• 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

#361
Vic said:
It's actually more than that. It's ALSO got significantly reduced mids. IMHO, having the ability to extend the lows and highs doesn't necessarily hit you as hard in a mix as also pulling out mids.
Click to expand...

Good point. The lack of a midrange notch filter is why I am not sure this would be the greatest amp for uprights, which usually have some really honky frequency that needs to be canceled out. I would expect this to be less of a problem with an EUB with great electronics, like the NS design (my dream bass FYI)
 
#363
I think it has unless anyone has anything they want me to try specifically. I honestly can't find anything I'd change with regard to the default settings. I thought I'd like a narrower Q, but I found out I was wrong. I've yet to make the compressor work better because it works so darn good to begin with.

So all we're really left with is the top end roll-off, which can be changed with this. It does work well, but I prefer the default settings personally.
 
#364
Eublet said:
I think it has unless anyone has anything they want me to try specifically. I honestly can't find anything I'd change with regard to the default settings. I thought I'd like a narrower Q, but I found out I was wrong. I've yet to make the compressor work better because it works so darn good to begin with.

So all we're really left with is the top end roll-off, which can be changed with this. It does work well, but I prefer the default settings personally.
Click to expand...

+1, the main advantage is the top end roll off part.

The rest, I probably wouldnt touch. I did start to fiddle but my PC has decided to play up so im now on the iMac and im trying to find a friend who will let me use their PC.
 
#365
I'm totally disappointed... not in what we've done, but in the fact that I don't feel like I've been able to really contribute much, since Ken pretty much nailed the EQ commentary right off (which is great!), and we pretty much agreed even before he started, on the things to look at.

Also, as we've said here before, other than maybe switching up the headphone jack, and seeing about rearranging and/or adding controls to make some things more easily accessible (like the Spectracomp and maybe a couple of its features for overall tweakability -- such as configuring for limiting vs compressing, for example), there's just not a lot this amp needs.

I've spent many "frustrating" hours with the compressor. Not frustrated by it's behavior or controls, but that I am unable to find an alternate setting that is worthy of me recommending an overall product change. I was really hoping to come up with something cool and make that my main contribution, but either I'm just not good enough with compressors, or it's simply "that good" already. Maybe both. :)

So I think the only thing left to ask/suggest is, whether TC would consider fleshing out and productizing the software for general sale so folks could maybe create their own custom amp profiles, as opposed to TC considering changes that must be ok with all their customers since they wouldn't be adjustable by the individuals. They could then also support dowloadable profiles from their website for folks that didn't want to tweak, but wanted to just pick a different base characteristic.

Anyway, kind of a rehash from stuff I've said and others have as well, but I think this does kinda' constitute our current "results".

Let me know if I've left anything off "the list".
 
#366
Yup, that's pretty much my take on the thread. (minus all the off topic tangents).
Ken pretty much nailed the EQ, top rolloff aspect of it, and everything else pretty much proved that TC did a great job.

So now we'll see if TC deems self imposed EQ injections by users to be worthy of making it available or not.


.
 
#367
I still think software for tweaking would be a great idea, perhaps even to the extent of changing the baked in EQ as well as everything else.

I too feel bad, as Ken did such a great job so quickly :)

I still have some work I would like to do on the project but im awaiting a PC to use the program with again after the problems Ive had.

I would be more than happy to be a part of this again if anything else came up.
 
#368
Vic said:
So I think the only thing left to ask/suggest is, whether TC would consider fleshing out and productizing the software for general sale so folks could maybe create their own custom amp profiles, as opposed to TC considering changes that must be ok with all their customers since they wouldn't be adjustable by the individuals. They could then also support dowloadable profiles from their website for folks that didn't want to tweak, but wanted to just pick a different base characteristic.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
#369
I think the software would be great if TC also included downloadable settings that user's could plugin immediately. Perhaps someone wants that S51 tone, but a bit less extreme. They could download the setting, then dial back the lows, and put back a little more mids. Then they could save that setting and share it with a friend. That's a cool thing I think. Not something I'd use personally.

I would ASSume that we'll see Tweetertone knobs in future products. Total guessing here, but with the popularity of the VLE in the MB line, it makes total sense. It's nice to have and can make an amp much more versatile just by adding that one feature. TC's already done it in their budget line, so we'll see.
 
#370
Eublet said:
I think the software would be great if TC also included downloadable settings that user's could plugin immediately. Perhaps someone wants that S51 tone, but a bit less extreme. They could download the setting, then dial back the lows, and put back a little more mids. Then they could save that setting and share it with a friend. That's a cool thing I think. Not something I'd use personally.

I would ASSume that we'll see Tweetertone knobs in future products. Total guessing here, but with the popularity of the VLE in the MB line, it makes total sense. It's nice to have and can make an amp much more versatile just by adding that one feature. TC's already done it in their budget line, so we'll see.
Click to expand...

+1 Fun experience to mess with this. I came out where you did. If TC just includes either a tweetertone control for the lo pass filter, or even a simple two level button like some of the GK amps for 'papercone top end (5khz)' and 'horn top end (10khz or whatever), that would be about perfect.
 
#371
KJung said:
+1 Fun experience to mess with this. I came out where you did. If TC just includes either a tweetertone control for the lo pass filter, or even a simple two level button like some of the GK amps for 'papercone top end (5khz)' and 'horn top end (10khz or whatever), that would be about perfect.
Click to expand...

Ya, but that doesn't help people with existing units at all. Outside of selling, taking a used resale hit, and rebuying just to get that ability.
 
#372
stflbn said:
Ya, but that doesn't help people with existing units at all. Outside of selling, taking a used resale hit, and rebuying just to get that ability.
Click to expand...
I don't think this should be a concern at all.

Last time this was kinda' brought up, I held my tongue, and no offense, but technology always moves forward. You can't realistically expect to always be guaranteed an upgrade path from a given product to newer models.

Clearly, the amp was very much worth what you paid as it is, or you wouldn't have purchased it. That will never change. People deal with this all the time... if some new model comes out with new features that are compelling enough, you simply flip the one you have and add cash to get into the new model.

The alternative would be to handcuff a company with upgrade concerns, which ALWAYS hampers product advancement. Trust me, I'm in a product development company. I KNOW this. And IMHO, for a product like this, that to be a significant net negative impact.

That said, I'm not saying adding features to older models is bad... not at all... it just has to be really easy/convenient to justify the business case... that's all.

IMHO/FWIW of course.
 
#373
Agreed, and going into this whole thread I assumed hype and chatter of 'potentially available for existing units' to likely be just that.

However, the functionality in this thread has clearly shown that the ability currently exists rather than an upgrade path. And, as I stated before... just depends if TC decides to make it available for current units vs just adding functionality for adjustments to specific parameters in future units.

The thread in it's entirely does reinforce how close to perfect for most people the head really is... as mentioned.
 
#375
Vic said:
I don't think this should be a concern at all.

Last time this was kinda' brought up, I held my tongue, and no offense, but technology always moves forward. You can't realistically expect to always be guaranteed an upgrade path from a given product to newer models.

Clearly, the amp was very much worth what you paid as it is, or you wouldn't have purchased it. That will never change. People deal with this all the time... if some new model comes out with new features that are compelling enough, you simply flip the one you have and add cash to get into the new model.

The alternative would be to handcuff a company with upgrade concerns, which ALWAYS hampers product advancement. Trust me, I'm in a product development company. I KNOW this. And IMHO, for a product like this, that to be a significant net negative impact.

That said, I'm not saying adding features to older models is bad... not at all... it just has to be really easy/convenient to justify the business case... that's all.

IMHO/FWIW of course.
Click to expand...

+1 I replaced my Markbass F1 (killer head) with an F500 (killer head+). It's the same amp but with a greatly increased feature set (i.e., the new upgraded model of the F1). As Vic says, that is just the way things work. The F1 still is wonderful, the newer F500 is better. I assume it will be the same in another year or two when the upgrade of the RH450 is introduced.
 
#376
KJung said:
+1 I replaced my Markbass F1 (killer head) with an F500 (killer head+). It's the same amp but with a greatly increased feature set (i.e., the new upgraded model of the F1). As Vic says, that is just the way things work. The F1 still is wonderful, the newer F500 is better. I assume it will be the same in another year or two when the upgrade of the RH450 is introduced.
Click to expand...

+1. This is true of all tech. Of course, there will always be nostalgia for a great product from the past. Like the original Tube Screamer is more sought after than any of the "upgrades"
sometimes a companies first effort is the best. has Fender produced a "better" bass than their pre CBS stuff?
 
#377
engedi1 said:
+1. This is true of all tech. Of course, there will always be nostalgia for a great product from the past. Like the original Tube Screamer is more sought after than any of the "upgrades"
sometimes a companies first effort is the best. has Fender produced a "better" bass than their pre CBS stuff?
Click to expand...

+1 It happens sometimes. There seems to be some nostalgia for the original DB750 versus the upgrade, and for the original GK 800 and 400 versus the current reissues, etc.
 
#378
As a gear slut amp flipper, I expect and experience loss in most flips and would not expect a company to do anything to discourage consumers from upgrading to the next product.

That being said, if an amp manufacturer evolves to offer upgrades to please existing customers for less loss than flipping an amp, I think TC would be that company. Also, that sort of dedication to a great product could lure more customers in the long run. I hope this is the case but wont count on it or be hurt if it isn’t.

Vic said:
I don't think this should be a concern at all.

Last time this was kinda' brought up, I held my tongue, and no offense, but technology always moves forward. You can't realistically expect to always be guaranteed an upgrade path from a given product to newer models.

Clearly, the amp was very much worth what you paid as it is, or you wouldn't have purchased it. That will never change. People deal with this all the time... if some new model comes out with new features that are compelling enough, you simply flip the one you have and add cash to get into the new model.

The alternative would be to handcuff a company with upgrade concerns, which ALWAYS hampers product advancement. Trust me, I'm in a product development company. I KNOW this. And IMHO, for a product like this, that to be a significant net negative impact.

That said, I'm not saying adding features to older models is bad... not at all... it just has to be really easy/convenient to justify the business case... that's all.

IMHO/FWIW of course.
Click to expand...
 
#380
Hey all,
I just found this great thread. In part to subscribe myself, I am reposting my post from the RH450 review thread from a few moments ago. Sorry if this has already been covered, but I can't read this stuff until later tonight...I can't wait to catch up on this thread! Good stuff!

A feature I would love to see on these RH450 & Staccato'51s would be that the shift button also shifts the presets, giving you access to 3 additional presets. It can be annoying being able to only store 2 presets if you want to edit and compare one to a another.

Hopefully they will provide the editor software to everyone. It's expected with any higher-end guitar processor these days (and many cheap ones have it too). Why leave out the bass players??? My TC Electronic G System came with a free editor/librarian. As did my Digitech GSP1101, all of my Line6 gear, ect...

Make it easy for us to share sounds, just like guitar players!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back