GM40 v GM36

As an ex owner of a GM36, I've been following the release of the GM40, plus reviews and reactions.

I have seen one or two comparison vids on YouTube.

Has anyone had experience of ownership of both? I sold the GM36 because I was unhappy with the tone and unable to get what I wanted live. Hughes and Kettner have promoted the GM40 as having whole new circuitry and improved tone. Some reviews agree, some don't.

Always liked the concept of the product but I gave up trying to get it to sound how I wanted.

Opinions from anyone with experience of both?

Stapletongas wrote:As an ex owner of a GM36, I've been following the release of the GM40, plus reviews and reactions.

I have seen one or two comparison vids on YouTube.

Has anyone had experience of ownership of both? I sold the GM36 because I was unhappy with the tone and unable to get what I wanted live. Hughes and Kettner have promoted the GM40 as having whole new circuitry and improved tone. Some reviews agree, some don't.

Always liked the concept of the product but I gave up trying to get it to sound how I wanted.

Opinions from anyone with experience of both?

I have both. I've gigged the GM36 for over two years now, and the GMD40 is new to me, with a few gigs under it's belt.

First off, the Red Box is vastly superior on the 40 over the 36. I'm much happier with the sounds of the new cabinet emulation in it. It actually sounds like there is some. I never liked the GM36 DI too much. I keep mine set on Vintage, large cab, and mic level. Playing it through headphones at night no longer needs an IR IMHO.

At volume, on stage, through my Recto 2x12...I find the amp is much warmer and organic sounding. It seems to have less gain than the GM36, which is what I'm happy about. The clean seems to have a little less headroom, but it's not an issue for me. It still has plenty. The Crunch channel is much better for what I use it for. I'm a professional musician who plays a lot of wedding and corporate stuff. I do a lot of funk/dance music, with a few rock songs. I wanted better low gain tones, and the new Crunch channel sounds bolder. The last one was a little too bright, and lacked a solid low end when the gain was at about 10 o'clock, but got better as it went up. The new one's just bigger overall to me. The Lead channel also seems to not be as bright and bitey. It's the channel that's the most similar to the GM36, but you can still hear a difference...and it's a good one. The Ultra channel has changed the most to me. It's far more modern metal sounding. It's just massive! I use it the least, but it's huge and tight. Nice and crunchy, and delivers on the nice tight chugging riffs I like to throw out occasionally.

All in all, for me...it was a good upgrade. I'm glad I finally got one. I was unsure after watching a video of the two stacked on each other, and A/Bed. I didn't think I wanted one after that. However I got one, and found that video didn't do it much justice IMO. It may be worth trying out, as the differences aren't that small.

Hope this helps!

Cheers, that's useful. I may have to find a dealer.

GM40 on the way, see how I get on with this one!

Suscribed ,bish0p34,are you talking about more "Classic Rock" type tones?(I hate using that term,but don't know how else to describe it)rather than more modern "High Gain"tones?,nothing wrong with High Gain or Metal ,I just don't/can't use it & every dem I've seen/heard is using Metal tones.
I'm really interested in a GM40,but I can't find one to Dem,i've tried a GM36,in a limited Dem,but it didn't give me the depth of "Tone",i look for,so subscribed to the thread after your comments on both Amps.Cheers.

Just got mine, did it without testing, but the deal was just too good

This YouTube review is a fair representation https://youtu.be/7m_DjSqyBxE

When I sold my GM36, the guy brought his Orange 2x12 cab loaded with vintage 30's to test it. I was staggered by how much better it sounded and quite surprised that vintage 30's were such a good match. Then again the H&K 2x12 has them too. Cab choice is really crucial.

Hughes & Kettner GrandMeister Comparison - GM36 vs. GM Deluxe 40

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyZG9GF5T90

@Graham G - if you just want some light crunch tones, I think the GM40 can do that no problem. Check out these clips I made with the GM40, the first sound I use is exactly that:

www.soundcloud.com/jonnynonsense/sets/amp-tests

First impressions having only used the GM40 at room volume is that H&K's claim that the pre amp has been redesigned and is a different beast from the GM36 appears to have some substance.

Tone is hard to describe as always, but this thing appears to have more body, it is fuller and a better balance and nicer mid range. I have swapped out the Chinese tubes for JJ's, ECC83mg's in the preamp section. Getting much better classic rock tones and enjoying it.

Lately I've been using a Mesa Mark 5:25 which was a big improvement on the GM36 sonically. Going from the Mark 5:25 to the GM40 is somewhat more seamless, not the same but equally pleasing on the ears.

Acid test is a gig, next one in two weeks. Update then.

Still subscribed thanks,it's beginning to sound like a really need to track down a GM40 on dem

Graham G wrote:Suscribed ,bish0p34,are you talking about more "Classic Rock" type tones?(I hate using that term,but don't know how else to describe it)rather than more modern "High Gain"tones?,nothing wrong with High Gain or Metal ,I just don't/can't use it & every dem I've seen/heard is using Metal tones.
I'm really interested in a GM40,but I can't find one to Dem,i've tried a GM36,in a limited Dem,but it didn't give me the depth of "Tone",i look for,so subscribed to the thread after your comments on both Amps.Cheers.

Yep. Classic rock tones are about what I was going for. I play a lot of lower gain stuff as well, so it was important for me to have them.

Stapletongas wrote:First impressions having only used the GM40 at room volume is that H&K's claim that the pre amp has been redesigned and is a different beast from the GM36 appears to have some substance.

Tone is hard to describe as always, but this thing appears to have more body, it is fuller and a better balance and nicer mid range. I have swapped out the Chinese tubes for JJ's, ECC83mg's in the preamp section. Getting much better classic rock tones and enjoying it.

Lately I've been using a Mesa Mark 5:25 which was a big improvement on the GM36 sonically. Going from the Mark 5:25 to the GM40 is somewhat more seamless, not the same but equally pleasing on the ears.

Acid test is a gig, next one in two weeks. Update then.

I'm curious to know your thoughts after the gig. I love mine, and it's gotten rave reviews from my band mates and sound guys.

Well, finally used the GM40 with a band. What a big fat sound!
Played it through a Marshall single 12 cab, Les Paul, rock, blues, R&B.
Suffice to say I’ll be gigging it this week.
This amp is a different beast from the GM36

Stapletongas wrote:Well, finally used the GM40 with a band. What a big fat sound!
Played it through a Marshall single 12 cab, Les Paul, rock, blues, R&B.
Suffice to say I’ll be gigging it this week.
This amp is a different beast from the GM36

Absolutely it is!

I still love my GM36, but I don't use it as any-thing more than a backup these days. The 40 sounds so much fatter.

Darn, darn, darn, diddley darn, darn, diddley iddley darn...........

With what I had heard online on YouTube I was pretty much convinced it wasn't too different and I was hoping you wouldn't say that. If only I could get the schematics for it and see how it is different to the GM36 there may be a chance I could mod the 36 to become a little like its younger brother. Oh well, keep dreaming. Enjoy it while you can, the GM45 will be on its way soon and then you two will see what it feels like.



(I suppose I've always got the Marshall anyway. )

This made me think again...plus an absolute bargain on eBay!

https://youtu.be/7m_DjSqyBxE

bordonbert wrote:Darn, darn, darn, diddley darn, darn, diddley iddley darn...........  

With what I had heard online on YouTube I was pretty much convinced it wasn't too different and I was hoping you wouldn't say that.  If only I could get the schematics for it and see how it is different to the GM36 there may be a chance I could mod the 36 to become a little like its younger brother.  Oh well, keep dreaming.  Enjoy it while you can, the GM45 will be on its way soon and then you two will see what it feels like.  



(I suppose I've always got the Marshall anyway. )

The first comparison video I watched actually put my decision on hold. By a chance of fortune, my TM36 was stolen, and I got an insurance payout that was more than I paid for it. Bought the GMD40.

Boy, the person shooting the video I watched couldn't dial it in. Definitely user error. It's much fatter, has less gain overall, and gets much better low gain tones on the Crunch channel (what I really wanted). The Red Box is in another league over the GM36 as well.

I'm absolutely satisfied with the upgrade.

The GM36 definitely has more midrange boost to it. That worked great for me when playing high-gain stuff as it cut right through the mix, but not otherwise. The GMD40 is much much better in this regard, and I can always add mids back via other means. The GMD40's onboard EQ doesn't boost or cut very much, so I use pedals to achieve that.

At the risk of going off topic, I have to ask if anyone has compared the GMD40 to a Mesa Mark V? Fell in love with the high gain sounds of the latter, but if I can dial that in on the GMD40, no need to bother, in fact would prefer not to because of the GMD40's versatility via MIDI.

Done another rehearsal with the GM40 and gigging it tomorrow. Doing rock, blues and old school R&B and it’s passing with flying colours so far.

I have used a Mesa Boogie Mark 5:25, so I’ll do a comparison.

Stapletongas wrote:I have used a Mesa Boogie Mark 5:25, so I’ll do a comparison.

Hi, new member here. Sorry for the necrobump, but I was wondering if you or anyone else has done a comparison of any Mark V and a GM40. I've been scouring the internet for this to no avail.

I just ordered a GM40 this week and am really excited to start playing it. I plan to use it primarily through redbox into my DAW and IR loader. It was a really tough choice between the Grandmeister and a used Mark V 35 that was available locally for a relatively close price. Of course, I'd still need to get a decent loadbox+DI since Mesa's cabclone is complete trash, imo.

If there's any evidence of anyone coming close to the raspy high gain bark of a Mark series through a GM40 (whether miked up or through any IR combo), then I will truly have found my Holy Grail amp.

Okay, here's an update I'm copying and pasting from the same question I posted on Gearslutz. Heard nothing but crickets there, so I answered my own question.


...I got to try the Mark out in Guitar Center, so he's the answer for anyone else who might come along with the same question one day.

The Grandmeister 40 has more gain and nicer gain than the previous GM and other amps in the tubemeister series. However, it's not a Mark. However, some really nice tones can be had by miking up or playing via the redbox out through good IRs. Personally, I like the GM's clean channel more than the Mark. They both respond very nicely.

With high gain tones, the GM40 starts to sound more bubbly. I've seen people elsewhere complain about fizz, maybe because they don't understand how the presence knob works. On the Grandmeister, the presence at 10 is unbearable. Dial it back, and you get much nicer high gain, but it's not as tight as the mark. However, the noise gate is really, really good on the Grandmeister. It might be more responsive and transparent than my Decimator 2. Turn that up and you can still pull off tight modern metal or djenty stuff. Keep the gain below 5, and the "bubbly" qualities are not as apparent.

However, the Mark still has its unique middy rasp that many people love so much, and I do not see any way to replicate this with the GM40. They are of course two completely different amps, but between the Mark V:25 and the GM40, I'd say it's a toss up. They're both extremely versatile and enjoyable amps to play.

One thing that H&K could really benefit from is better demos, particularly ones using external IRs. The Grandmeister becomes so much better when you switch off the redbox cabinet emulation and load up some good impulses. On the other hand, the GM40's silent out implementation and cabinet sim COMPLETELY BLOWS AWAY Mesa's cabclone. Absolutely no comparison. If cabclone only had a means to switch off the speaker emulation or if the 25 and 35 had a post-power amp line out, that would level things again...


Of course, I didn't get to try the Mark V out at home under the exact same circumstances, so anyone with good experience with both, please feel free to confirm or deny what I said here.

Interesting stuff Koitsu.  A few thoughts if I may.

Koitsu wrote:some really nice tones can be had by miking up or playing via the redbox out through good IRs

Hmmm!  I would have rather looked at the performance and sound of the amp using a simple "The amp + speaker" setup initially.  When you start bringing in micing up and IRs you are taking things away from most normal users' experience and needs.  If it takes that to get a good sound out of the amp then it really isn't as universal as it should be.  Of course you definitely have that need yourself and it is relevant and interesting to hear about it but it isn't the primary fashion in which the amp will be used by most owners.  I do think it is a bit limited to try to sell the amp on the strength of its ability to be manipulated into sounding good by external means.

Koitsu wrote:The Grandmeister 40 has more gain and nicer gain than the previous GM and other amps in the tubemeister series.

I would accept your description of "nicer" but I cannot see why it needs more than the GM36?  I have always found that the GM36 has more gain on tap than could ever be used even by the Death metal contingent.  It is a little unfair, perhaps unrealistic is a better word, to try to compare models at the top of the chain with those lower down as there are definite compromises that have had to be made in the circuitry which lead to a less sophisticated sound.

You do openly refer to High Gain which is always my criticism of the whole GM/TM range.  They are aimed unashamedly at high gain players and leave out the flock of guys like me who want to be in that "bouncing around somewhere between gritty Clean and dirty Lead" sound.  The GM36 doesn't do classic rock tones well, (no, I mean "real" classic rock, late '60s through to late '70s), and I haven't heard the GM40D do totally convincing ones either.  Once more the reviews on YT always seem to just go from the "shimmering Clean soulful dood" straight to the "lowest a weak High Gain player would ever use" and then soar upwards from there.  Where are the '70s Marshall or Fender class of overdrive tones?  Screaming squealies and pinch harmonics are fine but not everyone wants to go up to that level.

Everything I have heard of even the new GM40D leaves what I think is a good sound in parts under a layer of almost random buzz.  It isn't noise as such, that can be dealt with. It's the fizz we keep mentioning which can only be reduced with correct speaker choice. That said I am really not trying to piddle on your parade, just speak out for the guys who fall into the Twilight Zone as regards most of the good reviews the GM40D is getting.

bordonbert wrote:Interesting stuff Koitsu.  A few thoughts if I may.

Koitsu wrote:some really nice tones can be had by miking up or playing via the redbox out through good IRs

Hmmm!  I would have rather looked at the performance and sound of the amp using a simple "The amp + speaker" setup initially.  When you start bringing in micing up and IRs you are taking things away from most normal users' experience and needs.  If it takes that to get a good sound out of the amp then it really isn't as universal as it should be.  Of course you definitely have that need yourself and it is relevant and interesting to hear about it but it isn't the primary fashion in which the amp will be used by most owners.  I do think it is a bit limited to try to sell the amp on the strength of its ability to be manipulated into sounding good by external means.

Koitsu wrote:The Grandmeister 40 has more gain and nicer gain than the previous GM and other amps in the tubemeister series.

I would accept your description of "nicer" but I cannot see why it needs more than the GM36?  I have always found that the GM36 has more gain on tap than could ever be used even by the Death metal contingent.  It is a little unfair, perhaps unrealistic is a better word, to try to compare models at the top of the chain with those lower down as there are definite compromises that have had to be made in the circuitry which lead to a less sophisticated sound.

You do openly refer to High Gain which is always my criticism of the whole GM/TM range.  They are aimed unashamedly at high gain players and leave out the flock of guys like me who want to be in that "bouncing around somewhere between gritty Clean and dirty Lead" sound.  The GM36 doesn't do classic rock tones well, (no, I mean "real" classic rock, late '60s through to late '70s), and I haven't heard the GM40D do totally convincing ones either.  Once more the reviews on YT always seem to just go from the "shimmering Clean soulful dood" straight to the "lowest a weak High Gain player would ever use" and then soar upwards from there.  Where are the '70s Marshall or Fender class of overdrive tones?  Screaming squealies and pinch harmonics are fine but not everyone wants to go up to that level.

Everything I have heard of even the new GM40D leaves what I think is a good sound in parts under a layer of almost random buzz.  It isn't noise as such, that can be dealt with.  It's the fizz we keep mentioning which can only be reduced with correct speaker choice.  That said I am really not trying to piddle on your parade, just speak out for the guys who fall into the Twilight Zone as regards most of the good reviews the GM40D is getting.

Hi,Bordonbert,i'm still lurking around on here,i share your thoughts about not hearing the GM40(or TM40)demonstrated with "classic rock" tones,i still haven't been able to Dem one in the N.W.,the only stockist that actually seems to stock them is "way" down south,Guildford I believe,have you never actually played through a GM or TM40?,just curious.

Nope, never had the chance I'm afraid Graham, nor the interest to create it. And that said, I only live about 30mins away from Andertons in Guildford and I'm in and out of there pretty regularly sniffing around! I still have my GM36 which I tinker with and rely on for backup to the Marshall and, while it is a little different to the GM40D in being a bit less refined, I'm just not really interested in pouring a lot of money into an amp which is only a tad further developed than the one I have, (at least to my ears in the reviews I have heard).

I spent a lot of time dissecting the GM36 circuitry in detail and simulating it stage by stage throughout so I know its characteristics fairly well by now. It's a very complex circuit as it has a limited set of the expensive components to play with so it has a huge number of minor tone shaping sections which are completely intertwined in a fashion that prevents them from being modded in any simple way. If you were to improve the Lead channel you could be wrecking the Crunch and Ultra channels. Alter the Ultra channel in some ways and you can detract from the Clean channel. That isn't a criticism of the amp, H&K did their design work well in most respects, but it means that these amps are what they are and you can't do anything about it. You buy them for what they do and you forget what they don't.

As an ex-engineer who worked in design and development I can pretty much guarantee that the GM40D will be the same basic circuit as the GM36 with a few simple mods and tweaks. Now those tweaks could quite rightly make all the difference to some people but they don't grab me enough to consider the GM40D as a potential purchase. As I have always said, the H&K range in general are well designed. Their flexibility is astounding and I love them for that. But they fit a slot in the market, (high gain, remember they're German!), and you can't push their jagged profiles into a round hole.

bordonbert wrote:
Of course you definitely have that need yourself and it is relevant and interesting to hear about it but it isn't the primary fashion in which the amp will be used by most owners.

How do you know? In seriousness and in fairness, you're probably right (for now), but the reason that H/K is incorporating a DI into their amp in this particular way is to stay competitive against "in the box" options that many, many, many users are now migrating to. As my use case becomes more and more relevant, it's good for info like mine to be distributed so that others with the same questions will hopefully have an idea. Hence my feedback.  

bordonbert wrote:
I would accept your description of "nicer" but I cannot see why it needs more than the GM36? I have always found that the GM36 has more gain on tap than could ever be used even by the Death metal contingent.

Let me rephrase it then. I find the GM40 to have tighter and more well structured gain, though still not quite as tight as the Mark V:25. The amount of gain isn't necessarily a factor anyway, since to get a good modern metal tone, one often finds oneself well below 5 on the gain knob on most amps.

bordonbert wrote:
You do openly refer to High Gain which is always my criticism of the whole GM/TM range.  They are aimed unashamedly at high gain players and leave out the flock of guys like me who want to be in that "bouncing around somewhere between gritty Clean and dirty Lead" sound.

Make no mistake--my interests lie in 90s-current progressive rock and metal, especially current metal.

bordonbert wrote:
That said I am really not trying to piddle on your parade, just speak out for the guys who fall into the Twilight Zone as regards most of the good reviews the GM40D is getting.

Understood, and I'm sure I can relate when I see someone like Rob Chapman demoing metal amps with what the kids call "dad rock." As opposed to someone like Ola Englund. (I can say "the kids" because I'm in my 40s!)

I guess the GM40 wasn't aimed at the styles you speak of. If it was indeed aimed at someone who plays the styles I'm more interested in, then there above is my feedback as a prog+metal guy, comparing two amps with potential for prog and metal in a prog+metal frame of mind.