Upgrade power amp or replace rack with new head?

interstatejoe · #1 06-27-2010, 12:00 PM

Long story short, for the last 5 years or so my rig has been BBE BMax pre > QCS RMX850 > 810E. We had a lockout so I only had to move the 810 for shows, but last year we decided to get rid of the lockout in order to save $$$. After hauling the Ampeg fridge back and forth for a couple weeks I decided to pack it in the garage and picked up a lightly used Warwick WCA 411-PRO (600w/4 Ohms) on CL. Now the cab sounds great, but we added a 2nd guitarist to our band...I'm pushing the QSC to the point of clipping now and I'm just not cutting through anymore.

So I start looking into newer, bigger, lighter amp options and I find good reviews on the Peavey IPR 1600 power amp which would give me 600w @ 4 Ohms, weighs 7 lbs. and sells for $300. Then I browse around CL again and the guy I bought the Warwick cab from is now selling the matching Warwick ProFet 5.2 head which would give me 500w @ 4 Ohms and weight 26 lbs. for $280. I tried the cab/head combo when I bought the cab and it sounded great.

The Peavey option would bring my rack weight down from about 50 lbs to somewhere around 20 lbs, whereas the Warwick option would replace my rack entirely and weigh 26 lbs.

I need some more opinions to help me decide, so what would you do and why? Please help a brother decide!

thanks,
-Joe

steveksux · #2 06-27-2010, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

BBE BMax pre > QCS RMX850 > 810E. ...
Warwick WCA 411-PRO (600w/4 Ohms)

Peavey IPR 1600 power amp 600w @ 4 Ohms, $300.

Warwick ProFet 5.2 head 500w @ 4 Ohms $280.

I'm assuming you're running the QSC in bridged mode?

That's 830 watts@4 ohms.

Not realy a lot of difference going down to 600w with the Peavey, or even to 500w of the Warwick.

But getting less power is not going to help you cut through better.

If you're not bridging, and using one channel of the qsc to drive the speaker, you're only pushing about 300w.

Moving up to 500 or 600 watts won't make much difference from 300 watts, max of dB, not really noticeable.

If you're not running bridged, you can run another speaker off the other channel of the qsc, that would be my choice. Having 4 ohm speakers limits your options.

My fav setup is 2 8 ohm speakers on a bridged amp. You get max power out of the amp (one that bridges to 4 ohms), and 2 speakers are easier to carry (seperately) than one big one.

All the options you are thinking about won't help you cut through, but will lighten the weight, a worthy goal...
Randy

johnk_10 · #3 06-27-2010, 12:33 PM

not sure, but it sounds to me like the 810 had more volume for you, which is a matter of more cone area, instead of more power. IME, upping the power with a smaller cab won't get you there as easily as less power with a bigger (or at least one with more speakers) will.

interstatejoe · #4 06-27-2010, 12:45 PM

I ran the QSC in bridged mone with the 810, I tried running it bridged and as soon as it clipped once I stopped. I posted a question about running this combo bridged mono a few months here on TB, but I couldn't get a clear answer so I decided to play it safe and go back to stereo mode. I was uneasy about running the full 830w into a cab rated for 600w.

It crossed my mind to buy a 15" or 2x12" to sit under the 4x10, but I might as well go back to the 810 at that point. The idea of cutting nearly 30 lbs out if my rack was also pretty enticing.

RickenBoogie · #5 06-27-2010, 12:50 PM

The 830 watts through the 600watt rated cab shouldn't be a problem, unless you really crank it hard. or use alot of low eq. But, I agree with john, if it's more volume you want, it's more speakers you need.

steveksux · #6 06-27-2010, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

I ran the QSC in bridged mode with the 810, but dropped it to run 300w stereo since the going to the Warwick. I was uneasy about running the full 830w into a cab rated for 600w.

Go back to bridged mode, the louder you get the more power you're putting out of the amp, when you're quiet, you're maybe only putting 50w from the "800w" bridged qsc into your 600w cab.

You'd have to be running it very loud full time to approach the 600w limit (assuming the 600w is RMS rating, not peak power).

I've been running a 1500 watt bridged K1 into a pair of 500w speakers for 10 years now, haven't blown them yet. Just back off if you hear distortion/farting, you'll be fine.

Common wisdom is to use a power amp rated between 1.5x and double the capacity of the speaker to provide for clean headroom.

You should get way more power before clipping, that might get you to cut through without costing a cent...

As for cutting through, adding more low mids rather than lows gets you heard without blowing speakers. Turn that smile EQ into more of a frown.

Randy

interstatejoe · #7 06-27-2010, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickenBoogie

The 830 watts through the 600watt rated cab shouldn't be a problem, unless you really crank it hard. or use alot of low eq. But, I agree with john, if it's more volume you want, it's more speakers you need.

I play Drop C. Maybe I should have mentioned that....

steveksux · #8 06-27-2010, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

I play Drop C. Maybe I should have mentioned that....

Ouch, but not quite as bad as a 5 string with low B. Cab tuning on older cabs not meant for notes that low might have the low note below one of the tuning points on the cab, such that the port stops resisting the cone at those freqs and reinforce it instead, leading to excessive farting/excursion. Of the cab, not sure there's been any scientific studies as to the excessive farting of bass players rather than drivers.

So be wary of farting noises with lots of bass boost on the 410. The 810e is sealed I think, so without a port, it doesn't exhibit the port decoupling thing I mentioned like a ported cab.

Trouble is adding a speaker is the likely best option to get louder, but with an existing 4 ohm cab, you can't really add another speaker without going back to stereo mode, and losing a nice chunk of available wattage.

Randy

interstatejoe · #9 06-27-2010, 01:12 PM

I thought ported cabs usually get better low end response, while sealed got a punchier sound?

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but the Warwick spec says "resonant frequency: 50Hz, frequency range: 35Hz-3500Hz"...

**B-string** · #10 06-27-2010, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

I thought ported cabs usually get better low end response, while sealed got a punchier sound?

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but the Warwick spec says "resonant frequency: 50Hz, frequency range: 35Hz-3500Hz"...

Porting "extends" low end at the expense of a sharper roll-off in response. Sealed is a more gradual roll-off.

interstatejoe · #11 06-27-2010, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-string

Porting "extends" low end at the expense of a sharper roll-off in response. Sealed is a more gradual roll-off.

Oh I see...would you mind explaining that as if I were a 5 yr old cuz I don't think I understand. Porting gives you better lows but they're not as tight and too much lowend can cause issues in a ported cab? I've read reviews of this cab and most of them say the low B sounds solid.

Wow, this went from a thread about heads to a discussion about cabs... I'll give it another shot in bridged-mono tomorrow night.

steveksux · #12 06-27-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

Oh I see...would you mind explaining that as if I were a 5 yr old cuz I don't think I understand. Porting gives you better lows but they're not as tight and too much lowend can cause issues in a ported cab? I've read reviews of this cab and most of them say the low B sounds solid.

Wow, this went from a thread about heads to a discussion about cabs... I'll give it another shot in bridged-mono tomorrow night.

Think of it like when you're wading out into deep water. Sealed cabs tend to be a gradual drop off, as you get further out (deeper) you get lower (ouput is lower). More or less a straight line.

Other times, as you go out further, the water gets no deeper and you can go further out into the lake (same output from cab as you get into lower notes). Until you reach a dropoff, where suddenly the output drops off significantly and suddenly. make sense? May be a poor choice as "deeper water" and "deeper response" don't correspond to each other...

Sealed cabs drop off in the response as you get deeper notes, but are relatively smooth/flat as they do so.

Ported cabs tend to not drop off nearly as much as you get deeper notes, and then drop off suddenly. Right before they drop off, they're usually more output at a deeper freq than you'd have in a sealed cab. Ported cabs also tend to have peaks and valleys through that "extended" range.

Very generalized, as port tuning makes huge difference.
Randy

RickenBoogie · #13 06-27-2010, 02:44 PM

Another thought concerning the low end. Many cabs won't reproduce the actual fundemental of a really low note, anything below a normal low E. What you actually hear are the harmonics of those low notes, so when I mentioned using alot of low eq, I wasn't speaking of the frequency of the string, so much as the actual low eq knob on your amp. As already mentioned, the mid frequencies are your best friend in a band mix, and backing off the low eq actually provides more volume, since you're not wasting the power trying to reproduce those lowest frequencies.

interstatejoe · #14 06-27-2010, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveksux

As for cutting through, adding more low mids rather than lows gets you heard without blowing speakers. Turn that smile EQ into more of a frown.

The EQ section of the BBE preamp is a little different, the Bass and Treble controls are mainly “boost” and the Mid control
only “cut”. Then there is a Para-Mids section with freq range knob from 250hz-1khz and a gain knob from -12db to +12db, and last there is a BBE Sonic Maximizer section with Lo Contour and Process knobs, which gives you up to a 10db boost @ 50hz.

I run it mostly flat with the controls (0-10) set at
TREBLE:2, MID:10 (max), BASS: 2, with the bright switch off, BBE Sonic Maximizer either off or running very minimally, and I adjust the Para-Mids as needed. Doesn't that more or less make a frown?

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveksux

Think of it like when you're wading out into deep water. Sealed cabs tend to be a gradual drop off, as you get further out (deeper) you get lower (ouput is lower). More or less a straight line.

Other times, as you go out further, the water gets no deeper and you can go further out into the lake (same output from cab as you get into lower notes). Until you reach a dropoff, where suddenly the output drops off significantly and suddenly. make sense? May be a poor choice as "deeper water" and "deeper response" don't correspond to each other...

Sealed cabs drop off in the response as you get deeper notes, but are relatively smooth/flat as they do so.

Ported cabs tend to not drop off nearly as much as you get deeper notes, and then drop off suddenly. Right before they drop off, they're usually more output at a deeper freq than you'd have in a sealed cab. Ported cabs also tend to have peaks and valleys through that "extended" range.

Very generalized, as port tuning makes huge difference.
Randy

I thought I read somewhere that the Warwick 411PRO was tuned down to 30hz....

I'm happy with the sound I'm getting out of the cab, I just want it to be louder. As it sits right now, I'm running the QSC at 300w stereo with the gain maxed. Going to try running @ 830w in bridge-mono again tomorrow night, being careful about how hard I push it, and see how it sounds.

interstatejoe · #15 06-29-2010, 10:40 AM

Ran the QSC bridged mono last night, rolled off the lows a bit and adjusted the para-mids to boost around 300hz. I was still pretty paranoid about clipping so I added a bit more compression. Sounded pretty good, but I'll need to play around with it a little more. Thanks for the input and saving me some $$$.

bassplayer7770 · #16 06-29-2010, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickenBoogie

Another thought concerning the low end. Many cabs won't reproduce the actual fundemental of a really low note, anything below a normal low E. What you actually hear are the harmonics of those low notes, so when I mentioned using alot of low eq, I wasn't speaking of the frequency of the string, so much as the actual low eq knob on your amp. As already mentioned, the mid frequencies are your best friend in a band mix, and backing off the low eq actually provides more volume, since you're not wasting the power trying to reproduce those lowest frequencies.

Yeah. I'm using a Crown XLS 1500 with my BMAX preamp. I set the High Pass Filter on my Crown at 50Hz and boosted the Bass control on my BMAX up a notch, and I'm really digging the tone. To me, there is still plenty of low end sound but with much more clarity, and the 15 in my cab doesn't appear to be working so hard.

okcrum · #17 06-29-2010, 01:15 PM

The Warwick cabs have a response dip in the low mids - that's what I boost to make mine punchier. Works great.

johnk_10 · #18 06-29-2010, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interstatejoe

Ran the QSC bridged mono last night, rolled off the lows a bit and adjusted the para-mids to boost around 300hz. I was still pretty paranoid about clipping so I added a bit more compression. Sounded pretty good, but I'll need to play around with it a little more. Thanks for the input and saving me some $$$.

glad to hear that sounds like it's working out for you. running it bridged should give you alot more clean headroom to play around with. and as long as you don't boost any freqs below what your cab is able to produce, it should be able to get pretty darn loud, full and punchy.