TC RH450 combo

[llamalor2112]

Two simple questions... Can the head be taken out for use w/ other cabs? AND: Is the 210 cab specially designed to handle all 450watts or is it just an 8ohm RS210 like usual?

 

[Eublet]

Here's a good place to start:

www.tcelectronic.com

 

[llamalor2112]

Already checked out the product page but my two ws were the only two things I didn't see on that site.

 

[KJung]

Already checked out the product page but my two ws were the only two things I didn't see on that site.

The head can be taken out. The combo is 8ohms, and since the entire combo is the same size as the RS210, that means the internal volume of the cab is a bit lower (similar to the Walkabout Scout cab versus the extension cab).

Just IMO, but I would HIGHLY recommend going with the separate head/cab combination. Those 'built in carts' are cheap as heck and useless for going up stairs or over curbs, and it is a bit difficult to really protect the head and find a cover that works with the built in cart. Combine that with the reduction in internal volume of the cab, and the separates would, for me, be a better way to go. Again, IMO and just something to think about.

Also, I feel the RH450 can drive the little RS210 to full volume at 8ohms, so there would be very little advantage to finding a 4ohm version.

 

[Bass Junkie]

The head can be taken out. The combo is 8ohms, and since the entire combo is the same size as the RS210, that means the internal volume of the cab is a bit lower (similar to the Walkabout Scout cab versus the extension cab).

Just IMO, but I would HIGHLY recommend going with the separate head/cab combination. Those 'built in carts' are cheap as heck and useless for going up stairs or over curbs, and it is a bit difficult to really protect the head and find a cover that works with the built in cart. Combine that with the reduction in internal volume of the cab, and the separates would, for me, be a better way to go. Again, IMO and just something to think about.

Also, I feel the RH450 can drive the little RS210 to full volume at 8ohms, so there would be very little advantage to finding a 4ohm version.

The amp may be able to drive the cab at 8 ohms to its volume potential, but I've found that more watts at lower volume has a tighter sound with more presence. I also would prefer a single cab 4 ohm setup. Even better if TC would come out with a head with more power. I have a feeling that day is coming.

 

[KJung]

The amp may be able to drive the cab at 8 ohms to its volume potential, but I've found that more watts at lower volume has a tighter sound with more presence. I also would prefer a single cab 4 ohm setup. Even better if TC would come out with a head with more power. I have a feeling that day is coming.

Don't let the rated volume of the RH fool you... it is a hammer IMO and IME! Do hot confuse the 450 watts of this head with the GB440 your have (or the TF550 for that matter).... night and day difference!

I agree that more power, in general, is a good thing, but only if a cab can take it. My experience with the RS210 is that it is fully driven by the 8ohm performance of the RH450, which I find to be much superior to my other amps at 8ohm (Puma and MB heads).

I too prefer a single 4ohm cab configuration though, and use the wonderful 4ohm Bergantino AE410 with my RH450... amazing volume and punch, and the 410 is about same weight as that little combo!

 

[Bass Junkie]

Don't let the rated volume of the RH fool you... it is a hammer IMO and IME!

I agree that more power, in general, is a good thing, but only if a cab can take it. My experience with the RS210 is that it is fully driven by the 8ohm performance of the RH450, which I find to be much superior to my other amps at 8ohm (Puma and MB heads).

I too prefer a single 4ohm cab configuration though, and use the wonderful 4ohm Bergantino AE410 with my RH450... amazing volume and punch, and the 410 is about same weight as that little combo!

I didn't say I wanted more power for more volume. I would like to have it for better tone. Yes, the RH sounds great a 8 ohms, but anything can be improved. I would love to hear what that RH450/RS112 rig would sound like if the cab were 4 ohms. Again, not for volume, but for presence and a tighter sound.

 

[KJung]

I didn't say I wanted more power for more volume. I would like to have it for better tone. Yes, the RH sounds great a 8 ohms, but anything can be improved. I would love to hear what that RH450/RS112 rig would sound like if the cab were 4 ohms. Again, not for volume, but for presence and a tighter sound.

I hear what you are saying. My guess is, the RS112 would sound identical (presence and tightness) given that small single driver, but I agree with you that the RS212 or especially the RS410 would both be killer stand-alone solutions for the RH450, and much more open at 4ohms.

 

[Bass Junkie]

I hear what you are saying. My guess is, the RS112 would sound identical (presence and tightness) given that small single driver, but I agree with you that the RS212 or especially the RS410 would both be killer stand-alone solutions for the RH450, and much more open at 4ohms.

My only point of reference is when I were using the Berg HT112. My WW Ultra(800 watts) would sound better than my WW Hi Power(300 watts). Yeah it would be somewhat louder with limitations of course, but also on low to medium volume gigs the Ultra had much more presence and a tighter more controlled tone. Same result if I used any lower powered head vs the Ultra. More watts is better in more ways than one.

The RS112 is an outstanding sounding cab and will work fine with the TC head at 8 ohms, I just would like to be able to hear it with 450 watts behind it. I have feeeling that TC will come out with a 700 or more watt head in the near future.

 

[KJung]

My only point of reference is when I were using the Berg HT112. My WW Ultra(800 watts) would sound better than my WW Hi Power(300 watts). Yeah it would be somewhat louder with limitations of course, but also on low to medium volume gigs the Ultra had much more presence and a tighter more controlled tone. Same result if I used any lower powered head vs the Ultra. More watts is better in more ways than one.

Yeah, the HT112 likes a bit of power to open up, and I agree the Green Light Walters sounded like dog run at 8 at any volume (IMO and IME there). The Ultra is a beautiful thing at 8ohms (interestingly, I didn't really hear the Ultra open up significantly at 4ohms versus 8ohms).

The TC cabs seem to be higher SPL than the HT112 to me, and the RH450 would SPANK the Green Light WW at 8ohms.

Lot's of stuff to consider here versus just '8 versus 4'. The only way to really evaluate 8 versus 4 performance is the same head through two otherwise identically spec'd cabs in 8 and 4ohm versions (I luckily have a buddy with an 8ohm 410UL that we use to compare heads with my 410UL 4ohm).

 

[Eublet]

The amp may be able to drive the cab at 8 ohms to its volume potential, but I've found that more watts at lower volume has a tighter sound with more presence.

Respectfully, I think you are a bit confused over what you have observed. Having a 4 ohm cab doesn't mean you run more watts at a lower volume at all, regardless of the manufacturer. Assuming TC made a 4 ohm version of the RS210, then the cabinet would still reach the same exact volume with the same amount of wattage as the 8 ohm version. 200 watts at 4 ohms would be just as loud as 200 watts at 8 ohms. The only thing that matters is how well the head handles dynamics at different impedances/power levels. You've noticed that some amps sound better at 4 ohms, but that's because of the design of those heads might suffer at 8 ohms or 2 ohms. This is not unusual, but it has nothing to do with the impedance itself, but rather how the head is designed. What Ken is trying to tell you, and that I will 100% agree with, is that the RH450 does not suffer from such design issues at 8 ohms. You can fully drive an 8 ohm load on the RH450, such as the RS210. There would be no advantage to the RS210 being a 4 ohm load since the extra wattage it allowed from the RH450 wouldn't result in any noticable volume or dynamic benefit.

A watt is a watt. Impedance only dictates how "hard" the amp has to work to deliver that watt. Lower impedance makes amps work harder. Many heads that are designed to push 4 ohms optimally don't push 8 ohms as well, or vice versa. Same goes for adding 2 ohm functionality. Again, this is VERY common. The RH450 doesn't seem to have this issue at all. Many other heads don't suffer from it either.

Hope this helps, and as always IMHO/E!

 

[Bass Junkie]

Respectfully, I think you are a bit confused over what you have observed. Having a 4 ohm cab doesn't mean you run more watts at a lower volume at all, regardless of the manufacturer. Assuming TC made a 4 ohm version of the RS210, then the cabinet would still reach the same exact volume with the same amount of wattage as the 8 ohm version. 200 watts at 4 ohms would be just as loud as 200 watts at 8 ohms. The only thing that matters is how well the head handles dynamics at different impedances/power levels. You've noticed that some amps sound better at 4 ohms, but that's because of the design of those heads might suffer at 8 ohms or 2 ohms. This is not unusual, but it has nothing to do with the impedance itself, but rather how the head is designed. What Ken is trying to tell you, and that I will 100% agree with, is that the RH450 does not suffer from such design issues at 8 ohms. You can fully drive an 8 ohm load on the RH450, such as the RS210. There would be no advantage to the RS210 being a 4 ohm load since the extra wattage it allowed from the RH450 wouldn't result in any noticable volume or dynamic benefit.

A watt is a watt. Impedance only dictates how "hard" the amp has to work to deliver that watt. Lower impedance makes amps work harder. Many heads that are designed to push 4 ohms optimally don't push 8 ohms as well, or vice versa. Same goes for adding 2 ohm functionality. Again, this is VERY common. The RH450 doesn't seem to have this issue at all. Many other heads don't suffer from it either.

Hope this helps, and as always IMHO/E!

Sorry, you didn't convince me. Another example, I can take my CA9 and run one side into a 8 ohm cab, play through it, then bridge the amp,still at 8 ohms, and hear a tighter punchier sound and more dynamic. I'm not talking anything about volume, just tone. What am I doing? Just pushing more watts. The RS112 @ 8 ohms with the RH450 is pushing roughly 250 watts. If there were a way to get a RS112 4 ohm cab the amp would be pushing 450 watts. What am I missing here?

 

[Eublet]

Sorry, you didn't convince me. Another example, I can take my CA9 and run one side into a 8 ohm cab, play through it, then bridge the amp,still at 8 ohms, and hear a tighter punchier sound and more dynamic. I'm not talking anything about volume, just tone. What am I doing? Just pushing more watts. The RS112 @ 8 ohms with the RH450 is pushing roughly 250 watts. If there were a way to get a RS112 4 ohm cab the amp would be pushing 450 watts. What am I missing here?

What I'm saying is that you aren't pushing more watts if the volume is the same. This must be accepted first to understand the rest of what I'm saying. Wattage is wattage.

Assuming you accept that, then any difference you notice from your CA9 scenario above has more to do with the design and functionality of the poweramp, and nothing to do with the impedance or anything else. Perhaps that legendary poweramp does perform better when bridged, such that speaker dampening and dynamics are more present. That could very well be because the amp is able to better disperse it's wattage when bridged. That's cool, but that's a product of the poweramps design. It's not a law that applies to all equipment.

It sounds like you're describing what many folks associate with headroom, but even that is a limiting description. All that matters audibly is whether or not a head can deliver full power into a cabinet at a given wattage, including dynamic transients. There is a lot going on there, but you don't HAVE to have double the continuous wattage or more in reserve to get that same feel.

True headroom junkies will always want to have many times over the available wattage necessary to achieve a given volume. Much of their reasoning lies in experiences they've had that are very similar to what you are describing. I'm submitting that those experiences, while valid, aren't a law that can't be broken. The design of one piece of gear and how it works doesn't mean that another must follow suit.

Now on a larger cabinet, such as a 410 or bigger, lowering the impedance would definitely provide some extra room for wump. But a little 210 can only be driven so hard regardless of it's impedance. Wattage is wattage, and if the RH450 can put all the wattage into that 210 than it can handle, then lowering the impedance doesn't provide any benefit. That doesn't mean that another head would do the same, such as the LMII. It had VERY noticeable issues with pushing 8ohm loads compared to similar 4ohm loads, even with some smaller cabinets.

 

[Bass Junkie]

What I'm saying is that you aren't pushing more watts if the volume is the same. This must be accepted first to understand the rest of what I'm saying. Wattage is wattage.

Assuming you accept that, then any difference you notice from your CA9 scenario above has more to do with the design and functionality of the poweramp, and nothing to do with the impedance or anything else. Perhaps that legendary poweramp does perform better when bridged, such that speaker dampening and dynamics are more present. That could very well be because the amp is able to better disperse it's wattage when bridged. That's cool, but that's a product of the poweramps design. It's not a law that applies to all equipment.

It sounds like you're describing what many folks associate with headroom, but even that is a limiting description. All that matters audibly is whether or not a head can deliver full power into a cabinet at a given wattage, including dynamic transients. There is a lot going on there, but you don't HAVE to have double the continuous wattage or more in reserve to get that same feel.

True headroom junkies will always want to have many times over the available wattage necessary to achieve a given volume. Much of their reasoning lies in experiences they've had that are very similar to what you are describing. I'm submitting that those experiences, while valid, aren't a law that can't be broken. The design of one piece of gear and how it works doesn't mean that another must follow suit.

Now on a larger cabinet, such as a 410 or bigger, lowering the impedance would definitely provide some extra room for wump. But a little 210 can only be driven so hard regardless of it's impedance. Wattage is wattage, and if the RH450 can put all the wattage into that 210 than it can handle, then lowering the impedance doesn't provide any benefit. That doesn't mean that another head would do the same, such as the LMII. It had VERY noticeable issues with pushing 8ohm loads compared to similar 4ohm loads, even with some smaller cabinets.

Sorry, but I just keep getting the impression we are not on the same page. You keep referring to volume and driving a cab to its full potential, but I'm not looking to get max volume out of a small cab, just better tone. Maybe or maybe not a 4 ohm RS112(if it existed) would improve the tone, but I'd have to hear it with my own ears.

 

[Eublet]

Sorry, but I just keep getting the impression we are not on the same page. You keep referring to volume and driving a cab to its full potential, but I'm not looking to get max volume out of a small cab, just better tone. Maybe or maybe not a 4 ohm RS112(if it existed) would improve the tone, but I'd have to hear it with my own ears.

No, I think I'm on your page, trying to get you to come over to mine!

I'll say one more thing then to reply to this last comment of yours. Why does having more wattage on reserve improve the tone? Could it be because something in the design of the amp allows the tone to improve when it's working much below it's rated capacity? Does that design limitation, even though common, have to apply to all products?

 

[Bass Junkie]

No, I think I'm on your page, trying to get you to come over to mine!

I'll say one more thing then to reply to this last comment of yours. Why does having more wattage on reserve improve the tone? Could it be because something in the design of the amp allows the tone to improve when it's working much below it's rated capacity? Does that design limitation, even though common, have to apply to all products?

I've never in this discussion tried to get into the "why's" and "how's", I've only expressed what my experience has been with more watts. I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "watts is watts", yet I hear distinctive differences between power amps. That's why I have a CA9 and not a QSC! Like I said, I'll let my ears be the deciding factor.

 

[KJung]

I've never in this discussion tried to get into the "why's" and "how's", I've only expressed what my experience has been with more watts. Like I said, I'll let my ears be the deciding factor.

That can get you into a bit of trouble. Saying 'this sounds better than that' is totally valid. Saying 'this sounds better than that because it is running at 4ohms' without thinking through the issues or understanding the 'why' can result in spending money that is not needed, or choosing something (or eliminating something from consideration) for the wrong reasons.... been there, done that!

The 'how' and 'why' can be quite helpful in trying to compare things, especially regarding published wattage, which is almost as useless as published speaker SPL in actually determining how loud a given piece of gear is, or how much headroom it actually has.

Just trying to help out Feel free to ignore