New TC Elec. BH550 & 800

[drpepper]

Car analogies never work. I think they should be banned and anyone who uses one should have their head examined...but here's one, haha!

Suppose someone wants to buy a car for the purpose of being competitive in racing (unmodified) at a local track on weekends. They want a car that can do a 12 second quarter mile. It's generally the case that some cars with 450 HP or so can do this, so using HP and as determinative of acceleration, they decide that they want a "450 HP car."

This person buys the ACE RoadHammer450, based on the advertising that it is 450 HP and, further, that it is capable of a 12 second quarter mile.

The ACE RoadHammer450 proves to be fast enough for its purpose (analogous to an amp being loud enough) and drives with a good feel and a sweet exhaust note. Most agree. It wins more races than it looses to "similar" cars and does it in style, even 500 and 600 HP cars.

Now, when people at the track refer to horsepower, it's most normally the case that they're talking in terms of horsepower at the wheels (WHP) instead of horsepower at the crank (brake horsepower or BHP).

After gaining acclaim as a quick car, the RoadHammer450 is put on a dynamometer to measure its WHP. Because of the operation of the unique design of the flywheel used in the RoadHammer450, which uses the company's Acceleration Pulse Management (APM) technology, the dyno measures 236 HP, even though the BHP is 450. The reason is that the Flywheel's APM uses a device similar to an anti-lock break module.

On learning of the dyno results, some RoadHammer450 owners say they didn't get all the WHP they paid for and vocally denigrate the car as only "seeming" like a 12 second car. Some criticize that "anyone can bolt a ABS module to their transmission backwards…same thing."

Some owners realize that regardless of the WHP measurement, the car is fast enough, and they like the way it drives.

 

[smogg]

Ah yes;
but the part you left out is that if you run with the "seems like" 450 whp car vs the car with "real" 450 whp past the quarter mile point, the "seems like 450" car just runs out of juice and is pretty much useless past that point. Where as the "real 450" will continue to gain speed while maintaining stability up to a half mile or more.

THAT is the difference between "seems like" & "is."

Car analogies never work. I think they should be banned and anyone who uses one should have their head examined...but here's one, haha!

Suppose someone wants to buy a car for the purpose of being competitive in racing (unmodified) at a local track on weekends. They want a car that can do a 12 second quarter mile. It's generally the case that some cars with 450 HP or so can do this, so using HP and as determinative of acceleration, they decide that they want a "450 HP car."

This person buys the ACE RoadHammer450, based on the advertising that it is 450 HP and, further, that it is capable of a 12 second quarter mile.

The ACE RoadHammer450 proves to be fast enough for its purpose (analogous to an amp being loud enough) and drives with a good feel and a sweet exhaust note. Most agree. It wins more races than it looses to "similar" cars and does it in style, even 500 and 600 HP cars.

Now, when people at the track refer to horsepower, it's most normally the case that they're talking in terms of horsepower at the wheels (WHP) instead of horsepower at the crank (brake horsepower or BHP).

After gaining acclaim as a quick car, the RoadHammer450 is put on a dynamometer to measure its WHP. Because of the operation of the unique design of the flywheel used in the RoadHammer450, which uses the company's Acceleration Pulse Management (APM) technology, the dyno measures 236 HP, even though the BHP is 450. The reason is that the Flywheel's APM uses a device similar to an anti-lock break module.

On learning of the dyno results, some RoadHammer450 owners say they didn't get all the WHP they paid for and vocally denigrate the car as only "seeming" like a 12 second car. One legendary racer, who was rejected from production testing, often says the APM makes the RoadHammer's exhaust note sounds like a low bit-rate mp3 recording of a Corvette Z06. Many hang on his every word. Some criticize that "anyone can bolt a ABS module to their transmission backwards…same thing."

Some owners realize that regardless of the WHP measurement, the car is fast enough, and they like the way it drives.

 

[Stranger Danger]

Ah yes;
but the part you left out is that if you run with the "seems like" 450 whp car vs the car with "real" 450 whp past the quarter mile point, the "seems like 450" car just runs out of juice and is pretty much useless past that point. Where as the "real 450" will continue to gain speed while maintaining stability up to a half mile or more.

THAT is the difference between "seems like" & "is."

How many TC amps do own/gig?

 

[drpepper]

Ah yes;
but the part you left out is that if you run with the "seems like" 450 whp car vs the car with "real" 450 whp past the quarter mile point, the "seems like 450" car just runs out of juice and is pretty much useless past that point. Where as the "real 450" will continue to gain speed while maintaining stability up to a half mile or more.

THAT is the difference between "seems like" & "is."

Hahaha!!! You can't seriously be attempting to debate aspects of a fictitious car's performance, complete with descriptions of what it will or won't do past a quarter mile??? That's hysterical!

So, if we're going to do that, first, I didn't refer to "seeming like a 450 hp car" I referred to "seeming like a 12 second car." That points out the problem of deciding that watts are interchangeable with or define loudness...or, in my analogy, that WHP is interchangeable with or defines acceleration, when the acceleration capability in question has already been established. Loud enough is loud enough and quick enough is quick enough. Second, the RoadHammer450 does not run out of juice. It gains speed and maintains stability better than any production car on the planet, up to a half mile or more. It's my analogy, my fictitious car, and my fictitious flywheel. Get your own if you want to make stuff up about it, ha!

 

[lomo]

I have a TC product (BG 208 combo ) that I like. However, in terms of the whole power rating debate, for me, the issue is simple honesty. If they produce an amp that produces 240 watts and, through ingenious power management and some compression, it can produce perceived volumes equivalent to most 750 watt heads, they should say so. Calling it a "750 watt" amp is a lie. Period. That rubs me the wrong way, in a big way, period. YMMV.

 

[Stranger Danger]

I had an Ampeg SVT 7 PRO (1000 watts) that was not as loud as my RH450. That's real life not internet life.

 

[CL400Peavey]

How many TC electronic amps do you own?

None. Tried em, I don't like their compressed lows.

 

[PokeyPrasch]

this thread degenerated into something completely uninteresting.

 

[drpepper]

in terms of the whole power rating debate, for me, the issue is simple honesty. If they produce an amp that produces 240 watts and, through ingenious power management and some compression, it can produce perceived volumes equivalent to most 750 watt heads, they should say so. Calling it a "750 watt" amp is a lie. Period. That rubs me the wrong way, in a big way, period. YMMV.

I can respect that. And the "YMMV" indicates that you can respect that it doesn't rub me the wrong way.

It's pretty ho-hum to me, in light of the explanation, as I understand it; that the RH450, for example, has a 450W power module. Assuming that's factual (which I have no reason to think that it's not), I wouldn't agree that it's a "lie" to call it a "450 watt amp."

That's not why I'm not rubbed the wrong way at the "Long term watts RMS" is 236 for my amp when I might have incorrectly believed that figure was 750. Principally, I'm unconcerned (as I would be unconcerned if some specific measure was 100 or 50 or 1) because it doesn't affect how loud the amp is.

 

[drpepper]

this thread degenerated into something completely uninteresting.

And this is why we can't have nice things. It all starts with a car analogy.

 

[Guinness20]

I have a TC product (BG 208 combo ) that I like. However, in terms of the whole power rating debate, for me, the issue is simple honesty. If they produce an amp that produces 240 watts and, through ingenious power management and some compression, it can produce perceived volumes equivalent to most 750 watt heads, they should say so. Calling it a "750 watt" amp is a lie. Period. That rubs me the wrong way, in a big way, period. YMMV.

+100000000000... you get the idea. You can take all your car analogies and shove them where the sun doesn't shine, at the end of the day they are misleading consumers. Some of their amps may seem louder than other amps with more power, but to be frank I don't care because I wouldn't buy from a company that lies about their products the way TC do.

 

[Stranger Danger]

None. Tried em, I don't like their compressed lows.

You have to admit that your opinion is somewhat uninformed. The point that the good Dr. and I are trying to make is that if you didn't read about it then there is no way in hell that you would think that it's underpowered in anyway. That's if you had gigged it.

The compressed lows (aka tight) is what makes it sound like a vintage bass amp not a modern amp. That is something I like.

Again, I don't get my panties in a wad over the numbers because I have actual real world experience with the amp and I know what it can do.

If the RH450 power is any indication then this new BH800 should be bowel blaster for sure.

 

[Thundar]

Your order has become tiresome....I must dance!

 

[Stranger Danger]

Your order has become tiresome....I must dance!

Do you vant to touch my monkey?

 

[CL400Peavey]

You have to admit that your opinion is somewhat uninformed. The point that the good Dr. and I are trying to make is that if you didn't read about it then there is no way in hell that you would think that it's underpowered in anyway. That's if you had gigged it.

The compressed lows (aka tight) is what makes it sound like a vintage bass amp not a modern amp. That is something I like.

Again, I don't get my panties in a wad over the numbers because I have actual real world experience with the amp and I know what it can do.

If the RH450 power is any indication then this new BH800 should be bowel blaster for sure.

How is my opinion uninformed? You have no idea what my experience is, or what I heard from the amp.

 

[Stranger Danger]

How is my opinion uninformed? You have no idea what my experience is, or what I heard from the amp.

You said you tried it. I tried caviar once but I wouldn't jump in a caviar thread and drop opinions. Gigging the amp is where the rubber meets the road.

(But you're likely just trolling so I'm probably wasting my time.)

 

[CL400Peavey]

My experience with the TC amps, is through a very transparent cab. When you push them through that kind of system, you can hear the lows and highs squash. That isn't what I want out of any amp, tube or otherwise.

 

[smogg]

How many TC amps do own/gig?

Why on Gods green earth would I own something I don't like. I spent enough time (for me) early on to decide I DO NOT LIKE THE RH SERIES TC AMPS. (the 450 to be specific) Way too compressed at bedroom volume and WAY WAY too compressed at gig volume.

This is me as a working muso speaking, not an engineer. The fact that TC embellished the wattage ratings just verified what my ears heard from the get go. This does not mean that you have to agree with me, but don't try to sell be your rationalization about something that just plain sounds blah to MY ears. I spend my money where it benefits me most.

Hopefully the BH series amps will be a winner based on my needs & wants. The RH series was/is not.
So as was said earlier... "it's all good" ...... Looking forward to 3rd party bench testing.

 

[Pimmsley]

You said you tried it. I tried caviar once but I wouldn't jump in a caviar thread and drop opinions. Gigging the amp is where the rubber meets the road.

(But you're likely just trolling so I'm probably wasting my time.)

Dude you are really starting to sound a bit lame accusing people of trolling when most points you are fighting are valid points...

Me thinks the dude doth protest too much...

Are you sure you are happy with your amp ?

TC did a $hitty thing by trying to hide their amps true power rating with marketing garbage, it put a lot of noses out of joint here, and rightly so... If you enjoy your amp, that's great, but why keep putting people's comments down by accusing them of provocative behaviour... It's a forum... Get used to people having an opinion.

Hopefully TC learned from their mistakes and these ratings for the new amps are honest.

Personally I'll reserve my judgement following some bench tests...

Is Tom B reading this thread ? Save us from our underpowered misery, please...

 

[Shardik]

What I don't quite get is why the people who are not interested in the amps in question insist to hammer their negativity repeatedly into a thread like this. If I should enter every thread of products that I choose not to buy and argue vigorously my arguments against the product, what would that achieve? We all have different preferences which makes us weigh the properties of products differently.

About this power rating issue: It is something that is known. For some this is a deal breaker, for others it is not.

Me? For me the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I would try it before I buy it. It's as simple as that. But I love the enthusiasm about a new product.