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 Electronics RH450 Quasi-Wattage Ratings Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Jarrett
- Start date
- Status
You can call the sound "Squashed" if you like. Whatever sound it is, it's gotten me compliments from listeners including Bass players, soundmen, other musicians in the bands I play in, recording engineers and producers.
I would say the amp has it's own character and voice that sits beautifully in any context or genre I've covered including Jazz, Funk, Pop, Country, and Rock. It's got more than enough loudness (or whatever term you would like to use) to fill most stages. To say that an amp with more wattage sounds "better" is a matter of opinion. I trust my own ears and those with experience doing this stuff for a living. Funny how one test has made us throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Don't buy into the "I need more watts and headroom to sound good". I've heard guys doin the multi thousand watt amp thing with the esoteric pre ( I did it for years) and although I could deafen my bandmates and blow my cabs if I wanted to, it did'nt sound any BETTER than the TC.
I would say the amp has it's own character and voice that sits beautifully in any context or genre I've covered including Jazz, Funk, Pop, Country, and Rock. It's got more than enough loudness (or whatever term you would like to use) to fill most stages. To say that an amp with more wattage sounds "better" is a matter of opinion. I trust my own ears and those with experience doing this stuff for a living. Funny how one test has made us throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Don't buy into the "I need more watts and headroom to sound good". I've heard guys doin the multi thousand watt amp thing with the esoteric pre ( I did it for years) and although I could deafen my bandmates and blow my cabs if I wanted to, it did'nt sound any BETTER than the TC.
So the comparative significance of wattage, independent of loudness, is that different wattage ratings on equally loud amps can tell you which amp will provide a greater potential for unused power?
I don't really follow...have you never heard the rationale that more wattage into the same speaker cabinet (for example) won't make you louder but will give you more headroom? It's why they make amps that are rated up to thousands of watts.
I still have all the dynamics I need, plus more. It does not sound squashed to my ears. And I don't want the "Hosue" to squash my signal either.
Maybe hearing compression in your rig could be a good thing, It might give you a more accurate representation of what you sound like out the front of house
I wonder if the bass or anything else, during the recording, mixing and mastering process, you listen to through this stereo has been run through a compressor
Every gig you go to with a half decent PA/engineer. Guess what they sound engineer is running the bass through?
Ok, but does that mean you should compress it at the source as well? I understand the argument for live sound as you have to control for a lot of unknowns on the fly, but I don't believe (and I'm not the only one) that the trend toward overcompressing in the studio is a good thing.
Ya, OK...nobody's debating that it can't sound good. People are just miffed about being told it's almost twice the wattage that it really is. Crazy people...why don't they just accept being lied to?
I do hear what you are saying and I agree. But I don't think TC E is a bad sounding compression. Like you don't hear people complaining that tube amps sound bad when going into "tube" compression, do you?
Or what about the tape compression you get that you don't with digital, a lot of people pay extra to record and master onto tape.
I think the TC E amps sound very natural
Ok..thanks Jimmy.......Nobody's debating that it can't sound good. Now we're back on topic.
I think more people are in defense of the sound of the amp than anything. Some how since the cats out of the bag about the watts, all of a sudden the sound quality of the amps has gone with it.
That's just what I'm seeing, I'm probably wrong, but that's my 2 cents.
Well to be honest, I don't look for an amp to compress my tone and eliminate the peaks. However, I won't say that it can't sound good.
I figured as a portaflex user you certainly understand that an amp does'nt have to have megawatts to sound great. Not everyone will like the TC sound. My experience has been all positive and the amp sounds great to me and those whom I respect. I did'nt have an issue with the performance of the amp before the test and nothing has changed.
The wattage claims versus real watts are an entirely different issue.
I just don't share the same venom against TC and cannot demonize them for making what I and many others consider a great amp.
Makes sense -- and I wasn't really trying to steer the thread into a compression debate or anything, I just wanted to point out the headroom issue. Definitely agree on writing recordings to tape as I recently payed extra to do just that...but is it really compression that's making it sound better, or is that just an affect of the medium (I honestly don't know). I guess I just haven't heard "analog sounds better because it's more compressed", and usually the complaint from the purists is that everything is overcompressed these days, as opposed to when recording straight 2" tape was the norm, but I digress.
Anyway I think the reason this strikes a chord with me is because I own two Acme cabinets which respond really well to raw wattage/headroom. Not saying the TC's wouldn't work with their power management as I haven't tried this setup, I'm just saying headroom is what some bassists look for in an amp for that reason.
I don't get the fuzz here at all.
I mean, you play your amp and either it's powerful enough or not. It it's loud enough, so be it. End of story.
What do you care about the wattage? You wank off looking at the specs? You play better having a number in the back of your head?
I don't think so. You guys are way too much fixated on numbers.
I mean, you play your amp and either it's powerful enough or not. It it's loud enough, so be it. End of story.
What do you care about the wattage? You wank off looking at the specs? You play better having a number in the back of your head?
I don't think so. You guys are way too much fixated on numbers.
You know, I started to get the exact same feeling that I experienced with the AccuGroove AccuSwitch when I read the Bass Gear review. Nobody likes having the facts (specs) distorted, or being lied to if you prefer to call it that. There's a bit more to this than a simple "marketing gaffe".
However, the whole affair doesn't mean that I'm going to dump my TC amps or stop gigging them. Heck, I'm still using my El Whappo. But the whole thing leaves a bit of a sour taste. Man, are we going back to measuring amps using PMPO ratings?
That is all.
However, the whole affair doesn't mean that I'm going to dump my TC amps or stop gigging them. Heck, I'm still using my El Whappo. But the whole thing leaves a bit of a sour taste. Man, are we going back to measuring amps using PMPO ratings?
That is all.
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,350
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
Again, I don't really know any amp manufacturer who lies to the detriment of their wattage rating. Since wattage is a selling point to the general public, it does a company no good to under-report their benched wattage ratings.
The point I was making is that I've never heard anyone complain about getting something extra for free...but people will complain if they're trying to buy a full bag of chips and it only has half as much when they open the bag.
Rickett Customs
Commercial User
Which reminds me of which multi-band compressor that I loved, while I had access to it, the Maselec MLA-3....... very awesome unit, buy vastly expensive too.......
IDK. Looking at the real bass note in the review that started all this, the spike that the tc would kill is half a cycle, and about 10 dB. So an eightieth of a second or less of compression, then, based on the test signals, a relatively unmolested signal.
Where you start to see the TC pump is when the peak to average gets very low, like 2.5 dB. But in the real world, to have a small leading peak means you are playing softly so you are not anywhere near the max of the amp.
I doubt that the TC's compression per se affects overall tone most of the time, just because in my experience you have to be taking 10 dB or more off the sustain part of the note to start to hear significant tonal differences.
That said, I find the TC rating troubling. It's a 225 ish watt amp claiming to be a 450 watt amp. A real 450 watt amp will play the full dynamic of the leading edge of the note, Or, if you want to spend a hundred bucks or so on a compressor limiter, will perform like a TC-rated amp of 900 watts. It's misleading as stated.
+1!
I still think it's a great sounding amp and I never had any issues with it not having enough "juice". Knowing what I know now would I purchase the amp again at the original price? Absolutely not! TCE "distorted" the specifications and I have a feeling that they will ultimately pay the price in lost sales. I think that they should send me (and everyone who purchased their bass amps) some kind of rebate/refund.
I never got the whole thing about being able to use 3 of their 8 ohm cabs, but not 3 from other manufacturers... I was always convinced that the ratings on their cabs were "distorted" as well. More smoke and mirrors and I'm glad I didn't go down that road! I hope that Uffe Hansen and the gang at TCE are watching and reading closely...
- Status
