Why is the 1000 ASP ICE module not more popular?

[bucephylus]

This is a very timely thread. Let's please not post any content which will cause it to be closed.

 

[RoadRanger]

Hopefully someday the government will finally release the alien amplifier technology they've kept under wraps at Area 51....

Bang-Olufsen has been using alien tech since they started up - do those names seem of-this-earth to you?

 

[J.Wolf]

I think it's a combination of that, cabs, basses and me. Seriously, in an effort to raise money for my daughter's car I've stumbled upon an incredibly portable set of gear that works and sounds just like I want it to at a fraction of the cost.

Not knocking the IP or the 1000 but as an example of a 1000 implementation it has other characteristics that probably prevented popularity.

I thought that's what I was doing.

Those kind of gigs? Chamber of Commerce black tie dinner (singer incident), backing my son's school band woodwind quartet at the teacher's request, wedding receptions, swanky club parties...

Definitely. Nirvanic tone means different things to different people. I'm not carrying a 79lb 410 no matter how good it sounds.

I'm no pro. Just a part timer with a wife and 3 teenagers. I have to balance music with braces, cars, kitchen appliances, insurance, college... There are probably more bass amp customers like me than players that spare no expense in pursuit of bass perfection.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just laying out some reasons why the 1000 may not be popular. I could be wrong. It may be a conspiracy between aliens, freemasons and Ted Cruz.

And I don't mean to insult your gigs. I was saying that, for myself I only tend to worry about the safety of my gear in either bar/club settings with tight quarters and alcoholic drinks, or dodgy outdoor gigs with bad weather contingencies.

I also have a wife and kids, and am a part-time player with a full-time day job, so Im not dogging anything here, just elaborating on my own circumstance.

The difference for me is that I will carry a 79 pound 410 to gigs if it sounds good enough to justify. Moreso than when I was playing full time, because A) its less gigs to schlep stuff too, and B) I am playing more and more for my own enjoyment and trying to maximize said enjoyment, since time and energy for gigging has become a rarer commodity.

I understand all the practical reasons why that module is not more popular. My original post question was mainly a rhetorical conversation starter (which succeeded given the great dialog thats transpired). Again everybody has different goals and values, there is no right or wrong. I surely am making no assumptions about anybody elses, just processing my own.

 

[J.Wolf]

There are probably more bass amp customers like me than players that spare no expense in pursuit of bass perfection.

This is more than likely the case, but if it were prohibitively true, there would no successful high end boutique manufacturers out there. Obviously there is a market, albeit pretty small.

 

[nutdog]

This is more than likely the case, but if it were prohibitively true, there would no successful high end boutique manufacturers out there. Obviously there is a market, albeit pretty small.

My cabs are boutique, albeit small.

Again, I'm not trying disparage innovation or the pursuit of excellence and certainly don't want to stop the interesting technical discussion. I was just pointing out that the examples of available 1000 offerings fall into a size and price range that prevent popularity in today's market regardless of performance. That may change and if it does there will be something else that goes beyond and some of the contributors in this thread will probably take it there.

 

[J.Wolf]

Its true, people looking to maximize "small, cheap, and loud" will have better options out there. But as long as companies are competing to make the higher performance, higher fidelity (don't read as "clean") offerings, in my book the 1000 will be the best option to achieve an end result that can really go head to head against larger, more traditional heads. (looking at you, DB 751).

 

[RoadRanger]

Dunno why all y'all fret over "by my ears" and "on paper" evidence when it's pretty easy to record the goes-into and comes-out-of and compare them?

 

[agedhorse]

Dunno why all y'all fret over "by my ears" and "on paper" evidence when it's pretty easy to record the goes-into and comes-out-of and compare them?

Agreed, the data is all there IF you know how to read and understand it (correctly of course, there's been a lot of fundamental misunderstandings about what the data means).

 

[JGR]

More importantly, play the different amps and pick what sounds (and feels) best to you as a player. Specs mean nothing if they don't translate into a product that produces a satisfying experience for the end user in its intended environment.

 

[RoadRanger]

Agreed, the data is all there IF you know how to read and understand it (correctly of course, there's been a lot of fundamental misunderstandings about what the data means).

I suspect you maintain a library of recorded bass lines to "test" with?

I was just doing a look-see with what various pitch shifters do - Oy Vey LOL. The Behringer one in the "X" mixers is actually damned good except for the 50ms latency - love the "delay" control that goes down to 1 ms . The B1on's loses the attack how could they overlook that ?

 

[nutdog]

Yall talkin bout the same thing?

 

[seamonkey]

More promising modules in the market
Crown EMPOWER by Crown

I can bet some head makers can drop these in without any changes to the signature sound of their heads

 

[agedhorse]

I suspect you maintain a library of recorded bass lines to "test" with?

I was just doing a look-see with what various pitch shifters do - Oy Vey LOL. The Behringer one in the "X" mixers is actually damned good except for the 50ms latency - love the "delay" control that goes down to 1 ms . The B1on's loses the attack how could they overlook that ?

I have some bass loops, but we also do some pretty intensive testing and comparisons with live bass players and equally important, a variety of cabinets because the reactive nature of cabinets with higher powered motors and larger moving mass can generate some significant energy storage. How the amplifier handles (and recycles) this reactive energy can make a difference in the sound and feel with some implementations. Sometimes, what looks good on paper with a resistive load doesn't sound as good (or sounds even better) with a reactive load. (IMO, this is true with the 250 module as there are some benefits specific to this architecture (ASX2) compared with the older ASP architecture... one of the reasons for the evolving product.

Something that I recall with the ASP models (unless I am not remembering correctly), that can be a very real issue in SOME applications, is that both speaker terminals sit at 1/2Vcc (around +60VDC on the 1000 module). While this doesn't present any issues with a speaker load, it can cause some really big issues if somebody were to connect a direct box with pin 1 connected to the sleeve or speaker minus terminal. I am not 100% certain, but I also recall that the fault circuitry on these models do not protect against this particular fault (to ground) very well, and there were some cautions about this in the engineering notes. The changes in this regard to the ASX2 models were very helpful in many applications. The ASP modules were intended (primarily) for use inside powered speakers where the output terminals were not accessible to the outside world.

 

[JGR]

While this doesn't present any issues with a speaker load, it can cause some really big issues if somebody were to connect a direct box with pin 1 connected to the sleeve or speaker minus terminal. I am not 100% certain, but I also recall that the fault circuitry on these models do not protect against this particular fault (to ground) very well, and there were some cautions about this in the engineering notes.

Seems like a pretty unlikely scenario, especially with speakon only (no combo or quarter inch) jacks on the amp.

There's always the ability to do creatively stupid things and destroy an amp - I was fumbling around once and inadvertently connected one of my power amps to another power amp instead of the cab - made both amps very unhappy when I fired it up. Would have been cool if the amps could have protected themselves, but the mistake was on my end and I own (and paid ($) for) it.

 

[ThisBass]

control technology at it's best.
I'm not sure if it's the most unnoticed subject with all kinds of feedback "controlled" amplifiying systems, electrical, mechanical ...

It's a little paradoxial cause tools of control analysis belong to power engineering rather than LF frequency audio. Never the less the regularities have been established well in the audio engineering world.
Another helpfull tool is analysis of tranamission networks with (some knowledge of) informations and systems analysis.
I think the art is to bring both "disciplines" together as one to evaluate a simple thing like an audio amplifier.
I would not claim it's an easy job to do so.

edit,
before an amplifier can be evaluated by a listener the ampliefier first must be,
desgned on paper, build a prototype, evaluated by a few, redesigned, evaluated again, run at production line, available at the market OEM or generic customer.

 

[agedhorse]

control technology at it's best.
I'm not sure if it's the most unnoticed subject with all kinds of feedback "controlled" amplifiying systems, electrical, mechanical ...

It's a little paradoxial cause tools of control analysis belong to power engineering rather than LF frequency audio. Never the less the regularities have been established well in the audio engineering world.
Another helpfull tool is analysis of tranamission networks with (some knowledge of) informations and systems analysis.
I think the art is to bring both "disciplines" together as one to evaluate a simple thing like an audio amplifier.
I would not claim it's an easy job to do so.

Agreed, this is a difficult subject.

Speaking of control systems and feedback, another improvement in the ASX2 modules compared with the ASP's is the closer integration of the power supply within the amplifier, there is (tighter) feedback between the two, which is improved upon even more closely with the newest generation of parts. this improves the noise floor by allowing closer "cooperation" between the two sections.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

More promising modules in the market
Crown EMPOWER by Crown

I can bet some head makers can drop these in without any changes to the signature sound of their heads

Any amp module you drop in WILL change the character of the amp.Period. It might be better---might be worse---but it will be different. Anyone that plays bass that can't hear the difference in context should find another gig/hobby.

I'll have to get Radbass to chime in---he's building stand alone power amps with the 1000. His (and my) experience is that the amp is pretty much bullet proof. And I have to admit that he and I have both done stupid stuff that would destroy another amp.
I've been gigging on one for over a year and slamming it ridiculously loud. Into 8, 4 and 2.67 ohms. It's much more stable than the amps I've played based on the 250. Ice doesn't recommend the 250 into 4 ohms. That being said, obviously lots of amp designers have found that by adding fans, additional heat sinking, etc. they can get it to work into 4. But still---there are reports of thermal cycling. I know that even my two favorite 250 based amps, the Puma 900 and the Demeter "Lunchbox" both still had thermal problems although I personally haven't experienced this.

 

[agedhorse]

Ice doesn't recommend the 250 into 4 ohms. That being said, obviously lots of amp designers have found that by adding fans, additional heat sinking, etc. they can get it to work into 4. But still---there are reports of thermal cycling. I know that even my two favorite 250 based amps, the Puma 900 and the Demeter "Lunchbox" both still had thermal problems although I personally haven't experienced this.

Excuse me Mike, but let me correct some factual inaccuracies in your statement. We at GB had zero thermal issues with the 250 module, and we had full engineering approval from IcePower (including full warranty support) regarding our specific implementation over many thousands of amplifiers. It would not surprise me that some implementations have struggled, and some have greatly de-rated or crippled the output in order to be reliable, but there are ways to be successful (probably without infringing on our patent) IF the entire amplifier system mechanism is understood.

Can we please consider that some of us have been very successful using this part AND have a consistent track record doing so (I can think of a couple of different manufacturers that had no issues at all), and that perhaps not everybody designing bass amps has the necessary ENGINEERING skills to be successful in the same ways? Like every part out there, some will be successful using them and others will not, depending on their design understanding and ability.

 

[agedhorse]

On the Crown part that Mike posted, it specifies 50V RMS maximum output (per channel) rated at 2 x 750 watts continuous per channel at 4 & 8 ohms, yet how is this possible? That's only 625 watts at 4 ohms and 312 watts at 8 ohms based on 50 volts RMS.

Perhaps this is peak power or power based on peak voltage on a continuous basis? I would be surprised if this was the case based on my understanding of their commercial DriveCore products.

Also, I see the spec of "peak voltage as high as 50V RMS", this too is puzzling due to the mixing of peak and RMS units unless they mean something else entirely?

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Unfortunately IMO the amps I mentioned were the only ones that worked for me. While the others may have been more reliable, sonically they weren't worth the purchase for me to give them an extended trial.

My point is not to diss the 250 module, but your point seems to be dissing the 1000 and pointing out how and why the 250 is a better amplifier. My concerns aren't with specs. I play bass for a living and in every conceivable context. While I respect yours and others expertise and I wouldn't even try to keep up with you in a technical discussion, you would be hard pressed to find a bassist with as discerning an ear and with the ability to evaluate these amps in context. And discuss these findings in as articulate a fashion.

I've seen many products designed by very intelligent people that just didn't work in context, and ones designed by some that I didn't consider the sharpest tools in the shed that came up with exceptional products.

My opinion stands----the 1000ASP module sounds and functions better than any amp I've heard including the above mentioned Tecamp and Demeter designs as well as the other 250 based amps that I considered less successful.