LM Tube vs RH450

funkygeos · #1 03-23-2010, 10:58 AM

Hi folks,

Do you guys have any experience with the above amps? I'm thinking of buying either one of them but i can't make up my mind. Which amps u guys preferred?

Regards,
Kay

rpsands · #2 03-23-2010, 11:20 AM

What are you looking for soundwise?

If it were me I'd go with the Rh450 for everything (just about every player) without even hearing it, just based on the reviews it's a lot more organic a sound than the LM stuff.

I play an F1 but it's not my ideal tone to be honest. Very convenient though, and sounds pretty darned good.

silky smoove · #3 03-23-2010, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpsands

based on the reviews it's a lot more organic a sound than the LM stuff.

Not owning, but trying that head several times through a variety of cabs, organic is NOT the word I would use to describe it's tone. It's true that the semi-parametric EQ section can dial out a lot of what I was hearing, but terms like hyped low end, nasal sounding midrange, overly aggressive upper mids are about all I could get out of that head through a Schroeder 15+L, a Berg AE410, a Berg HS410 (the best combination, but still not what I would call great) a TC RS210 and lastly a TC RS212.

I'm clearly in the minority on this, but I really didn't like the RH450. I really wanted to based on the feature set, but it just didn't deliver the goods tonally for me. It's too bad. Quite an impressive head in every other respect.

Andy V. · #4 03-24-2010, 10:58 AM

I'm with Silky on that one.
I was shopping for a light head and ended up with the LMT after A/B'ing it with several heads (TC, AG500, LMT800, LMIII).

As I mentioned on another thread, the VLE works like a tone knob to my ears.
It's just my opinion, but I wanted a modern tubey sound (?!) and found it with MB.

rpsands · #5 03-24-2010, 11:15 AM

Sounds like someone could use some more practice with parametric eq -- I had no trouble dialing in a warm sound out of an Iamp 800's parametric.

Wish there was somewhere around here I could give one a shot, but everything I've read about the TC is tubey tubey tubey.

**nostatic** · #6 03-24-2010, 12:15 PM

I am happy with my RH450. I have an LM Tube coming later this week (if music123 ever ships it), so I'll be able to compare directly. My plan is to keep both so I have a backup and use the LM Tube doubling as an acoustic guitar rig. Running the RH450 with a Berg AE112 gives me a nice fat and warm tone. No way I'd describe it as nasal or thin, both with Sadowsky PJ5 and Rob Allen.

silky smoove · #7 03-24-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpsands

Sounds like someone could use some more practice with parametric eq -- I had no trouble dialing in a warm sound out of an Iamp 800's parametric.

Two things. I had no problem dialing in, not only warm tones, but great tones on an iAmp Pro. Secondly, lack of warmth was not the problem with the RH450 at all. Definitely had plenty of warmth down low, perhaps too much, which is why I gave my description of a hyped low end earlier.

silky smoove · #8 03-24-2010, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostatic

No way I'd describe it as nasal or thin, both with Sadowsky PJ5 and Rob Allen.

To be fair, no one in this thread has described it as sounding thin. There was a nasal quality to it when I was playing it that seemed to coincide with the aggressive mids. No amount of tweaking to the parametric controls or gain levels of the EQ's seemed to cure it.

naturalkinds · #9 03-24-2010, 06:22 PM

The RH sounded quite processed to me, and I suspect it's an artifact of its onboard compression. (Read about it on the TC site.) That said, it sounded very, very good.

The LM series to me is still a no-brainer if you're in the market for an amp in its price range. I'd go for that.