Genz Streamliner 900 and TC RH450 Comparison

[adivin]

There is no comparing a 900 watt Monster to a 450 watt amp. However you want to look at it.

Just call me the objectionable one, he who speaks his mind.

I mean we really can't be doing that can we?

I think most are trying to compare the SL600 to a 450 watt amp. So when is the most powerful amp the best? There's always the Blacksmith then.

 

[Dave Hill]

I didn't get to see the "action" in this thread, but anyone baggin' on Ken for his thoughts must not do any gigs on the level he does, or any at all.

Just out of curiosity, what "level" does Ken gig on?

 

[MikeBass]

Just out of curiosity, what "level" does Ken gig on?

I won't speak for Ken, but VERY high level corporate gigs where they fly him in from Detroit to play.

I'll let Ken comment if he feels. But he's the real deal pro level player.
Trust me.

 

[Jeff Scott]

There is no comparing a 900 watt Monster to a 450 watt amp.

But, that's only a 3dB difference in output. I would think tonality would be a more important aspect than a mere doubling of the output power.

 

[GRoberts]

But, that's only a 3dB difference in output. I would think tonality would be a more important aspect than a mere doubling of the output power.

Could be true, but I've found Headroom can never be overrated. At the same reasonable volume level, an amp with more headroom is usually more touch sensitive, percussive and responsive. That may not be the case between the SL600 and SL900, but for a few more bucks, I'll always opt for the amp with more headroom. ... and for me, that is not about playing louder. It's about punch and response.

 

[GrowlerBox]

But really ....?


I thought you had already made your choice

Anyway, I am the happy owner of both

The "But really?" was directed at the aforementioned mudslingers (known to me by reputation only on this thread, I might repeat) -- I guess my point was that by (almost) all accounts the Streamliner is a great amp, and by absolutely all accounts that I have come across, one with a great sound. "But really", a "mechanical" failure and the resulting decision of one (albeit highly respected) player not to risk his next gig on it should probably not have generated the degree of angst and teeth-gnashing that it did. 'Tis all....

And you're right, I have made my choice, not necessarily for the "better" amp, just for the one that better suited my current situation. Would be nice to have both, and I'm glad you're enjoying them .

 

[Stephen]

The "But really?" was directed at the aforementioned mudslingers (known to me by reputation only on this thread, I might repeat) -- I guess my point was that by (almost) all accounts the Streamliner is a great amp, and by absolutely all accounts that I have come across, one with a great sound. "But really", a "mechanical" failure and the resulting decision of one (albeit highly respected) player not to risk his next gig on it should probably not have generated the degree of angst and teeth-gnashing that it did. 'Tis all....

And you're right, I have made my choice, not necessarily for the "better" amp, just for the one that better suited my current situation. Would be nice to have both, and I'm glad you're enjoying them .

Thanks for clarifying. It could have been taken as anti-GB. I was second guessing my assumption before you responded.

You will love the 450. I was an acoustic image amp only guy for years but the 450 sent them to the back room.

All the best !

 

[Vic]

There is no comparing a 900 watt Monster to a 450 watt amp. However you want to look at it.

I strongly disagree, because as we've found oh so many times before, printed ratings just don't tell the whole story. I've compared the shuttle 9.0 to the RH450 and on a gig, at least subjectively, they seem like about the same amount of power and headroom. So given the Streamliner is based on the same, or even very similar power section as the shuttle 9.0, I think this comparison is not nearly as far off as you seem to suggest.

But even if you throw the power out... I also think there's fair grounds for at least tonal comparison.

IMHO/IME of course, so YMMV as always.

 

[Red Planet]

I think tonality would be a big part of comparing these two amps.

I just think if you need the kind of power (900 watts) the Streamliner has to offer then the TC amp is automaticly out of the running. And yes both the Streamliner 900 and Shuttle9.0 are definitely pushing 900 watts. Easily half a PLX 1804.

3db is a huge difference.

The difference bettween the 450 and the 900 would be omph! The 900 will have way more omph.

I do agree it would be more fair to compare the 600 with the 450 but not the 900. The 900 is gonna stomp the 450 every time in every way. To try and compare the 450 to the 900 is just one more subtle polite way of dragging the brand name down and pulling the perception down of what the 900 is capable of.

The 900 is capable of out performing the 450 in a tight curve and in a straight away as well. It is not fair to the 450 to even try and bring it into the fold of the Big Boys.

IMHO

 

[hasbeen]

I strongly disagree, because as we've found oh so many times before, printed ratings just don't tell the whole story. I've compared the shuttle 9.0 to the RH450 and on a gig, at least subjectively, they seem like about the same amount of power and headroom. So given the Streamliner is based on the same, or even very similar power section as the shuttle 9.0, I think this comparison is not nearly as far off as you seem to suggest.

But even if you throw the power out... I also think there's fair grounds for at least tonal comparison.

IMHO/IME of course, so YMMV as always.

the way we handle the output section on the Streamliner is VERY different then on the Shuttle. If you find it isn't the loudest 900 watt amp, I'll take it in return.

 

[KJung]

Just out of curiosity, what "level" does Ken gig on?

Just to be clear (based on my buddy Mike's over flattering post!), I am a relatively typical 'B' level player (I read, my ear is good, and I play lots of styles, and have relatively average chops and skill on the instrument). I chose the kind of high end corporate type freelance career I do many years ago, and I've been very lucky to be relatively successful at it.

The gigs I do are surely not anything 'musically' special, but are many times very high level, meaning the event is high profile and big money is being spent. That means how you look, how you behave on breaks, your 'professionalism' regarding volume, and even the look for your rig on stage can have as much of an impact on you keeping the gig as anything else (assuming you reach the minimum level of musical competency required for the gig). I've been in situations where a high end 'party planner' requested that a player not be used again for a variety of reasons, none of which were musical in nature.

So, 'high end' in my case is more the venue and situation, versus anything that has to do with my playing level. I'm a basic player who, at this point, gets as many gigs for my attitude and work ethic (and never really folding) versus anything to do with my particular skill level on bass

90% of my work at this point is on the road.

I'm a big fan of providing context for my reviews and clips, so in that spirit, I hope the info above 'peels back the onion' a touch more for those who care to read my other comments.

 

[xed]

Thanks for going into some detail Ken. I wasn't going to ask but I'll admit I was curious.

Everyone's idea of a "good" amp is always thought of in terms of their own situation. Everyone should try to keep that in mind.

In my own case what wouldn't ruffle my feathers at all would probably be a complete deal breaker for Ken and there's nothing wrong about either situation or opinion.

 

[Saluki]

the way we handle the output section on the Streamliner is VERY different then on the Shuttle. If you find it isn't the loudest 900 watt amp, I'll take it in return.

Whoa, cool. Vics main amp is his M9, so when I get my streamliner 900 we'll test em out. Not likely we would ever need that much power, but as Gary said nice to have the headroom. I have always found the micros to fall a bit short in the oomph department vs the more lead sled type, but I am really hoping this amp changes that.

 

[12bass]

Yeah... SL 900 and M9 should be a good heads-up comparison. Going from test reports, the M9 should have a very honest 900 Watts, so it will be interesting to hear how it turns out.

 

[bassjam]

Whoa, cool. Vics main amp is his M9, so when I get my streamliner 900 we'll test em out. Not likely we would ever need that much power, but as Gary said nice to have the headroom. I have always found the micros to fall a bit short in the oomph department vs the more lead sled type, but I am really hoping this amp changes that.

I personally would love to hear this comparison.My main head is also an M9.I love it,but the smaller lighter format sounds promising.Be sure to post the tonal differences too!

I love the micro idea too-but like you they seem to lack the oomph I have in the M9.

 

[svtb15]

Well, i guess perception is somewhat subjective in ways.
Dont want to distract from the thread completely.. But i had a fellow TBer come out to my gig a few weeks ago. He wanted to hear my Uber Quad 1288s.. It was a local gig and i had no PA support.. and it was playing LOUD..
I had my Shuttle MAX12 and Shuttle 9 on the gig.. Swapped out the amps in the middle of the set ... He is an avid fan of his Rh450.. his conclusion was that his RH450 was not as %^&%( loud as the STL9..
Ok , my cabs are different than his etc etc etc..
Im just saying...
Many variables here, i know..
But when he came up to stand next to my rig he giggled at how much air this was moving... Kind of like that tickle you get when you hit the first hill on a roller coaster.
HE didnt think his RH could do the same.. again Im just the messenger here.

I strongly disagree, because as we've found oh so many times before, printed ratings just don't tell the whole story. I've compared the shuttle 9.0 to the RH450 and on a gig, at least subjectively, they seem like about the same amount of power and headroom. So given the Streamliner is based on the same, or even very similar power section as the shuttle 9.0, I think this comparison is not nearly as far off as you seem to suggest.

But even if you throw the power out... I also think there's fair grounds for at least tonal comparison.

IMHO/IME of course, so YMMV as always.

 

[RocketMusic]

Maybe Rocket Music can answer this one. How does the SL600 compare with the RH450 in terms of actual volume? Of course the SL is rated higher, but it has been said that the RH is a very conservative 450 watts and really cranks. When pushed, how do they compare either at 8 ohms or 4 ohms?

Sorry, my first batch of 600's shipped the same day they came in, so I haven't had a chance to fire one up yet. I've got more on the way, so hopefully I'll be able to get to that sooner rather than later!

 

[Vic]

Whoa, cool. Vics main amp is his M9, so when I get my streamliner 900 we'll test em out. Not likely we would ever need that much power, but as Gary said nice to have the headroom. I have always found the micros to fall a bit short in the oomph department vs the more lead sled type, but I am really hoping this amp changes that.

Actually, my M9 is NOT my main amp... it's my big dawg, as I need that kind of power sometimes, but most typically not. By far, the amps I use most are the lightweight class D micro heads in the 500W class. 90% of the time, they have all the horsepower and tone I need.

That said, I'm still going to be very interested in trying out an SL900. Regardless of the horsepower, Ken's description of its tone, which I trust quite a bit, leads me to believe it's the "tube" sound/platform I've been looking for for quite some time.

I really hope the good folks at GB share what happened here, including the plans for remediation. Unlike some folks posting here (not just one), I'm not a big believer in the uber-fragility of tubes and just automatically blaming bad or super fragile tubes, and I'm not convinced GB isn't very well versed in designing a durable amp and decent shipping packaging... this is not the first time they've worked with tubes, and not the first time they've worked with tubes in a small lightweight form factor, either. I just think something else happened here. Take that with a grain of salt tho... I have no facts/details... just an extremely high level of reliability in the past with shipping and using amps containing tubes in the pre, and a firm belief that GB knows how to make a road-worthy product.

 

[bucephylus]

I really hope the good folks at GB share what happened here, including the plans for remediation. Unlike some folks posting here (not just one), I'm not a big believer in the uber-fragility of tubes and just automatically blaming bad or super fragile tubes, and I'm not convinced GB isn't very well versed in designing a durable amp and decent shipping packaging... this is not the first time they've worked with tubes, and not the first time they've worked with tubes in a small lightweight form factor, either. I just think something else happened here. Take that with a grain of salt tho... I have no facts/details... just an extremely high level of reliability in the past with shipping and using amps containing tubes in the pre, and a firm belief that GB knows how to make a road-worthy product.

+1 We do need the data; totally agree that this platform looks very promising.

Vic, not sure what "folks" you are referring to; but, my initial response to Ken's dilemma was simply that when you have a preamp section that has 3 preamp tubes, and there is a functional issue, I would simply have at least popped the cover to see if the tubes weren't seated or failing that popped some of my many spares from the tube drawer in to at least check the box.

Those of us who have been around have plenty of experience with tubes and know full well they are gig-worthy. I think we're both on the same page that we need to know what happened. I also think some of us may have taken different trouble shooting routes, that's all. Diversity is good. I happen to be an R&D scientist in the straight job; so, tend to take a more direct route. But, that's just me. This isn't rocket science; we just need to understand what happened. My 2c. GL

 

[Vic]

+1 We do need the data; totally agree that this platform looks very promising.

+1!

Vic, not sure what "folks" you are referring to...

No worries, and you don't have to defend your experience with me. I really don't wanna' "go here", which is why I generalized my post. The crux of my post was simply because of the 2 out of 2 (essentially) new DOA thing... not to generally state tubes should never be suspect when diagnosing amp problems. I know better than that, too.