Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Behringer EP2500 with Ampeg SVT610HLF

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by ndjx, Apr 30, 2004.


  1. ndjx

    ndjx

    Oct 26, 2001
    MN
    Hey everyone,

    My band is about to go on tour again this summer and the B2R just isn't quite cutting it with my cab. I found a really good deal on this poweramp and was wondering if it would work ok with my cabinet? It's 600 watts RMS, 1200 peak. The amp is rated at 2500. Would it be better to get the lower powered model? I don't wanna risk blowing my cabinet. I plan on using a Behringer Bass V-amp Pro as my preamp. Anyways, any comments on the reliability of this poweramp?

    It would be really nice if we could steer this thread of away from being another ethics thread. Thanks.

    I also plan on selling my B2R after I get my rack setup, I'll post that up in the For Sale section when I'm ready.

    Thanks.
     
  2. DaveDeVille

    DaveDeVille ... you talkin' to me ?? Supporting Member

    if the Behringer really is set up as a copy of the QSC RMX2450 ,
    then you don't have to run it in bridge mode ... it should put out about
    500 - 600watts { @ 8 ohm } per channel , or 700 - 800watts { @ 4 ohm } ... in other words , you can use only one channel to power your 600watt cabinet , and just not use the other channel on the power amp.

    . btw , you didn't mention which PRE-AMP you are gonna use , you do know that you need one , right ?

    there have been discussions about not using pre-amps , but i don't know of anyone set up like that ... :meh:

    edit : oops , i just noticed you DID mention your choice of pre-amp .
    sorry , sometimes i get ahead of myself ... :oops:
     
  3. Bob Lee (QSC)

    Bob Lee (QSC) In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio! Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Jul 3, 2001
    Costa Mesa, Calif.
    Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
    I can vouch for the original design of the amp, but not for how well it was implemented and manufactured by the copiers. ;)
     
  4. DaveDeVille

    DaveDeVille ... you talkin' to me ?? Supporting Member

    Bob ,
    after reading a few of your many excellent responses to people's questions , i just purchased the RMX 2450 , and can vouch for it's power AND customer service !! this was a major factor in my decision to go with your product ...
    { yes , this is a shameless plug for QSC !!! }
    :D
     
  5. Stinsok

    Stinsok Supporting Member

    Dec 16, 2002
    Central Alabama
    Courts erred in trademark duel on doing The Wave

    BY GEOFF MANTOOTH
    Guest Columnist

    Amar Bose was a successful inventor and entrepreneur. If his name is familiar, it's because you've heard of Bose speakers, which are high-end, high performance speakers for sound systems.

    After writing on patented inventions the last couple of months, this month delves into trademarks, and particularly well known trademarks. Bose Corporation moved to stop another business from adopting an encroaching trademark. While the tale offers insight into how to acquire well known trademarks, it creates ambiguity in figuring out how to avoid them when choosing a new mark for your products.

    Amar Bose was an MIT electrical engineer who, in the 1950s, bought a sound system. Disappointed in the poor quality of the speakers, he began researching how to emulate the sounds one heard in a concert hall. He struck on the idea of delivering the sound from not only the front side of the speaker, facing the listener, as in conventional practice, but also the back side, and achieved a richer sound. A sympathetic MIT professor provided some seed money and Bose Corporation was off and running.

    In the 1980s and 1990s, Bose introduced complete sound systems featuring not only its speakers, but radios and CD players, selling them under the trademarks ACOUSTIC WAVE and WAVE. The speakers and sound systems have been a commercial success. Today, the company remains privately held, with annual sales of several hundred million dollars.

    Bose of course isn't the only entrepreneurial company in the sound business. QSC Audio of California had its beginnings in one of the founder's garages. It developed and manufactured power amplifiers for use in sound systems. In 1994 QSC introduced a power amplifier under the trademark POWERWAVE. When QSC sought registration of its mark, Bose cried foul, claiming POWERWAVE was too close to ACOUSTIC WAVE and WAVE.

    When looking to see how close is too close, trademark lawyers consider a number of different factors, such as the marks themselves, the products and whether the same avenues of sales are used. Another factor considered is the fame of the mark. Famous trademarks are entitled to greater protection than unfamous ones. Some marks are so famous as to be beyond debate: Ford, Chevrolet, Kellogg’s and so on. These marks have been in use for decades and their owners have spent large sums promoting the marks. With a famous mark, the products don't have to be too close to each other. For example, Frito-Lay for snack food was entitled to such broad protection as to encompass Fido Lay for dog snacks. Try slapping the Ford logo on watches and see how fast Ford slaps you with a lawsuit.

    Bose told the court that its ACOUSTIC WAVE mark was famous because for 17 years, annual sales had been about $50 million, with annual advertising of $5 million. Since 1993, Bose's sales of WAVE products totaled $250 million, with total advertising expenditures of $60 million. Based on these extensive sales and promotions, as well as trade articles discussing the products, the court found the marks to be famous. Since both companies had incorporated WAVE in their marks and sold sound equipment, the rest of the closeness question was easy; the court said POWERWAVE was too close. In lawyer terms: But for the fame of its marks, Bose would have lost.

    Unfortunately, the court's logic was sloppy. Much of the fame of Bose's marks was acquired after QSC began using it POWERWAVE. In fact, Bose began using WAVE only a year before QSC adopted POWERWAVE. It's tough to become exclusively famous after only a year. The court also relied on reviews of Bose's products to bolster the claim to fame, but such reviews are typically nothing more than media hype. There was even a reference to the "widely circulated Northwest Airlines magazine" that showed a photo of the ACOUSTIC WAVE product. Since when can you buy airline magazines at the newsstand? It seems the saving grace for Bose was that sales of ACOUSTIC WAVE products totaled about $200-300 million before QSC began using its mark.

    So, what does it take to develop a famous mark? A lot of sales and advertising, including reviews. It no longer takes decades to achieve fame, only a few years will do. Getting your product in one of those airline magazines apparently helps, too. On the other side of the coin, when choosing a mark, stay away from anything that has sales in the hundreds of millions. The late comer is charged with exercising caution in adopting a mark.

    Therein lies the irony. Suppose QSC, as part of its ordinary research into the availability of POWERWAVE, called Bose and asked what its sales were. Incidentally, QSC also sells speakers. How do you think the closely held Bose would have responded?

    Geoff Mantooth is a patent and trademark attorney and shareholder of Decker, Jones, McMackin, McClane, Hall & Bates. He can be reached at (817) 336-2400, gmantooth@deckerjones.com



    Everyone feels they are a victim!! Bose did not invent the word "wave" but felt that it was wrong for QSC to use it. My point is that almost anyone with any product to sell feels that someone is copying them. I am sure that when QSC was started in the garage they did not whip up an amp out of thin air. They had someone's design opened up went from there.
     
  6. bmc

    bmc

    Nov 15, 2003
    Switzerland


    Gee Bob...say it ain't so. :eek: :eek: :eek:
     
  7. Bob Lee (QSC)

    Bob Lee (QSC) In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio! Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Jul 3, 2001
    Costa Mesa, Calif.
    Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
    Interesting article, though it incorrectly implies that "PowerWave" was the name of the amplifiers, and it actually is what we call the switch-mode power supply technology used in them. Bose contended that having "Wave" in a QSC trademark would confuse consumers because of their "Wave" trademark in consumer audio products. Bose is a highly litigious company, but they can afford a big legal department.

    Is that copying? No. Did Bose contend that QSC was copying them? No.

    When Pat Quilter started building amps, he designed them himself and didn't duplicate someone else's design. You can't say the same about that B company. ;)
     
  8. Bob Lee (QSC)

    Bob Lee (QSC) In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio! Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Jul 3, 2001
    Costa Mesa, Calif.
    Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
    Learn the difference:

    [​IMG] and [​IMG]


    [​IMG] from [​IMG]

    ;)
     
  9. DaveDeVille

    DaveDeVille ... you talkin' to me ?? Supporting Member

    LOL ... :D :D
     
  10. bmc

    bmc

    Nov 15, 2003
    Switzerland

    Thanks Bob. It's just your spin on things once again.
     
  11. Bob Lee (QSC)

    Bob Lee (QSC) In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio! Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Jul 3, 2001
    Costa Mesa, Calif.
    Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
    Sure it is. :bassist:
     
  12. ndjx

    ndjx

    Oct 26, 2001
    MN
    Um gee thanks for the help? I'd really like some more opinions here if possible not long articles on court stuff.
     
  13. MascisMan

    MascisMan

    Nov 21, 2003
    Dallas, Tx
    Is the cab 4 or 8 ohms? I would put a lot of juice into it just for headroom reasons. You can bridge it mono and then just not turn it up all the way. Many people do that
     
  14. bassic1959

    bassic1959

    Jan 16, 2003
    I used to use a B2R head also. Loved the tone, just not enough ooomph. I replaced the head with an Ampeg SVP-Pro Pre and a Behringer EP1500. Although I use Eden speakers that combined are rated at 800 watts handling, I run the amp in bridged mode producing 1400 watts at 4 ohms. I set the amp volume about halfway and my pre about the same. Plenty of volume, lots of headroom and no blown speakers. Just remember your speaker ratings and don't go nuts with the volume control. You will end up with a great sound and headroom to spare. Hope this helps. I wish every Behringer question did not end up with a lengthy discussion about copyrights and ethics. I respect everyone's opinion, but stay on topic.
     
  15. ndjx

    ndjx

    Oct 26, 2001
    MN
    The cab is 4 ohms.

    So what would you guys say? EP1500 enough? or should I get the next step up?