured in dB) have been employed by the power amp industry for decades. This just comes across as a manufacturer being intentionally evasive.
Click to expand...
True - but more and more manufacturers seem to be leaving that path, besides Behringer you can see TC Electronics or EBS going the same way.
 
#89
Bob_Ross said:
But there's already a common, universal set of specifications that convey that info more or less objectively: RMS watts plus Dynamic Headroom (measured in dB) have been employed by the power amp industry for decades. This just comes across as a manufacturer being intentionally evasive.
Click to expand...

Given how I use my amps, the peak rating actually makes sense to me. My amplification's ability to handle big peaks is more important that running something more continuous like recorded music through it. And my Veyron Mosfet is capable of so much more clean volume than I need that for me, a very experienced buyer, it's a non-issue. I understand why some get hung up on this stuff... I rely on checking things out for myself. I've gigged mine for around four months... it's a proven entity for me. And it's been pushed, mainly demoing how silly it can get.

One of my favorite older amps is the Euphonic Audio Iamp 350. It was rated at 350w but also listed that it could do 1200 peak. Its performance reflected that... I've had some pretty inefficient cabs that it drove with ease while other amps rated as much as 900w RMS couldn't. Those amps used the universal rating but they dont tell the entire story. Every 350w amp isn't required to handle far bigger peaks.

My favorite light head remains my Genz Benz Shuttle 9.0. Because for me it just works. I think it's under five lbs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Afc70 and Lindex
#90
This has been good for me for several years with PA support but fine also in small to medium venues.
3737BA13-9E86-43A6-9A67-468DA6FB616F_zpsszkg0rvk.jpg
 
#93
I have used the TH500, Markbass F500 and GK MB800. I still have the GK do to the higher wattage but probably preferred the Markbass just a tad but really like all three. Just got a GB Shuttle 6.2. Looking forward to giving it a good run through on my gig this weekend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jnewmark
#94
I have two class D amps, a TH500 and a GB Shuttle 6.2. The GB is more modern and it is punchy and loud enough, the TH is more vintage and is also loud enough. I use both for different applications and when one is the main one, they other is the backup... They both are great with my Berg CN212 but I actually prefer the GB with my Accugroove Tri210L, together they sing...
 
  • Like
Reactions: armybass
#98
Slpbass81 said:
I have read previous posts about this but figured I would get an updated opinion. After years of saying lifting an Ampeg SVT-CL is no big deal I finally blew my back lifting it while twisting. This is the first time I will consider leaving the tubes at home and bring a smaller/lighter solid state. The only tube amp I am keeping in the conversation is the Mesa Prodigy because of how light it is for an all tube. But it may lack the booty I'm used to. Let me know what you guys like and why.
Click to expand...
After I developed back issues, I sold all my heavy stuff and bought Bergantino CN112's and a GK MB 800. I like them a lot. I've added an MBF 800, and I'm up to three CN112's. Very scalable, and very easy on the back!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back