• 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 RH750 ???!??

Status
Not open for further replies.
#901
Jarrett said:
I guess I was just listening during those 20 msecs :D They can apply whatever numbers they want, but my RH750 is considerably louder than that RH450 I played yesterday.
Click to expand...

Both the RH450 and the RH750 are limited to 236 watts. They don't peak above that for any amount of time. But, the RH750 does an even better job (presumably) of amplifying the envelope of the bass signal following the peak.
 
#902
tombowlus said:
Both the RH450 and the RH750 are limited to 236 watts. They don't peak above that for any amount of time. But, the RH750 does an even better job (presumably) of amplifying the envelope of the bass signal following the peak.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate on this, Tom. Short of limiting the bandwidth further, I can't see how 236 watts could be much louder than 236 watts.
 
#905
tombowlus said:
Both the RH450 and the RH750 are limited to 236 watts. They don't peak above that for any amount of time. But, the RH750 does an even better job (presumably) of amplifying the envelope of the bass signal following the peak.
Click to expand...

Hey Tom
Ever though of adding double blind testing into the mix?
I'm sure you could round up enough volunteers. It would sure shed some light on actual or perception versus measurements.

I know that signal processing can affect loudness. I own MaxxBass and it works. I can make a 236W amp seem louder, and it still won't go past 236W.
 
#910
buckalori said:
Are people in general happy with the compressor on the RH750?

How does it compare to having a seperate one?
Click to expand...

IMO, one of the best on-board compressor on the market (even compared to the wonderful unit on the EBS heads). Very transparent, and the multiple band design means it doesn't totally quash the low notes while doing nothing to the upper register notes. Really good, as is the tuner.

One of the negatives of the RH450 that was changed on the 750 based on input from the 'tweaker' test that I was lucky enough to be a part of is that now the compressor has its own knob that is usable 'on the fly' without having to go into shift mode. Very nice IMO!
 
#912
seamonkey said:
Hey Tom
Ever though of adding double blind testing into the mix?
I'm sure you could round up enough volunteers. It would sure shed some light on actual or perception versus measurements.
Click to expand...

Actually, yes. We have been working with the music tech program at our local college for some time (we conduct our loudspeaker tests on campus), and we've been discussing a variety of ways to incorporate some of their music tech students into the BGM review process. Setting up some double blind testing is one of the ideas on the table. We have a lot of cool things planned, but it's a lot of work doing the level of testing that we are currently doing, and it's not all that easy to find the time to work more things in (and to do so in an intelligent, "connected" fashion which will work well in the context of a review).

That being said, I do hope to incorporate some group double blind testing in over the next year or so. :cool:
 
#913
tombowlus said:
Actually, yes. We have been working with the music tech program at our local college for some time (we conduct our loudspeaker tests on campus), and we've been discussing a variety of ways to incorporate some of their music tech students into the BGM review process. Setting up some double blind testing is one of the ideas on the table. We have a lot of cool things planned, but it's a lot of work doing the level of testing that we are currently doing, and it's not all that easy to find the time to work more things in (and to do so in an intelligent, "connected" fashion which will work well in the context of a review).

That being said, I do hope to incorporate some group double blind testing in over the next year or so. :cool:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother with this myself. First, double blind is probably not appropriate (or even possible) for these types of questions. First, you guys (the testers) aren't biased to make one head or cab or whatever win. And, there would need to be much interaction with the head by whoever is turning the knobs anyway, since testing a head at only one EQ setting would give a very limited and possible misleading result, since a different mix of non-linearly related components could give you a very different result.

Also, since any test of a bass, amplifier, cab or whatever is an interactive and highly non-linear system, trying to isolate one simple linear impact (i.e., maximum volume in this example) is a losing game. Depending on tone dialed in, interaction of voicing with cabinet, the player (technique, etc.), the room, etc., etc., you can get quite different result, even if you have a single blind rating panel with a reasonable number of members. Even holding all this constant (one player, one room, one cab, one bass, etc., etc.) only results in a very limited and very possibly misleading result.

Possibly, doing a 'difference test' on some subtle issues like cables or whatever might be interesting, but even then, the signal source (strings, player, tone, attack, etc.) can interact with a cable or whatever to skew the results.

Much better to rely on a pattern of a large number of real world and seemingly relatively unbiased TB reviews (if you remove endorser responses, etc.) for that type of information IMO.
 
#914
KJung said:
I wouldn't bother with this myself. First, double blind is probably not appropriate (or even possible) for these types of questions.
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, I don't want to do any kind of testing just for the sake of doing "that kind of test." If we were to bring in a new test of any kind, I'd like it to be as well thought-out as possible, more probative than prejudicial (sorry, hard to turn off the "law talking guy" side of my brain), well connected to the overall purpose of the review, and ultimately as useful as possible to the reader. That being said, the first situation in which I am tempted to utilize double blind testing is probably going to be when we do the instrument cable shootout.

But there are certainly all kinds of situations where double blind testing just isn't really going to bring all that much to the table, and so it's not something that we would look to use across the board.
 
#915
KJung said:
I wouldn't bother with this myself. First, double blind is probably not appropriate (or even possible) for these types of questions...
Click to expand...
Sounds like you're coming at this from the wrong angle. You don't do double blind testing to answer technical questions. You do them to collect SUBJECTIVE results and just learn what you learn from them with that in mind. IMHO, those are some of the most interesting things to read about... the whole "real world" vs "lab" thing.
 
#916
Vic said:
Sounds like you're coming at this from the wrong angle. You don't do double blind testing to answer technical questions. You do them to collect SUBJECTIVE results and just learn what you learn from them with that in mind. IMHO, those are some of the most interesting things to read about... the whole "real world" vs "lab" thing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely incorrect. You are mixing concepts here. I"m assuming you have no training in experimental design. It is a bit more complex than one would think, and true experiments can be done in both the lab and the field.

The only thing worse than no information is information from a poorly designed experiment:)
 
#917
KJung said:
Absolutely incorrect. You are mixing concepts here. I"m assuming you have no training in experimental design. It is a bit more complex than one would think, and true experiments can be done in both the lab and the field.

The only thing worse than no information is information from a poorly designed experiment:)
Click to expand...
Wow. Ouch.

All I'm saying is, if you're just looking for a group of folks to state their opinions, and you clearly state how the test was conducted, how is that "incorrect"? I'd agree if there was a specific technical point you were trying to prove, and the test was done poorly to that end, but I think that lies simply in the goals of the test.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back