TC Electronic controversy...solved.

[seamonkey]

"WATTS" Wild Ass Tricky Tech Specs

Dump "Watts"
They are tainted forever. No chance of recovery.

Ask for Voltage RMS across resistive loads.

Or "calories". There we go. When you hear "This amp is really fat" you know it means high calories.

 

[cheezewiz]

I vote with my wallet, and I own both TC and Ampeg gear (although I'll NEVER own an SVT III or any of the B series.)

 

[BurningSkies]

I vote with my wallet, and I own both TC and Ampeg gear (although I'll NEVER own an SVT III or any of the B series.)

I'm glad you like your amp.

 

[Menno]

It seems pretty clear to me:

1. Watts is not a measure of loudness
2. Many people don't know that
3. TC realised this
4. <discussed to death>
5. PROFIT!

Is this cool?

Disclaimer: I don't own nor have even tried any TC product.

1. Watts is not a measure of light.

Yet if you buy an ordinary lightbulb it states for example 100watts. Thats the consumed wattage to get a certain amount of light.

If you buy an energy saving lightbulb it can state power consumption 20 watts but it gives an amount of light equal to an ordinary bulb of 100 watts.

People relate the amount of light to the consumed wattage since they used the ordinary bulbs for so long. It's takes a long time for people to get used to Lumen. They put that beside the "100 watts" now.

So, is it important what to expect from an amp for the purpose you're using it for -> amplifying a signal to a certain (perceived) loudness comperable to something you know or do you buy an amp to stick a multimeter in it and cry?

 

[ksandvik]

So, is it important what to expect from an amp for the purpose you're using it for -> amplifying a signal to a certain (perceived) loudness comperable to something you know or do you buy an amp to stick a multimeter in it and cry?

Watt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Menno]

There is nowhere you can get 450 watts at any output.

If you could turn the APM off (you can't) and you had access to the output of the internal power module (you don't - it isn't output anywhere external to the amp) then you could see 450 watts.

So it can't output 450W.



It's a lie.

Nowhere on the external surface of the unit can you derive greater than 240 watts of power (peak or RMS) no matter what you do.

Sigh, it doesnt state anywhere 450w at the external surface of the unit. Inside are several components with their own input and outputs. Still assumptions.

 

[Menno]

Watt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks, i know what a watt is. I have internets and an education.

 

[aborgman]

Sigh, it doesnt state anywhere 450w at the external surface of the unit.

Correct.

...and if it is completely unavailable to any user, they shouldn't state it at all.

I mean - the power transformer on a 300W Ampeg SVT is capable of putting out about 1000W.

Now, it's only available inside the chassis, and it isn't in any way signal power... but there is AN output of SOME internal component that puts out 1000 watts... so I guess it would be ok for them to call the SVT a 1000W amp in your world.

 

[Musicman20]

@ earlier poster, FWIW, from everything I've seen, the 3pro does put out it's rated power. People think they're underpowered because they don't RTFM and thus don't know how to set up the gain structure as intended. I haven't owned one, but played a couple, and didn't get the feeling it was weaker than it was supposed to be.

I mentioned that I gained it correctly, used mids, used everything to cut through at 4 ohms. Tried it a few times, rehearsals and gigs. Tried two units in total. Both of them seemed underpowered.

A fellow bassist put me onto them, and said (this was about 8 years ago) its an 'affordable Ampeg'. Obviously now I'd get the 7 Pro (and I wouldn't need the wattage, but I'd be asking where the extra 25% went). In his words 'it sounds pretty good but my other cheaper Trace amp is much beefier and louder no matter what I do with the gains/masters'.

 

[will33]

Sigh, it doesnt state anywhere 450w at the external surface of the unit. Inside are several components with their own input and outputs. Still assumptions.

What do you think matters when playing an amplifier? It could have a 5 million watt power module inside. If the only place you can plug in a speaker won't put out more than 10 of those 5 million watts, it's a 10 watt amp....period. It's not that complicated.

 

[BurningSkies]

1. Watts is not a measure of light.

Yet if you buy an ordinary lightbulb it states for example 100watts. Thats the consumed wattage to get a certain amount of light.

If you buy an energy saving lightbulb it can state power consumption 20 watts but it gives an amount of light equal to an ordinary bulb of 100 watts.

People relate the amount of light to the consumed wattage since they used the ordinary bulbs for so long. It's takes a long time for people to get used to Lumen. They put that beside the "100 watts" now.

So, is it important what to expect from an amp for the purpose you're using it for -> amplifying a signal to a certain (perceived) loudness comperable to something you know or do you buy an amp to stick a multimeter in it and cry?

But lightbulbs output lumens...which is why I shop for bulbs by comparing lumens, wattage used and color.

 

[Passinwind]

Sigh, it doesnt state anywhere 450w at the external surface of the unit. Inside are several components with their own input and outputs. Still assumptions.

This is a direct quote from the TC website:

"450W (800W inst. Peak @ min. Load)"

At the load. Not inside the amp somewhere.

 

[BurningSkies]

What do you think matters when playing an amplifier? It could have a 5 million watt power module inside. If the only place you can plug in a speaker won't put out more than 10 of those 5 million watts, it's a 10 watt amp....period. It's not that complicated.

This. TC/Uffe tried this the first round, telling everyone that the module can produce a "burst 450w RMS" there's some fancy footwork in that phrase, but neglecting the fact that amp power is measured at its output(s) not by what's been hobbled under the hood.

 

[will33]

I mentioned that I gained it correctly, used mids, used everything to cut through at 4 ohms. Tried it a few times, rehearsals and gigs. Tried two units in total. Both of them seemed underpowered.

A fellow bassist put me onto them, and said (this was about 8 years ago) its an 'affordable Ampeg'. Obviously now I'd get the 7 Pro (and I wouldn't need the wattage, but I'd be asking where the extra 25% went). In his words 'it sounds pretty good but my other cheaper Trace amp is much beefier and louder no matter what I do with the gains/masters'.

That may very well be your experience, can't argue that. From what I've seen, they do bench their rated power, that's all. Could be a hundred other things that makes them sound the way they do. I don't think they're that great if amps either and I never did buy one. It feels a little bit like you have to push your note through it rather than it just respond to what your doing. Don't know how to explain that but if I have to use one, I can get useabke tone/volume from it.

 

[Menno]

Correct.

...and if it is completely unavailable to any user, they shouldn't state it at all.

I mean - the power transformer on a 300W Ampeg SVT is capable of putting out about 1000W.

Now, it's only available inside the chassis, and it isn't in any way signal power... but there is AN output of SOME internal component that puts out 1000 watts... so I guess it would be ok for them to call the SVT a 1000W amp in your world.

I didn't say it's ok in my world, but it wouldn't be a lie if Ampeg would say that. I personally hate marketing where they leave to many blanks for the consumer to assume what they want to assume. So, that would be all marketing in more or less extent. You won't sell much if you give the consumer all the details.

If i were Tc I would have made the thing 450W RMS at the output surface terminal and it would sound like a 1000W amp. And there would be tubes in it and certainly no digital components...

 

[aborgman]

I didn't say it's ok in my world, but it wouldn't be a lie if Ampeg would say that.

Yes, it would.

If there is any intent to deceive, it's a lie.

 

[Menno]

Yes, it would.

If there is any intent to deceive, it's a lie.

Yes, but you would have to proof it is intended to deceive.

 

[aborgman]

Yes, but you would have to proof it is intended to deceive.

No, I don't have to prove anything.

Anyway - The statements on TB by Uffe, and the statements in the original marketing fluff are more than enough evidence.

 

[JHAz]

I am getting repetitive, but it doesn't say anywhere 450W at the speaker output terminal. It just says 450W output power, if thats 450W before APM, it's still true even if you can't turn it off.

And if it can't output (anywhere in the unit) 800W for any short a time, then it's a lie in their document.

If it's wise for a company to state their specs as they do is a different matter.

When BGM tested the 450, they got 236 watts continuous and 243 watts burst on the test bench into 4 ohms (133 and 133 at 8 ohms).

 

[nostatic]

Yes, but you would have to proof it is intended to deceive.

so you're either:

a) an attorney
b) a marketing guy
c) a TC shill

Or maybe all of the above

Some serious semantic shaving (oooh, alliteration!) going on here. In the spectrum of marketing liberties TC went a tad far according to almost everyone who followed the situation. I personally don't care as I found their CS to be unsatisfactory and as a result I won't buy or own any TC products. There are too many good companies out there that are honest with their marketing and responsive with their CS. As always ymmv, offer void where prohibited, see dealer for details.