ebozzz

I guess that I was attempting to find out if that was something that had changed with the EVO II line. It seems that it hasn't. As I mentioned, it's not a deal breaker for me and I love my amp....

Congratulations! Do you find that there's a difference in the volume level with the compressor engaged and without it in use? I have the RM-800 EVO and there's a definite difference with my unit. Not a deal breaker but just one of the traits of the amp.

Wrong....... 😎

I've known about and heard the Boom Bass Cabinets for over three years. About a month ago, I acquired one of the Tank 1012 models. The cabs work very well......

You folks in Europe are getting a better price than we do in the States! Every now and then I get tempted to buy the tube version again when I see a good deal but thus far I've been able to resist. I think part of the reason for that is that I purchased a different set of tubes that I planned to try to see if it had an impact on the tone. Unfortunately, I saw another deal that I had to move on fast and sold the amp before getting a chance to perform the trial....

The Veyrons are the only bass amps that are still in Bugera's product line and in production. I'd like to think that it's because that the heads must have more positive attributes than not. Mine has been with me for over three years and it's still going strong.

I love Ashdown amps. With my Rootmaster 800 EVO without using the compressor, the gain stage is pretty smooth. With the compressor engaged? It gets a lot louder much earlier than either of my other two amps.

Thanks for this explanation. It's been the one most helpful to me on this thread or other. No sarcasm here. I'm going to ask you a direct question. As frustrating as you and others seem to think I am, I'm really not trying to be that. Bugera claims that the amp is 2000 watts peak at 4 ohms. You feel that it's not near that value. Could you please elaborate on why you feel so strongly that it's not?

Oh, you were teaching? 😉

Thanks for the correction!

No Bill, I really don't.....😉

Maybe he should! The premise here seems to be 90% of the manufacturers use RMS but Bugera doesn't. They MUST be trying to mislead. That's the only reason for them NOT using what the 90% are using!

I'm not sure how you connect the dots between Bugera listing peak only and GK listing what appears to be RMS only to reach the conclusion that Bugera is purposely being misleading. The company has openly stated that they do not believe that RMS is the rating system that provides the best indication of how a bass amp should perform. From what I've read, it doesn't seem that they feel peak is the best either but it may be better for rating bass amps in their opinion. We need a NEW & improved ratings system...

Assuming that you meant the 750 watts figure is RMS, wouldn't the peak value be significantly higher?

Sometimes things drawn up on paper don't work out as well as expected when implemented and occasionally, the results are better than expected. All that I'm saying is that until there's some definitive proof, it's a little premature to accuse an entity of fraud, If there is some definitive proof, I'd love to review it....

I'm admittedly not a Physics person. Nor am I an engineer. Neither am I of the opinion that "fraud is a good thing". If fraud can be proven by testing the amp, I'm fine with the results of testing. Fine meaning that I can accept it with no qualms. Bugera claims 2000 watts peak at 4 ohms. Can that claim clearly be ruled out without testing?

With the MB Fusion 800, GK doesn't clearly specify if the rated power output is Peak or RMS on their web page or in the manual. If it is indeed RMS, wouldn't 800 watts put the Peak value in the neighborhood of 2000 watts?

Got anything else other than "ifs"?

Respectfully, I know a lot more gigging bassists that own one of than the type of end user you have described. You and others keep saying that Bugera is deliberately lying about their rating. If that's truly the case, prove them wrong! Enough with the assumption of guilt. It's just as exhausting......

The web page does not clearly state that the figures are RMS. Therefore, how would someone know that those were in the "90%" simply by looking there? And, I wasn't complaining. It was just an example of how manufacturers are all over the place. At least one person in this thread made a big deal about Bugera not being clear on their site. It's not like RMS is the end all & be all for amp ratings anyway.....

I know they're RMS but I wouldn't have clearly known that from the web page. The manual is much more informative though. I personally take all marketing with a grain of salt. I consider it, do my own research and then make a decision on whether the product is something that might fit my needs. If I'm extremely doubtful in any way, I make a purchase using a vendor that allows me ample time to test the product as well as the ability to easily return the item if it's not for me. I was unsure about the Veyrons before buying. Having a 45 day return period and being able to get discounted price made it less of risk. I'm glad that I took a chance....

Let me clarify that I'm all for a standardized rating system with regards to amp specifications. It has to be a system that makes sense and that provides useful insight. Hanging onto RMS when that form of rating probably isn't the best indicator does not make much sense at all to me. It's time for something new.....

If I were to only consider the following link, I'd say that Mesa Boogie is "cynically aware of the state of the market" also..... http://mesaboogie.com/amplifiers/bass/subway-series/subway-d800-plus/index.html

If it's not, why are so many of you hung up on that type of rating? They did expressly indicate that it was 2000 watts peak. In the manual....

I actually had to scroll through the manual several times and when I didn't find a specifications page, the only clear possibility to me was that it might mention something with the section on the speaker outputs. I've seen that before with a different manufacturer.......