TC Electronic BH250+TC Electronic RH450

Discussion in 'Amps [BG]' started by Eifan, Nov 25, 2012.


  1. Eifan

    Eifan

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Hi!

    I was just wondering if it's possible to connect the BH250 to the RH450 as an effectamp, only to use the toneprint function on the BH250?
    And if so, how would I have to connect the amps? And does it work with a Marshall 7412 cabinet on 4ohm?
  2. CL400Peavey

    CL400Peavey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Media:
    11
    Albums:
    1
    Location:
    Grand Rapids Michigan
    What are you trying to accomplish? Use the front end of the 250 through the power section of the 450? Im pretty sure they use the same power section. If you already own the 250, just use it.
  3. Musicman20

    Musicman20

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
    ?!
  4. CL400Peavey

    CL400Peavey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Media:
    11
    Albums:
    1
    Location:
    Grand Rapids Michigan
    The RH450 is a 236 watt amp. No reason to run the other one through it.
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. Musicman20

    Musicman20

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
    The amp is 236 W through a set testing setup and utilises technology that I doubt any of us really know anything about. Its an incredibly loud amp...and it is not JUST '236' and that is it...there is much more to it than that.

    Unless anyone on here has opened one up and cares to enlighten us on how it works?

    Yes. there is a tone to the amp and colour, and yes that involves compression, but it is not just a 236 capable module stuck in an amp...
  7. DuShauh

    DuShauh Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Location:
    West Michigan
    + 1 ^^^

    I thought that we had moved beyond throwing daggers at "anything" that says TC. In an industry full of options, TCE is a viable option that obviously is appealing to some. To the OP question, ???. But I can see where having the use of Tone Print, with the more powerful and diverse RH450 would be a pretty slick. ;)
  8. arai

    arai

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    There are two ways you could wire the amps together but there is no way that I can think of that will allow you to use the tone prent without using the BH250s pre amp and eqs.
    One way is plug your bass into the rh450 and run a cable from the 450s effects send into the 250's input then run a cable (cannon to jack mic cable) from the 250's DI out(post eq) into the 450's effects return.

    Or plug your bass into the BH250 and run a cable (cannon to jack) from the 250's DI out (post eq) into the input of the 450

    There are a couple of people that still like to troll all the tc threads they can.
  9. Shardik

    Shardik

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Location:
    Halden, Norway
    I know I am probably kicking in open doors, but I just got the BH250, and it is loud. It is also worth it to note how the power is specified for it:

    Power module rating: 250w (500w instantaneous Peak @ min. Load)

    Min load is 4ohm, btw. That parenthesis is important, though. As long as you are using a dynamic playing style like slapping, "chickenpicking" with a pick or just doing percussive attacks in your playing style, not using overly compressed attacks and a lot of sustain, the attacks will be pretty much like a 500W amp. That is dynamic headroom for you. This means that you can not have a 500W rumble bass, but you actually have headroom for those dynamic playing styles like an ordinary 500W amp.

    That means that for articulate playing styles with a lot of dynamic peaks, this will behave like a 500W head. At the moment I am running this into an 8ohm load (210), and I love the power, which right now is 125W continuous/250W instantaneous peak.

    I seriously doubt that the RH450 will provide any more usable power than the BH250. TCE got a lot of criticism because of the low measured power of the RH450. I think the specifications of the BH250 and BG250 is correct, and that the model name is more in tune with the power rating on these new amps.

    My advice: RH450 is a good amp, and probably about the same power rating as the BH250. If you want tone print, buy the BH250 and sell the RH450. Or keep the RH450 it to drive a second cab for when you need the power. I do not know the RH450 well, but if it accepts active basses, I guess it can also amplify the DI out signal from the BH250, which you can then choose to have pre or post EQ (and Toneprint).

    PS. And by the way: The cabinets and their speaker elements are often more of a limit to how much air you can move (= how loud sound you can make) than the power of the amps that are rated from around half of the power rating of the cabs. The cabinet power rating is for safety, it does not mean that you have to use that much power to get the best sound.
  10. mystic38

    mystic38

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Location:
    Mystic CT
    I have a BG250 so am not down on the BH250 or anything.. and i admire your enthusiasm for your amp...

    but your stated conclusions are wrong.

    There is nothing, not a single thing, in the "power module" rating to directly or indirectly specify the actual output power of this amp...any performance is simply inferred.
    Amps for a long time have had a uniform way of specifying them as X Watts into Y Ohms at Z percent distortion.....and there is no doubt in my mind that if the BH250 was capable of 250W RMS into 4R/125W RMS @8R at (say) 0.5% distortion TC would loudly proclaim that.

  11. Shardik

    Shardik

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Location:
    Halden, Norway
    Seems that you are somewhat right and that I am somewhat wrong.

    I found this somewhat more technical paper enlightening (probably posted before):
    http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/9...mp_power_rating___active_power_management.pdf

    It seems like my mistake was to assume that 4 ohm is the minimum load, while it seems like the minimum load is somewhat lower (closer to 2ohm, probably based on some safety limit). It seems like the module power rating is based on the capabilities of the built in power section. Knowing the efficient nature of class D, that is not very stupid. The "soft clipping" of the module seems like a good idea to me, but hampers the measured power output. "Soft clipping" is not new, and I remember quite well when the hifi amplifier manufacturer NAD launched their amps with very conservative power ratings (the opposite of what TC is doing). NAD really got a reputation for sounding louder than their rating, and "NAD watt" became a coin phrase for watt specifications that were conservative compared to perceived sound.

    TC has obviously chosen the other specification route with their APM or "soft clipping", rating their modules more like what they sound like, which will never measure up. And true, when measured, the NAD amplifier would probably be correctly specified, but still sound louder, while the TC "power rating" probably be measured as less on the output, due to the circuitry to avoid hard clipping.

    I agree that the power rating is somewhat dishonest, but the chosen tech enables you to turn it up louder without hard clipping. I like that.
    When it comes to distortion, "soft clipping" circuitry will never measure well. After all, that clipping IS distortion (hard or soft alike), measurement wise. It is a deviation from linear amplification. But to most, it soft clipping sounds better. According to that TC paper above, a bit more like a clean tube amp, which also often has bad distortion measurements.

    On the bottom line, I guess it all comes down to 450"TC watt" vs 250"TC watt". Assuming the same tech and power rating is in use, it would mean that the RH450 is less than 3dB louder than the BH250. I guess that is important to some. My advice would still be to try the BH250. It may be that it is found to be sufficient. If it isn't, the RH450 may still be used as a power amp, if BH250 is sufficient, sell the RH450.
  12. mystic38

    mystic38

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Location:
    Mystic CT
    I remember NAD well.. if it was called the NAD 2020 with 20W per channel i need a cigarette for elephantine memory..lol

    at the end, it is a shame that TC is taking this path, they could be making PR sunshine out of "boxing above their weight" instead of a shell game with smoke and mirrors

    I just sincerely hope that this is not the start of a trend or valve amps will start getting re-specified to 3-4x their rating (yay my 60W Fender Blues Junior!), but i guess i could then see a market for the "50W" pedal (soft limiter for ext fx insert)..lol

    hmm, wait ..time to bring up the cct simulator :D

    regards Ian

  13. kevinpmajka

    kevinpmajka

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2013
    Location:
    Moving to Phoenix in August 2014
    For gigs that I use a backline, a one or two button tone print pedal would be great to lug around. Not the mini pedals but two selectable banks like on the Bg series. I'd pay money for a pedal like that.
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2014

Share This Page