- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,944
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Bass Gear Mag issue 6
- Thread starter OldogNewTrick
- Start date
Well now...I'm enlightened and now I'm all for it! Obviously if it responds like a 450w tube amp, it's 450w, even if it's only 250 with a comp in front of it. That's right...if you hear it, it's there, right? If it sounds good, it IS good, right?Speaking of "wrong", check this out. The "Active Power Management" pdf linked at the bottom of the page.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Learn all about transistor watts, vs tube watts, vs perceived watts.
Try not to scream. It does hurt.
Cool products. Nifty engineering. But geez... where'd they dig up the carnies and hucksters running the marketing department?
:scowl:Well thank you for bringing that to our attention, mako. And thank you Bass Gear Mag for blowing the lid off of this scandal.
But what if the "bit" they're removing is the bit you want to hear? Does the RH450 deliver 450w equivalent for a certain frequency response curve but only 250w equivalent for a flat (or as flat as possible) frequency response? Is it 450w for Marcus Miller but only 250w for Robbie Shakespeare? If that's the case, thanks, but no thanks.
I look forward to TC's response to this brouhaha.
I know you are,
was just pointing it out as a common form of dishonesty in the industry
What bothers me is that by all accounts it is a great amp. What they are doing with that Active Power Management is cool stuff. It sounds more sophisticated than just slapping a comp/limiter on it... more like automated gain and peak management.
But why'd they have to go and slap a phony number on it, and make up this "perceived watts" garbage? (Perceived loudness, fine. But perceived watts?!)
It's as if the the engineers developed an honest-to-goodness super antibiotic, but the marketing people decided to stick it in a snake oil bottle and claim it would cure cancer, and add size and girth to your... um... cabs.
But why'd they have to go and slap a phony number on it, and make up this "perceived watts" garbage? (Perceived loudness, fine. But perceived watts?!)
It's as if the the engineers developed an honest-to-goodness super antibiotic, but the marketing people decided to stick it in a snake oil bottle and claim it would cure cancer, and add size and girth to your... um... cabs.
- Nov 24, 2008
- 4,343
- 7,163
- Disclosures
- Owner & designer, AudioKinesis; Auth. mfg, Big E (Home Audio only)
I especially appreciate Tom's even-handed, sane, and (to the best of my knowledge) accurate commentary on the neodymium magnet situation, on page 6.
Also well worth taking a second look at is Tom Lee's "Long Winded and Overly Detailed Explanation of Amplifier Power Rating", starting on page 96. As a speaker designer dude guy, I appreciate his including the speaker's impedance curve in his overview of real-world issues that amplifiers have to deal with.
Also very much enjoyed Tom's review of the Orange isobaric cabs. My understanding of the term is that it refers to "constant pressure" (as in "a thermodynamic process in which the pressure stays constant"), rather than "constant weight" (as implied by a more literal translation of the Greek root), in that the inner woofer's tandem-dancing with the outer woofer theoretically maintains constant pressure in the chamber between the two, thus tricking the outer woofer into thinking that it's "seeing" a huge box. Alas the inner woofer doesn't get the benefit of such trickery, so the effect has its limitations. But my virtual hat is off to Orange for making it work and work well.
I'm gonna go with stupidity.
Arrogance is stupid. Disdain for customers is stupid.
And a great amp that sounds like double the rated wattage is the makings of a classic, and would likely make them more money in the long run directly via sales, and indirectly via reputation and interest in their other (and future) products. Whereas false claims are bound to be discovered and result in the opposite.
Imagine if it really was 450W, and beat the pants off of anything else like it, and even hung right in there with amps in the 8-900W range. They'd fly off the shelves, and so would the eventual update/replacement.
Instead they built a 250W amp that could hang with 4-500W. That's great. But then they lied, calling it 450W.
Stupid.
I wonder what the RH750 measures at. Next issue?
Imma gonna hafta subscribe to the print version. Good stuff.
tombowlus, do you actually invite the reviewees to comment on your findings ?
Before publishing ? In the next issue ?
TC used to post here... being August, I guess all of Denmark is still on holidays...
Before publishing ? In the next issue ?
TC used to post here... being August, I guess all of Denmark is still on holidays...
Then it isn't the amp for you.
I suspect this is most noticeable in the "feel" of the punch of notes - basically the attack at high power levels will be "mushier". Like a lot of tube amps.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,944
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
All of our product reviews are shown to the manufacturers before printing to review for technical accuracy. In addition, we offer all manufacturers the opportunity to submit an official response, which we print in that issue.
TC did see and approve of everything, and in fact, Uffe was very complimentary of the accuracy and thoroughness of Tom Lees' review and his follow up "A Closer Look" article on Active Power Management.
Word of thanks to Tom for some good reading, I like all the techy bits.
Couple things we can glean from this TC thing.
A. The power rating measured on a level playing field with other amps is indeed false.
B. A real 450 or whatever watt amp also puts out roughly half of that on a consistent basis with the rest in reserve to handle those peaks, that's the difference. When you look at the bench test results for the orange terror, that's what honest power ratings should look like.
I like your cab tests as well. Displacement limits could be calculated but your measurements should be an eye opener for people who think their cabs sound deep when they start falling off around 80-100hz and what happens off axis.....good stuff.
Couple things we can glean from this TC thing.
A. The power rating measured on a level playing field with other amps is indeed false.
B. A real 450 or whatever watt amp also puts out roughly half of that on a consistent basis with the rest in reserve to handle those peaks, that's the difference. When you look at the bench test results for the orange terror, that's what honest power ratings should look like.
I like your cab tests as well. Displacement limits could be calculated but your measurements should be an eye opener for people who think their cabs sound deep when they start falling off around 80-100hz and what happens off axis.....good stuff.
alexclaber
Commercial User
I'd love to see some high power measurements for the cabs, to show excursion limited power handling and other limitations - but then I would say that! 
The off-axis measurements are nice and seeing the sensitivity plot is great (although the derived figure from it is a bit bizarre) and the impedance plot is useful too, though probably more for me than potential customers! The tests really showed the folly of 'full-range' isobaric speakers...
I'm disappointed that TC took this approach with their specs as I'd been assuming that the APM was making their 450W amp sound like more, not their less than 450W amp sound like it is 450W. It has however fired me up to get a Barefaced amp to market sooner rather than later!
The off-axis measurements are nice and seeing the sensitivity plot is great (although the derived figure from it is a bit bizarre) and the impedance plot is useful too, though probably more for me than potential customers! The tests really showed the folly of 'full-range' isobaric speakers...I'm disappointed that TC took this approach with their specs as I'd been assuming that the APM was making their 450W amp sound like more, not their less than 450W amp sound like it is 450W. It has however fired me up to get a Barefaced amp to market sooner rather than later!
I'd love to see some high power measurements for the cabs, to show excursion limited power handling and other limitations - but then I would say that!
I'm disappointed that TC took this approach with their specs as I'd been assuming that the APM was making their 450W amp sound like more, not their less than 450W amp sound like it is 450W. It has however fired me up to get a Barefaced amp to market sooner rather than later!
I'd be cool with calculated limits, of course you'd need some proprietary specs to calculate it. There are gizmo's that can reverse engineer drivers.
Or yeah, what he said. Put power to it and see what happens with excursion, cone distortion , power compression, etc.
Don't know how far you want to take it but perhaps a pass full spectrum and one with some filtering common to bass amps or one with some low boost, one flat and one cut.....who knows.
And yes, with your expertise on the speaker end of things, I can imagine a Barefaced amp being quite a nice piece.
Wow, I remember Alex when he was just a shlub like the rest of us, and now he's going to be designing amps? Very cool. Good luck with it!
+1, & judging by his cabs-well, the reviews I've read, he's making good gear.
He certainly knows a lot more than I re tech stuff :-/
Alex, your articles in UK's BG Mag are one of the main reasons I grab my copy. Keep up the great work.
He certainly knows a lot more than I re tech stuff :-/
Alex, your articles in UK's BG Mag are one of the main reasons I grab my copy. Keep up the great work.
And not one comment about the great NAMM pics?
That stuff's some of the (much needed) fluff that sells magazines. I like the tech stuff and to Tom's credit there's a healthy dose of it that's both informative and understandable to people who maybe have a little grasp on things but certainly no engineering degree.
