QSC PLX v. Crest Audio CA Series

[inazone]

PB&J;

Boy, did I just date myself with that one.

 

[the dude]

Well, I think this is one of the best threads on TB...

Ever.

...because it's *honest.* No tip-toeing around here.

Nope it's the expression of honest opinions with all the stops pulled.

Good stuff.

Jim - your post was amazing. You are completely right. What I hear you saying is..

"Forget all the damn descriptions and graphs and specs. LISTEN! No, *not* to other people's opinions, listen to YOUR SOUND!"

TB is a great place to get ideas, but at the end of the day, they are just that. Ideas.

The only way for a bass player to decide what gear he/she wants is to PLAY IT! (Ideally in a gig setting or two.)

I've said it before, but let's all log off and go PLAY!!

 

[ster]

JMO but " I think its time to put this whole arguement to rest" is valid. I wish this thread was around two years ago before I bought three plx amps and was told that all high end amps sound and perform the same. Im still waiting for someone to show me why my Trace 280 watt amp gets louder and has less clipping than my 1100 watt plx.

Every time this issue comes up we are led to belive we need to match gain or "buy" more power. Two thousand dollars later, I take these claims with a grain of salt.

Thanks Mr. B for posting.

How can it be valid? How is he going to end the argument? Obviously Jim nor Bob hasn't. There are many people who disagree with both siedes. Nobody can end the argument. Everybody hears things differently. How many times do you hear varying opinions on a preamp,bass,strings,
amplifiers etc. I actually read that someone didn't think Acme's had any low end. Sorry but these arguments won't ever end. I was merely pointing out a contradiction. It just seems to me like he was going to settle the argument based on what hehears. Please don't get me wrong here, I think Jim Bergantino has brought up some eye opening points that I am eager to investigate myself and I like many others are grateful. I just think that some of his sarcasm is uncalled for since I believe that Bob Lee is basing his argument on what he hears. Doesn't it strike anyone as a little arrogant to claim that an argument can be ended without any real proof?

BTW, Which one sounds better tube or solid state?

 

[James Hart]

BTW, Which one sounds better tube or solid state?

depends on which one *you* like best I switched to tubes

Thanks for the posts Jim, I agree with most everything you've said here.... and have been shot down and beat up trying to state them. It took a true Pro from the field

 

[Petebass]

.I think we are all sometimes guilty, myself included, of expecting a new technology, just because it’s newer, to sound and perform the same, or even better, than the one it’s trying to replace, rather than to just judge it on its own merits.

Yes but the same is also true in reverse. In fact I believe that people in general are reluctant to accept new technologies. How many times have I heard people say "Speaker x sounded brittle, I attribute this to the neo magnet". To which I reply, "Then what to what do you attribute brittleness in the many non-neo speakers I've heard that also sound that way?". In other words, the new technology can often become the scapegoat.

I'm not taking sides here. I can see the argument from both sides. As someone who has used many lightweight amps for PA (including PLX's on subs) and who uses neo cabinets for bass, I'm not buying into the philosophy that it has to be heavy to sound good. At least Jim to his credit has tried these things out for himself before drawing a conclusion.

I have a question for you Jim, and please don't take this as an attack - if the market over the next 10 or 20 years evolves such that neo speakers are considered the norm, will you then consider incorporating them into your cabs?

 

[inazone]

How can it be valid? How is he going to end the argument? Obviously Jim nor Bob hasn't. There are many people who disagree with both siedes. Nobody can end the argument. Everybody hears things differently. How many times do you hear varying opinions on a preamp,bass,strings,
amplifiers etc. I actually read that someone didn't think Acme's had any low end. Sorry but these arguments won't ever end. I was merely pointing out a contradiction. It just seems to me like he was going to settle the argument based on what hehears. Please don't get me wrong here, I think Jim Bergantino has brought up some eye opening points that I am eager to investigate myself and I like many others are grateful. I just think that some of his sarcasm is uncalled for since I believe that Bob Lee is basing his argument on what he hears. Doesn't it strike anyone as a little arrogant to claim that an argument can be ended without any real proof?

BTW, Which one sounds better tube or solid state?

You need to reed between the lines a bit. I agree that this agument wont ever end. In part because Bob Lee wont concede that some amps "perform" better than others in different areas. It always ends with teck talk and its a bit missleading.

Example: If you in a loud rock band and you cant hear your self, Jim says if a svt 3-pro clips too much and isnt loud enough, use a 4-pro. Bob says, adjust the gains on both the 3 and 4 pro and they are both equall.

From where I stand, Jim states different products work better for different people. Bob states you have to get them on equal ground to be fair. Your right, people hear things different but I bet most people who take Bobs side havent played both a plx AND a CA amp, including Bob.

Keep in mind, Im not bashing Bob, nor Is Jim. He has had some great info for myself and others and I hope he still will continue. What is frustrating is the basic "in a double blind test, you cant tell the difference" bit. When was the last time anyone did a double blind test at a gig.

 

[inazone]

Lol,
after all my thoughts and posts in this thread about the CA9 being a better amp for my needs than the plx 3402, Ive used the plx at the last two shows and will do so again tonight.

Again I'll say: different gear works better in different areas.

 

[Joe Beets]

What really bothers me is that my ears aren't working well enough to hear the difference. I've AB compared before. If my ears are too shot to pick up an apparently obvious difference in the sound between switching and conventional power amps, that's not good. What else am I missing in the music? What does my bass really sound like? I guess with my screwed up hearing I'll never know.

 

[Kindness]

Is it possible that Jim and Bob are actually arguing two different points? It appears to me that Jim is mainly arguing that for a given RMS rating, a conventional amp will have significantly more dynamic headroom, ensuring faithful reproduction of bass signals at dynamic levels a switching supply amp cannot. Conversely, I believe Bob is arguing that prior to clipping, the two amps will sound nearly indistinguishable. These are two different arguments and, as far as I know, both points may be true.

If the above is true (I certainly could be wrong!) I believe confusion may be occurring because Jim's posts imply that the two amps simply sound different at every volume level. However, Jim never states the volume at which he has made his comparisons. Although, Jim's references to the QSC not faithfully reproducing the input signal imply the QSC is being judged at a sound level that exceeds it's clipping level. I could be wrong and Jim might simply be stating that the switching amplifier technology employed in the PLX causes it to clip at every volume. If so, there is no question there is full-fledged disagreement here, which will not be resolved by any amount of arguing.

I'll continue to read along and enjoy every post in this thread...

 

[Joe Beets]

OK fine. I was already to jump on the CA9 bandwagon, so I went to an online website to order one. I figured that since they have the old boat anchor technology they would be priced like a PV2600 or a RMX1850HD or a Crown XL. But the Crest was $1250. Wow. I would have guessed maybe $599. Then I looked all the way down to the bottom and saw the weight. Forty seven pounds. If I'm going to lug around a hunk of iron like that I'd rather go all the way, RMX5050.

 

[PB+J]

Joe Beets that's my thoughts too--I read this thread and looked up crown amps and saw the price and the weight and thought nope. Why is the "conventional" design so much more?

Then I thought "maybe it's more expensive, and heavier, because it's better." Then I thought "maybe not. A rolex is heavier and more expensive than my timex. Is it better? Not at telling time. Maybe its the same reason you can list a plywood box with a single twelve in it for $430

Have any of you "trust your ears" guys noticed that Bob Lee is talkng about "Blind LISTENING tests?" Which sense do you think he's suggesting people trust? Smell?

 

[zombywoof5050]

Have any of you "trust your ears" guys noticed that Bob Lee is talkng about "Blind LISTENING tests?" Which sense do you think he's suggesting people trust? Smell?

If the switching amp goes up in smoke before the conventional amp (or vice versa), I suppose smell might be useful.

 

[the dude]

OK fine. I was already to jump on the CA9 bandwagon, so I went to an online website to order one. I figured that since they have the old boat anchor technology they would be priced like a PV2600 or a RMX1850HD or a Crown XL. But the Crest was $1250. Wow. I would have guessed maybe $599. Then I looked all the way down to the bottom and saw the weight. Forty seven pounds. If I'm going to lug around a hunk of iron like that I'd rather go all the way, RMX5050.

...that's easy. Do what I did. Buy used. Presto! $600!

 

[tombowlus]

...that's easy. Do what I did. Buy used. Presto! $600!

Yup, I bought one used CA9 for just over $600, and a second for $499. My PLX 3002 cost me over $700 (used).

 

[the dude]

Joe Beets that's my thoughts too--I read this thread and looked up crown amps and saw the price and the weight and thought nope. Why is the "conventional" design so much more?

Then I thought "maybe it's more expensive, and heavier, because it's better." Then I thought "maybe not. A rolex is heavier and more expensive than my timex. Is it better? Not at telling time. Maybe its the same reason you can list a plywood box with a single twelve in it for $430

Have any of you "trust your ears" guys noticed that Bob Lee is talkng about "Blind LISTENING tests?" Which sense do you think he's suggesting people trust? Smell?

Hey blind listening is of course ideal - the idea being that it removes natural bias towards your preference.

Heck I *wanted* to prefer the lighter weight switching-type amps. I was dissapointed when I realized I would have to haul the CA9. But to my ears, it was no contest. That's o.k., though. The Stewart makes a wonderful power amp for our monitors - and it really helps to haul less PA gear weight (then again, the front end is a CA9...)

I think the "a VW will get you there the same a Porsche" and "the Timex is as good at telling time as the Rolex" are great analogies, becuase it is my *enjoyment* of the experience that makes the difference! Lots of people are completely happy with their VWs and Timexes (sp?) and think Porsches and Rollexes are stupid. Are they wrong? I don't think so - but it doesn't make me like Rolexes or Porsches any less (and I don't own either!)

For me the CA9 increases the enjoyment of the experience of playing bass because I like what I hear better than with a Mackie, Stewart or other light weight switching-type amp.

I'm not saying anyone else should think the weight difference is worth it - only that for I want to hear, I've gotta haul.

 

[Arthur U. Poon]

I also don't mind hauling a heavier rack. If that's what it takes for me to get the most performance from my amp rig, no big deal.

IMO the bottom line is whatever works for you.

If you're one of the many, many happy PLX-Series users, fantastic.

- Art

 

[Aram]

I don't possess an engineering degree (it was hard enough for me to get one in polisci ), and the only dedicated power amp I've ever owned or used is my RMX 2450, but I do see Bob's point in matching gains to get a fair comparison. Maybe this is a poor example, but my first amp was a Crate BX-80, and the first thing I noticed was that when I plugged into the 0db input it sounded WAY better (fuller, louder, etc) than the -10db input. I realize that that's at a different stage, but wouldn't that difference bias the output in a similar way (please correct me if I'm wrong)?

Also, I was initially having clipping problems with my RMX 2450, which has (I think) an even lower input sens. than the PLX series, but when I added a Presonus Eureka to my rig (even with the EQ and compression bypassed) I noticed a lot fuller sound, with a ton more headroom and no clipping. I tried the Presonus both in the effects loop of my Demeter, and as a dedicated preamp. Again, I can't say with any kind of credibility that QSC is better than Crest or anything, but I don't think it's unreasonable for Bob to suggest properly matching gains (if you really want an accurate answer).

Having said all that, matching gains really is a pain in the arse...amps should have ONE volume (like my home stereo) to cater to those of us who are intellectually challanged

 

[rockstarbassist]

All I know is, having an amp that weighs more than my cab just doesn't make tons 'o sense.... until you get to pay someone else to carry it!

Hell, last night we played a small (75-100) people outdoor gig, and I just plugged into my Demeter pre, straight to the board, and out through the PA. Tone was great, even the bandmates said so.

Compared to the other amps and pre's I've had before, the Dem just so totally owns them my choice in getting a Stewy 1.2 for now, just to power my 1210, definitely is a trade off. All I need to hear onstage is myself, and everyone out there will be hearing the pure, and wonderfully full unaffected tone of the Dem, so, 40 less lbs. in the rack, just for monitoring purposes, I think will work for me.

Now, when I add 1212 or maybe a 21012, we'll talk about a heavier, more bass-oriented amp because it's already so much junk anyways. But, I got the Schro and getting a 1.2 BECAUSE I've had Mesa RR gear, Ampeg fridges, Eden 4x10's that weighed as much as my car, etc.. But your audience is gonna come up and say "Wow, hey, tell your bass player he should solo more during your little breaks or bridges or whatever", not "Hey man, I see you're running a Stewart 1.2 into that Schroeder 1210 and pumping a Demeter VTBP-201s. Why not just get a Crown CA-6 or something, man? Sheesh."



Not saying it's not important to a lot of people, but compliments on my playing are 1,000x better than that on getting compliments on my tone.

 

[tombowlus]

Hey blind listening is of course ideal - the idea being that it removes natural bias towards your preference.

Heck I *wanted* to prefer the lighter weight switching-type amps. I was dissapointed when I realized I would have to haul the CA9. But to my ears, it was no contest. That's o.k., though. The Stewart makes a wonderful power amp for our monitors - and it really helps to haul less PA gear weight (then again, the front end is a CA9...)

I think the "a VW will get you there the same a Porsche" and "the Timex is as good at telling time as the Rolex" are great analogies, becuase it is my *enjoyment* of the experience that makes the difference! Lots of people are completely happy with their VWs and Timexes (sp?) and think Porsches and Rollexes are stupid. Are they wrong? I don't think so - but it doesn't make me like Rolexes or Porsches any less (and I don't own either!)

For me the CA9 increases the enjoyment of the experience of playing bass because I like what I hear better than with a Mackie, Stewart or other light weight switching-type amp.

I'm not saying anyone else should think the weight difference is worth it - only that for I want to hear, I've gotta haul.

Your story mirrors mine almost exactly. Except that since I have two CA9's, one is in my bass rig (when I use a SS amp) and the other powers the low frequency cabs in our PA. If I stop using a SS power amp in my live rig, I'll probably move the other CA9 over to mid/high cabs, but for now, my Stewart handles that duty quite well. The PLX 3002 covers monitors - and does a great job in this regard.

My next round of testing is intended mainly as a sanity check. Or so I think at this point...

 

[John D Harris]

John:

Thank you as well for your suggestions (which seem to be mirroring what Bob and Passinwind are saying).

A big thank you to all who have responded to my request for assistance in developing as good of a testing procedure as possible. It is no secret that I am a gearaholic, and part of my affliction is that I really enjoy listening to different gear and appreciating their sonic qualities. I suppose I do have a "bias" in the sense that I enjoy listening for differences in sound, and to that extent, the placebo effect surely applies in that my brain is programmed to believe their is a difference (though I stand by the notion that I honestly have no preference for Brand A over Brand B).

I will definitely get one or two buddies involved to keep me honest!

Give me a couple of weeks to find time when the wife and kids are out of the house, and I'll see what I can discover!

Tom.

You have four VL-208 cabs -- you could hook up a pair to each of the two amps you wanted to compare (just to be fair you could run the tests, then swap the two pair of cabs and repeat, just to make sure there's not something unique with one or more of the cabs).