GK800RB vsGK700RB

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 3:21 pm

What are the major differences between these two,the 700 seems to be more powerful??

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 4:15 pm

As far as I can tell, the 700 is 450W and the 800 is 400W. Plus the 700 is more updated curcuit-wise and case-wise. The 800 uses the older design case. I use the 400RBIII and love it. Plenty loud enough, if using any kind of PA.

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 6:02 am

The 800RB is actually a bi-amp setup. It has two power amps, a 300W for the low end, and a 100W for the top end. You can also run it full range (without the crossover) and play through either, or both power amps.

I owned one of these from '86 until just last year when I sold it.

Nice amps, but after a while I started to dislike the EQ.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 6:22 am

The biamp setup always seemed a little odd to me......isn't the high-end for just the tweeter as opposed to say 10" speakers as the high with 15" for the lows? Never really saw the point to that setup when most cabinets with tweeters (horn/dome) tend to have an attenuator(?).

GK heads tend to provide great clean tone.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 6:49 am

Mine actually gets pretty snarly once it heats up, is played loud for a set or so. I almost have to back off of the drive because it gets a nice little distortion going.
And I have never understood the bi-amp thing either.

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 6:56 am

The point of b-amping is that each amp works more efficiently/cleaner because it handles a smaller range of frequencies.

In theory 2 5W full range amps together is 10W, but two 5W amps run in a bi-amp setup is more like 20W+.

You can use the high end amp for anything. My setup was 2 12"s for the high end, and 1 18" for the lows (GK cabs).

When you switched it from full range to bi-amp, the sound got much cleaner and fuller.

later on I used a Mesa 4X10 cab with tweeter for the high end and a 15" for the lows.

The newer GK amps/cabs have the wiring setup for bi-amp, and I think the high amp goes to the tweeter. But the 800RB just has two power amps and a crossover.

bassman_bob · Post by **bassman_bob** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:29 am

I'll add my 2 cents. I don't know the electronics of these heads; I'll leave that to those who do. However, I played thru both, in my house, with the same 4001. Hands down the 800's sound was far superior to the 700. The 800 had more range to my ears, lower lows and crisp highs. The 700 was blah, sterile in sound, more mid range. I returned the 700.

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:59 am

The 800RB definitely has its own sound. That was one of the reasons I sold mine. After a while I felt couldn't get anything else but that sound. It's a good sound, but I had played through a Hartke head at someone's house (connected to a Yamaha PA cabinet), and felt it was a more accurate sound... sounded like my bass direct. I thought, "wow, there's my sound!" My Trace is close, but I keep thinking I want to pick up a Hartke.

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:01 am

Never mind I decided to go with an Ampeg pro 3 or 4.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:28 pm

LOL! OK then!

highway_star · Post by **highway_star** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:02 pm

I just bought the 700RBII and 410RBH cabinet. I like the growl and it still has some low-end articulation to it. It's not as warm as an Ampeg, but it suits the style of music my band is playing.

BTW, I have an Ampeg SVT-3 head and SVT410HLF cab for sale.

henry5 · Post by **henry5** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 6:40 am

Ron, I'm taking delivery of my 2nd Aguilar tomorrow, and thanks for the previous advice. Since getting the results of my MRI recently, I think my back is going to thank me for it...plus it means I can sell my combo and look for another bass (or a spare head).

David, I've always thought the Hartke gear was good, although I haven't always been able to get a great Rick sound through it (my 72 being the main culprit). I know some find it too bright/metallic, but I just feel it has nice amount of aggression. And great for the money.

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:02 am

Shaun, I'm not playing a Rick at the moment, and haven't tried one with a Hartke, so you might be right. My main bass has a pretty full range sound, and I usually end up rolling some of the low end off to get a more open sound, so the Hartke gave me exactly what I have been looking for.

I suppose with a very bright bass they might be a bit too bright... but that's what tone controls are for.

What I liked about them was the response was very quick, and they are very punchy... the exact opposite of a tube amp I suppose. It wasn't at all harsh sounding, but neither is my bass.

I actually didn't want to like the Hartke... I'm not sure why though! I always liked the speakers.