Markbass clarity vs TC RH450 colour?

[alhbass]

Hi. I'm currently (reluctantly) selling my Markbass LMK head (cos I need the money) - but I'm already looking ahead to what I'll replace it with as and when...

I love the LMK - it's versatile for sure, lightweight, powerful, and, above all for me - super clear and uncoloured. Now I know this isn't to everyone's tase - some think it "sterile". I don't. I think it's just wonderfully clear, allowing the characteristics of different basses to shine through - I've never heard a P-bass sound as good as mine did thro' this amp. And if I need a thicker, more coloured sound, there are the tone controls and VLE/VPF filters to help you get there. I also use a Sansamp BDDI to add some grit and dirt when I want it.

But then - everything about the RH450 seems pretty fantastic. I'm really impressed by the range of great tones I've heard it deliver, and by the simple convenience of having a good compressor, tuner and tube emulator all in one small, portable, programable, user-friendly head. So I'm very tempted (and I'm a fickle sucker - always looking for a new toy to satisfy my short attention span!). My only reservation/query is whether the RH450 can deliver MarkBass-like clarity if the tube tone is turned right down, as well as fat, SVT-like warmth? Think I'd really miss having that option if it's not there...

Would welcome advice from anyone with firsthand knowledge. Thanks.

[Musicman20]

[quote name='alhbass' post='768408' date='Mar 8 2010, 07:54 PM']Hi. I'm currently (reluctantly) selling my Markbass LMK head (cos I need the money) - but I'm already looking ahead to what I'll replace it with as and when...

I love the LMK - it's versatile for sure, lightweight, powerful, and, above all for me - super clear and uncoloured. Now I know this isn't to everyone's tase - some think it "sterile". I don't. I think it's just wonderfully clear, allowing the characteristics of different basses to shine through - I've never heard a P-bass sound as good as mine did thro' this amp. And if I need a thicker, more coloured sound, there are the tone controls and VLE/VPF filters to help you get there. I also use a Sansamp BDDI to add some grit and dirt when I want it.

But then - everything about the RH450 seems pretty fantastic. I'm really impressed by the range of great tones I've heard it deliver, and by the simple convenience of having a good compressor, tuner and tube emulator all in one small, portable, programable, user-friendly head. So I'm very tempted (and I'm a fickle sucker - always looking for a new toy to satisfy my short attention span!). My only reservation/query is whether the RH450 can deliver MarkBass-like clarity if the tube tone is turned right down, as well as fat, SVT-like warmth? Think I'd really miss having that option if it's not there...

Would welcome advice from anyone with firsthand knowledge. Thanks.[/quote]

Hi

Check out these videos by KJung on Talkbass....

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJEjRkZVPI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJEjRkZVPI[/url]

[Pkomor]

[quote name='Musicman20' post='768504' date='Mar 8 2010, 08:55 PM']Hi

Check out these videos by KJung on Talkbass....

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJEjRkZVPI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJEjRkZVPI[/url][/quote]


That guy has some great comparison videos! cheers!

[JMT3781]

how much you want for the LMK when your all sorted?

Edited March 8, 2010 by JMT3781

[stevie]

>Check out these videos by KJung on Talkbass....

Although he says that all the amps are flat, I think he must mean that all the tone controls are set to zero, because the only one that sounds flat to me is the TC. The Mark Bass sounds mildly scooped with some HF lift and a depressed LF. The Puma sounds as if there is an excess of lower mids. Depends on the cab, of course, and I'm assuming that the Bergantino is relatively uncoloured.

Edited March 9, 2010 by stevie

[Muzz]

Well, I spent an hour in Sounds Great yesterday A/Bing the RH450 with a LMII, plus the RH 2x10 and 2x12 stack against the MB Jeff Berlin and 151HR. I had the LMIII and a 410HR, but it all got nicked (there's a thread somewhere about that), so I'm after a complete new rig.

I was very surprised to find I MUCH preferred the MarkBass gear, as there's tons and tons of enthusiasm and giddyness about the RH450 around at the moment. I didn't like the tubetone valve simulation on the RH much (my Roland D-Bass did a more convincing tube tone on its Vintage setting), and overall I thought it sounded less full and rounded a sound altogether. If anything, the RH sounded too modern and sterile - unless the tubetone was dialled in, when it sounded like a cheapish distortion pedal. Maybe with some EQ tweaking the RH450 would have given me a more acceptable sound, but the LM flat was just [i]there[/i].

The onboard tuner is a corking idea, the memories are great, I love the LEDs (but you can't read the button titles at the top because of the overhang), and the unit itself just exudes quality (and so it should for the price), but when it came to the tone, there was no contest for me.

I was, as I said, surprised. Thank God I didn't buy the TC gear simply on recommendation.

YMMV, natch.

[Bass Culture]

[quote name='Muzz' post='769253' date='Mar 9 2010, 02:03 PM']Well, I spent an hour in Sounds Great yesterday A/Bing the RH450 with a LMII, plus the RH 2x10 and 2x12 stack against the MB Jeff Berlin and 151HR. I had the LMIII and a 410HR, but it all got nicked (there's a thread somewhere about that), so I'm after a complete new rig.

I was very surprised to find I MUCH preferred the MarkBass gear, as there's tons and tons of enthusiasm and giddyness about the RH450 around at the moment. I didn't like the tubetone valve simulation on the RH much (my Roland D-Bass did a more convincing tube tone on its Vintage setting), and overall I thought it sounded less full and rounded a sound altogether. If anything, the RH sounded too modern and sterile - unless the tubetone was dialled in, when it sounded like a cheapish distortion pedal. Maybe with some EQ tweaking the RH450 would have given me a more acceptable sound, but the LM flat was just [i]there[/i].

The onboard tuner is a corking idea, the memories are great, I love the LEDs (but you can't read the button titles at the top because of the overhang), and the unit itself just exudes quality (and so it should for the price), but when it came to the tone, there was no contest for me.

I was, as I said, surprised. Thank God I didn't buy the TC gear simply on recommendation.

YMMV, natch. [/quote]

It's extraordinary isn't it, the difference between people's perception of the same gear?! This more or less sums up my experience of my RH and a LM II I tried - except exactly in reverse! I found the LM to be sterile and kind of thin sounding, compared to the RH I went with, which sounds - to me - fuller and more character-ful. Makes you wonder just how valuable anyone's but your own opinion is!

[Muzz]

Yep, a valuable lesson in the value of your own ears. Or my own ears. Someone's ears, anyway...

Thinking on it, the clear difference I heard between the amps may well have been overly coloured by the cabs - the MB was 2 x 15s, whereas the RH450 was through the RH stack, which is 10s and 12s. It might have been more the TC cabs I didn't like. I'm going to go back when I've got the cash ready to go and spend longer switching the cabs and amps around to try and get a definitive answer. I just don't like mithering shop staff too much when I know I haven't actually got the cash.

It's made me seriously consider distance buying of any sort of amplification without trying it, though.

[chris_b]

[quote name='Muzz' post='769253' date='Mar 9 2010, 02:03 PM']....I was very surprised to find I MUCH preferred the MarkBass gear, as there's tons and tons of enthusiasm and giddyness about the RH450 around at the moment....[/quote]
Me too. I used to think that I must have bought the only non-sterile sounding Markbass amp!

To me the LM2 has a fat, full bass tone with plenty of punch and a lot of zing, and I usually run the EQ flat. I think that anyone who hears Markbass amps as sterile needs to look at the rest of their signal chain or go to EQ school!

[Uncle Balsamic]

[quote name='stevie' post='769198' date='Mar 9 2010, 01:30 PM']>Check out these videos by KJung on Talkbass....

Although he says that all the amps are flat, I think he must mean that all the tone controls are set to zero, because the only one that sounds flat to me is the TC. The Mark Bass sounds mildly scooped with some HF lift and a depressed LF. The Puma sounds as if there is an excess of lower mids. Depends on the cab, of course, and I'm assuming that the Bergantino is relatively uncoloured.[/quote]

The LMII is actually pretty much exactly flat with all of the controls at noon.

[alhbass]

[quote name='Muzz' post='769253' date='Mar 9 2010, 02:03 PM']Well, I spent an hour in Sounds Great yesterday A/Bing the RH450 with a LMII, plus the RH 2x10 and 2x12 stack against the MB Jeff Berlin and 151HR. I had the LMIII and a 410HR, but it all got nicked (there's a thread somewhere about that), so I'm after a complete new rig.

I was very surprised to find I MUCH preferred the MarkBass gear, as there's tons and tons of enthusiasm and giddyness about the RH450 around at the moment. I didn't like the tubetone valve simulation on the RH much (my Roland D-Bass did a more convincing tube tone on its Vintage setting), and overall I thought it sounded less full and rounded a sound altogether. If anything, the RH sounded too modern and sterile - unless the tubetone was dialled in, when it sounded like a cheapish distortion pedal. Maybe with some EQ tweaking the RH450 would have given me a more acceptable sound, but the LM flat was just [i]there[/i].

The onboard tuner is a corking idea, the memories are great, I love the LEDs (but you can't read the button titles at the top because of the overhang), and the unit itself just exudes quality (and so it should for the price), but when it came to the tone, there was no contest for me.

I was, as I said, surprised. Thank God I didn't buy the TC gear simply on recommendation.

YMMV, natch. [/quote]

This is really interesting, and exactly the kind of A/B test I'd love to carry out myself, if only there was a store where I could do so within reasonable reach (I'm in York - anyone know of one? Don't think any of the Leeds shops that I'm aware of carry TC gear yet...).

I've heard all the arguments for and against MB amps many times already, and have my own opinion based on years of owning them - and I'm certainly guilty of being swept along with the "giddyness" (good term!) around TC. But then, I have heard some great sounding demos of the RH450 online...Clearly I need to try and hear one live before making any expensive decisions.

I've asked elsewhere, but anyone know of anyone planning to bring one to the Yorkshire Bass Bash?

[Bass Culture]

[quote name='chris_b' post='769343' date='Mar 9 2010, 03:53 PM']Me too. I used to think that I must have bought the only non-sterile sounding Markbass amp!

To me the LM2 has a fat, full bass tone with plenty of punch and a lot of zing, and I usually run the EQ flat. I think that anyone who hears Markbass amps as sterile needs to look at the rest of their signal chain or go to EQ school![/quote]

I think there's a bit (i.e. a lot!) of generalisation in the last sentence. I for one wouldn't describe Markbass amps as sterile, having owned both a LM II and a SA450. I [i]would[/i] personally describe the LM 11 as sterile, but I wouldn't the SA 450 - I quite happily lived with one for a couple of years before I had a brainstorm and decided to 'downsize' to a combo. And as for anyone who hears Markbass amps as sterile 'needing' to look at their signal chain or going to EQ school, I'll respectfully decline, I think - you go if you want to, I'm happy as Larry with my opinion and my RH 450, thank you very muchly!

[51m0n]

When it comes to amps I really really rate the MB LMII/III family.

They are very clean and just a lovely tone, I don't hear them as sterile or in anyway harsh either.

I havent A/B'ed an SA450 against an LMII for years (not since I plumped for my SA450) but I recall thinking there was hardly anything in it - I went with the SA450 because I valued the more versatile EQ and other extras more than the smaller form factor.

When I had a go on an RH450 I didnt think it was better in any way than the SA450. Then again I carry a full fat rack tuner, and a full fat compressor in my rack, and both those features in the RH450 are compromised in comparison.

I still think the RH450 is good head, but I really want a head that obscures the sound of my basses with its own colouration less than I felt the RH450 does, if I was desperately seeking a tiny head I'd find it very hard to go for anythign other than an F500, but I am firmly of the belief that only the best will do when it comes to compression, and I'd rather forego any compression than have anything that wasnt as good as my rack unit. And if we are go ing for small form factor I can take an ickle tuner to a gig/rehearsal if I need to.

[gazhowe]

[quote name='alhbass' post='769481' date='Mar 9 2010, 05:36 PM']....This is really interesting, and exactly the kind of A/B test I'd love to carry out myself, if only there was a store where I could do so within reasonable reach (I'm in York - anyone know of one? Don't think any of the Leeds shops that I'm aware of carry TC gear yet...)...[/quote]

Can I suggest you pay a visit with your own bass to Bass Direct in Warwick as they stock both the RH450 and numerous Mark Bass amps?

I recently spent an afternoon there trying out my Status through various Mark Bass amps (using the MoMark testing tower) and different Bergantino cabs, then tried the RH450 with TC 2x10 & 2x12 cabs before A/B'ing the LMIII and RH450 through the same Berg cabs. Before arriving I desperately wanted to like the sound of the RH450 because of all of the great features it has built in but this was far outweighed by my personal preference for the sound of the Mark Bass, even though it doesn't have the 'bells and whistles' of the RH450.

The varied, but equally valid, opinions expressed in this thread only serve to highlight that if you are thinking about spending £500+ on an amp then it's worth the effort to travel to somewhere that allows you to do a true comparison and then let your ears decide.

[alhbass]

[quote name='gazhowe' post='769628' date='Mar 9 2010, 07:50 PM']Can I suggest you pay a visit with your own bass to Bass Direct in Warwick as they stock both the RH450 and numerous Mark Bass amps?

I recently spent an afternoon there trying out my Status through various Mark Bass amps (using the MoMark testing tower) and different Bergantino cabs, then tried the RH450 with TC 2x10 & 2x12 cabs before A/B'ing the LMIII and RH450 through the same Berg cabs. Before arriving I desperately wanted to like the sound of the RH450 because of all of the great features it has built in but this was far outweighed by my personal preference for the sound of the Mark Bass, even though it doesn't have the 'bells and whistles' of the RH450.

The varied, but equally valid, opinions expressed in this thread only serve to highlight that if you are thinking about spending £500+ on an amp then it's worth the effort to travel to somewhere that allows you to do a true comparison and then let your ears decide. [/quote]

Thanks for the suggestion - I'll certainly bear it in mind. Just a question of finding the time to get over to Warwick sometime...

[alhbass]

[quote name='gazhowe' post='769628' date='Mar 9 2010, 07:50 PM']Can I suggest you pay a visit with your own bass to Bass Direct in Warwick as they stock both the RH450 and numerous Mark Bass amps?

I recently spent an afternoon there trying out my Status through various Mark Bass amps (using the MoMark testing tower) and different Bergantino cabs, then tried the RH450 with TC 2x10 & 2x12 cabs before A/B'ing the LMIII and RH450 through the same Berg cabs. Before arriving I desperately wanted to like the sound of the RH450 because of all of the great features it has built in but this was far outweighed by my personal preference for the sound of the Mark Bass, even though it doesn't have the 'bells and whistles' of the RH450.

The varied, but equally valid, opinions expressed in this thread only serve to highlight that if you are thinking about spending £500+ on an amp then it's worth the effort to travel to somewhere that allows you to do a true comparison and then let your ears decide. [/quote]

Hey - just noticed that you're listing MB MoMark amplification in your sig... What's that like then? I've read all the MB literature, and a couple of reviews, but not heard directly from a firsthand user.... (Perhaps I should be starting a new thread to ask this?). Much as I love and respect MB, it's be kinda hard not to wonder whether MoMark isn't a bit of a gimmick...? I mean, do you find yourself using the modular aspect of the set up at all? Do you switch components for different gigs or something? Just curious really...

[gazhowe]

I tried various options however I went for the 500w MoMark for the following reasons;

1. I liked the sound I was getting just using the VPF and VLE controls on the amp with the EQ on my bass set flat so I went for a simpler setup (solid state input module with mute button, blank EQ module and output module with only volume, VPF and VLE controls).
2. It has a mute button (unlike the LMIII) which allows me to silently tune up using my rack tuner without needing to have the tuner in the signal chain between bass and amp.
3. Future proofing - I can change a module or the power section rather than the whole amp if I fancy a change at some point or it develops a fault.

It was a little more expensive than the LMIII but, for the above reasons, the MoMark made sense to me. I haven't switched any modules yet and it's unlikely that I will so, for an amateur player like me, it could be considered a bit gimmicky. More importantly though, I love the sound that I'm getting using this amp and the AE410 (bought at the same time) and haven't found any negatives so far.

[Musicman20]

Markbass are not sterile...it may be the bass thats sterile as basically it replicates that perfectly but with a tubey warmth (although perfectly clear and no grit). MB with a Stingray is perfect, (seriously....try it!).

I like both TC and the LM3...but the TC amp just has that massive amount of options and presets that are actually very useful. The TC wins it for me but im keeping the LM3.

The RH450 goes all the way from old motown thud, to brighter jazz zing, all the way to full on grindy modern punk tones.

If you want my opinion, Markbass and TC have basically the best micro/small amp range going, (apart from Mesa Walkabout).

[51m0n]

+1 for a trip to bassdirect, Marks a gent, he will however let you fall in love with hidously expensive gear by letting you play it for as long as it takes, offering very occasional pearls of wisdom - clever git!

You have been warned....

[ThomBassmonkey]

I've never tried the TC heads personally, but I had a go with a 210 cab with my GK RB head when I first got it and I was very disappointed. Maybe all the tone in that setup comes from the RH450 head, but the TC cab with my GK sounded bland. Even the guy in the shop sounded disappointed about how it sounded.

It didn't sound bad, it just didn't sound good either. There was no punch at all (which is one of the main factors I want from a bass amp personally) without me dialling in loads of treble and high mids which just made it sound tinny. The bass frequencies were either missing or just flabby.

Got myself a GK 210RBH since and it sounds beautiful, however I have the EQ set, there's no bad tones in the thing.

Of course, that's not tested with a matching head though so it might just be a bad pairing.

[gazhowe]

[quote name='51m0n' post='769934' date='Mar 9 2010, 11:50 PM']+1 for a trip to bassdirect, Marks a gent, he will however let you fall in love with hidously expensive gear by letting you play it for as long as it takes, offering very occasional pearls of wisdom - clever git!

You have been warned....[/quote]

I can vouch for that......

[alanbass1]

[quote name='gazhowe' post='770008' date='Mar 10 2010, 07:07 AM']I can vouch for that...... [/quote]

+1

[alanbass1]

[quote name='alhbass' post='768408' date='Mar 8 2010, 07:54 PM']Hi. I'm currently (reluctantly) selling my Markbass LMK head (cos I need the money) - but I'm already looking ahead to what I'll replace it with as and when...

I love the LMK - it's versatile for sure, lightweight, powerful, and, above all for me - super clear and uncoloured. Now I know this isn't to everyone's tase - some think it "sterile". I don't. I think it's just wonderfully clear, allowing the characteristics of different basses to shine through - I've never heard a P-bass sound as good as mine did thro' this amp. And if I need a thicker, more coloured sound, there are the tone controls and VLE/VPF filters to help you get there. I also use a Sansamp BDDI to add some grit and dirt when I want it.

But then - everything about the RH450 seems pretty fantastic. I'm really impressed by the range of great tones I've heard it deliver, and by the simple convenience of having a good compressor, tuner and tube emulator all in one small, portable, programable, user-friendly head. So I'm very tempted (and I'm a fickle sucker - always looking for a new toy to satisfy my short attention span!). My only reservation/query is whether the RH450 can deliver MarkBass-like clarity if the tube tone is turned right down, as well as fat, SVT-like warmth? Think I'd really miss having that option if it's not there...

Would welcome advice from anyone with firsthand knowledge. Thanks.[/quote]

You can see from my signature that I'm a big Markbass fan, having two heads and a combo. I actually find my F500 a little too clean and prefer the warmth added by the tube compressor in my TA501, which is my favourite MB head. I also recently purchased a RH450 head. I got the RH450 as I wanted to get a little more 'grind' to my sound which I used to get when I was running a P Bass trhough an SVT in the 70's/80's. The RH450 gives me that and works especially well with passive basses. I'm getting to grips with tuning in my active basses as well, but I will still keep hold of my Markbass gear as it is really nice and I'm in the fortunate position of not needing to sell it. The trump card for me is that I can swtich between clean and grind, the compressor really is excellent and having a built in switcheable tune is also great.

[alanbass1]

[quote name='alhbass' post='768408' date='Mar 8 2010, 07:54 PM']Hi. I'm currently (reluctantly) selling my Markbass LMK head (cos I need the money) - but I'm already looking ahead to what I'll replace it with as and when...

I love the LMK - it's versatile for sure, lightweight, powerful, and, above all for me - super clear and uncoloured. Now I know this isn't to everyone's tase - some think it "sterile". I don't. I think it's just wonderfully clear, allowing the characteristics of different basses to shine through - I've never heard a P-bass sound as good as mine did thro' this amp. And if I need a thicker, more coloured sound, there are the tone controls and VLE/VPF filters to help you get there. I also use a Sansamp BDDI to add some grit and dirt when I want it.

But then - everything about the RH450 seems pretty fantastic. I'm really impressed by the range of great tones I've heard it deliver, and by the simple convenience of having a good compressor, tuner and tube emulator all in one small, portable, programable, user-friendly head. So I'm very tempted (and I'm a fickle sucker - always looking for a new toy to satisfy my short attention span!). My only reservation/query is whether the RH450 can deliver MarkBass-like clarity if the tube tone is turned right down, as well as fat, SVT-like warmth? Think I'd really miss having that option if it's not there...

Would welcome advice from anyone with firsthand knowledge. Thanks.[/quote]

You can see from my signature that I'm a big Markbass fan, having two heads and a combo. I actually find my F500 a little too clean and prefer the warmth added by the tube compressor in my TA501, which is my favourite MB head. I also recently purchased a RH450 head. I got the RH450 as I wanted to get a little more 'grind' to my sound which I used to get when I was running a P Bass trhough an SVT in the 70's/80's. The RH450 gives me that and works especially well with passive basses. I'm getting to grips with tuning in my active basses as well, but I will still keep hold of my Markbass gear as it is really nice and I'm in the fortunate position of not needing to sell it. The trump card for me is that I can swtich between clean and grind, the compressor really is excellent and having a built in switcheable tune is also great.

[Bass Culture]

[quote name='alanbass1' post='770181' date='Mar 10 2010, 11:18 AM']You can see from my signature that I'm a big Markbass fan, having two heads and a combo. I actually find my F500 a little too clean and prefer the warmth added by the tube compressor in my TA501, which is my favourite MB head. I also recently purchased a RH450 head. I got the RH450 as I wanted to get a little more 'grind' to my sound which I used to get when I was running a P Bass trhough an SVT in the 70's/80's. The RH450 gives me that and works especially well with passive basses. I'm getting to grips with tuning in my active basses as well, but I will still keep hold of my Markbass gear as it is really nice and I'm in the fortunate position of not needing to sell it. The trump card for me is that I can swtich between clean and grind, the compressor really is excellent and having a built in switcheable tune is also great.[/quote]

So good you said it twice!!!