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.
TC Electronic RH450 discussion - Tweaking the Preamp
- Thread starter Eublet
- Start date
Actually there was nothing more than a tempest in a teapot. Let the sour grapes go...
Good to see you found something you like.
I assume by 'test pilot debacle', you mean 'I wasn't chose and hence offended'
NICE!! Now I just have to curb the excitement the best I can and pray it becomes a product. I love TC just for imagining it and testing it. Any of you lucky 5 evaluators interested in adjusting the spectracomp as a limiter????
I assume by 'test pilot debacle', you mean 'I wasn't chose and hence offended'
ha ha ha
I applied, and wasn't chosen. I got over it immediately.
I don't know why some people have been so burned by it..?
I assume by 'test pilot debacle', you mean 'I wasn't chose and hence offended'
There are always some who will be offended.
I dont understand why a test pilot project would stop someone buying the amp?!
Are we talking about the original test pilot program? I didnt even know about it, and I when I found out, before I bought the amp, I thought it was a damn good idea. Let the public see what they think.
Ah well, whatever you choose, as long as you like it!
I assume by 'test pilot debacle', you mean 'I wasn't chose and hence offended'
No Ken I admit that I wasn't chosen but the whole thing was handled very poorly. When it comes to loyalty or what makes a person shell out his/her hard earned money any company should protect that.
Enjoy your project, I sincerely mean that. The ability to program your amplifier from a PC or a Mac is highly desirable. It leads to a one size that really does fit all.
Paul
Actually there was nothing more than a tempest in a teapot. Let the sour grapes go...
Good to see you found something you like.
Sour grapes are long behind me. I do however have a long memory!
Paul
wow sweet guys! ive really been wanting to get one of these heads for my rig, im subscribing and will be watching closely. thanks to you and thanks to TC for giving you such a cool opportunity
Rick Auricchio
Registered Bass Offender
Here's a drawing I made from the compressor settings information. It may help, since the tweaker screen is not currently organized for ease-of-use.
I don't know what the "DIR" parameter is in each compressor module, nor do I know what "Crest" does.
I suspect the "Thrsh all" is the action of the single SpectraComp setting that we adjust via the Shift button. Adjusting SpectraComp in a preset adjusts all three thresholds at once...maybe.
The Mix percentage is standard for most FX processors, though with compression we usually want 100% of the processed signal, and none of the unprocessed.
With those caveats, the attached diagram is a fair representation of a three-band compressor.
I don't know what the "DIR" parameter is in each compressor module, nor do I know what "Crest" does.
I suspect the "Thrsh all" is the action of the single SpectraComp setting that we adjust via the Shift button. Adjusting SpectraComp in a preset adjusts all three thresholds at once...maybe.
The Mix percentage is standard for most FX processors, though with compression we usually want 100% of the processed signal, and none of the unprocessed.
With those caveats, the attached diagram is a fair representation of a three-band compressor.
Attachments
You misunderstood his email. That's not exactly what he was saying. The software DOES NOT work with an off-the-shelf RH450. Maybe I didn't post this before, but I've already tried it with mine, and the software never connects.
This is a two part rig, you need BOTH the tweaker software AND the special firmware in the RH450. I believe Uffe's point was only to say no hardware modifications were necessary. Trust me, I'm not just spewing assumptions here. If you don't believe me, try it for yourself.
Also, a general point, it's only a MIDI cable if it's MIDI running on it (which we don't know). It's just a 5 pin cable that adheres to a Link Removed standard. Bottom line, until we know otherwise from Uffe, it's just a serial interface running the MIDI bitrate using the same kind of line drivers MIDI interfaces use (since it mates with the MIDI interface we were given). Other than that, we don't know what protocol it's running, and I wouldn't necessarily assume MIDI.
I don't mean to nitpick on this last point, but I just want to be careful we're only saying exactly what we know and accurately. People are gonna' read our posts and start their imagination churning with possibilities. This is a good thing, but we don't want to spin off in a direction founded on a bad assumption.
For example, if they were running the MIDI protocol, then it would clearly have been their intent to integrate with things that know how to speak MIDI to devices and control things. Otherwise, they could just be using a MIDI interface as a convenient way to have an opto-isolated serial interface available, which could be running something completely proprietary, geared specifically for their needs, in which case integration with actual MIDI controller devices wouldn't be viable.
+1... I have no idea what half that stuff is in the current screen. The diagram you put up is more familiar to me, based on full featured compressors I'm familiar with. That sort of layout and feature labeling would be a must if they decided to go forward with this.
Why do you feel that way? I think the goal was to allow us free reign so we wouldn't feel limited by specific guidance, to allow for greatest flexibility and possibility for discovery.
Now obviously, with minimal specific guidance, there'll be a lot of spinning, which we have seen here, but a lot of times, that's also where the cool ideas come from.
So maybe I'm missing the real point of your objection?
No. Ken's comments are misleading you, and this kind of confusion is exactly my reason for being kind of a stickler for accuracy here. No offense, Ken.
Again, no problem... totally moot point to me. I would again never recommend applying a piece of test software to an existing amp. That's big trouble! I was only communicating what was in Uffe's post, which indicated it would work. Probably a 'translation' issue or something.
Now, more importantly, how about somebody other than me start posting about the actual test!?!?!?!?!?!?
I will have a gig review of the more open high end by the end of May. I have plenty lined up so I can start playing with this software
I will have a gig review of the more open high end by the end of May. I have plenty lined up so I can start playing with this software
Excellent!!! That should be fun. I might do the same next weekend, although I'm pretty happy with the RH450 just the way it is at this point. My Sadowsky, and that Berg AE cab just sit perfectly with the more 'rolled off' top end of the RH450 for what I'm trying to do tone-wise.
However, when they come out with the RH600 with tweeter control (relax Vic, just musing... I know that might not happen
), I'll buy one the day it comes out
So it's not applicable to any of the current owners?I still support TC for pushing "Bass 2.0" movement forward but at the same time...
I know nothing about firmware, would it make since (is it practical) to update the firmware or would current owners be out of luck? I'd pay to send TC my amp for an improved high end.
