TC Electronic RH450, RS210, RS212 Review Thread (Lucky Part VII)

[Thor]

Continued from here:
TC Electronic RH450, RS210, RS212 Review Thread (Part VI)

[Vic]

In... of course.

[iammr2]

Thank you, sir!

[Eublet]

Love my RH450 and dual RS210 stack! Best rig ever! In!

[ashbory]

I have the RH450 and am thinking about upgrading to the 750. I don't need the tweetertone, I am just thinking the extra power would be nice. How many watts is the 750?

[Rick Auricchio]

Originally Posted by makohund

I was thinking less "internal only modules that only work in a chassis", and more along the lines of discrete self-contained units that used external interconnects. Rackmountable just like any other rackmount gear. Maybe that would cut down testing/certification requirements a bit?

Actually, that makes it even worse than the MoBass system. You need to use compliant power supplies (which is why some manufacturers choose wall-warts), build a full case for each piece (instead of a "shell" chassis), and deal with all the connectors. That takes up more PCB space and testing. Then you may need to address cooling for each piece, instead of having one fan for an integrated amp.

And you still have to do all the compliance testing, no matter how you build it.

Now, if you could sell musical-instrument equipment at the typical volumes of consumer electronics, all this work would be justified. But MI sales are a niche market when you consider the development costs...it's always been tough.

EDIT: I forgot about things like grounding too.

[Vic]

Originally Posted by ashbory

I have the RH450 and am thinking about upgrading to the 750. I don't need the tweetertone, I am just thinking the extra power would be nice. How many watts is the 750?

"Enough". Yeah, I'm gonna' get that inducted as an industry standard technical term.

[ashbory]

Originally Posted by Vic

"Enough". Yeah, I'm gonna' get that inducted as an industry standard technical term.

Hmmm, I always feel more comfortable having "more than Enough"

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by Rick Auricchio

And you still have to do all the compliance testing, no matter how you build it.

Oh, I think enough big name amp manufacturers have shown that all you have to do is slap compliance stickers on whatever piece of junk you throw out, and hope the FCC doesn't catch on.

[Eublet]

Originally Posted by Vic

"Enough". Yeah, I'm gonna' get that inducted as an industry standard technical term.

I agree with Vic, as nebulous as it may sound.

My RH450 had more output than my LMII.
It spanked my Shuttle 6.0.
It was on par with my Shuttle 9.0
It was very close to my Streamliner 900

Now, that's an RH450. The RH750, by a few accounts, bests all those heads I've listed above in output. So, I think it has "more than enough" for sure. Put it on 3 TC RS cabs, and you're going to have a lot of volume and oomph to play with.

[Rick Auricchio]

Nah, there are too many safety/compliance agencies if you plan to sell worldwide, which TC does. The US agencies, sure, they're probably the easiest to fool.

And all you'd need is to be caught once, and no agency would ever trust you. Oh, wait...we've been through the "trust" issue already.

[greencow]

Originally Posted by ashbory

Hmmm, I always feel more comfortable having "more than Enough"

Howabout "To much for my neighbour"
Or "Enough for me and the bassist living next door"

As to the previous comments about 2x10" not cutting it as a solo cab. For my purposes I have been using a Hartke MB4210 and have never had to litle power or volume. I know that an 8x10" is louder and would be nice to have, however for rehersals itwould be overkill and with the litle stages here a 2x10" would be a better choise because of thesmaller footprint andless room requiered for the porting to work properly. I understand how a rock/metal group can needmore drivers, however I prefer to keep the stage volume down andalso be able to talk with my bandmates during rehersals.

Plus I like the punchiness I get from my 10" drivers right now and am a bit worried about loosing it if i go over to the dark side. First it'll be 12", after that 15", and I have a feeling there will be no turning back. I guess I'm just sticking with what is comfotable. Also my current setup is a sealed cab so I should get an increase in low end response with ported cabs right?

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by Rick Auricchio

Nah, there are too many safety/compliance agencies if you plan to sell worldwide, which TC does. The US agencies, sure, they're probably the easiest to fool.

And all you'd need is to be caught once, and no agency would ever trust you. Oh, wait...we've been through the "trust" issue already.

Ehh... Peavey and Behringer have both gotten nailed for it in the last couple years, and it's endemic in consumer electronics. Lots of folks doing it, and lots of folks getting away with it.

[Rickett Customs]

....Something is rotten in the state of denmark......


j/k....

Get another gig with RH in hand and out the door I go..........

[makohund]

Originally Posted by Rick Auricchio

Actually, that makes it even worse than the MoBass system.

See, I told you you were probably right.

It would be nifty, though. Basically taking advantage of smaller, lighter technology to make a new standard form factor for racked gear. 6" instead of 19". The little 1/3 rack-width PreSonus gear was drifting through my head at the same time as the MoMark and TC stuff.

Now here are probably the two biggest problems...

1. In the micro heads like this one, the guts of the preamp probably take up a lot less space than the power amp does. The pre could probably easily fit in a 1.75x6x8" or so box. The amp... unlikely. So splitting it into equal halves just can't happen, even if everything else you listed was not an issue.

2. And even if you could... try fitting all of the controls in a 1.75"x6" space on the front of the pre. They'd have to be pretty small and fiddly little things. And look at that equal amount of space on the front of the amp, mostly empty and going to waste.


So between that and your list of issues, MoMark is probably the better direction to go. But I think the options available there are actually overkill... a system that simply separated pre and power would be plenty flexible (rather than separate pre, eq, master, and power).

Here's a twist... instead of the 3-bay chassis of the MoMark, do a smaller power amp/chassis with a single, shallower, full width bay. (Maybe 2.5x12x10".) Give the amp a screw-on sheild/plate for the front, and connections/level knob in the back so it could be used purely as a monoblock power amp without it. (So if you buy another one, you could still use the older one for whatever.)

Make the pre fill the whole bay. Like the removable face on a car stereo, but more substantial and bolted down. You get the entire surface for controls. You could still swap power sections if you want. You could still make a footpedal that the pre could mount into the same way. You could make a minimal chassis with no amp, that just provided power and connections, to run it as a fully independent pre. Any of the chassis would take care of the power, grounding, cooling, etc.

Still silly, and still with plenty of problems of its' own. Probably not worth the trouble... the micros are pretty good as-is. But hey, nothing wrong with dreaming up stuff.

[Papersen]

I`m in and waiting to share a review sometime in the near future.

[JimmyM]

Just posting so I can find this thread when I do a "Find your own posts" search and keep up with any more news about stunts being pulled.

[KJung]

Here's a clip of the RH450/RS210 in more of a jazz context. Wonderful warm tone, amazing features, and it is a hammer volume-wise.

It is a voiced head... very punchy, warm, and it does a pretty good job of emulating the feel of a tube power section when pushed.

Feature set is stupid good... great tuner, really nice multiband on-board compressor, high quality feel and fit and finish, and a good reliability record.

Like any head, it sounds like what it sounds like. If you like it warm and punchy and 'organic' sounding, I highly recommend it. The RH750 adds the tweetertone control, which allows the top end to sparkle a bit more, versus the 'vintage tone profile' baked into the RH450.

Rob Allen Mouse through TC RH450/RS210 - YouTube

[KJung]

Here's another clip that has been up for a while, but thought I'd post it in the new thread. A comparison of the RH450 and Markbass F1/F500 with my Sadowsky.

The RH450/Sadowsky is a nice match-up, with the warmth of the RH450 taming the quite aggressive Sadowsky voicing. One of my favorite match-ups, especially through the amazing Bergantino AE410 (unfortunately, that wonderful cab is no longer available).

Sadowsky Vintage through Bergantino AE410 driven by TC RH450 and Markbass F1 - YouTube

[Jazzdogg]

Originally Posted by KJung

Here's a clip of the RH450/RS210 in more of a jazz context. Wonderful warm tone, amazing features, and it is a hammer volume-wise.

It is a voiced head... very punchy, warm, and it does a pretty good job of emulating the feel of a tube power section when pushed.

Feature set is stupid good... great tuner, really nice multiband on-board compressor, high quality feel and fit and finish, and a good reliability record.

Like any head, it sounds like what it sounds like. If you like it warm and punchy and 'organic' sounding, I highly recommend it. The RH750 adds the tweetertone control, which allows the top end to sparkle a bit more, versus the 'vintage tone profile' baked into the RH450.

Rob Allen Mouse through TC RH450/RS210 - YouTube

Thanks, Ken; that's my favorite clip on your YouTube channel.