TC Electronics RH450 Quasi-Wattage Ratings Discussion Thread

[gregbackstrom]

Thinking any sub-500w amp is crap is the work of dopes and people who play way too loud

I'd be willing to bet that there are a lot more honest companies out there than dishonest ones, BTW. Several companies on that list have already been proven to be relatively honest by BGM, and a select few have been proven to be extremely honest.

I don't think that the few reviews BGM has done in its 6 issue existence is enough to prove the "relative honestly" -- let alone the "extreme honesty" -- of any company. (Unless BGM has reviewed all that company's products, of course.)

 

[fdeck]

OK here's a question:

Using the Spec sheet from the 125ASX2 as an example...

Link Removed
250 watts @ 1% THD, 550 watts @ 10% THD

If the RH450 is limited at 240 watts, how powerful would the TC amp module be without the limiter? 450 watts perhaps?

If I make an amp using the 125ASX2, can I call it a 550 watt amp? Or does it depend on the amp design?

Look at Figure 6. If you accept 10% THD as the rating criterion, then you can call it a 550-Watt amp. Note that this would not be a continuous power rating. On page 24, it says:

If the average output power of the ICEpower125ASX2 exceeds 65W @ 4Ω (SE-mode with both channels driven) or 70W @ 4Ω (BTL-mode) for a long time at 25°C ambient temperature, the module will reach its maximum allowable temperature and the temperature protection will be activated.

An amp designer could bump up the continuous rating to some extent by adding forced-air cooling. This would probably be prudent in a bass amp design.

If they provided me with as much info about their amp as is contained in that datasheet, then I wouldn't care what they called it.

 

[JHAz]

I'd be very interested to read a spec on the Shuttle, Tom. I can't see how they could reach their 600 watts, or even 550 watts without employing exactly the same limiting that is being used in the RH236.

Original dreck deleted. Sunday must be my extra stupid day this week.

I will say I'd be surprised if the power management system performs to elinate the system's access to half its power, but who knows.

 

[JimmyM]

I don't think that the few reviews BGM has done in its 6 issue existence is enough to prove the "relative honestly" -- let alone the "extreme honesty" -- of any company. (Unless BGM has reviewed all that company's products, of course.)

They've done plenty of heads, and most seem to hit their marks.

 

[JimmyM]

Why do they rate it at <3 percent and not 1 like all the others? What would be the output then? This is no rant, just curiosity.

Not an engineer But tube amps are always rated using a higher THD because apparently THD is inherent in the tube amp design, so they get a little more leeway. If that bothers people, they can always buy solid state power amps with miniscule levels of THD. But at least they inform you of it and that's better than a lot of companies.

 

[jnewmark]

??? I don't own any TCE gear, never have. I am also not cool with any effort to control thread participation (except by the mods of course).

I would refer you to post # 576, where a Mod specifically asks everyone to stick to the OP. He's not limiting participation as such, but requesting that everyone stick to the " very narrow " subject. It's not about what other companies do or not do, it's about TCE.

 

[lowstrung5]

So.......to sum things up again............TCE advertised an amp at 450 watts that only actually tests out at aprox 240 watts yet performs like it's maybe more that 450 watts. That pretty much covers it .............again. Really, how much more can ya beat this dead horse?

 

[JackANSI]

So.......to sum things up again............TCE advertised an amp at 450 watts that only actually tests out at aprox 240 watts yet performs like it's maybe more that 450 watts. That pretty much covers it .............again. Really, how much more can ya beat this dead horse?

Till the owner of the horse comes out and tells us why he calls it a horse, when its really just a pony...

 

[lowstrung5]

Till the owner of the horse comes out and tells us why he calls it a horse, when its really just a pony...

Maybe you didnt read Uffe's post. I beleive he says in a round about way.........he marketed his pony as a horse because his pony acts like a horse and was concerned some people would'nt even ride his pony if he did'nt call it a horse. Does that help? Unlike other companies that have horses that act like ponies. That seems to be OK if ya market in that direction.

 

[BurningSkies]

I'd like to apologize in advance to anyone who is offended by this post. It isn't directed at anyone in particular, and it probably betrays the pent-up frustration of a technophile who spends a lot of his time working with creative types.

Anyway, I can't get over the level of angst portrayed on this and other recent TC-related threads. At first, when I heard about how awful it was that TC wasn't following FTC specs, I was confused. The last time I checked, exaggerated power numbers on MI amps were the rule, not the exception. So I got busy Googling, and was relieved to find that I hadn't been asleep under a rock for the last 20-30 years. In fact, the ONLY companies I could find that used proper, qualified power numbers, were Eden and Epifani.

Sure enough, power "ratings" in our business are still a total free-for-all. The following companies ALL use unqualified power numbers on their websites. This allows them to talk about Instantaneous, RMS, PMP or ??? power output, and measure it at any level of distortion or frequency that suits them.
- Acoustic
- Acoustic Image
- Aguilar
- Ampeg
- Ashdown
- Behringer
- Bugera
- Carvin
- EBS
- Euphonic Audio
- Fender
- Genz Benz
- Gallien Krueger
- Hughes & Kettner
- Line 6
- Markbass
- Marshall
- Orange
- Peavey
- Phil Jones
- Roland
- SWR
- TC Electronic
- Tech 21
- Traynor

You have to admit, that covers a pretty big chunk of the bass amp market...

To recap:

- TC used weird-Alice technology to produce an amp that has a bunch of cool features, sounds like 600 or more watts but only benches at 240 or so clean, and has a funny-looking dynamic envelope when viewed on an oscilloscope.
- TC used a marketing number that split the difference between the perceived and actual power outputs, in a desperate attempt to make the new technology understandable.
- Meanwhile, knowing that their average customer is technically illiterate, the rest of the industry continued to hide behind vague, meaningless numbers. This way, people wouldn't rate their amps as "underpowered" without listening to them, and they couldn't be caught in an outright lie.
- Cartloads of bass players got their knickers in a twist about statistics that they don't fully understand, and TC is now seen as the spawn of Satan, even though their amps are generally recognized as being Seriously Good Stuff.
- The other guys, most of whom exaggerate their ratings at least to some degree in order to stay competitive, and most of whom couldn't produce as good a product as TC if their lives depended on it, have gotten off scott-free.

I'm sorry, but I'm embarrassed by the mob mentality, personal attacks, nonsensical arguments, and lack of intelligence displayed by some people on this thread. Maybe musicians really are as dumb as we are sometimes portrayed...

As always, IME and IMO on all of this.

Whelp. This is a big red herring innit? Although I'm sure you had a fun time making up your list...I mean how many people here have been shouting about TCE using FTC standard. Actually, the argument is about TC reaching ANY standard. Which they're not. They made up a completely fictitious number then published it as fact. Actually, they made up 2 numbers, one that said 450w, the other that said 800w. Since we know that PEAK power on the amp is 236w, both of those are false, although one is nearly double and the other is nearly 4 times the actual amount.

To me this argument is like being caught for speeding but complaining to the trooper that there are others speeding too. But then, since you didn't have a radar gun, you can only assume.

As Tom Bowlus has already opined with the limited number of amps that they've tested, only a couple have numbers that don't directly relate to what they found on the bench.

Although I welcome you to start a thread about each and every one of those manufacturers to discuss their ratings procedures.

 

[Stephen]

Till the owner of the horse comes out and tells us why he calls it a horse, when its really just a pony...

That preforms like a horse, and a great one at that.

 

[gregbackstrom]

They've done plenty of heads, and most seem to hit their marks.

What's plenty? A quarter? Half? They've done a few heads at most. Tell you what -- I'll count 'em and report back later. (I have all 6 issues.)

 

[projectMalamute]

The AMD cpu's were way cheaper than Intel, so people (including me) accepted this and used them. In addition the AMD did perform well in some applications like gaming but the Intel CPU were stronger in more serious calculations.
The TCE amps are not the cheapest in the class D category, so many doesn't like the idea of paying 999$ for a 236w amp where could buy two GK MB200 or almost two GK MB500 for the same money.

Also, nowhere does AMD claim that my AMD Athlon 3200+ is running at anything other than the 2.0 GHz it is running at. AMD marketed a 2.0Ghz chip that had comparable performance to the competition's 3.2 Ghz chip as just that, a 2.0GHz chip with performance comparable to the competition's 3.2GHz chip.

If TCE had marketed the amp as a 230 watt amp with performance comparable to the competition's 450 watt amp (which by all accounts is exactly what it is) we would not be having this conversation.

 

[BurningSkies]

My thought is that we would benefit from third-party measurements, such as conducted by Bass Gear Magazine. This will encourage amp makers to either adopt BGM's rating methods themselves, or be more specific about their test methods.

I agree. I think it won't happen, but you know, it would be cool. It would also be cool if every issue of BGM had a chart (similar to the pricing chart in VG magazine) that listed all the amps they've tested and how they tested.

My point is lets keep it in perspective. People are saying they will never buy TCE products because they lied ... i.e. - will buy other brands because they assume they don't. What they did is not uncommon in the industry and I gave 2 specific exapmles.

Other brands lying are absolutely relevant to this discussion

I own a TC product and have no plans to sell it. Probably not going to buy any of their amps though, unless they get their act together.

Again, I'm not sure that other folks lying has much to do with this one. Although I would guess some of the interest people have in the topic is based upon HOW they lied (aka just makin' stuff up!). They didn't fudge which number they were quoting, or at what distortion level they were measuring at, or any of the usual tricks of the trade. They just got together and scratched their heads and said 'it sounds like 450w, and I guess that would make it an 800w peak, lets run with it".

??? I don't own any TCE gear, never have. I am also not cool with any effort to control thread participation (except by the mods of course).

Remember, this discussion WAS in a TC thread. All of the happy owners and those who thought that TC was being maligned complained bitterly that those of us who felt that it was worth discussing should go off and start another thread to discuss it and leave their revelry alone. And that's why this thread started. Also, a mod has stepped in to tell people to keep it on topic to TC specifically.

I disagree with the premise that TCE amp owners shouldn't be allowed to state their views, good or bad. IMHO, they should not be berated for it either. And, no I am not a TCE amp owner.

I'm all for amp owners stopping in to voice their opinions. TB is about discussion and that's what we're having. Even though each side is just running the same tropes over and over again.

I also am happy for this thread to have active participation because it keeps the thread UP and visible both on TB and on search engines like Google. The more visibility this thread has, the more pressure on TC Electronics to actually step up and so something besides writing an email that politely says "yep we lied" then walk away. Which is what's gone on to date.

The comment on Harpies works from both sides. Remember, this wouldn't be a discussion if one side wasn't posting just as much as the other.

 

[BurningSkies]

What's plenty? A quarter? Half? They've done a few heads at most. Tell you what -- I'll count 'em and report back later. (I have all 6 issues.)

FUD.

 

[JackANSI]

Maybe you didnt read Uffe's post. I beleive he says in a round about way.........he marketed his pony as a horse because his pony acts like a horse and was concerned some people would'nt even ride his pony if he did'nt call it a horse. Does that help? Unlike other companies that have horses that act like ponies. That seems to be OK if ya market in that direction.

Whether or not it acts like a horse or a pony is subjective and the straw man in the room. It didn't act like a horse to me.. more like part of a horse. I always felt it sounded weak during practice, side-by-side with pre/power combo, or without PA support (unless I had 3 RS212's hooked up to it), but a SVT 610 is lighter than 3 RS212's and louder with a pre/power combo.

Its marked a 450W/800W peak. It falls roughly 50% short of the 450 and 70% short of 800W. I bought a 450 watt amp.. where is my 450 watts?

Thats the point here, not if it subjectively sounds like 450 watts. You can 'claim' its as loud as 450 watts all you want, its not.

I have a very, very nice RTA/SPL meter. The classic AudioControl SA-3050A. If someone near central PA wants to put their RH450 against a SVP/Powerbase2 combo through the same cab to put this "sounds as loud" BS to bed, I'm all for it I really regret not doing just this before I sold my RH450.

Bring it! Put up or shut up time.

I'll also loan my SA-3050A to BGM if they want to put together that microamp shootout with some SPL figures. Only request I have would be to try to include 3 classic 'old-iron' amps. The tube SVT, the SVT 4 Pro, and the Hartke 3500.

 

[Lonesomedave]

wow-- looks like we're gonna hit 1000 posts soon.

happy anniversary!

so, the owner was afraid no one would ride the pony unless he called it a horse? and that is why he lied? (if he did lie)

well, ok, that sets a new standard. let's try that defense in court, if we're ever sued under the Consumer Protection Act.

"your honor, i admit that I mis-represented my product. but my defense is, if I had told the truth, no one would have used it."

sounds like a winner.

/s/ Dave

 

[lowstrung5]

If TCE had marketed the amp as a 230 watt amp with performance comparable to the competition's 450 watt amp (which by all accounts is exactly what it is) we would not be having this conversation.

I agree. They made a bad desicision in an attempt to market a great amp. It sucks because it's a great product. Now maybe everyone should rely more on their ears instead of a spec sheet. If you've been around a while and tried different bass heads (which I assume are being honest in their wattage rating) you find out how different the performance is with heads that are rated the same watts. Product "A" claims 500watts yet product "B" also rated at 500watts kicks it's ass in performance. It only reinforces that it's not just about wattage. We as bass players seem to have been a sucker for the bigger is better thing for a while. It's probably too big of a leap to beleive the market would be accepting of the "less can compete with more" concept. It's like a featherweight kicking a middleweights butt while being disqualified because they lied at the weigh in.

 

[drpepper]

There are a number of people genuinely upset about being lied to. If you have no issues with being lied to, go protest at a military funeral, you'll fit right in. Seriously. You contribute nothing of value to this discussion, except to shout from the periphery about nothing related to the issue at hand.

Well just in time for the closing of this thread....

Yes. There are a number of people who are rightfully very upset. I can't and wouldn't try to take that away from them. There are also people who are mildly upset, and there are people who are not upset at all. Because I don't share someone else's viewpoint or reaction to this particular lie, it doesn't necessarily follow that I have nothing valid to say or that I generally believe that lying is okay or right. I don't openly judge people to be mentally defective simply because they don't share my perspective. That seems to be where your position pretty easily goes. You might try harder to understand positions that you don't necessarily agree with (that is intended as nothing more than a friendly suggestion).

My issue with TCE's lying would be resolved by their apology correction of published specifications (web, ads, manuals, whatever else) to include a properly measured wattage. My personal sentiment is relatively mild, primarily because I don't feel cheated of value as a result of the lie. For me, being cheated of value would require watts to have a fixed scale of value. They do not; across brands and types of amps watts are anywhere from roughly $.50 to $30.00 each. Also, for me, wattage as a number would have needed to be a matter of importance in my purchase. It was not.

There are posters insisting that the only subject of this thread is whether or not TCE lied.

If the RH450 cannot achieve a measured power of 450 watts, then with respect to wattage, I don't see how it could be disputed that the misrepresentation is a lie. The is intent to mislead on the facts of the wattage. It is a lie. It appears to me that there is almost total consensus on that.

However, the issue at hand is not about being lied to, PERIOD, as some are saying. "It's about" our reaction to being lied to; it's about the weight we give to various factors and how we interpret aspects that are open to interpretation. Someone can react differently and disagree with you without being wrong, stupid, bereft of morals or ethical understanding, high on glue, or any of the other charges that have been made here.

Reactions to lies are situational.

If you think about it, I'm sure that you'd have to admit that your reactions to being lied to are situational too...

Or maybe you really do feel the same way about all lies, and when you learned that your parents had lied to you about Santa Claus, you ceaselessly berated them for lying to you, gave back the presents and vowed to never accept another, right?

 

[Session1969]

I guess ampeg should be rating the svt classic at 700 watts if we are going by this perceived volume thing.

Maybe GK as well. They seem very conservative in their wattage rating to me.

I'm probably in the minority of this thought but it seems that alot of class d amps aren't as loud as ss amps for their wattage claims. Kind of how ss amps are in comparison to tube amps ? One thing that my ears tell me is that when a class d amp is paired with a neo cab, the sound seems thinner than a ss with ceramics. It comes more into play in a band setting , imo.