• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

New Arkham Class D “Beast”

Yeah, that's weird. What's the story with that @Arkham Sound?

The Class D module used here is designed around a nominal 4 ohm load, stable at full rated power down to 2.67 ohm. I chose it because of its tone and feel, not because of its wattage rating.
From what I've seen on the bench, the power specs are conservative. But I'd prefer to cite them rather than make claims or caveats.

It's no big deal for an amplifier with an output transformer - like your SVT - to include a dedicated 2 ohm tap.
Class D amplifiers are a different story. I believe that the GB Shuttlemax you mentioned is not 2 ohm compatible - it's actually driving your two 4 ohm cabs separately.
 
Curious Andy. Are you dropping the rail voltage for 2 ohm operation? My understanding from Ice was that they did not recommend 2 ohm operation. I know that there are some manufacturers that are using the 700 into 2 ohms but use a switch that lowers the rail voltage.
 
No, the rail voltage remains constant. This application was done will full engineering review and approval by IcePower as well. All of our amps are also fully tested and approved to international safety standards which includes thermal testing of all critical components under 2 ohm operation. We also do accelerated aging and stability tests at 2 ohms.
 
Even an amp with real world guaranteed 2 ohm ratings and a history of successful operation?

Why not?
In my mind a well designed 2 ohm stable amp run at 2 ohms should be just as reliable as a well designed 4 ohm stable amp run at 4 ohms.

Not that it's just as easy or costs less to design and build the reliable 2 ohm stable amp.

(typo #9067 fixed)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: murphy
In my mind a well designed 2 ohm stable amp run at to ohms should be just as reliable as a well designed 4 ohm stable amp run at 4 ohms.

Not that it's just as easy or costs less to design and build the reliable 2 ohm stable amp.

EXACTLY the same criteria are used, with 2 ohm data instead of 4 ohms.

It's ALL about the thoroughness of the design.
 
in any case---I love the Ice 1200 and have not played through an amp with the 700 that I dug. I hope there is a "trickle down" engineering at Ice. The tonal balance and note envelope of the 1200 is just what I'm looking for. Now if I could get that in a 700 or 800 watt module. Especially one that is less than 12" long. Can't fit a 1200 into the 8" cabs. I'll be switching to the Pascal in the 8" cabs and the 1200 in the 12" cabs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 31HZ
To clarify, Murphy was talking about 2 ohms and the Subways, in response to Mike's comments about not trusting an amp rated at 2 ohms into a 2 ohm load.

Thanks Andy

Ah -- apologies to you both for my misread, then. I got that it was in response to Mike's comment but goofed which amp you were talking about "not trusting into 2 Ohms," Murphy.

I don't believe I've ever gigged any of my amps with less than a 4 Ohm load, so I can't speak from experience to running at 2 Ohms. Over years of reading TB threads, though, I got the impression that (for some amps, at least) it was something of a gray area and put more stress on components than might be prudent long-term. Heads running hot (and the occasional thermal shutdown/failure) was a common theme. Reduced control over the speaker was a less common one, but one I recall. There were mixed messages (sometimes from users, sometimes from manufacturers) about the advisability of 2 Ohm operation -- the Eden WT550 (never owned one, but I dig my friend's 550), to cite one example, was variously rated for a 2 Ohm or a 4 Ohm minimum load, depending on when you bought yours.

Even now, there are power amps that are rated for less power at 2 Ohms than at 4 Ohms and bass amps for which 2 Ohm operation is "tolerated, but not encouraged" (quote from a company rep). Neither is necessarily a fault with the amp -- and if it's advertised honestly, then I guess that's just the way it is -- but, taken with everything else, contributes to an impression (or did for me) of 2 Ohm operation being inherently "a little bit dangerous..."

In my mind a well designed 2 ohm stable amp run at 2 ohms should be just as reliable as a well designed 4 ohm stable amp run at 4 ohms.

Not that it's just as easy or costs less to design and build the reliable 2 ohm stable amp.

(typo #9067 fixed)

EXACTLY the same criteria are used, with 2 ohm data instead of 4 ohms.

It's ALL about the thoroughness of the design.

...but I guess that depends on the amp. As I said, I'd feel pretty confident running my GBE at 2 Ohms, but I was under the impression that that was, at least potentially, more stressful for the amp (though accounted for in the design) than 4 or 8 Ohm operation. I'm happy to be corrected there.

I appreciate your thoroughness and conservative approach to reliability, Andy (one reason I hold on to my GBE), and, if you design an amp for 2 Ohms, I believe it, but I think I get where Mike was coming from with his comment, too.

I don't know what this amp sounds like, but 'The Beast of Both Worlds' is just fabulous, like a 50's cheesy black and white sci-fi movie title. Bravo !

Those are some of the best movies -- some are more nuanced than you'd expect (and some aren't)! I dig the name, and the amp itself looks promising. I'm curious to hear more of @J.Wolf's impressions as he gets more time with the amp.
 
...but I guess that depends on the amp. As I said, I'd feel pretty confident running my GBE at 2 Ohms, but I was under the impression that that was, at least potentially, more stressful for the amp (though accounted for in the design) than 4 or 8 Ohm operation. I'm happy to be corrected there.

As Mr. Arnopol pointed out, heat is not the best thing for semiconductors. But there is more to it than that. Semiconductors die from crib death (I believe this was about 1/50,000 in the 80's or 90's, usually DOA or dies within normal factory burn-in), exceeding the thermal rating (not running at the high end of thermal ratings, but above), over-voltage (includes static discharge/ESD damage from poor handling, even before the part reaches the factory, often mistaken for a crib death, can make it past burn in, lasting, days, weeks or moths... the walking wounded, common with obsolete/out of production/surplus parts which are needed to keep old designs alive), or just old age (IIRC 20+ years typical, here is where keeping stuff cooler can help extend the age, but probably N/A to bassists... do you plan to keep your amp over 20 years?). <---My use of "(" ")" keeps this from being a run-on sentence. By the late 90's, I walked away from electronics, service and support, jumping out of the pot and into the fire, so I'm sure things have changed and my memory is fogged, but that should be the basic theory of it, and does not include such malpractice as counterfeit parts and user abuse (not beating the users, we all want to, but the user abusing the gear).

I believe the expectation that parts will run warmer or you will make the amp work harder at 2 ohms is false or at least a moot point for MI amps. For SS/class D, there are two types of amps I am aware of, those with a switch for 2 ohm operation, offering the same wattage at 2 ohm as 4 ohms (like GB IIRC or Mesa... nice as you don't need two 4 ohm cabs to get full power) and amps without a switch (requiring a 2 ohm load to get to full power, kind of nice for me, allowing me to detune performance for weaker cabs/lower volumes in my living room).

Amp with a 2 ohm switch: Moot. You have a D800. You have a pair of 4 ohm cabs, you play 1 cab and have around 800 WRMS, or you use both cabs, flip the switch and still have 800 WRMS available. Same temperature, 800 WRMS = 800 WRMS. Maybe you turn down and run cooler.

Amp without a 2 ohm switch: Maybe moot. You have a Carvin BX1600. You have a pair of 4 ohm cabs, you play 1 cab and have around 400 WRMS, or you use both cabs, and then have 800 WRMS available. Maybe you turn down and make it moot. Or maybe you just use both channels at 4 ohms and get the same power to both cabs at half the rated capacity making it moot.

Either way, if it's a good design, it won't matter.

I appreciate your thoroughness and conservative approach to reliability, Andy (one reason I hold on to my GBE), and, if you design an amp for 2 Ohms, I believe it, but I think I get where Mike was coming from with his comment, too.
Amen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkA
I appreciate your thoroughness and conservative approach to reliability, Andy (one reason I hold on to my GBE), and, if you design an amp for 2 Ohms, I believe it, but I think I get where Mike was coming from with his comment, too.

I think the amount of engineering (and expertise/experience of said engineers) employed by companies is all over the map. Some just do the minimum required to get an MVP and not get sued and call it good. Others sweat the details.

The boutique side of things is an interesting mix of book smarts and street smarts, and it has been fascinating to see things evolve over time.
 
If these had a mid control rather then a switch I'd be more inclined to check one out but regardless they look awesome.

I had the same reservation before I received the Abyss. But my experience has been that the inherent sound of the preamp coupled with the controls it offers, I am not wanting for any midrange control. Its all right there for me, either by cutting lows and highs, or by popping the mid switch which is beautifully voiced, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BassikBrad
If these had a mid control rather then a switch I'd be more inclined to check one out but regardless they look awesome.
The James tonestack with the Range control really provides a lot of mid control, and IME, sounds more organic and natural than some traditional mid controls I’ve had on other amps. The mid switch is just an added bonus.

The Arkham tutorial, linked above, is a must-read.