• 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 RH450 Club

#422
digest and forward...

Reaper=1
Eublet=2
A J Brown=3
John Wentzien=4
J-Razz=5
LM Bass=6
dkb=7
mcnach8
KJung=9
onkelpo=10
Legion=11
oddio=12
Petersland=13
wraithwrider=14
fisheadjoe=15
drpepper=16
mingusbass=17
Sparks 55=18
Musicman20=19
jackANSI=20
Freddels=21
gnuv=22
fazzoes=23
coedvette=24
Lizzy D =25
James E=26
Addlepate=27
leehoop=28
tifftunes=29
stflbn=30
bassmanjla=31
Baird6869=32
joeykun=33
caw=34
Jam119=35
nervous=36
hogbog=37
Steve Clark=38
dimetech=39
petey=40
SharkUSMC=41
Ivan M=42
Ron Plichta=43
mjdyson=44
ms502arc=45
walkingUpright=46
frankie5string=47
antonismbass=48
TheShape101=49
jkramer5=50
jeliot=51
peledog=52
vin*tone=53
Tieiririyi=54
arai=55
Gregor69=56
4-string=57
madinventions=58
slawie=59
badboyb=60
Menno=61
parapentep70=62
pauliebass=63
dustinfennessey=64
badboyb=65
fretno=66
major10th=67
Nightsun=68
mikepcann=69
rsm=70
Abertho3=71
hansrune=72
neo land=73
Ur2funky=74
jozenerd=75
Daniel Piper=76
banebass=77
 
#424
drpepper said:
I know that the contribution of different tastes, different basses, different cabinets, different rooms, etc., etc., make the value of trying to share settings questionable, but I dialed in a tone that just absolutely nailed punchy, fat and crisp with my RH450, RS212 and Lakland 55-02.

Flat centers and this EQ (+ misc tweaking on the bass)

rh4-2012.jpg


It's recently hit home that I sometimes feel like I don't have the control I like over steering EQ directly to the sound I want to hear. As an example, I've run into boominess problems in particular rooms. I'd to do what intuitively seemed like the right thing (less bass, twiddle around with the mids, turn this, turn that), but that didn't necessarily get the result I was looking for.

I was playing with some A/Bing this weekend and stumbled across backing the hi-mid all the way off, and it immediately struck me that it didn't necessarily sound "scooped," it just sounded clear and tight....no real deficit or mid hole. I made some tweaks and saved it. I played with a band on Sunday, and I thought it sounded just awesome.
Click to expand...

I just saw this so I took a second and tried out the settings and found it to be a great sound, especially considering the sound I had come up with myself! Thanks for posting this... I have band practice tomorrow night and will see how it works with all the other folks blaring away!
Folks, if you have settings that are to your liking, please keep posting them as I have found the info to be quite helpful!
Fishheadjoe
 
#425
Fishheadjoe said:
Thanks for posting this... I have band practice tomorrow night and will see how it works with all the other folks blaring away!
Click to expand...

Very cool to hear that it makes sound that works for others!

I found that it worked great with a band (two guitars, keys, drums). It cut, it punched, it was beautiful...

I'll be interested to hear your further results.
 
#426
I have a setting that works very well for me.

eq:
Bass: +2
Low Mid: +6
High Mid: -6
High: +6

freq:
Low: +0 @280Hz
Low Mid: - 4 @250Hz
High Mid: -2 @635Hz
High: +10 @ 5000Hz

I was trying to imitate Sansamp's tone of mid frequency cut @ 600Hz.
However, I don't feel anyway lack of mid for this setting at all. The cut makes the whole thing tighter. The bump at bass @280Hz and low mid @250Hz together really packs a BIG PUNCH.

I use a fender deluxe jazz tho,which has a lot of high mid. So you may have to cut less/more high mid to fit your bass.
 
#430
Tieiririyi said:
I have a setting that works very well for me.

eq:
Bass: +2
Low Mid: +6
High Mid: -6
High: +6

freq:
Low: +0 @280Hz
Low Mid: - 4 @250Hz
High Mid: -2 @635Hz
High: +10 @ 5000Hz

I was trying to imitate Sansamp's tone of mid frequency cut @ 600Hz.
However, I don't feel anyway lack of mid for this setting at all. The cut makes the whole thing tighter. The bump at bass @280Hz and low mid @250Hz together really packs a BIG PUNCH.

I use a fender deluxe jazz tho,which has a lot of high mid. So you may have to cut less/more high mid to fit your bass.
Click to expand...

When you say SANSAMP, which unit do you refer to?
 
#432
BrickBatMansion said:
How is it voiced differently?
Click to expand...

I feel like I'm the worst person in the world to describe tone and tonal differences, but I guess I did set myself up for that question. I struggle to find the right words to describe what I'm hearing.

I suppose I should first note that I made that comment based on having spent very little time with the RH750 and having pulled it out of the box, punching up "the same" settings I had on the RH450 and running off to play with a band. I remembered later that the default frequency centers are set differently on the RH750.

So, to try to answer the question, while the difference is less than I initially thought, lining up the settings as equally as I can and running tweeter tone at 0 to compare, the RH750 seems somewhat more open, natural and airy/metallic (but not ganky), mostly in the upper mids into the treble. In that space where they're different, I'd say the RH450 sounds a little less natural and slightly nasal. Boosting tweetertone takes it places that the RH450 can't go.

I hope that comes across with some meaning that makes sense. Maybe someone else can chime in on top of that.
 
#436
BrickBatMansion said:
Gotcha. Thanx so much. And you say its louder?
I thought i read somewhere that the power rating was the same.
Click to expand...

Well, I doubt I'm ever going to hear max on either. I get the same volume with less on the master on the RH750.

My main band practices too loud, and I usually had the RH450 at ~ 11:00 to 12:00. I couldn't have even thought about taking the RH750 to 12:00 all other things being the same.

Parts of the wattage ratings controversy are above my head. I know what I need to know.
 
#438
BrickBatMansion said:
Gotcha. Thanx so much. And you say its louder?
I thought i read somewhere that the power rating was the same.
Click to expand...

The peak output is the same but the 750 can put out more on the backside of the crest, and since we hear in terms of averages over time, it'll definitely be perceived as louder than the 450.
 
#439
tombowlus said:
...it'll definitely be perceived as louder than the 450.
Click to expand...

IOW, it's louder.

I'm not specifically criticizing or looking to argue the point, just commenting on an observation that's been made over a series of posts. I've just personally found it interesting how so many people speak of "perceived" loudness as though it's an illusion or a cheat (again, not that you're doing that here, Tom. I'm sure you're just trying to be clear).

But hearing is how we perceive sound. All loudness is "perceived," so saying something has "perceived loudness" is redundant and leads to the mistaken notion that there is a different, "real" loudness that is of higher integrity and greater importance.

This idea seems like it has gotten so clouded that many people have apparently taken up the idea that wattage is "real" loudness. And when 600W "Amp X" is louder than the RH, that's its real loudness shining through, but when 600W "Amp Y" isn't as loud as the RH, that's the cheap trickery of the RH conning you into thinking it's louder, when it's really not.

All of the factors (objective measures) that go it our perception are...well...all of the factors that go into are perception. They're all real. Using our ears, we don't/can't gauge sound directly by objective measures of sound power. Those objective measure can correlate to loudness, but our ears and mind are the gauges of how loud something is.

All amps are as loud as they seem.

We have a somewhat regular gig at this dock bar that's a bit too close to some homes, and last time we played there, a call came in that the bass was too loud and bothering one of the residents. I had to laugh a little bit thinking that they should have said to the guy "Don't worry, it's not really too loud, that's just perceived loudness."
 
#440
drpepper said:
IOW, it's louder.

I'm not specifically criticizing or looking to argue the point, just commenting on an observation that's been made over a series of posts. I've just personally found it interesting how so many people speak of "perceived" loudness as though it's an illusion or a cheat (again, not that you're doing that here, Tom. I'm sure you're just trying to be clear).

But hearing is how we perceive sound. All loudness is "perceived," so saying something has "perceived loudness" is redundant and leads to the mistaken notion that there is a different, "real" loudness that is of higher integrity and greater importance.
Click to expand...

No worries, I think we are on the same page. I was just trying to point out that loudness (which is perceived) and peak output (which is measured) don't always correlate directly. There are other factors involved.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back