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

Carvin DCM 1000 vs. QSC RMX 1450

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Wxp4759cb, May 17, 2002.


  1. Carvin DCM 1000

    13 vote(s)
    59.1%
  2. QSC RMX 1450

    9 vote(s)
    40.9%
  1. Wxp4759cb

    Wxp4759cb

    Nov 23, 2000
    Kansas City, MO
    Which should I get? The RMX has a little more power (bridged to 4 ohms), but I can't find the slew rate or damping factor. Does either have cooling problems? Is the Carvin wattage overated?

    Edit: The RMX is also alot heavier.
     
  2. Phat Ham

    Phat Ham

    Feb 13, 2000
    DC
    From what I've heard either one should perform well. I have a Carvin R600 head, and the power amp section is the same as the DCM600. The thing performs flawlessly. I have a dj friend who has an RMX1450 and he says he pushes it for about 6 hours straight on his gigs with no problems at all.
     
  3. chucko58

    chucko58

    Jan 17, 2002
    Silicon Valley, CA, USA
    I paid for all my gear myself. Well, me and MasterCard.
    Shop around. You can probably find the RMX cheaper than the Carvin.

    I went with an RMX 1850HD myself. And I'm quite happy with it.
     
  4. ldiezman

    ldiezman

    Jul 11, 2001
    Nashville
    hey man. I voted for carvin... mainly because I have no experience with RMX stuff.. But either way you should come out on a good note :). You just want them for power and that is what you will get... I think whatever you can get the best price on is what you should go for IMO
     
  5. HeavyDuty

    HeavyDuty Supporting Curmudgeon Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Jun 26, 2000
    Suburban Chicago, IL
    I have the DCM1000, and like it - but I'm not voting for a favorite. I think they're BOTH good amps!
     
  6. Brendan

    Brendan

    Jun 18, 2000
    Austin, TX
    Ditto.
     
  7. I've been looking at these sames poweramps, I've never used one. So if I have two 8ohm cabs, and I dont bridge the amp, does the (Carvin lets say) run at 4ohms or 8ohms per channel? Cause if its 8, then the power boost aint that much. It would only be 225W per channel, which is what I get from my current amp at 4ohms.

    Ok, and bridging - if you bridge the channels, can you still use both outputs (into two cabs) or only the center one output? Cause if I can bridge and run the two cabs, thats 1000W at 4ohms - now thats some power!

    hOpe that made sense, sorry to tread on your thread :)

    Greg
     
  8. I did not vote.

    I owned an RMX and found them to be solid, completely reliable, very inexpensive. And heavy. Not as heavy as my (former) Godzilla MX-3000a amp (nothing is that heavy).

    I'd own an RMX any day of the week, and I suspect they are probably more reliable than the Carvin. Not knowing this for certain, I didn't vote on speculation. The RMX is low tech, lots of steel and transformer type power. The Carvin is high tech switching.
     
  9. fast slapper

    fast slapper

    Dec 11, 2001
    Fresno, CA
    The Carvins aren't high tech switching, they are the same type as the RMX. I'm sure both are good, but I would go for the RMX.
     
  10. HeavyDuty

    HeavyDuty Supporting Curmudgeon Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Jun 26, 2000
    Suburban Chicago, IL
    If you run one cab per channel (2x8 Ohms), it would be 225W per cab.

    If you run both cabs on one channel (1x4 Ohms, one channel free), you'd get 350W (175W per cab).

    If you bridge, you only have one output (amp defaults to the left gain control) and 1000W, or 500W per cab in your case. Grunt.

    (On edit - corrected specs)
     
  11. So I'd run out from the amp to one cab and then from that cab to the other? Isnt that running in series rather than parallel? I was under the impression cabs needed to be wired different to do that. Or am I missing something? I dont mind telling you, I feel kind of st00pid right now :D

    Greg
     
  12. Yes, you are absolutely correct. I was thinking of the Peavey DPC series. My apologies for not checking first.

    The Carvin at 26 pounds is less weight than the 40 pound RMX-1450. Personally, I would be looking at the RMX 1850-HD instead, as it is designed to run with 2 ohm loads. The 1850 also has the more efficient 2-step Class H output circuitry.

    I replaced both my RMX and MX series amps with PLX models because of the weight.
     
  13. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    No, that's parallel.
     
  14. malibu

    malibu Guest

    Dec 26, 2001
    the connections on the cab -- the 1/4" plugs, binding posts, banana plugs -
    are wired so + and - are all in parallel.

    so a speaker cable running out one cab to another cab has the + and - connected in parallel with amp.
     
  15. Merci :)

    Greg
     
  16. Wxp4759cb

    Wxp4759cb

    Nov 23, 2000
    Kansas City, MO
    Let me make sure I have this right. On a power ach channel is seperate, so the ohms do not effect eachother. So if I run two 4ohm cabs (one each output), then I still have a 4 ohm load, not 2?
     
  17. ebozzz

    ebozzz Supporting Member

    May 17, 2001
    Denver, Colorado
    Think of it as having two power amps. One per channel. If you run one 8 ohm cab on each channel you would get the 8 ohm rated power for channels A & B. Two 8 ohm cabs or one 4 ohm cab per channel and you get the 4 ohm rated power for channels A & B. You would need four 8 ohm cabs or two 4 ohm cabs to get the 2 ohm load. It's not required to run both channels and the same information would apply if either was used individually. I hope that I'm at least being a little clear with this. If not, someboby help me out! :)
     
  18. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    Here's the point: when you're running a power amp in stereo, you wouldn't just say, I have a 4 ohm load. You need to specify the load for each channel. You could be running a 4 ohm cab on each side, in which case your load would be *4 ohms per channel*. You wouldn't just say the amp's load was 4 ohms, 2 ohms, or anything else. Or you could be running a 4 ohm cab on one side and an 8 ohm on the other, in which case you would specify your load as 4 ohms on one channel and 8 on the other. You wouldn't say just that the load on the amp was 2.67 ohms, or 4 ohms, or whatever.

    Now, if you bridge the amp, things change, because bridging means you now have only one amp output rather than two. So you can talk about bridging into 4 ohms, or 8; you wouldn't specify per channel.

    Keep in mind that in terms of an amp's ability to handle a load, bridging into a load of X is equivalent to running a load of X/2 per channel if you were in stereo. So bridging into 8 ohms is like running 4 ohms per channel in stereo. Which shows why you can rarely bridge into 2 ohms--that would be like running 1 ohm per channel in stereo!
     
  19. running in "stereo" requires each poweramp to have its own input. can you do this with only one preamp? send the signal to both amps? i thought you'd need two preamps to do that.

    greg
     
  20. ebozzz

    ebozzz Supporting Member

    May 17, 2001
    Denver, Colorado
    There are some preamps that have stereo outputs. Or I think that you could run the single output with a cable that has a "Y" type connection on one end.