Why weak wattage?

[la bam]

I get a bit / lot confused sometimes.... 

 

With another load of new gear being released at the moment, I can't help wonder the same thing every year... 

 

There's only really 2 uses for an amp - practicing/home use and playing live / in bands. 

 

So why do nearly all the manufacturers sell ranges that are dead set in the middle? And serve neither use? 

 

Ie the 200w class d type? Or 200w class d combos etc... 

 

That's too loud / needless for home and just not practical for gigging and to be honest not much different in price. 

 

I see loads and loads of stuff I'd like to buy second hand, then see it's the weaker version, drives me mad! 

 

Surely it's the same effort to put in a 500w power module as it is a 200w one? 

 

A bass amp used to be a bass amp... Ie you could gig with it without worry, and a practice amp for home was just that. Now it's a minefield out there... 

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

There's small gigs, and there are bigger gigs. If the aim is to keep up with an unmiked acoustic drum kit for small pub gigs and rehearsals, just about any modern amp rated at 200W should be up to the job.

 

A 500W isn't 2.5 times as loud as a 200W amp, it is twice as loud as a 50W amp.

 

* please note: gross oversimplifications may have been applied

Edited 6 hours ago by Jean-Luc Pickguard

[neepheid]

My backup head is 250W and I wouldn't worry about gigging with it.  In fact tonight I might gig with it, as a proof of concept/fire drill.

 

[chris_b]

I use the same amps at home as I do on the loudest gig. 800 watts sounds fine in my front room. They all have a thing called a master volume.

[Dad3353]

1 hour ago, la bam said:

I get a bit / lot confused sometimes.... 

 

Amplifiers don't deliver sound; speakers (drivers, cabs, whatever...) deliver sound. Watts is a unit of power, not volume; decibels is a unit of volume. The more efficient the speaker (driver, cab, whatever...), the more volume (decibels...) it can deliver for a given power (watts...). This would be referred to as its 'efficiency'. Soooooo... A low-powered amp into an efficient cab can produce more volume than a high-powered amp into an inefficient cab. Watts, in themselves, are a very poor unit for expressing volume.
What's the solution..? If volume is required, look for an efficient cab, then match an amp to that cab. Turn the volume down at home. There is no contradiction; a good amp/cab combination can be used on stage and at home with no issues. If arena volumes are required, the PA will do the 'heavy lifting', anyway, and an IEM system will keep the stage volume  at decent levels, whatever the amp/cab. Any quality amp and/or cab will be fine for both purposes (but a less imposing version may be preferred for home practice, to avoid carting stuff around...)

There's a lot of advertising spiel surrounding the selling of music gear in general; don't be taken in by claims of 20/200/500/1000 watts or whatever, and ask your peers for their experience of 'real-life' usage.
Hope this helps. 

[Lozz196]

I suppose it’s about money at the end of the day, if manufacturers only have practice amps at £150 then high powered gigging amps at £700 then there’s a big gap there. Anyone wanting an amp loud enough for stage use but with only being able to raise £400/£500 is then only able to go used, whereas have an in the middle amp price/power wise and said manufacturer may well get the dosh as many prefer to buy new.

[msb]

I like the little class D heads. I’ve picked up a bunch of ‘em in the 200-350 watt range.

[TimR]

Electronics is a lot cheaper and easier to mass produce than it was 'in the old days'  

 

Manufacturers will do market research and watch sales figures and know what sells. 

 

My first Amp in 1987 was 100w. It was just about loud enough to keep up with a drummer in a pub. 

 

But everything got louder as it got cheaper. That's not good for anyone imo.

 

Everything is getting lighter now. It'll get to the point where everything becomes  1000W as it'll cost the same and be the same size as a 100W amp. 

 

[Mediocre Polymath]

11 minutes ago, TimR said:

But everything got louder as it got cheaper. That's not good for anyone imo.

I agree with this. The last few times I've been to a pub with a band playing, they've been rocking 1000-watt-per-side PA speakers with bass bins for an audience of maybe 50 people. It doesn't matter how good you are, I'm not going to enjoy a pub gig where I have to lean over the bar and scream my order to the bartender.

[TimR]

I blame the "keeping up with the drummer" mindset. Even I have fallen into that trap in my post.

 

The drummer should be playing at the appropriate volume. Too many non-musical drummers playing at one volume. But that's another thread. 

[tauzero]

I use a 200W amp both at home and at an open mic night, combined with a @Phil Starr 6" micro cab. I use a bigger amp and cab for pub gigs, with the 200W one as a backup. Can't see any problem with having a 200W amp for a wide range of use. After all, 40 years ago I was gigging with a Laney 150W head, which was all the power you needed.

[Dan Dare]

It's a bit academic nowadays, as watts have become cheaper and more plentiful. As others point out, the difference between 50 and 500 watts is only around twice the volume (depending on speaker efficiency, eq choices, etc). And that's before you get into the minefield that is wattage, how much difference quoted/claimed figures actually make and so on.

 

Class D has meant high powered amps are small and light, so there is no longer a need to have large and smaller amps. I use either of my heads (700w or 1000w claimed) for practice and small gigs with one or two cabs and keep the volume down. If I need to make more noise, I simply add more cabs and turn up the wick. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Dan Dare

[Phil Starr]

First of all not all bands are rock bands, some may not even have a drummer, people who play quieter genres of music still need an amplifier if they play electric bass.

 

Secondly we don't all use our amps to fill a room with sound. In my current band the bass amp is just a monitor for the band. The audience hear my bass through the PA. My bass amp only needs to fill the stage and if it is too loud it ends up going through the vocal mics and distorts the sound for the audience. If you are so loud that only a 500W amp will do then your band probably sounds quite poor however well you play because of the volume in the vocal mics.

 

Finally you need to take account of the range of speakers we all use. A 100W amp through a 102db/W is going to be louder than a 300W amp through a 96db/W speaker.

 

Like most people who are commenting I carry a 200/130W micro amp as a backup to my 500/300W amp but I tend to use the smaller amp almost all of the time as it is more than loud enough for the gigs I do. 

[DGBass]

If we are talking modern class-d amps, I suspect that someone in the industry, probably an accountant, has decreed that 200w gives the best bang for your buck in an entry level bass head ( or combo). The amp designers also probably agree that 200w class-d should be just enough to gig with in a band not requiring a full blown FOH gig setup. If you take a company like ICE Power for example, the unit cost of a 50w, 100w, and 200w class d module is virtually identical. It's literally pennies of a difference. They are also all roughly the same size so will fit in a small box that needs only minimum peripherals to support them eg small cooling fan that runs fast, I/4 inch jacks and basic EQ and a DI. Would anyone be interested in buying a 50w or 100w class d head when a 200w head is the same cost? Could you gig with a 50w or 100w class d head? Maybe a combo though. Fender's Rumble 100 is a very good example of a successful package and I think they use 100w ICE Power modules into a 4 ohm speaker. 

 

ICE Power's 300 watt modules are only marginally more expensive but larger so need a bigger case, more peripherals. When you get to 500w modules, the cost has doubled from the 200w modules. Slightly more peripherals like a larger cooling fan, maybe combi speakons, more features mean there is an increase in costs and that is reflected in the jump in retail prices.  At the end of the day cost plays a large part in the proliferation of smaller class d heads around 200w. It's a sweet spot for budget rigs nowadays.  It's possible to buy a 200w class d amp brand new for about £90 ( eg TC Electronic BAM200). So these days, class-d 200w, 500w and 800w( 700w with 100 marketing watts added😉) are basically what is generally available to choose from new and second hand. These replace what in the past was class a/b 50-100w, 100-300w and 500w +; where 50-100w was for home/studio use and the pub/club player, 100-300w the advanced prosumer player who could afford it( wedding bands?), and 500w + the fully professional level amp. IMHO of course. I still have a couple of amps that I'm equally happy to use at home, studio, and gig with in the 100w-300w power range. None are class-d, and that's just a personal choice. 🙂 

[Lozz196]

I remember back to my early years of gigging in the late 80s with a 150 watt 1x15 Laney Linebacker combo, which though pushed at times was always enough. Is the introduction of higher wattage amps to do with Class D something to do with this, with the sound not being “big” enough with amps of 150/200 watts? I’m not that good on the technical side of things so this a question rather than having a pop at today’s amps. 

[la bam]

To clarify, I understand all the science behind everything, watts is power, not volume, more speakers, efficiency, ohms etc. 

 

I don't know anyone who is gigging a 100w class d amp. Or a 50w solid state a/b amp. 

 

The whole a 500w amp is only twice as loud as a 50w amp never works in real world. (again, I know watts is power). 

 

My point is I don't see what the middle ground serves..... They're too loud for home practice, so they haven't been designed for that, and as I've said imo on their own not really upto the majority of gigging, so they can't be designed for that, they're not far off but they run out of steam or get driven that hard it's not good for them, when the same chassis could carry a more power amp for hardly any more money to build. 

 

I would understand a middle ground that allowed you to gig with volume and headroom, and turn down for practice (my boss katana 210 even has a 1w switch), but these current span of middle ground don't do that. 

 

For example the Laney Digbeth, great heads, the 500w one. Not massively loud to be fair though. 

So...they bring out a 200w combo.... Makes no sense.... Just bring out a 500w combo! 

 

Ashdown have a million amps the same.... 100w 200w 300w class d combos.... Same with the rumbles... And all the copies... 

 

Now... The elf from trace I understand. Ground breaking, good sound, and can be used as a di or Di to foh, and you can fit it in your pocket.... But heads and combos the same or similar size as larger powered ones, that have to be really pushed just to do the job? I just don't get it. 

 

Maybe I'm missing something? What specific use would a 200w amp have over a 500w or 800w have? 

 

It can't be weight as even some 800w amps weigh in at 2kg now, and any speaker is going to be heavier than the head? 

Edited 1 hour ago by la bam

[LawrenceH]

I understand well enough the relationship between watts, speaker sensitivity and volume. But (for example) wattage doubling tends to be dismissed as 'only' 3 dB difference ignoring the fact that a few dB is usually the difference between keeping up or not in the type of venue where you rely on backline. Super small amps are great but if I have to add more speakers they've made a bigger problem than the one they solve.

My very cheap ~800w Bugera Veyron is only a little bigger than a Trace Elf or similar, and only a couple of kg heavier. If I'm using modern long-throw drivers that can handle the wattage, then I can squeeze close to 6dB more out of them than at 200, with barely any extra packing space or weight compared to doing the same by doubling my speaker complement. In practice that means my 2 DIY 1x10" cabs made well over a decade ago have handled any gig I've thrown at them and I've always had that 'punch' you get from having a little headroom at the amp. My 500w F1 used to work ok but was occasionally at its limit, whereas 200w wouldn't reliably be enough.

 

I also agree with @la bam that in practice, for whatever reason, turning volumes down on powerful setups doesn't usually have the same effect as using a smaller rig. But that might be as much a speaker thing. I wish I could find a good lightweight 8" driver (or even 6") optimised for high power handling, low resonant frequency, medium Q and low sensitivity. Something towards the old Acme B1 but even smaller and less sensitive.

Edited 52 minutes ago by LawrenceH

[neepheid]

Well, each to their own.  Personally I think the whole "too loud for home practice" thing is a false argument - amps have got volume controls.  Until I got my Joyo 30W Vibe Cube, I was using my TC Electronic BH250 just fine for home practice - although mostly in headphones because I couldn't be arsed trotting out a cab.  The only reason I got the Joyo was because it's more plug and play so I might practice at home a bit more (so far this seems to have borne fruit).

 

I also don't really see why a 200W amp has to justify its existence to one particular person - the market as a whole will decide if it works or not.  You buy one, or don't, and that's absolutely fine.

 

There's a whole lot of IMO going on here, and while that's fine and dandy, it just gets argumentative in the end.  You don't like/get them - fine, don't buy 'em.  There are plenty folk who do.  Like I said, I'm going to gig my 250W backup head tonight in a pub gig with no PA support and I'll report back as to how lacking or not it was, how does that sound?  Does it even matter?  I'm not you after all, I don't play in your venues or in your bands, so maybe I'm just wasting my time.

[LawrenceH]

Not sure if that was directed at me or not, but I thought the whole point of a forum is to be able to voice opinions and discuss the reasons for our subjective preferences. 

 

Personally, I've found that in the gig circumstances where 200w is enough through 2x 10" drivers, then I can instead get away with just 1 driver if I push it using a 500w amp - remembering that at 8 ohms I'd only be getting about 130 Vs 300 watts based on typical amps on the market at those sizes. Plenty of good drivers nowadays will happily take 200 to 300w all day long so it makes sense to me to have amps that match that. For me, whatever solution gets me to gig volume for least size/weight is my preference.

 

As mentioned by DGBass above, the likely reason why there is a plethora of 200w amps is, that's where the current technology is at in terms of cost sweet spot. Rather than it being the wattage the market 'demands'. With the previous generation of slightly larger and more expensive class D modules that spot appeared to be around 450-500 watts.

[la bam]

It's just a bit of healthy debate. 

 

My point being is that they're not designed for home practice, and not designed for gigging - so what is the purpose they were designed for?

 

Im not knocking them, if you practice or gig with them fine, have another use for them etc, but neither of those could be described as what it was designed to do. Amps that you don't have to worry about running out of power and headroom were designed for gigging, amps that are comfortable at home volume and carry extra practicing tools are made for practice. 

 

A 200w version of a 500w head? I don't know what that is made for? 

 

Again, keep it light, it's a bit of debate

Edited 12 minutes ago by la bam

[neepheid]

1 minute ago, LawrenceH said:

Not sure if that was directed at me or not, but I thought the whole point of a forum is to be able to voice opinions and discuss the reasons for our subjective preferences. 

 

Personally, I've found that in the gig circumstances where 200w is enough through 2x 10" drivers, then I can instead get away with just 1 driver if I push it using a 500w amp - remembering that at 8 ohms I'd only be getting about 130 Vs 300 watts based on typical amps on the market at those sizes. Plenty of good drivers nowadays will happily take 200 to 300w all day long so it makes sense to me to have amps that match that. For me, whatever solution gets me to gig volume for least size/weight is my preference.

 

As mentioned by DGBass above, the likely reason why there is a plethora of 200w amps is, that's where the current technology is at in terms of cost sweet spot. Rather than it being the wattage the market 'demands'. With the previous generation of slightly larger and more expensive class D modules that spot appeared to be around 450-500 watts.

 

Because there's no message being quoted in my previous post, you can rest assured it was not directed at you, but at the thread in general and I guess the OP in particular as the instigator of the thread.

 

I'm at a loose end, filling in time before a gig tonight, my wife's away so I've got the house to myself and honestly, I think I've gone a bit peculiar.  To be brutally honest, the whole tone of the OP's initial post (and subsequent same again, but longer post) just got up my nose, and it probably shouldn't have.  So, sorry all and @la bam in particular.  I clearly have got too much "me" time right at this very moment and I overanalysed things.  My bad.

[la bam]

It's no problem at all

 

Its not a dig at anything, just a genuine question.... Just light hearted. If it works for you, then great. 

 

Why build a weaker powered version of something that works well, and produce something that may not (in certain circumstances)? 

 

Why build a practice amp that is too loud for a house, (I'm all for more power and a volume knob) but not suitable for the majority of gigs? 

Its properly also to do with the YouTube over enthusiastic rave about anything presenters as well who help shift these to people as amazingly loud gigging amps, who then find out that they need something else.. 

[neepheid]

Is recording a separate use case for a bass amp?