• 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.

Trickfish Bullhead 1K Question???

#3
From the manual:
Power Output: (8 Ohms) 1000 Watts Peak .05% THD, 4 Ohm minimum load

'Peak' is the catch. Since it's 1000w peak, the actual power output is likely around 600-700 watts. Probably 350 or so at 8 ohms and 700 at 4 ohms, with 1000w 'peaks'.
 
#4
mmbongo said:
From the manual:
Power Output: (8 Ohms) 1000 Watts Peak .05% THD, 4 Ohm minimum load

'Peak' is the catch. Since it's 1000w peak, the actual power output is likely around 600-700 watts. Probably 350 or so at 8 ohms and 700 at 4 ohms, with 1000w 'peaks'.
Click to expand...
Curious as now I wonder what the Bullhead .5's numbers are. I think I recall 500 watts at 8 ohms and 700 watts at 4 ohms. That's probably a peak number?

I did see literature saying that the 1k did 1,000 watts peak at both 8 and 4 ohms. Just odd that the output on the 1K is the same at 8 and 4 ohms while the .5k has differing outputs at 8 and 4 ohms
 
Last edited:
#5
Quadzilla said:
Curious as now I wonder what the Bullhead .5's numbers are. I think I recall 500 watts at 8 ohms and 700 watts at 4 ohms. That's probably a peak number?

I did see literature saying that the 1k did 1,000 watts peak at both 8 and 4 ohms. Just odd that the output on the 1K is the same at 8 and 4 ohms while the .5k has differing outputs at 8 and 4 ohms
Click to expand...

BULLHEAD .5K Specs (preliminary) Power Output:
8 Ohms: (Continuous Power ‐ 253W @ .13% THD, 365W @1% THD),
4 Ohms: (Continuous Power ‐ 312W @ .13% THD, 702W @1% THD),
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quadzilla
#8
I emailed to ask them a question regarding their power ratings years ago and didn't understand their reply. I'll see if I can dig up that Convo. The key here seems to be if "continuous power" is the same as RMS, and that most manufacturers, I believe, use the 1% THD rating, not the lower one.

EDIT:
Here's the question I sent them. (Seems like I worded it rudely without intention.):

"Hi I'm a bit confused by something so I thought I'd bring it to your attention, in case it helps. I notice that your Bullhead 1k amp is rated at 1000W peak at 8 ohms. That's it--no other information. This is confusing because just about every bass amp manufacturer uses watts RMS rather than peak watts to describe their amp's output power. They also tell you how much power the amp puts out at 4 ohms. You've chosen not to give this information and I wonder if it was a decision you made on purpose or if there was a mistake. You have a fairly expensive amp geared toward people who know something about amps, even if we're not engineers. It seems like a strange oversight. Thanks for reading."

And this was Trickfish's reply:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

"Here is some detailed info on the power amp module. We've added extra capacitors to improve the peak handling capabilities of the module.

There is a lot of confusion and misinformation on the veracity of RMS specs and we chose not to add that spec as it's relatively meaningless when someone is evaluating an amplifier. Not every amp manufacturer uses standardized test protocols to arrive at their data and an RMS rating tells you nothing about the ability of the amp to handle transients.

The more important spec when it comes to music is the peak rating. In other words, how does the amp handle transients? That tells you about the dynamics of the amp - basically the headroom you'll need to evaluate the musical properties of the amp. In actual playing situations this the more important spec.

FYI - We've measured the BH1K at 1275W at 4 ohms with 1% distortion."

This was 2017 so I don't know if the specs have changed since then.
 
Last edited:
#10
My real world experience over the last few years with my B1K is this: It's a powerful head, however it seems to me to have less total output than similarly rated heads I've owned in the past. Most notable was the GK MB800 I owned right before buying my B1K. I suspect the sensation of less total output has to do as much with the voicing of the preamp as anything since the B1K feels a good bit wider and less aggressive in the upper midrange than the GK. I previously owned a Genz Benz Streamliner 900 that I seem to recall feeling more powerful than the B1K but also less powerful than the MB800, which again likely comes down to voicing as much anything. Too much time has past since owning my older Tecamp Puma1000, which was one of the old models that used a PowerSoft amp rather than an ICE one, but if I had to guess they'd be in similar ballparks.

The moral of my fairly rambling story is that the B1K doesn't standout to me as being especially powerful given the rating, but it is still more than capable of providing excess power on any gig I've thrown at it. I don't play in mega-loud rock or metal bands, but I've had it pushing a pair of TF112 cabs on a number of loud corporate gigs where the bass amp had to carry the room due to a vocals-only PA, and it performed just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BaltoNealio, eff-clef and matante
#12
silky smoove said:
My real world experience over the last few years with my B1K is this: It's a powerful head, however it seems to me to have less total output than similarly rated heads I've owned in the past. Most notable was the GK MB800 I owned right before buying my B1K. I suspect the sensation of less total output has to do as much with the voicing of the preamp as anything since the B1K feels a good bit wider and less aggressive in the upper midrange than the GK. I previously owned a Genz Benz Streamliner 900 that I seem to recall feeling more powerful than the B1K but also less powerful than the MB800, which again likely comes down to voicing as much anything. Too much time has past since owning my older Tecamp Puma1000, which was one of the old models that used a PowerSoft amp rather than an ICE one, but if I had to guess they'd be in similar ballparks.

The moral of my fairly rambling story is that the B1K doesn't standout to me as being especially powerful given the rating, but it is still more than capable of providing excess power on any gig I've thrown at it. I don't play in mega-loud rock or metal bands, but I've had it pushing a pair of TF112 cabs on a number of loud corporate gigs where the bass amp had to carry the room due to a vocals-only PA, and it performed just fine.
Click to expand...

I’m replying to your post because I have similar experiences with a Bullhead 1K that I bought (lightly-to-moderately) used. I’m learning how best to take advantage of the frequency shelving and seem to have found the sweet spot (at least in the band’s studio/rehearsal space). Not quite dialed in at the last gig (in an old playhouse/theater), but a couple of guys and a female bassist checked it out afterward; I guessed they wouldn’t have had they not been impressed by its output and tone.

Many years ago, decades actually, I had been accustomed to tubed heads, Fender and Acoustic 360/361 in particular; there really wasn’t much in the way of alternative circuitry back then. I’ll put this way: had the Trickfish existed back then, despite obvious weight advantage, I would have preferred it over anything else I was playing at the time. I’m not big into complicated dials n buttons, but the ability to be able to select MY sound and tone justifies it. It’s clearly the best amp I’ve ever used in terms of striking a balance between volume/gain and frequency-tweaking flexibility. [When your drummer gets excited about YOUR sound/tone it’s worth taking notice!]
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back