I've been a happy RH (450 then 750) user since 2009; happiest over the past year, after really having gotten the semi-parametric mid/shelving point setup truly under control (vs being somewhat hit-or-miss). Since deciding to keep a backup head, I've been on something of a quest to try everything I can. I figure at some point, a head may knock the RH750 out of the top slot and I'll have a go-to amp that I'm even happier with.
My latest buy/try/backup amp is the TCE BH550. I wanted to give some personal initial impressions and comparisons to the RH750, but wanted to hold off until I played in a group setting, which I did last night.
Unboxing -
Totally a minor point, but I'm always impressed with TCE's packaging. It's done very well with great protection and attractive/convenient touches, like a strap handle on the box. Anyway, on pulling it out of the box, it was bigger and heavier than I expected. I find that I can read specs and see pictures but still form a mental image that doesn't quite match the reality. My mental image here was that it would be a little smaller and lighter. In hand, it seems about the same size and weight as the RH750. That's not a bad thing. I'm not really a fan of the appearance (I guess it's the color and the two white knobs - I like the lines, fit and finish), but it feels compact and substantial with nothing striking me as flimsy or cheap feeling; it seems the "right" weight for its size (where the BX500, for example, seems overly light for its size and the case seems to lack some amount of substance). Where I might prefer buttons, the switches used are small and kept short with a longish throw, so they're nicely functional yet sturdy feeling.
Initial A/Bing -
I went back and forth on my Schroeder 212PL. The RH has the advantage of already being setup to my liking. I made these first comparisons without using any of the comp or tube TonePrints. Set flat, the BH is pleasant enough if just a bit "dry" with more hi mid than I liked. Pulling the contour switch on my bass sounded great, actually very balanced. I basically could have left it at that, but for general use that seems to bump the bass a bit much. I made some smallish adjustments to the EQ (nothing more than 10:00 or 2:00) and found a sound that compared nicely to the RH in an overall way but was clearly different. I've usually been able to at least find some kind of words to describe differences I'm hearing, but this one is leaving me at a bit of a loss. I don't want to make too much of it because it's slight and only apparent as a direct comparison. But the word that keeps coming to me is "dry"..."harshness" and "brittleness" are too strong of description, but are in the realm of what I mean in a very slight way; as an undertone..."unrefined" "lacking density" maybe? The best I can do to try to convey is that the quality I'm hearing seems to be in the base character of the midrange frequencies, not the level. With an otherwise balanced tone, the "dry" character is there, but efforts to drop the dry quality end up with the frequency noticeably muted/muffled…no idea if that makes sense, sorry. In direct comparison, I found the RH preferable; richer, smoother, clearer (as a relative matter, less of those qualities = "dry").
On some of the features -
I'm familiar with the BH's tuner from owning a BG250. Making a more direct comparison to the RH, you can say that the BH tuner certainly works…works well, but the RH tuner is way ahead.
The RH's presets are one of the things that seem "nice" and probably become under appreciated when you get used to having them. Even just for saving a single setting. Using other amps, reminds how easy it is to accidentally bump knobs and sliders…you do that, even just a little bit, and what you had is gone. In comparing to other amps, I've found this to be a real usability bonus that the RH has.
As with the tuner, I'm familiar with TonePrints. I never really found much use for them. I'm not an effects guy, and the little use I have for them, I get from my B3. I also don't like overdriven tone as a staple sound. Trying out some of the tube and compressor TonePrints is a next thing on my list. I'll be interested to see if one of the options works to wet that dry character that I'm hearing.
With a band -
I had a rehearsal last night and switched back and forth between amps every few songs. The BH did fine, but I found myself continuing to prefer the RH. The same characteristics showed through with guitars and drums added in. This also needs to be re-tried with a TonePrint on the BH…we'll see.
The BH is "good" and completely useable. In the absence of a direct comparison, I'm sure it would be golden. Bottom line, so far, is that I personally like the RH better...others' MMV. I tend to bounce back and forth some in my thinking on the value of simplicity in EQ versus the power of highly controllable (if more complex) EQ. Given the limited circumstances so far, simplicity just isn't getting it. It's entirely possible this could be a matter of the BH just not being as good a match with the Schroeder, and without para-EQ, the BH can't be made to match up as well.
I'll be doing a little "shootout" with a friend. We'll get an RH450, RH750, BH550, TH500 and LMIII (which, from what I've seen on TB, gets a lot of love from Schroeder owners) together with the 212PL and a Berg CN212.
My latest buy/try/backup amp is the TCE BH550. I wanted to give some personal initial impressions and comparisons to the RH750, but wanted to hold off until I played in a group setting, which I did last night.
Unboxing -
Totally a minor point, but I'm always impressed with TCE's packaging. It's done very well with great protection and attractive/convenient touches, like a strap handle on the box. Anyway, on pulling it out of the box, it was bigger and heavier than I expected. I find that I can read specs and see pictures but still form a mental image that doesn't quite match the reality. My mental image here was that it would be a little smaller and lighter. In hand, it seems about the same size and weight as the RH750. That's not a bad thing. I'm not really a fan of the appearance (I guess it's the color and the two white knobs - I like the lines, fit and finish), but it feels compact and substantial with nothing striking me as flimsy or cheap feeling; it seems the "right" weight for its size (where the BX500, for example, seems overly light for its size and the case seems to lack some amount of substance). Where I might prefer buttons, the switches used are small and kept short with a longish throw, so they're nicely functional yet sturdy feeling.
Initial A/Bing -
I went back and forth on my Schroeder 212PL. The RH has the advantage of already being setup to my liking. I made these first comparisons without using any of the comp or tube TonePrints. Set flat, the BH is pleasant enough if just a bit "dry" with more hi mid than I liked. Pulling the contour switch on my bass sounded great, actually very balanced. I basically could have left it at that, but for general use that seems to bump the bass a bit much. I made some smallish adjustments to the EQ (nothing more than 10:00 or 2:00) and found a sound that compared nicely to the RH in an overall way but was clearly different. I've usually been able to at least find some kind of words to describe differences I'm hearing, but this one is leaving me at a bit of a loss. I don't want to make too much of it because it's slight and only apparent as a direct comparison. But the word that keeps coming to me is "dry"..."harshness" and "brittleness" are too strong of description, but are in the realm of what I mean in a very slight way; as an undertone..."unrefined" "lacking density" maybe? The best I can do to try to convey is that the quality I'm hearing seems to be in the base character of the midrange frequencies, not the level. With an otherwise balanced tone, the "dry" character is there, but efforts to drop the dry quality end up with the frequency noticeably muted/muffled…no idea if that makes sense, sorry. In direct comparison, I found the RH preferable; richer, smoother, clearer (as a relative matter, less of those qualities = "dry").
On some of the features -
I'm familiar with the BH's tuner from owning a BG250. Making a more direct comparison to the RH, you can say that the BH tuner certainly works…works well, but the RH tuner is way ahead.
The RH's presets are one of the things that seem "nice" and probably become under appreciated when you get used to having them. Even just for saving a single setting. Using other amps, reminds how easy it is to accidentally bump knobs and sliders…you do that, even just a little bit, and what you had is gone. In comparing to other amps, I've found this to be a real usability bonus that the RH has.
As with the tuner, I'm familiar with TonePrints. I never really found much use for them. I'm not an effects guy, and the little use I have for them, I get from my B3. I also don't like overdriven tone as a staple sound. Trying out some of the tube and compressor TonePrints is a next thing on my list. I'll be interested to see if one of the options works to wet that dry character that I'm hearing.
With a band -
I had a rehearsal last night and switched back and forth between amps every few songs. The BH did fine, but I found myself continuing to prefer the RH. The same characteristics showed through with guitars and drums added in. This also needs to be re-tried with a TonePrint on the BH…we'll see.
The BH is "good" and completely useable. In the absence of a direct comparison, I'm sure it would be golden. Bottom line, so far, is that I personally like the RH better...others' MMV. I tend to bounce back and forth some in my thinking on the value of simplicity in EQ versus the power of highly controllable (if more complex) EQ. Given the limited circumstances so far, simplicity just isn't getting it. It's entirely possible this could be a matter of the BH just not being as good a match with the Schroeder, and without para-EQ, the BH can't be made to match up as well.
I'll be doing a little "shootout" with a friend. We'll get an RH450, RH750, BH550, TH500 and LMIII (which, from what I've seen on TB, gets a lot of love from Schroeder owners) together with the 212PL and a Berg CN212.
Last edited:
thanks again
