Dismiss Notice

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

Crest CA6 vs. QSC PLX2402 Best amp for bass

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by kelbrihan, Oct 6, 2005.


  1. QSC 2402

    10 vote(s)
    28.6%
  2. Crest CA6

    25 vote(s)
    71.4%
  1. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Crest CA6 vs. QSC PLX2402, I currently own both and have a/b ed the best I can. Has anyone else owned both? Which has the better track record for bass? For large gigs, i'm running a 4ohm Epifani 212 on one side and a 4ohm Epifani UL410 on the other and for smaller gigs just the 212. I do take into consideration the weight difference.
     
  2. Arthur U. Poon

    Arthur U. Poon

    Jan 30, 2004
    SLC, Utah -USA-
    Endorsing Artist: Mike Lull Custom Basses
    I used to have use a QSC PLX2402. I then bought a Crest CA-9; the PLX2402 is long gone.
     
  3. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Yeah but what about the CA6?
     
  4. Dan1099

    Dan1099 Dumbing My Process Down

    Aug 7, 2004
    Michigan
    This is going to get ugly... :)
     
  5. Zooberwerx

    Zooberwerx Gold Supporting Member

    Dec 21, 2002
    Virginia Beach, VA
    I'm using a CA-6 to drive an Acme B-4. I have no complaints.

    Riis
     
  6. emjazz

    emjazz Supporting Member

    Feb 23, 2003
    Boston, MA
    My money would go with a CA6 everytime. It sounds robust, powerfull, full; the kind of power that can hit you in the chest and also allow great control of dynamics. I love that amp. I had one and only got rid of it to get an Ashdown head. Didn't need all the power of the CA6 (or the heft).
     
  7. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Yeah the heft is why I bought the 2402
     
  8. tadawson

    tadawson

    Aug 24, 2005
    Lewisville, TX
    I am running CA-6's, CA-9's and a 3001 in my PA, and the Crest stuff just keeps on giving and giving . . . . . . and is insanely easy to work on, should you ever need to - fully modular. You can change an entire channel in about 5 minutes . . . . . And no, I have never blown one, I just take them down every few years for a good cleaning . . . .

    - Tim
     
  9. Arthur U. Poon

    Arthur U. Poon

    Jan 30, 2004
    SLC, Utah -USA-
    Endorsing Artist: Mike Lull Custom Basses
    The PLX-Series vs CA-Series amps subject has been posted quite a bit, I suggest that you do a search, because it has gotten heated in the past.

    I don't have a CA-6; but you do. Have you tried both amps head to head using the same cab setup?

    I had the opportunity to do this with my CA-9 and my PLX 2402. I took both amps to the same venues over a few week span and used each, alternating between sets. I highly recommend that you try this, then post your findings.

    Which amp hits clipping on your lowest notes sooner? Which amp has more volume and headroom before it reaches clipping?

    I found both amps had a really good sound quality, but the Crest had much more volume and headroom. Perhaps the CA-9 vs the PLX2402 isn't a fair comparison, though.

    From a specs standpoint, the PLX2402 has more rated wattage. Plus, it's lighter and has features the CA-6 doesn't: defeatable Clip limiter, Low pass filter, Speakon outputs, etc. plus it weighs half as much as the CA-6.
    PLX2402: 700 watts at 4 Ohms, 21 Lbs. CA-6: 600 watts at 4 Ohms, 44 Lbs. From your post, weight is also a big issue. In that case the PLX2402 will win every time.

    Best regards, Art
     
  10. I thought I'd write a whole bunch and say nothing. I bought 3 QSC amps for my small bar band back in '98. The PLX line was just out and getting great reviews. I got a 1602 for monitors, 2402 for tops and 3002 for subs. They always worked great. The band split up and I managed to keep the 1602 and 3002 so I have limited use with the 2402. A couple years later, I got a great deal on a demo 3002 (used one). I put it in my bass rack to replace an older Crest FA800. I figured that I could use the 1000w at 4ohms to drive my bass cab(s) and have a spare channel in case a PA would ever die and need extra power. OK, that's just how I justisfied it. :meh:

    A friend of mine who runs a sound company was using all Crest (for shows and clubs) and AudioPro (club rentals). I talked to him a couple months back and now he using almost exclusively PLX1602 for his monitors and tops. I really likes them.

    I have been using the PLX line exclusively for the last 7 years, but always find the Crest to have a little more punch to them. I can't explain it, but that's my feeling and not based on any scientific analysis. I'd love to get a bunch of CA amps, but I love the 20lbs QSC, and they are paid for.

    To answer your question... if weight is not an issue, I would use a CA6 over a PLX2402. Just my $0.02.

    See... I told you... whole bunch of words that didn't add much. :D

    Rocky
     
  11. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Yeah that was what I was getting at. The CA9 has 200 more watts @4ohms per side so it is going to win over the 2402, but the 2402 has 100 more than the Ca6 so...I was wondering about issues like reliability, quality of sound, weight, etc.
    I have tried the side by side but by the time that I switch cables and play, I have kinda forgotten what the first one sounded like, y'know?
     
  12. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Thanks Rocky, I guess that I have to decide if the weight issue is big enough to tip the scales, there's also the super depth issue i.e. deeper amp ,deeper rack, that adds to the overall weight. I was hoping to be blown away by the QSC to make my decision easier, I have to keep one and sell the other.
    A while back I was in a similar situatuon, I was useing a Crown Microtech 600 and I received a Stewart 1.2 in a trade deal. I used it and was blown away at the "sound for size" of the Stewart. I was hoping this decision would be easier.
     
  13. Arthur U. Poon

    Arthur U. Poon

    Jan 30, 2004
    SLC, Utah -USA-
    Endorsing Artist: Mike Lull Custom Basses
    Actually from what I've read 200 watts won't make a noticeable increase in perceived volume, but I agree with you there, it doesn't seem like a fair comparison.

    I also tried the "at home" test and noticed the same thing: I couldn't remember one amp from the other after the cords had been swapped.

    IMO this is where the "live-onstage" test helped me. I played with a really loud drummer and guitarist at that time so I needed an amp that could deliver the goods. Yeah, it was a bit of a hassle to pack around an extra amp, but it helped me decide with amp was the best for my needs.

    Perhaps you don't play in a super loud setting, so you may never see either amp hit clipping. In that case, I'd prefer the PLX2402, because it's just so easy to move. From a sound quality standpoint, I couldn't hear any differences between the two.

    -Art
     
  14. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    Yeah I think that I will do this tonight, I'll post my findings tomorrow. Britt
     
  15. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    But what is he using for his bass bins?

    I A/B/C'd my CA9, Stewart World 2.1, and PLX 3002 (which are listed in order of least rated power to most rated power) and for bass, the CA9 was the clear winner (IMHO) in the areas of tone, dynamics, and overall visceral impact. The other two were lighter, and the PLX series offers a very nice set of dip-switchable options. But other than those advantages, I pretty much prefered the CA9 across the board. I now own three CA9's (two for my PA rig, and one for SS bass rig). My PLX 3002 does do a great job on monitors, though.

    Tom.
     
  16. The CA9 is the better bargin IMO. I weighs only a few pounds more and isn't that much more cost. Might as well have the headroom. I used to use a 2402.
     

  17. Oops... I just gave heck to my boss for interrupting me and making me forget to write a sentence! ;)

    I know he was using CA18 and AP6040 on the subs. He told me that he would sell the CA if he could find a buyer as he likes the AP almost as much and they are a lot cheaper and he needs a few more. So this would keep his rig(s) consistent.
     
  18. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    I'm sure that if I owned the CA9 that I would love it but I have the CA6.
     
  19. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    The Republic of Texas
    Match the gain and sonicly, they sould sound the same at or below the CA6 full power rating.
     
  20. kelbrihan

    kelbrihan Banned [Deceiving users with multiple usernames] Banned

    Dec 2, 2004
    The live comparison results.I played with a high volume 4 piece and noted that during the louder songs the CA6 clip light was on at high volumes. The PLX clip light only hit once. The sound man reinforced the praises of the QSC.