Westenra Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 So on the verge of getting a TC amp, was originally sold on the RH450 but this talk of a low pass filter has warned me off considering I'll also be running my synth through it. So the question is what is the frequency range for the RH450, 750 and the staccato? I've read not to trust TC with ratings considering their wattage cover up for these amps! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 I think lots of people got their knickers in a twist because they believe that 500W (for example) is an absolute rating of 'volume', which of course it is not. The RH750 is still a very capable amp. If however you aren't swayed, then look at the BH800 which doesn't feature the 'tube amp emulation' of the APM circuitry and has a more 'hifi' tone which would suit your synth needs too I would guess. BH800 is a great little amp for the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 I owned and gigged an RH450 for several years and never once did come close to feeling like it was running out of power or lacking in volume. I don't think I ever needed to take the volume above about 10 o'clock - even when the bass wasn't going through the PA. While TC may not have been entirely truthful with their figures (if that is indeed the case) but in my experience, their claims that the RH450 can compete with a 'real' 450 watt amp, are perfectly justified. A lot of guys on here don't seem to like them, but I thought it was a superb little amp. As Dood alludes to above, the tone of the RH450/750 is more of a warm, vintage kind of vibe, so they may not be the ideal choice for a synth. As with everything, there are a million and one opinions online. But they are just that - someone's opinion. See if you can get your hands on an RH450 and try it and make your own mind up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westenra Posted May 5, 2017 Author Share Posted May 5, 2017 Thanks for the input guys, volume wise isn't really an issue for me, it's more how much of the high end gets rolled off between the two? My synth can go a lot higher and lower than my bass and I'd like the amp to keep up! The vintage style tone doesn't bother too much as I think it adds character to my synth, but I do need quite a high low pass filter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 [size=4]Sorry, I've got no idea about any possible high or low pass filtering.[/size] I'd say the tone of the RH450 is more mid focused. It has bottom end, of course, but it doesn't really do subby lows if that's what you're looking for. If I remember correctly, the lowest frequency on the bass semi parametric equipment is about 70 Hz. Like the bottom end, the top end is there but it doesn't really do the ultra modern 'glassy' treble tone of something like a Trace Elliot or EBS. Each of the 4 eq bands are semi parametric so it might be that you can dial in the sound that you want. I never really explored the full extent of what the eq could do as I was happy with the flat tone and didn't really deviate from that other than to eq for bad sounding rooms. What the '450 excels at is an old school, slightly dirty, valve amp like sound. I imagine it'd sound great with an old Hammond going through it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunderthumbs Posted May 6, 2017 Share Posted May 6, 2017 Had the RH450 for a spell and found it gutless so got rid and bought a Mark Bass LMIII. All good so far Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wateroftyne Posted May 6, 2017 Share Posted May 6, 2017 I had the RH450 for a year. Dunno why I stuck with it - it was (IMO) the aural equivalent of throwing wet toilet paper at a sheet of cardboard. (IMO, for those who missed it the first time) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westenra Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 Wasn't expecting so much TC dislike! In what context would "gutless" be used as? Not enough power? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markstuk Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 My rh750 keeps up quite nicely with my thunderfunk.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcnach Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 [quote name='blunderthumbs' timestamp='1494090007' post='3293202'] Had the RH450 for a spell and found it gutless so got rid and bought a Mark Bass LMIII. All good so far [/quote] Similar path here. I wouldn't call the RH450 gutless, but there was something in the low end that just didn't sound right to me no matter how much I fiddled with the extensively tweakable EQ, and found that the top end just wasn't there when I wanted it. The LM3 was a much more pleasant amp for me, and much easier to get the sound I want with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannybuoy Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Btw the 750 doesn't have same rolled off treble that the 450 has. I've heard many a user disappointed with the 450 thinking it lacked clarity, to find the issue gone in the 750 version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgsjx Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 From what Osiris has said, the lowest frequency dial on the RH450 is 70hz, whereas the LMII/III it is 40hz. This isn't saying that the RH450 won't reproduce 40hz frequencies, but that the LM boosts/cuts at 40hz with the knob labelled "Bass". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 [quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1494092480' post='3293234'] I had the RH450 for a year. Dunno why I stuck with it - it was (IMO) the aural equivalent of throwing wet toilet paper at a sheet of cardboard. (IMO, for those who missed it the first time) [/quote] I'm not sure it was that good 😂 I've owned both the RH450 and the Staccato and really disliked both of them (don't ask me why I bought the Staccato, guess I thought it might 'fix' all the problems with the RH450 I was having!). I'd say the RH450 was the single worst amp I've ever used in a live ggging situation. I spent quite a few hours setting up different presets at home but once on stage they all sounded like gutless mud. Complete tone sucker that I could not be a single decent sound from live. I was using very good quality Bag End speakers that generally made any ampmused with them sound good but not the RH or Staccato. I know the 'real' power rating of these was 235w and assumed there was sort of serious compression hard baked into the amp somewhere to boost the perceived volume to the claimed 450w level. Since then I've tried a 750 and found it to be a bit sterile and lacking a really good quality tone. To be fair it was being compared to an Aguilar DB750 and a Glockenklang Heart Rock so it was being seriously outclassed by those two. However I have heard a 750 being used live (into an Aguilar DB410) and it sounded quite punchy. Personally I'd be wary of using any of these three for a synth as I'm not sure they have the 'oomph' required for low end response or the clarity at the high end. Definitely worth trying one out at some serious, gig level, volume to see if they will handle a synth in a live setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 (edited) [quote name='Westenra' timestamp='1494333518' post='3295031'] Wasn't expecting so much TC dislike! [/quote] You have to bear in mind that forums like this tend to heap praise on horse sh*t and that you often have to dig through the horse sh*t to get to the truth. I too had one of these, although it was the cheaper Classic version. Whoever designed the exterior deserves an award, but I had a real problem with the low end roll off. I was using a cabinet that was a bit bass light and needed some low end boost to fatten it up - but the TC made the low end even weedier. Unfortunately, I couldn't boost the bass without also boosting the upper bass, which made everything boomy. The 450 has more flexible tone shaping, but I believe it has the same low end response. I swapped it for a Markbass LMIII and got my woof back. I can't say that I noticed any problem with the high end, but as the others have said, there's a big difference between a synth and a bass guitar. Edited May 10, 2017 by stevie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcnach Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 [quote name='stevie' timestamp='1494404797' post='3295604'] I swapped it for a Markbass LMIII and got my woof back. [/quote] There seems to be a recurring theme here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 [quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1494415422' post='3295732'] There seems to be a recurring theme here... [/quote] I went the other way, from a Mark Bass little mark 2 to the TC . The MB certainly has more low end in the 40hz ish range, but in my experience its these lower frequencies that need to be tamed when playing on boomy stages so a bass eq control set that low is only really useful for cutting mush. But that's just my opinion I also found the default eq points to be much more usable on the TC than the MB, certainly in a gig situation. The MB eq points were too wide (i.e. bass was too low and the treble too high) to be useful in a live situation. No doubt they'd be useful in a studio though. The high and low end roll off was never an issue for me as I tend to play with a flat-ish eq setting and if anything, I prefer to push the mids rather than the extreme high and low end. Both were very good amps and I'd happily own both of them again. One isn't necessarily 'better' than the other, they just offer different sounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Getting your woof back? I think the LMIII a fairly safe bet. It seems to do most things right, although like all gear, it won't suit everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.