Advice on changing from Markbass to TC Electronic...

[Tee]

Is it reasonable to compare the LM3 to the RH450, if you were in the market for a head like that? The TCs look feature rich, but what [i]is[/i] the TC 'sound' exactly? Likewise what is the MB sound? I've heard warm and articulate for MB. Any other view or descriptions?

[mcnach]

[quote name='Tee' timestamp='1460998527' post='3030518']
Is it reasonable to compare the LM3 to the RH450, if you were in the market for a head like that? The TCs look feature rich, but what [i]is[/i] the TC 'sound' exactly? Likewise what is the MB sound? I've heard warm and articulate for MB. Any other view or descriptions?
[/quote]

I don't think the compare at all.

I was in the market for a head like that and chose the RH450 over the LM3 because I found a good deal in a local shop and I liked the features etc. Later on I tried the LM3 and I regretted going for the RH450. The RH450 was ok, but never fully satisfied me, and had something in the low end that i could not put my finger on, while the LM3 just sounded 'right' without much (or any) tweaking.

I now own only the LM3 (for a while I had both)

[Tee]

Are you saying the LM3 has a more pleasing tone/body/feel to your ears? I like the idea of the multi band (spectra)comp on the TC though, built in tuner etc. But i would probably take better tone over features at the end of the day. I'd say the DI out tone/quality is pretty important to me due to its use live/recording. But i guess the DI quality is directly related to the quality of the preamp (pre-EQ).

[JamesBass]

[quote name='Tee' timestamp='1461001171' post='3030548']
Are you saying the LM3 has a more pleasing tone/body/feel to your ears? I like the idea of the multi band (spectra)comp on the TC though, built in tuner etc. But i would probably take better tone over features at the end of the day. I'd say the DI out tone/quality is pretty important to me due to its use live/recording. But i guess the DI quality is directly related to the quality of the preamp (pre-EQ).
[/quote]
Without doubt, for me anyway, MarkBass LM3 sounds MUCH better than the TC. The TC has lots of features but really those features aren't all that, especially when you can go and buy pedals that do more than the comp, tuner pedals etc.

The MarkBass sounds modern, while still sounding vintage-y. It's very hard to describe, but it's something just more pleasing and recognisable.

[Twincam]

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1460552865' post='3026735']


Just be careful if, like me, you have big fat fingers! I found it very frustrating to use the GK MB800 (big brother to the 500) as the controls are very close together and easily knocked while trying to adjust an adjacent one.

In the end it got so annoying I sold it, although I quite liked the tone from the amp through my Barefaced cab...
[/quote]

That guy on eBay could remove some controls for the sausage fingered guys hahaha

[mcnach]

[quote name='Tee' timestamp='1461001171' post='3030548']
Are you saying the LM3 has a more pleasing tone/body/feel to your ears? I like the idea of the multi band (spectra)comp on the TC though, built in tuner etc. But i would probably take better tone over features at the end of the day. I'd say the DI out tone/quality is pretty important to me due to its use live/recording. But i guess the DI quality is directly related to the quality of the preamp (pre-EQ).
[/quote]


Absolutely. For me, of course. The LM3 feels more 'solid', whatever tone I go for.

I liked all the built-in features of the RH450. They're impressive indeed! The 4-band semiparametric seems very versatile. IN practice... after playing with them a bit I stuck to the default centres. That's just me, of course. The 'tube tone' I was not very keen on. The compressor is very good and very transparent. The tuner... is a great thing to have. I'd rather use the LM3 and buy a compressor and a tuner. Presets are useful... but limitedly, for me... I have no problem turning the knobs when I need a different sound. I do most of my tone shaping at the bass anyway.

The DI is very good in either of them, I'd say. I've recorded our second album with the LM3 DI (into expensive studio equipment) with a Stingray and it received very good comments. I recorded the first with the RH450... no complaints there either.

Tone is subjective to a large degree. I would be ok with an RH450 if that's all I could use. It's not bad. But I really prefer the LM3. It's an amp that gives me the sound I like with minimal tweakage, so I may be lucky. But there's something else with the bottom end that feels... perhaps tighter and bigger? with the LM3, and the RH450 never fully satisfied me.

[DBerriff]

You asked about the Tecamp range. The company has been renamed Eich. There is a USA company continuing the Tecamp name, but I will pass on commenting on that.

The Tecamp Puma amps all have an extra tone-shaping control called Taste. It is a variation on contour controls but, in my experience and opinion, works particularly well. Anti clockwise gives more clarity, clockwise gives more warmth. I rarely touch the other tone controls. Plus the Pumas appear really well made (in Germany). How many makers have a ground wire attached to the amp top? - as you will find if you take the top off to peek inside. And the 500 does not have a fan; perfect for quiet, home-practice sessions.

Edited April 18, 2016 by DBerriff

[JTUK]

Markbass over TC for me... and I'm not anywhere near a MB fan, myself.
I find both sounds a bit sterile but have more time on LMll's as used the combo a lot.

My main problem with the MB was how it worked at volume..which is always
a issue for me but I'd still use one if I was lent it.-

Liked the 750 in the shop..not so much outside it.
If that was provided again, I'd take my own..which tbf, is why I have a lightweight rig anyway.

[TrevorR]

[quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1460552659' post='3026729']
At the SE Bass Bash last year we did a cab shootout using the Puma 500 as the stock amp - due to it`s clean sound - and many of us (make that all) were very impressed at the pairing of that with the Super Midget.
[/quote]

Careful Lozz, this could start up a conversation that leads inexorably to a trip to Maplins! :-)

PS really sad to hear that you're not around to demo more of your slap skills for the SE Bash this year. I had been wondering what this year's shootout might be. :-( Wouldn't be the same if we tried to do one without you.

[kwmlondon]

Just found this thread from loooooong ago but I wanted to say a bit about a new (to me) TC Tone Print amp. I've had a BH800 for a few months but just never used it much - my live/practise rig is a CMD121 that I can put on a trolley and take on the bus or tube. In terms of size and weight it's knock-out. I also have an NY121 cab that I can use as well, though that means taking a car/taxi and honestly I don't often need it. Also, for home practise I go through a preamp into a tiny pair of desk monitors that gives me a nice full-range sound that doesn't go through the walls and annoy the neighbours. But... I ended up with a TC BH800 amp and though I've had it for a few months I've not had the chance to try it out but I'm away from home and have the NY121 cab with the head and finally got the tone print to work. And... I have to say it's a lovely, lovey amp. Really sweet, warm tone. There's a valve dirt tone print that can add just a tiny bit of grit to the tone that makes the whole thing very warm and organic. Very impressed. Not sure what situation I'd use the TC in but at the moment I'm enjoying it enormously!

[Chienmortbb]

On 13/04/2016 at 09:35, DBerriff said:

The Barefaced 12" range does sound different to the 10", and is more HiFi. I was a bit disappointed at first when I got my Super Compact as I had got used to the old school warmth of the One 10. It is a matter of adapting the signal chain and adding a touch of colour in the amp, in my case. Also, the SC came into its own on a recent gig with its clarity and headroom, and should be great when I get back to playing upright. The Barefaced team are far more knowledgeable than I am, and really helpful as you have found. So I would not hesitate in taking their advice, should you go with BF. In the interest of balance, there are of course other excellent options including Genz Benz which I have used as a very dependable and great sounding system (now Genzler).

I am not sure exactly how lightweight you need but a better 1x10 to monitor in a similar fashion to the FoH would be the LFSys Monza. That depends on whether 11Kg is too heavy although I know @stevie is working on a lighter version.

[chris_b]

2 hours ago, Chienmortbb said:

. . . .  That depends on whether 11Kg is too heavy although I know @stevie is working on a lighter version.

 

A lighter version of the Monaco, maybe 11-12kg, would be interesting.