I disagree.
I own both (XLS2000 and a ProLite 2.0) and to my ears they are nearly identical.
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.
Power Amp Help.....
- Thread starter kenny ames
- Start date
I disagree.
I own both (XLS2000 and a ProLite 2.0) and to my ears they are nearly identical.
I your pre amp has enough head room to drive them and not change significantly tonally then sure they will sound pretty close. If your amp is getting to squishy tube sound before you get as loud as you want, then they are not the same. The ProLite 2.0 is much easier to drive to its full potential, so the OP wont have to push his pre as hard to get there.
I use an Aguilar DB 659 pre with a QSC PLX 1804, usually with a Genz Benz Uber 410 cab. Prior to the PLX 1804, I used a QSC RMX 850.
I purchased the PLX 1804 from a fellow TB'er a few months ago. The only reason that I replaced the RMX 850 was due to the size & weight.
I tried a brand new Crown XLS 1500 last year. I had to crank the volume all the way up to get the same power as I did with the RMX 850 at about the 10:00 position. That didn't make any sense. After troubleshooting potential problems, with some guidance from Crown's Tech Support, (no change in the XLS 1500's performance), I sent it back, and used my RMX 850 until I purchased the PLX 1804.
I couldn't be happier. I have plenty of power with much to spare. I love the sound of the Aggie paired with QSC. Both QSC power amps have performed flawlessly for me. No complaints.
Good luck.
I purchased the PLX 1804 from a fellow TB'er a few months ago. The only reason that I replaced the RMX 850 was due to the size & weight.
I tried a brand new Crown XLS 1500 last year. I had to crank the volume all the way up to get the same power as I did with the RMX 850 at about the 10:00 position. That didn't make any sense. After troubleshooting potential problems, with some guidance from Crown's Tech Support, (no change in the XLS 1500's performance), I sent it back, and used my RMX 850 until I purchased the PLX 1804.
I couldn't be happier. I have plenty of power with much to spare. I love the sound of the Aggie paired with QSC. Both QSC power amps have performed flawlessly for me. No complaints.
Good luck.
This is correct. For that fact, the RMX's 10:00 position (~37%) is the recommended initial setting when gain matching with a mixing desk.
Riis
Very happy with the Crown XLS 1500. I'm running a line mixer so not subject to the vagaries of input sensitivity.
I went from a QSC PLX 1602 to the PLX (2) 1804 with my Alembic F-1X and have been extremely pleased. The 1804 just matched up better with any combination of speaker cabs that I am likely to throw at it. The 1804 is 500 wpc at 8 ohms and 900 at 4 ohms. The 1602 was-IIRC-350 into 8 and 500 into 4 ohms. Even in bridge mode, the 1602 did not seem to have the 'girth' down low that the 1804 does. Can't tell you why from a technical standpoint...
Kim
Kim
Passinwind
I know nothing.
- Dec 3, 2003
- 23,069
- 46,011
- Disclosures
- Designer/Toaster Tech @ Passinwind Electronics
The 1804 makes a great bass amp if the two channel-only format (IOW no bridging) works for you. I too like it better then the 1602 I used to own. I borrowed the QSC A/B/X comparator and confirmed that with proper gain matching a borrowed CA-9 and the 1804 were indistinguishable in my particular playing situations. I don't use my QSC on gigs very often though, because my 1000 watt plate amp has extensive DSP capability, weighs even less, and has no fan, which sometimes matters to me.I went from a QSC PLX 1602 to the PLX (2) 1804 with my Alembic F-1X and have been extremely pleased. The 1804 just matched up better with any combination of speaker cabs that I am likely to throw at it. The 1804 is 500 wpc at 8 ohms and 900 at 4 ohms. The 1602 was-IIRC-350 into 8 and 500 into 4 ohms. Even in bridge mode, the 1602 did not seem to have the 'girth' down low that the 1804 does. Can't tell you why from a technical standpoint...
You're welcome. The dbx DriveRack set-up wizard offers a menu of known power amps and provides a suggested attenuator setting for each with the unwritten understanding that the user is attempting to set gain structure with a properly configured mixing desk. Amp-to-amp, the recommended attenuator settings are all over the board!
A fully cranked (no attenuation) RMX will clip @ -15 to -10 on the main sliders. Not good.
Riis
Thanks ALL for the info.
Per Zooberwerx post and some one else's I realized I wasn't using a bridged spkr cable. I know simple but has been many, many years since I've done a rack/power amp set up.
Picked up a bridged mono spkr cable today at the NAMM show here in town and the amp is thunderous. Have some in town stuff this weekend and will A/B it against the Trace power section but at home it seems to be what I was hoping for to begin with.
Thanks again for all who took time to chime in. It is appreciated and helped me to get to where I was wanting.
Per Zooberwerx post and some one else's I realized I wasn't using a bridged spkr cable. I know simple but has been many, many years since I've done a rack/power amp set up.
Picked up a bridged mono spkr cable today at the NAMM show here in town and the amp is thunderous. Have some in town stuff this weekend and will A/B it against the Trace power section but at home it seems to be what I was hoping for to begin with.
Thanks again for all who took time to chime in. It is appreciated and helped me to get to where I was wanting.
Glad things are working out to your satisfaction and remember:
ROTSS - "rule out the simple stuff".
Riis
