Chef
In Memoriam
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Warwick Micro; 1000 watts 4 ohms!
- Thread starter gustobassman
- Start date
No, we are saying that he is not correctly identifying the modules and/or the specs of the modules that his competitors are using. He is either quoting the specs from the lower powered units in the 'mono' line of ICE modules, or he is quoting the non bridged single side spec of the 'x 2' ICE modules
Totally different products.
Chef
In Memoriam
- Feb 12, 2006
- 60,978
- 5
- 220,734
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
No sir, you are completely and factually incorrect about the 250ASX2 ratings. Again, you appear to be applying the single ended ratings to the BTL application, and there is no published 4 ohm BTL specification because it takes additional engineering to achieve reliable performance per IcePower themselves.
This is an engineering topic that is trying to be addressed by a marketing person, please leave this to engineering folks so that those who are trying to understand this stuff are not confused by factually inaccurate information being posed as fact.
When I first saw it I immediately thought of Frank Grizwald and the faimly truckster. Yuck!
My .02:
Late to the party and badly dressed, but laden with all the desireable features. Having 2 discreet channels that are not footswitchable means the application is practically limited to 2 different instruments. I would have preferred a smaller, less expensive unit with 1 channel. Also, if it is truly 3 rackspaces high, that's distinctly suboptimal. I wouldn't turn down a free one, but at $750, my amp dollars will go elsewhere. I wonder how many Hellborg rigs Warwick sold?
Late to the party and badly dressed, but laden with all the desireable features. Having 2 discreet channels that are not footswitchable means the application is practically limited to 2 different instruments. I would have preferred a smaller, less expensive unit with 1 channel. Also, if it is truly 3 rackspaces high, that's distinctly suboptimal. I wouldn't turn down a free one, but at $750, my amp dollars will go elsewhere. I wonder how many Hellborg rigs Warwick sold?
I can see the benefits of having two discrete channels. You could keep two very different basses plugged in and ready to go, or two very similar basses for an immediate backup in case of a string breakage or other disaster mid-song for a very important gig or something. It could make sense. I can even see not making them foot switchable if that was your particular design goal.
However, claiming that an internal switch would compromise the tone makes no sense to me. I'm no EE but I had to take circuits. A properly imlemented switching relay with a simple AB switch will be totally transparent to the amps tone. The signal does not flow through any of the relays only the switch. If the channel switch would degrade the tone so would the mute switches, active pads, etc.. but they don't. A signal doesn't see a switch in its path, it only sees a conductive path. with high quallity parts the path to channel 1 will sound exactly like the path to channel 2, even with a relay actuated switch in the middle. Guitar amplifier manufacturers have been doing this for decades. (with the possible exception of Matchless)
However, claiming that an internal switch would compromise the tone makes no sense to me. I'm no EE but I had to take circuits. A properly imlemented switching relay with a simple AB switch will be totally transparent to the amps tone. The signal does not flow through any of the relays only the switch. If the channel switch would degrade the tone so would the mute switches, active pads, etc.. but they don't. A signal doesn't see a switch in its path, it only sees a conductive path. with high quallity parts the path to channel 1 will sound exactly like the path to channel 2, even with a relay actuated switch in the middle. Guitar amplifier manufacturers have been doing this for decades. (with the possible exception of Matchless)
I checked it out at NAMM and it sounded nice though it's tough to really get a great read on things in that environment.
One note though...I dabble in trying to play chapman stick/warr guitar so this amp is an instant hit for me with the two independent channels. I look forward to trying one out for that use.
One note though...I dabble in trying to play chapman stick/warr guitar so this amp is an instant hit for me with the two independent channels. I look forward to trying one out for that use.
This will be something to approach like a new model of car. My friends in the car biz would always advise against buying a new model, in its' first year. They would advise waiting until the bugs had been worked out. Look for Warwick to get it right, for next year's NAMM.
The ICE module power ratings rathole is bottomless. It's all over audiophile forums. There is value added engineering technolgy that users of these modules can add in based on their goals for the modules. Warwick could pull in a few and look to see what other manufacturers have added.
I'd like to see a pre-amp only version of the Warwick. I like two channels.
A single rack space to pair with any power of my choice.
Is this this Warwick as a pre-amp worthy to stand on it's own?
I also don't care about "class-a" pre-amps unless there's actual comparisons that it has some superior behaviors. Not just marketing speak.
I'd like to see a pre-amp only version of the Warwick. I like two channels.
A single rack space to pair with any power of my choice.
Is this this Warwick as a pre-amp worthy to stand on it's own?
I also don't care about "class-a" pre-amps unless there's actual comparisons that it has some superior behaviors. Not just marketing speak.
"Class A pre-amp" hits my immediate ignore button and makes anything after that statement suspect. A techie thing maybe?
I like Andy who demo's the Warwick basses, but what have they told him to say in this amps demo?!
You can't go round pointing fingers like that at other manufacturers.
Aguilar took their time to get into Class D, but they got it right, 100%.
This? Not so sure. I actually think it looks kinda kookie and cool, but its huge.
I'd opt for a SMax 9.2 or Glock over this.
You can't go round pointing fingers like that at other manufacturers.
Aguilar took their time to get into Class D, but they got it right, 100%.
This? Not so sure. I actually think it looks kinda kookie and cool, but its huge.
I'd opt for a SMax 9.2 or Glock over this.
Is it April 1st already? This is an almost comic offering from a major player such as Warwick. One could get past the aesthetics of the form if the product delivered on function, but it appears on 1st blush that this amp doesn't do anything impressive enough functionally to offset the funky form.
On top of that, the demo video is a fail on many levels, not the least of which is the sniping at the competition.
On top of that, the demo video is a fail on many levels, not the least of which is the sniping at the competition.
Unbelievably, they STILL haven't pulled that absolutely horrible, HORRIBLE video.
Quote:
"...but across the board since they came out, they all kinda have a, have a, a spongy kinda digital sounding low end to them and, and the quality just isn't there in terms of having a real classic kinda bass amp sound...you sacrifice that a little bit...and that's the reason why Warwick didn't enter the market already--the technology just wasn't there--but now it is."
Really guys? C'mon.
Still love ya!
i've read two pages w/ people mostly complaining how it's ugly and it's going to be a 'FAIL'. while only one poster actually had a chance to play it. on very noisy NAMM floor.
do not know if discussion changed it's course on pages three, four and five. did not really had wish to continue.
do not know if discussion changed it's course on pages three, four and five. did not really had wish to continue.
It's weird. In the video, the guy says you can change channels with a footswitch. There's no footswitch jack on the amp. Maybe it's bluetooth?
Seems a little large to compete with most other class D amps' reputation for portability, though the low weight would certainly help. I always prefer small size over low weight because low weight doesn't help you squeeze something into a hard case, and wieght was never an issue for me for anything except large, valve heads. I agree about the knobs too, they stick out a little far and are likely to get not sheared, but snapped off over time. That would bolster Warwick's replacement parts manufacturing business though, so good for them I guess.
Class D amps will never have such consistent performance in the low-end category as all-valve heads, but I've never really found tone an issue with any of them. Warwick amps do generally have good tone, and the Hellborg stuff sounds fantastic, so I'm sure this thing can sound sweet with the right settings. Volume? Pfft, come on man, what amp manufacturer doesn't lie a bit about their wattage figures. But a solid-state amp that falls short of a 1000 watt target is still damn loud, so that won't be an issue.
I have to ask though, why two preamp sections? As stated, you can't switch between them with a footswitch so it seems a bit too cumbersome to be worth the added design complications. That statement about tone loss via an internal A/B switch is conjectural by the way; as stated, internal or external, a signal switch is a signal switch, and the tone loss would be about the same as if you used a slightly longer guitar lead. That and the knobs seem like fundamental design flaws to me, but then again, few amps are truly flawless
I personally think it looks cool, pretty 70's but I like it. That combined with the wood makes for a design aesthetic that's actually quite original, IMO. The wood could maybe be a bit polished, like what you'd find in a Mercedes' dashboard, then it'd look really classy. That said, I'm still a Genz Benz guy, cause those amps just slay anything class D.
Class D amps will never have such consistent performance in the low-end category as all-valve heads, but I've never really found tone an issue with any of them. Warwick amps do generally have good tone, and the Hellborg stuff sounds fantastic, so I'm sure this thing can sound sweet with the right settings. Volume? Pfft, come on man, what amp manufacturer doesn't lie a bit about their wattage figures. But a solid-state amp that falls short of a 1000 watt target is still damn loud, so that won't be an issue.
I have to ask though, why two preamp sections? As stated, you can't switch between them with a footswitch so it seems a bit too cumbersome to be worth the added design complications. That statement about tone loss via an internal A/B switch is conjectural by the way; as stated, internal or external, a signal switch is a signal switch, and the tone loss would be about the same as if you used a slightly longer guitar lead. That and the knobs seem like fundamental design flaws to me, but then again, few amps are truly flawless
I personally think it looks cool, pretty 70's but I like it. That combined with the wood makes for a design aesthetic that's actually quite original, IMO. The wood could maybe be a bit polished, like what you'd find in a Mercedes' dashboard, then it'd look really classy. That said, I'm still a Genz Benz guy, cause those amps just slay anything class D.
