Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
New TC Elec. BH550 & 800
- Thread starter PokeyPrasch
- Start date
You disagree with what? The fact that TC amps can not hit their rated specs in any situation?
Their proprietary, non-defeatable system, limits their "750 watt" amp to a burst power of 450 watts, and a continuous power of 236 watts. That is done by chopping of the transient peaks in the signal.
Cool.
However. A 750 watt amp, it does not make.
If other manufacturers used non defeatable limiting, could they make the same claims?
I actually really like my BH208, but how you can convince yourself that their marketing isn't a bold faced, intentional, straight up, good old fashioned lie is difficult for me to comprehend. I can fully understand someone liking their products enough to overlook the marketing, but I still see no justification for the marketing itself. It is, at the very best, a premeditated attempt to mislead the bulk of consumers. Anyone paying hard-earned dollars for an amp painted as producing 800 watts deserves/has a right to know how the amp performs in relation to competing products, and that includes true power output. I am looking forward to a bench test, as well as real world reviews.
So...still no one tried this amp?. Bet someone at TC follow this thread and somebody at TC should chime in and clear things out, we are already on page 8.
The instantaneous peak power and their max output voltage both correspond to the claims of power. They have simply decided to manage it differently from other amps.
How do you figure?
With their "different management" both their instantaneous peak power and max output voltage do not meet their claims. On the BH500 they claim a 500 watt output. Their own measurements have that amp at 325 watts burst, at 51v.
Looking through the Link Removed's manual, they only mention the power of the modules used. Not the actual output of the amp. This is a shame, as it probably means they are using the same kind of "management" here.
Don't think the TC guys hang around here much any more and would not expect them to jump back in the line of fire. He/they got chased away by the angry towns folk bearing pitchforks & torches during the initial RH debates.
As I have stated several times in this thread. (and I speak for myself only) IF the new 550 & 800 amps bench out and they do not have that "squashed" sound of the RH series amps, then I'm genuinely interested in these new heads.
If that seams unreasonable then I can always spend my money somewhere else.
Do you all really think the engineers, marketing people, etc., at TC actually sat down and decided to lie to the consumer? LIE? "hey, we can't design a true 450 watt amp, so let's make it 1/2 that and just LIE to everyone"??? Really? Purposefully lie about those numbers? For what possible purpose? To save money? This is all just insane. They tried something different with the RH heads. That's all they did. They took something, tried to make it do something else, and put it out there. I just can't get my head around people being so darn relentless with them over this. It seems the whole world is acting in a similar manner. Pure and total outrage over something really pretty trivial in the end. There' no malice in TC's intentions, they engineered a power amp to act a certain way, and in volume level, they achieved a 450 watt output at the speaker. They did it totally differently than other companies. The amp feels, and acts to me, like a 500 watt bass amp. Why such utter outrage over and over?
They absolutely did lie. They used marketing fluff to match a different section of the market so they could use similar pricing.
Except they didnt. They achieved a 236 watt output. You may be fine with the sound/feel of the amp, but there are plenty of people who can hear/feel the difference between these amps, and amps that have outputs matching the claimed power ratings.
Lie? It's not like the RH amps were cheapo, and they had to fluff it up to fool people. I remember back when I was into car audio, they had these no-name cheapo amplifiers that said "1000 watts per channel", and they were $99. It was pretty obvious they were lying about something, just to grab the lower end of the market. But TC is not some low end company. They make some very high-end gear, and clearly know their way around electronics. I'm just not buying it was all done as a lie. And it's not some phantom marketing department trick either. Marketing puts out there what engineering, or product managers tell them. They designed that amp to compete with 450/500 watt bass amps, and that's all it is. I just don't buy the line of thought it was all a big lie, a trick, a scam, to fool people into buying their amps. That's nuts. The RH amps are beautiful, innovative, and at the time, as cutting edge as can be expected. No one else had a product like that on the market. I think they are getting a little long in the tooth, and am anxiously awaiting an updated line, adding a few toneprints or something.
I am not outraged by TC. I actually like their products and feel their tech is very forward thinking. There are a lot of features in the RH heads I like, but deal breaker for me was the feel & tone. I found the 450 too compressed and the roll off of the bass just too steep. Even with tweaking to me the amp just felt weird. This was well before the output power debates. So I chose another micro that suited my needs instead.
I'm really looking forward to bench and field tests on these new offerings. No animosity here.
I'm really looking forward to bench and field tests on these new offerings. No animosity here.
would and did. The amp sounds great to me, never, ever, had to push it one bit farther than any of the many other class D 500 watt amps I had before. I've always thought amp ratings were pretty fuzzy anyway. I don't rely on specs like that anyway. I tried a 200 watt GK mini amp, along with my 250 watt TC BH250, and at 4 ohms, they were about the same to me. Just in overall headroom and ability to push the speakers. So, one amp says it has 20% more power, but I know that it really doesn't matter in the end. What matters is how it works with speakers. So if TC says 236, or 450, I could care less.
I totally agree about the tone. It is distinct. I didn't like it either. My first RH was sold after a few gigs. Replaced with a series of GK MB heads. Loved the GK tone. Then I kept remembering how that squashed dark tone on the RH really sounded good through my Genz NeoX-212T. So picked up another, and have stuck with it ever since. My bright, wide open tone just grew tiring for me over time, and I started to like the layed back darker squashed sound of the RH.
Because some people have issues. What's really stunning is that isn't even people who own the amp.
That is you. There are many people who wouldnt look twice at an amp claiming 236 watts if it cost $1000. 750 is a different story. TC's marketing group used the marketing claims that matched the price point they wanted to sell their amp at.
There ya go. Our profiles show we both use Mill 5ers and we both use GB NeoX 212. But in the end we have different tone goals/needs. So we part ways at the amp. The BH amps could be that bridge between your tone and mine.
The BH250 is dark too, I often crank the mid and high knobs, but even then, it doesn't get hissy, or sound weird. I'm going to grab at least the 550, maybe the 800 just because I've grown to like the toneprint knob on my BH. I like simple setups, and not having to have a tuner, a chorus pedal, or any pedals, and power cords, all in one amp is my favorite. Plus, I just like new stuff!
Yes the 800 has my attention. I'm assuming (hoping) the hi & low mids vs the single mid on the 250 will allow for greater flexibility. The tuner and tone print are icing. Too bad you can't do both tone prints at the same time. I'll bet that feature could be available down the road though.
