Darkglass B7K Ultra vs Microtubes 200 amp

[Hollowway]

I couldn’t find any comparisons of these two, so I’m hoping someone has some experience with them. I want to get something for headphone practice, and i was going to buy the B7K Ultra, given that it has a cab sim and headphone out. But then I saw that the MT 200 is essentially the same price. Is there some functionality, in terms of EQ, switches, etc, that I would be missing if I just did the actual amp? I want something that can range from clean to distorted, and it looks like both do that. The pedal has a lot more knobs, though, which is why I’m wondering.

 

[HeHasTheJazzHands]

Yeah you want the B7K. Significantly more tweakability. From what I can tell from the 200 it's just a B3K in a box with a 4-band EQ and blend. Plus a 200-watt power amp you probably won't use lol

EDIT: btw yeah, you're missing some cool stuff by going with the amp. The pre-EQ grunt and attack switches, the semi-parametric mid controls, footswitchable distortion, and the sole reason I'd get this over the 200; IR loading capabilities.

 

[CTID]

Another vote for the B7K, personally. The pedal has more voicing options for you to tweak it exactly how you want it to sound, and agreed with JazzHands that 200W is probably less than you're going to want for bass anyway.

 

[Hollowway]

Thanks, fellas. Looks like I’m getting a B7K!

 

[Hollowway]

I just posted in another thread, but if I were to get a V1 of this pedal (or a different DG pedal) anyone have a suggestion for a way I could practice through headphones? I’m guessing a small IR pedal and likely something to amplify the signal to the headphones?

 

[Grindspine]

I really liked my B7K Ultra, but found it easy to lose "the sound" with a few tweaks. I ended up replacing it with a Microtubes 900 v2 and nail exactly the sound I want every time I turn it on. I find the graphic EQ way easier to tweak vs the 4 band EQ with the extra switches. The built-in compressor on the 900 v2 has also all-but-replaced my Hyperluminal.

Add to speaker compensated output with the DarkGlass Suite adjustments (Forresters 4x10 is my main recording sound) and a 900 watt power section at under 10 lbs, and the 900 v2 was a clear winner for me.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

I just posted in another thread, but if I were to get a V1 of this pedal (or a different DG pedal) anyone have a suggestion for a way I could practice through headphones? I’m guessing a small IR pedal and likely something to amplify the signal to the headphones?

The Darkglass Element is a basic speaker sim and headphone amp... plus some other stuff.

But, it'd probably be cheaper to buy a used B7KU if that's the way you want to go.

 

[HeHasTheJazzHands]

I just posted in another thread, but if I were to get a V1 of this pedal (or a different DG pedal) anyone have a suggestion for a way I could practice through headphones? I’m guessing a small IR pedal and likely something to amplify the signal to the headphones?

For the price of an old B7K + IR loader used, you can just get a used B7K Ultra

 

[Grindspine]

Also, the Microtubes 500 and 900 v2 amps do have the VMT distortion included. With the Microtubes 500 v2 being in the $800 range, it is a solid buy.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Micro500V2--darkglass-microtubes-500-v2-500-watt-bass-head

If you want to stick with a pedal-based format, the Microtubes Infinity will give you more versatility with B3k and VMT distortions, multiband distortion (like the Microtubes X) and multiband compression along with the Darkglass Suite and cab sims for around $600.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MTInfinity--darkglass-microtubes-infinity-preamp-distortion-audio-interface

It's weird that I used to work with this guy. This video really emphasizes the differences between the Adam, Alpha-Omega Photon, VMT, B3k, and X style distortions. It's nice that even listening to the full gambit, that I am still reallly happy with my choice on the 900 v2 since the B3k and VMT distortions are my favorites.

 

[Hollowway]

Also, the Microtubes 500 and 900 v2 amps do have the VMT distortion included. With the Microtubes 500 v2 being in the $800 range, it is a solid buy.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Micro500V2--darkglass-microtubes-500-v2-500-watt-bass-head

If you want to stick with a pedal-based format, the Microtubes Infinity will give you more versatility with B3k and VMT distortions, multiband distortion (like the Microtubes X) and multiband compression along with the Darkglass Suite and cab sims for around $600.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MTInfinity--darkglass-microtubes-infinity-preamp-distortion-audio-interface

It's weird that I used to work with this guy. This video really emphasizes the differences between the Adam, Alpha-Omega Photon, VMT, B3k, and X style distortions. It's nice that even listening to the full gambit, that I am still reallly happy with my choice on the 900 v2 since the B3k and VMT distortions are my favorites.

I’ll have to check that video out - I missed that when I was researching all this. I do have to be careful I don’t start with wanting a good practice solution, and wind up replacing my whole amp, but maybe I will!

 

[Grindspine]

I’ll have to check that video out - I missed that when I was researching all this. I do have to be careful I don’t start with wanting a good practice solution, and wind up replacing my whole amp, but maybe I will!

I mean, I am not trying to convince you to replace a whole rig, buuut... that's pretty much what I did. For practice, jamming, or if I actually had to perform, my 900 v2 and Mesa cabs would cover everything I need to do. For recording, the cab IR on the v900 gets an awesome recording sound. I have only used the heaphone outs a few times, but that amp is completely loaded.

I might have been able to get away with the 500 v2, but I typically opt for having more headroom if available. The only other appreciable difference between the 500 and 900 is that the 900 has an additional gain knob before the EQ that is useful for adding a bit of grit to the cleans or fine-tuning overall output without pushing EQ bands.

 

[Hollowway]

I mean, I am not trying to convince you to replace a whole rig, buuut... that's pretty much what I did. For practice, jamming, or if I actually had to perform, my 900 v2 and Mesa cabs would cover everything I need to do. For recording, the cab IR on the v900 gets an awesome recording sound. I have only used the heaphone outs a few times, but that amp is completely loaded.

I might have been able to get away with the 500 v2, but I typically opt for having more headroom if available. The only other appreciable difference between the 500 and 900 is that the 900 has an additional gain knob before the EQ that is useful for adding a bit of grit to the cleans or fine-tuning overall output without pushing EQ bands.

View attachment 144125

Man, that is a pretty sweet rig. I may have to get another cab, too.

 

[Hollowway]

I mean, I am not trying to convince you to replace a whole rig, buuut... that's pretty much what I did. For practice, jamming, or if I actually had to perform, my 900 v2 and Mesa cabs would cover everything I need to do. For recording, the cab IR on the v900 gets an awesome recording sound. I have only used the heaphone outs a few times, but that amp is completely loaded.

I might have been able to get away with the 500 v2, but I typically opt for having more headroom if available. The only other appreciable difference between the 500 and 900 is that the 900 has an additional gain knob before the EQ that is useful for adding a bit of grit to the cleans or fine-tuning overall output without pushing EQ bands.

View attachment 144125

Ok, now I’m officially down the rabbit hole: 900 (or 500) vs Exponent. What is the difference? I’m seeing a lot of differences posted about MIDI, etc, but in terms of tones, I’m not sure what there is.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

Ok, now I’m officially down the rabbit hole: 900 (or 500) vs Exponent. What is the difference? I’m seeing a lot of differences posted about MIDI, etc, but in terms of tones, I’m not sure what there is.

The Exponent is basically a clean amp with built in digital effects.

I'm pretty sure the the Microtubes amps use an analogue distortion path. It's why the Microtubes has no presets.

 

[Crungy]

IIRC I don't think you can get too crazy with the Exponent using their different distortions/effects since the processor is not very powerful. I've also read making changes with the app isn't the most reliable as well, though I think that was more of an issue with android devices.

 

[Grindspine]

In the video that I posted, Spunde from Sweetwater goes over some of the distortions.

DarkGlass amps basically have the following; cleans to pushed cleans, Vintage Microtubes (VMT), which is inspired by a bit of the old Ampeg SVT sound, B3k/B7k, which is the modern, aggressive bass distortion blended with cleans to keep low-end intact, Alpha-Omega Photon, which is a blendable mix of overdrive and fuzz, and X, which is a modified B3k distortion using a crossover to keep only higher frequencies distorting and all low frequencies completely clean.

The biggest thing is going to be listening to all of those different distortion modes to figure what you want to hear for your sound.

The 500 and 900 share most of the same features on the front end and sounds available. The 500 lacks a second speaker output, which wouldn't keep someone from using a second cabinet as long as the first cab had a parallel output. The 500 lacks the secondary gain control before the EQ (global gain that can be used independently of the B3k/VMT microtubes circuits), The 900 has a cooling fan, MIDI, a 2 ohm mode, pre and post DI outputs that the 500 lacks.

The 900 comes with the Intelligent footswitch (clean / distortion selection, mute if held for 3 seconds). The 500 has a footswitch jack, but doesn't include the switch. The 200 lacks any footswitch option. The 200 also lacks the Vintage Microtubes alternate distortion sound, which is a bit more mid-heavy and useful for bass standing out more in a mix compared to the B3k rhythm.

The B7k Ultra will give you the B3k sound, a footswitchable EQed direct clean, and cab sim.

The Microtubes 500 will be way easier to dial and give you way more options and flexibility. The 900 might be overkill for your situation while the Microtubes 200 is just barebones.

Definitely listen to samples between the Alpha-Omega 500 and Microtubes 500 before choosing between them though.

 

[Hollowway]

In the video that I posted, Spunde from Sweetwater goes over some of the distortions.

DarkGlass amps basically have the following; cleans to pushed cleans, Vintage Microtubes (VMT), which is inspired by a bit of the old Ampeg SVT sound, B3k/B7k, which is the modern, aggressive bass distortion blended with cleans to keep low-end intact, Alpha-Omega Photon, which is a blendable mix of overdrive and fuzz, and X, which is a modified B3k distortion using a crossover to keep only higher frequencies distorting and all low frequencies completely clean.

The biggest thing is going to be listening to all of those different distortion modes to figure what you want to hear for your sound.

The 500 and 900 share most of the same features on the front end and sounds available. The 500 lacks a second speaker output, which wouldn't keep someone from using a second cabinet as long as the first cab had a parallel output. The 500 lacks the secondary gain control before the EQ (global gain that can be used independently of the B3k/VMT microtubes circuits), The 900 has a cooling fan, MIDI, a 2 ohm mode, pre and post DI outputs that the 500 lacks.

The 900 comes with the Intelligent footswitch (clean / distortion selection, mute if held for 3 seconds). The 500 has a footswitch jack, but doesn't include the switch. The 200 lacks any footswitch option. The 200 also lacks the Vintage Microtubes alternate distortion sound, which is a bit more mid-heavy and useful for bass standing out more in a mix compared to the B3k rhythm.

The B7k Ultra will give you the B3k sound, a footswitchable EQed direct clean, and cab sim.

The Microtubes 500 will be way easier to dial and give you way more options and flexibility. The 900 might be overkill for your situation while the Microtubes 200 is just barebones.

Definitely listen to samples between the Alpha-Omega 500 and Microtubes 500 before choosing between them though.

Thanks for that write up! I think the B3k sound is the one I’m after, as I feel the AO is just TOO fuzzy. The X is interesting, though, so I’ll have to watch that video more carefully. I like the cranky, bright sound to a bass, like punk, pop-punk, and Nolly, but the AO demos sound just like a sloppy mess to me.

 

[Grindspine]

Yeah, the fuzz / od blend on the alpha/omega is a bit much for me. The X is quite nice, but the clean / high gain blend (opposed to crossover blending) on the B3k / B7k suits my needs really well. Between the B3k and VMT, the B3k will be more aggressive and scooped while the VMT is a bit more mellow, but with more midrange punch. The VMT and B7K Ultra pedals are both very worthy contenders. I still advocate that the Microtubes 500 v2 is essentially a simplified Super Symmetry compressor, VMT pedal, B3k pedal, Element cabinet sim, and power section all rolled into a single package.

 

[Screamingdaisy]

The AO more a scooped distortion (Alpha) and mid heavy distortion (Omega), and you can blend both with the clean. The mid heavy side is more along the lines of a Rat (IMO), but with better control over the low gain sounds. Most Darkglass demos tend to show their products with extreme settings, however dialled back it's pretty moderate as a distortion sound and can be fairly subtle. It's generally thicker sounding than the B7K.

Turning on the grunt switch feeds more low end into the distortion, which does make it sound a bit more like a fuzz. With the grunt off the low end stays cleaner with the distortion sound shifted up in frequency.

The B7K I consider a bit more natural sounding. I like it because it doesn't drastically alter the sound of my bass, but it gives that high mid harmonic pop that has it cut through the guitars when I turn it on. It can obviously be used fairly extremely, and examples of that are all over YouTube, but I tend to use it fairly subtly and wanted to mention that since that's harder to find on YouTube.

The B7K is my go-to distortion. I use the AO when I want something a bit thicker that takes over my sound more.

The X (to me) is less of a distortion pedal and more of an always on preamp. It sounds great, and it stacks well with other distortions put in front of it. That said, when it comes to an always on preamp I prefer a BDDI. Both are great, but the BDDI is a bit thicker/more old school.

 

[Hollowway]

The AO more a scooped distortion (Alpha) and mid heavy distortion (Omega), and you can blend both with the clean. The mid heavy side is more along the lines of a Rat (IMO), but with better control over the low gain sounds. Most Darkglass demos tend to show their products with extreme settings, however dialled back it's pretty moderate as a distortion sound and can be fairly subtle. It's generally thicker sounding than the B7K.

Turning on the grunt switch feeds more low end into the distortion, which does make it sound a bit more like a fuzz. With the grunt off the low end stays cleaner with the distortion sound shifted up in frequency.

The B7K I consider a bit more natural sounding. I like it because it doesn't drastically alter the sound of my bass, but it gives that high mid harmonic pop that has it cut through the guitars when I turn it on. It can obviously be used fairly extremely, and examples of that are all over YouTube, but I tend to use it fairly subtly and wanted to mention that since that's harder to find on YouTube.

The B7K is my go-to distortion. I use the AO when I want something a bit thicker that takes over my sound more.

The X (to me) is less of a distortion pedal and more of an always on preamp. It sounds great, and it stacks well with other distortions put in front of it. That said, when it comes to an always on preamp I prefer a BDDI. Both are great, but the BDDI is a bit thicker/more old school.

You know, I looked at the Sansamp stuff, but they don't have headphone outs, so I'd still need to get a little mixer or something to use it. What I'm trying to do is use this as a practice rig. But I can get a whole new rig, too, so long as I can still use it with just headphones.

I should also probably consider just buying an updated interface and doing a DG plugin. 99% of my practice is done sitting in front of my computer.