New TC Electronic heads

[thisisswanbon]

Unfortunately I'm not the most technically savvy person, I'd listen to Woodinblack over myself.  I got my numbers from the below table, however I fully admit to not really understanding it! 

 

[Woodinblack]

6 hours ago, jensenmann said:

Thrust is a patented circuit in API 2500 compressors.

You can patent thrust??

[Woodinblack]

6 hours ago, thisisswanbon said:

Unfortunately I'm not the most technically savvy person, I'd listen to Woodinblack over myself.  I got my numbers from the below table, however I fully admit to not really understanding it! 

 

No you are right from those figures, I was thinking of the burst power ratings (which are in actual playing all you would see), but litterally yes, it should be the last column.

[grandad]

4 hours ago, jensenmann said:

Thrust is a patented circuit in API 2500 compressors. It´s basically a sidechain highpassfilter which causes the compressor to react less on LF signals than on HF.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-what-does-api-2500-compressors-thrust-control-do

Let´s wait and see if there will be a patent violation lawsuit....

Interesting, thanks for the link.

[yorks5stringer]

TC are owned by the same people as Behringher now, and we all know what they do for their wattage ratings with Bugera......2000 watts!

[wateroftyne]

2 minutes ago, yorks5stringer said:

TC are owned by the same people as Behringher now, and we all know what they do for their wattage ratings with Bugera......2000 watts!

Crazy. I’ve got a 100w valve head that would leave the Bugera in a pile of wreckage, not to mention the other ICEPower Diet Coke amps.

I just ignore power ratings now. At least EBS tried to be honest with the Reidmar, but I bet sales suffered.

[Wolverinebass]

40 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

Crazy. I’ve got a 100w valve head that would leave the Bugera in a pile of wreckage, not to mention the other ICEPower Diet Coke amps.

Quality!! "Diet Coke amps." I'm going to use that at some point unless you have patent pending.

[gjones]

On 07/08/2018 at 11:21, grandad said:

I have the BH250 and have for several months have successfully resisted the temptation to buy the BH550 attracted by the hi and low mid controls rather than the 1.

 

 

I used to own a TC Classic 450 but but disliked the low mid control, as for about 33% of it's rotation, there was no discernible change in the sound coming out of the speaker. I even went into a shop and checked the demo model, which sounded exactly the same. So if you like a bit of low mid in your sound, you'd be better off trying the BH550 before you buy one.

[Woodinblack]

Don't know about the classic, but it changes fine on the non classic. 

[grandad]

Only familiar with the BH250 but find that a little adjustment goes a long way so have to be quite gentle with the EQ controls.

As far as the wattage out goes they really have muddied the waters. Shame as I like the BH250 and the BG250-208 I've got. They are good products at a reasonable price that suit my present needs. I roughly halve the claimed wattage ratings.

 

 

Edited August 8, 2018 by grandad
grammar

[40hz]

11 minutes ago, grandad said:

Only familiar with the BH250 but find that a little adjustment goes a long way so have to be quite gentle with the EQ controls.

As far as the wattage out goes they really have muddied the waters. Shame as I like the BH250 and the BG250-208 I've got. They are good products at a reasonable price that suit my present needs. I roughly halve the claimed wattage ratings.

 

 

It's only the RH series that suffered from this wattage/compression issue. The BH series do not and are very much the full 550w and 800w wattage rating claimed.

[wateroftyne]

Just now, 40hz said:

It's only the RH series that suffered from this wattage/compression issue. The BH series do not and are very much the full 550w and 800w wattage rating claimed.

What's your source?

[40hz]

10 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

What's your source?

I don't have a source. It's bits and bobs gleamed from the interweb regarding the issue as I was wary of it at the time. Given the fuore over the RH series, im not sure would TC persist with the same rating system on the newer heads?

In any case, the RH series were known for compressing hard at volume, I can confirm that there is nothing of the sort with my BH550. It's clean, clear and utterly composed all the way up to stupid volumes. Easily going toe to toe if not surpassing a MB LM3 I used for a while.

[wateroftyne]

Just now, 40hz said:

I don't have a source. It's bits and bobs gleamed from the interweb regarding the issue as I was wary of it at the time. Given the fuore over the RH series, im not sure would TC persist with the same rating system on the newer heads?

In any case, the RH series were known for compressing hard at volume, I can confirm that there is nothing of the sort with my BH550. It's clean, clear and utterly composed all the way up to stupid volumes. Easily going toe to toe if not surpassing a MB LM3 I used for a while.

..until I hear hard facts otherwise, I'm going to have to assume it's not a 'true' 550 watt head. Not least because if it was, it would be one of the only Class D's out there to live up to its marketing claim.

[LukeFRC]

27 minutes ago, 40hz said:

It's only the RH series that suffered from this wattage/compression issue. The BH series do not and are very much the full 550w and 800w wattage rating claimed.

Not according to the table posted above.

however as @wateroftyne alludes too it’s a slightly fictitious discussion - mainly as most all the class D amps will have some kind of burst power .... and not only is it hard to compare, but who’s to say that TCs implementation isn’t more intelligent than any other makers... 

[40hz]

Just now, LukeFRC said:

Not according to the table posted above.

however as @wateroftyne alludes too it’s a slightly fictitious discussion - mainly as most all the class D amps will have some kind of burst power .... and not only is it hard to compare, but who’s to say that TCs implementation isn’t more intelligent than any other makers... 

That's fair enough! The table lists the BH500 which is the precursor to the 550 and 800 in design.

As always with these discussions, I am just going by what my ears tell me and the BH550 I have is in no way lacking in terms of volume/power (I actually found it cleaner than the MB800 I owned funnily enough)

[wateroftyne]

re: my Diet Coke analogy above, I think it's appropriate 'cos I wonder if we have become so used to the size, light weight and availability of the micros, we've forgotten what a 'proper' power stage actually feels like.

Truth is, it's not really relevant to your average punter watching the gig, but from a player's perspective, that tactile response is SO satisfying.

IMO, IME, etc.

[Lozz196]

16 hours ago, wateroftyne said:

re: my Diet Coke analogy above, I think it's appropriate 'cos I wonder if we have become so used to the size, light weight and availability of the micros, we've forgotten what a 'proper' power stage actually feels like.

Truth is, it's not really relevant to your average punter watching the gig, but from a player's perspective, that tactile response is SO satisfying.

IMO, IME, etc.

That`s why I went back to a heavier amp, WOT, on a bigger stage the difference is easily noticed in my experience. In pubs etc, where you`re all close up together not so much but on those big stages, with the amp pushed louder, well that`s when they stand up and get noticed.

[dave_bass5]

Looks like they have also left out the Intelligent EQ section the BH heads have.

[stingrayPete1977]

If the gig is large enough to need a big amp then it's big enough to need everything in the pa,  if you're doing a mixture of venue sizes then in ears would make life easier and full of heft, thrust and everything else. 

[afterimage]

_{https://bassmusicianmagazine.com/2018/08/tc-electronic-introduces-bq250-bq500-bass-heads/}

[grandad]

They look very similar on the outside but maybe it's 2 different beasts. To compare them would be pointless, better to highlight the difference between them so to decide whether or not they're your cup of tea.

BQ250 £199

BH250 £222

I think the BH is the better deal here for an extra £23 you get the toneprint and therefore a choice of compressor or effect to download. A mute button I don't want to do without and the built in tuner is just so convenient, (always on it provides an LED display of endless technological fascination).

Reading the bumpf, TCE describe the thrust control as giving punch and the ability to capture every nuance of your playing.

So, Thrust = a Punch and Subtle control, (not sure if those 2 things are compatible).

We all tend to sing the praises of our own choice of gear and that includes myself although, out of curiosity,  I would like to try out other small class D heads and compare them to my BH250. But I do think TCE got it right with the BH models. I've just hit 70 years of age and smile when I lift my Tiger cajun bag containing a BF One10 + BH250 and leads into the car boot, (20lbs), remembering all the years I lugged heavy gear around.

If I was still gigging regularly, (weekend warrior-wise), I'd think about a BH550 and a Two10 but for the charity events and music club events et cetera nowadays, I'm sorted.

Having had time to think about why TCE should launch the BQ models maybe they're just emulating a no-bells tube head in class D format. And maybe everyone else here on BC sussed that out straight away and it's just me that's been slow on that point. Maybe the only questionable aspect then is the labellng of the tube-like compressor control as 'Thrust' which some of us found amusing. 

IMO TCE offer good products at good prices and I would encourage others that they are definitely worth considering when looking for new gear.

I look forward to a review of the BQ250/500 as soon as a fellow parishioner buys one.

Edited August 10, 2018 by grandad
grammar

[wateroftyne]

11 hours ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

If the gig is large enough to need a big amp then it's big enough to need everything in the pa,  if you're doing a mixture of venue sizes then in ears would make life easier and full of heft, thrust and everything else. 

I do a mixture of venue sizes. I play with so many people the consistency of kit just isn't there, so the idea of using ears just doesn't appeal. I don't fancy getting stuck somewhere where there aren't enough mixes, or the monitors aren't up to it, or (or the PA in smaller gigs).

It's not exactly a hardship to carry backline around, and if you choose wisely it'll be an easy lift , and sound marvellous.

IEMs are clearly the answer to many, but not all.

[The59Sound]

On 07/08/2018 at 12:29, wateroftyne said:

A 500-watt revolutionzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Weren't you the guy who bigged up the RH450 when it came out? 

[wateroftyne]

18 minutes ago, The59Sound said:

Weren't you the guy who bigged up the RH450 when it came out? 

I was possible complimentary about it for a few weeks... until the novelty wore off and I realised it was a steaming pile of poo.

Since then, I no longer come to conclusions about amps until after the honeymoon period has worn off.