True power output?

[drpepper]

FWIW, here is the link to our Invalid Link Removed. And here is Invalid Link Removed.

Why would anybody want to read that nonsense when they can can just go by what they saw that someone else who apparently read it posted about it?


(j/k good stuff)

 

[ThisBass]

Wait....are we talking power at the crankshaft or the wheels??

good point,
if you buy a car that is rated to 200 horse power then do you ask salesman at which RPM n/min this power is applcable? That's why I prefere Diesel engines, less power on paper but available power spreads broader over n/min so average is "felt" bigger. Try to swap a big truck diesel engine with a Ferrari engine coming with identical horse power, and then try to move 50 tons of weight with the Ferrari engine.

 

[PeaveyPlayer]

I use the BH800 and I'm getting the volume I need

No complaints for me

 

[tombowlus]

That is actually a good point. Has anyone actually done an SPL test of an RH450 and some other "around 450w or 250w" amp from another maker through the same cab in the same room?

The Tom Lees article I referenced above compared the RH450 to an Orange TB500 and ran them both through a similar battery of tests, with some interesting (I think) results.

 

[drpepper]

I use the BH800 and I'm getting the volume I need

No complaints for me

The BH800 doesn't have Active Power Management.

 

[drpepper]

FWIW, here is the link to our Invalid Link Removed. And here is Invalid Link Removed.

Hey Tom, thanks again for posting the links. I think it’s a needed contribution. I’d be curious if you have any thoughts on something that has occurred to me. Re-reading these, one thing that stands out now more than before, is that I feel Tom Lees actually contributes to the misunderstanding and confusion that he says he fears TCE’s marketing will be responsible for by feeding into the idea that the RH450 is being sold as “a 450 watt amp” BECAUSE and on the sole basis that it “feels as big as a 450 watt amp.”

By the wording that he chose, he suggests, repeatedly, that APM takes the output from a 250 watt power module and makes that “feel like a 450 watt amp.” The idea being that, regardless of definition, there is only one definition; “A 450 watt amp is a 450 watt amp because it benches at 450 watts.”

The key point I take from reading this, and understanding that TCE has said that they chose to label the RH450 as being a “450 watt amp” for its power module, which is rated at 450 watts, is that APM has a response goal, and to meet that goal in the RH450’s design, takes a 450 watt rated power module, which results (because of APM) in a measurement of 236 watts. In the RH750’s design, meeting the goal requires a 750 watt rated power module, which also happens to result in a measurement of 236 watts. From that, I’d speculate that a 250 watt power module behind APM would “feel as big as a 250 watt amp” while giving an RMS measurement somewhere well below 236 watts.

 

[ThisBass]

Hey Tom, thanks again for posting the links. I think it’s a needed contribution. I’d be curious if you have any thoughts on something that has occurred to me. Re-reading these, one thing that stands out now more than before, is that I feel Tom Lees actually contributes to the misunderstanding and confusion that he says he fears TCE’s marketing will be responsible for by feeding into the idea that the RH450 is being sold as “a 450 watt amp” BECAUSE and on the sole basis that it “feels as big as a 450 watt amp.”

By the wording that he chose, he suggests, repeatedly, that APM takes the output from a 250 watt power module and makes that “feel like a 450 watt amp.” The idea being that, regardless of definition, there is only one definition; “A 450 watt amp is a 450 watt amp because it benches at 450 watts.”

The key point I take from reading this, and understanding that TCE has said that they chose to label the RH450 as being a “450 watt amp” for its power module, which is rated at 450 watts, is that APM has a response goal, and to meet that goal in the RH450’s design, takes a 450 watt rated power module, which results (because of APM) in a measurement of 236 watts. In the RH750’s design, meeting the goal requires a 750 watt rated power module, which also happens to result in a measurement of 236 watts. From that, I’d speculate that a 250 watt power module behind APM would “feel as big as a 250 watt amp” while giving an RMS measurement somewhere well below 236 watts.

So what do you think about an audio pro amplifier that is rated on paper to 3500 Watt but drops down after 0.1 sec to 2500 watt?
Is this cheat?

 

[tombowlus]

The idea being that, regardless of definition, there is only one definition; “A 450 watt amp is a 450 watt amp because it benches at 450 watts.”

Actually, I think that Tom was trying to encourage people to broaden their scope of thought beyond that strict paradigm.

 

[ThisBass]

As manufactureres do lots of research on the physics of audio in general (music and speach and all kinds of "sound") so the more related perceptions will take place in amplification designs.
I'm convinced that in future it will be more important for consumers to understand the way how burst and continous capability both do accomplish.

If this blamed RH450 amp indeed has no more to offer than 236 watt power THEN it's possible to power a 200 watt cab without any doubts.
Was there something with burst capability? Seems to be ignored.
Question to the continous advocates.
Is burst capability a potential of power that is suitable to exceed Xlim of a driver?

My own experience, the nasty sound of drivers when a amplifier with huge amount of burst capability tries to kill a speaker, after 1 second at most the amplifier turns down just before the driver hangs off, that nasty sound may scare the poopie out of you.

 

[tombowlus]

As manufactureres do lots of research on the physics of audio in general (music and speach and all kinds of "sound") so the more related perceptions will take place in amplification designs.
I'm convinced that in future it will be more important for consumers to understand the way how burst and continous capability both do accomplish.

If this blamed RH450 amp indeed has no more to offer than 236 watt power THEN it's possible to power a 200 watt cab without any doubts.
Was there something with burst capability? Seems to be ignored.
Question to the continous advocates.
Is burst capability a potential of power that is suitable to exceed Xlim of a driver?

My own experience, the nasty sound of drivers when a amplifier with huge amount of burst capability tries to kill a speaker, after 1 second at most the amplifier turns down just before the driver hangs off, that nasty sound may scare the poopie out of you.

The RH450 (and RH750) cannot exceed 236w, by design - even in terms of burst power. It's what happens on the tail end of the knee after the burst that makes them sound/feel louder.

 

[drpepper]

Actually, I think that Tom was trying to encourage people to broaden their scope of thought beyond that strict paradigm.

Yes. I understand and agree with that...at least in my reading of it, but there are a few wording choice that (to me) read almost like he's still stuck in that paradigm as he's writing about not focusing on the numbers. Effectively, he says that what defines "a 250 amp" is a 250 RMS measurement. I read an article explaining how this amp essentially defies this particular measurement as a gauge of performance. What's completely discounted/absent is TCE's reasoning behind the "450 watt" label.

It's demonstrably the case that TCE could have done better to educate and market, but that's only in light of the confusion, misunderstanding, pitchforks and torches. I still don't know exactly what it is that I believe they should/could have done. I don't think the "right" thing would have been to put out in front that "The RH450 is a 236 watt RMS amp that's as loud as a 450 watts amp." As Tom Lees went through, there's more to it than that.

Personally, I don't find the 450 watt label bothersome. If the RH450 actually has a 250 watt rated power module and APM gooses that up to loudness that would be expected from a typical 450 watt amp, that would be bothersome to me. If they actually claimed 450 watts RMS, I'd share the concern of others on that specific point. It wouldn't affect what I have in my hands, but it would be a problem.

 

[tubedude]

Was it an attempt to sell a ton of amps before the stain of beringer made them suspect?

 

[xk49w]

Well, there was Link Removed of APM from TC Electronic about the RH450. In it is discussed crest factor, bass guitar signals, and so on. Further, about the RH450 it is stated "On the power amp side of things, we chose an amp capable of 450 watts (20ms burst @1kHz) (fig. 6)."

This claim does not seem to have been verified by the burst testing done by Bass Gear that measured a burst power of 233 or something, though I don't recall reading what the test case for BG burst test actually was. If the RH450 were in fact measured to achieve 450 Watts for 20 msec @1kHz then it could be claimed by the right sort of engineer-lawyer that it did meet the stated specification under certain (un)stated conditions. After all, an RMS claimed power measurement is really an average power measurement (well, square root thereof) and as such is averaged over some time interval, for example a well-chosen 20 msec. IMO still a bit of marketing trickery.

 

[azwipe]

Hoping to do just that!

Awesome. Throw a Bugera Veyron in there too while your at it!
Several threads have been popping up about those and I'll bet I'm not the only one curious about their 2,000 watt claim.

 

[Jim Carr]

I'd also like to have some one check the old faithfuls, like the Crest CA6 or CA9 or the bigger QSC lead sleds to set a mean high tide mark.

 

[JackANSI]

Not sure why that would matter. An amp either meets its advertised specs or it doesn't. And the method they use to measure wattage may not tell you everything about loudness, but it's the established standard, and "sounds like X watts" isn't good enough.

Not trying to give them a pass for lying on specs. I'm genuinely curious if it can reach the same SPL as an amp that has been labeled right. Not a graph done on a bench.

I highly doubt the RH450 could do it.

 

[JimmyM]

Not trying to give them a pass for lying on specs. I'm genuinely curious if it can reach the same SPL as an amp that has been labeled right. Not a graph done on a bench.

I highly doubt the RH450 could do it.

There are some who agree with you, for sure.

 

[fdeck]

Is burst capability a potential of power that is suitable to exceed Xlim of a driver?

That's certainly a fair question, something I'd be interested in researching. Some things to think about. Excursion is proportional to voltage, i.e., roughly the square root of power, so a seemingly large burst power margin is a much more modest voltage margin. Second, you'd have to look at what an actual bass waveform looks like. A 20 ms burst is only one cycle at 50 Hz -- I don't think an electric bass is capable of producing such a thing. Third, you have to look at the transient response of the speaker, rather than its continuous response curve.

I have the equations that would need to be solved, but haven't worked on solving them.

Roll these things together into one giant I Don't Know. It may very well be that the burst capability of a bass amp doesn't add very much to its ability to reproduce real waveforms from bass to speaker.

 

[Korladis]

I don't put a ton of stock into it. I figure it's a "target rating" for the market anyway. Same thing with motorcycles. My bike is a "1600" but actual displacement is 1552 cc.

Does it bother me? No, I test rode it first.

1552 and 1600 are pretty close.

236 and 450 are not.

There is fudging a little, and then there is blatant ********. TCE's stunt is the latter.

Not sure why that would matter. An amp either meets its advertised specs or it doesn't. And the method they use to measure wattage may not tell you everything about loudness, but it's the established standard, and "sounds like X watts" isn't good enough.

Exactly. It's not about whether it's a loud amp. It's that they blatantly lied about how much power it put out.

 

[tombowlus]

Well, there was Link Removed of APM from TC Electronic about the RH450. In it is discussed crest factor, bass guitar signals, and so on. Further, about the RH450 it is stated "On the power amp side of things, we chose an amp capable of 450 watts (20ms burst @1kHz) (fig. 6)."

This claim does not seem to have been verified by the burst testing done by Bass Gear that measured a burst power of 233 or something, though I don't recall reading what the test case for BG burst test actually was. If the RH450 were in fact measured to achieve 450 Watts for 20 msec @1kHz then it could be claimed by the right sort of engineer-lawyer that it did meet the stated specification under certain (un)stated conditions. After all, an RMS claimed power measurement is really an average power measurement (well, square root thereof) and as such is averaged over some time interval, for example a well-chosen 20 msec. IMO still a bit of marketing trickery.

I believe their claim that the particular output section was capable of putting out 450 watts. But as implemented in the RH450, it cannot put out more than 236 watts (continuous or burst).