• 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.

Bugera Veyron Now Available

#143
ebozzz said:
What I really interpreted Uli's statements, which were made in another thread, to mean is that he felt that the testing & ratings criteria is flawed and needs to be revamped for amp specifications. In so many words, he said that there was no consensus. Is he right?? I have no clue.....
Click to expand...

Still, even if RMS is flawed, it's GOTTA be more useful than peak, right? It seems like most of us have been doing just fine for years matching up RMS ratings from amps and cabs.

Anyway, I know you're just the messenger, haha. It just seems so strange to have to consider purchasing an amp without having any idea how much power it's going to produce.
 
#144
Eminor3rd said:
Still, even if RMS is flawed, it's GOTTA be more useful than peak, right? It seems like most of us have been doing just fine for years matching up RMS ratings from amps and cabs.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's certainly more useful to me. At least with RMS I have some sort of idea of what to expect and how to conduct myself accordingly.

Eminor3rd said:
Anyway, I know you're just the messenger, haha. It just seems so strange to have to consider purchasing an amp without having any idea how much power it's going to produce.
Click to expand...

:D Not really even the messenger as I don't have a dog in this fight. I was simply interested in the amp as it seems, at least on paper, to be a decent value. Haven't had the pleasure of trying one. That thread that Uli made the comments in was turning out to be fairly interesting to me but it got shut down by the Mods. I would have loved to see more of the discussion that was taking place.
 
#146
The issue really, for me, is how to match cabs for the amp...& also if you are just using your head in a multi band situation where you would be sharing cabs. By now I'd have hoped for a few more hands on reviews from the real world. I'm probably going to order one in a week or so from Thomann but would be nice to hear other users :)
 
#149
Chef said:
No dude. They have a 2000 watt 115.
It's all good and truthy.
Click to expand...

Then he'll give you a line about how he's maligned and how it makes more sense for him to rate it at 2000w because other companies do this thing that they do so his company can just make up whatever. Although it was entertaining to watch him try to go toe to toe with some of our other industry insiders here.
 
#151
Chef said:
OK;
Send me that "2000 watt 115;" and I'll hook up a qsx plx 2402 to it and we'll see about all that.
Or even just my anemic GK MBF500.

Whichever.
Click to expand...

I'll compare it to the "450/900w" 3015LFs I use with my IPR3000. I bet I can make fire before I get to my 'live gig volume'. ;)

Also, we're doing a triple bill next week with Make Fire and Anemic...should be a fun show.
 
#152
Eminor3rd said:
Still, even if RMS is flawed, it's GOTTA be more useful than peak, right? It seems like most of us have been doing just fine for years matching up RMS ratings from amps and cabs.
Click to expand...
It might make amps and cabs more comparable to each other, true.

But RMS as a valuable rating for a bass player?
In this case I have to agree with Uli, RMS would be a constant pink noise signal at a certain maximum total harmonic distortion which doesn't really make sense for measuring a bass player's output signal.
It may be fine in HiFi music reproduction where you use the full frequency spectrum, peaks smoothed out by a studio compressor and where you want to keep THD as low as possible.
In a real world bass application we are putting out a very dynamic, peaky, rhythmic signal with strong emphasis on lows that is far away from that kind of signal that is used in RMS ratings.
So why not use that one peak that you produce when you slap the open E string and rate at what maximum power this can be reproduced without the amp breaking in?
And why measure at 0.5% THD where many of us bass players just want that bit-o-grit that comes from a distorted signal?

So I'm not saying that giving peak power numbers is the holy grail, especially as there's no clearly defined measuring method for this.
But in my opinion it gives you more of an idea about what an amp can do for your bass signal than RMS can.

Except comparing it to other manufacturers' equipment, that is... ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ebozzz and disssa
#155
Mr. Foxen said:
How useful RMS watt ratings are is demonstrated by the whole 'valve watts' thing. The watts might be the same, the perceived volume, that is the relevant thing, totally different.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
And that is especially because of the tube's compression and distortion.
If you'd measure peak Watts in tube amps they would probably be shown as completely underpowered as they cut the peaks creating a lot of THD, but it is a very nice sounding distortion.
So even if they can't get any higher in the peak signals, the average signal below the peaks can still get louder without making the amp sound ugly as most solid state designs do.
That's why in perceived loudness they seem to have much more power than identically rated solid states.
With Class-D this becomes even more evident as they really don't like to be overdriven, even way less than old school solid states.
As you absolutely want to prevent this, you have to stay on the safe side even with the peaks, which leads them to seem to have way less power than solid states or even tubes.

But then, add a good compressor/limiter to any of these amps, and they will all reach the same level of loudness if they have the same power rating.
Well, at least if the power supply and the capacitors can hold up to the increased energy consumption then, which is another story...
 
#156
Rating amps and speakers like that just plain takes advantage of the mostly uninformed musician. For the most part the ratings given by manufactures make it reasonably easy to compare different brands - at least to some extent. Companies like Behringer coming up with yet another way of specifying their products does not help one bit (remember TC with their "Power Module Watts"). What's keeping Behringer from telling the specs like most of the rest do? <- see first sentence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: backin82 and S-Bigbottom
#157
They do it for marketing. They know that people will see it next to others and say, "The B has more watts and is cheaper, then I will take the B."
If it was ratted between 300-500 watts or whatever its real rating is, then there would not be as much interest as it now has.
It says 2,000 so a lot more are interested just by this number. That is why we are talking about it is such details, because of 2,000.
How ever they get that number, it looks good.

edit @tom-g is a faster typer then i am.
 
Last edited:
#158
At that price point if it's only a 500 watts amp, sounds good, has nice features and proves to be reliable.... Who really cares how they market it? Other manufacturers do other things to generate excitement. Now, I have NOT tried either of the Veyron amps. Probably won't be trying them unless I just happen to come across one in a store setting. Barring some unfortunate event, I can safely say that I won't be ordering one as I am am pretty happy with my amp situation right now. What was of interest to me was the dialog that was taking place. Different perspectives being shared. I see valid points on both sides.....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: S-Bigbottom

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back