Is it me or are others in the same boat?

[macfly]

That's not what Monitor 2 mode is... It's actually the flattest EQ.

There's is a mode called "GUITARCAB" which is probably what you're referring to?

Oh LOL. No I'm just using mon 1 most of the time, and what I was referring to was mon 2, sorry for the mistake re: its actual eq. With my presets it sounds less like a PA speaker...i'd guess because alot of the speakers we play through are more smiley face eqs? I never looked at the manual to see what each one was...I just know that 90% of the time the first one sounds great and if it's too bright, I go to the next one. I think I tried GUITARCAB early on and didn't like it.

Interesting tho that you've prompted me to go read the manual. It says mon 2 is a "Secondary preset with more LF boost." It sounds more like your description but anyway. Whatever it is...1 and 2 work for me. Thanks for letting me know tho!!!

 

[macfly]

I think this AITR vs (high quality) FRFR is a mental thing for most.
If Fractal sounds great via studio monitors, and it sounds great via the mains, why wouldn't it also sound great via a high quality FRFR?
I use an FM3 and CLR on stage and love it...so do the FOH folks...and when I go out front it sounds exactly the same, only bigger.

Agreed. Mine does!

 

[Greg Ferguson]

Finally a cool thing about the EV wedge: it has a "monitor 2" setting that shaves the frequency range down, giving a more cab-like quality.

Here are the response curves for the various modes as applied by the DSP:



"Monitor 2" remains within ±3 dB from about 80Hz to just under 20K.

 

[vika12]

Like the OP, I tried the Atomic CLR NEO and Xitone Active wedge. I ended up selling them. Instead, I run my Fractal through a Quilter Tone Block 202 with its FRFR voicing. I've run it through the front of the amp and also through the amp's FX return, with Fractal amp and cab modelling turned ON. I have a stack of NEO 12" cabs -- a Celestion Copperback and a Celestion BNS-300. Both sound good but I prefer the FX Return route. IMO, this sounds and feels better than FRFR solutions.

 

[macfly]

Not really. Here are the response curves for the various modes as applied by the DSP:

View attachment 111573

"Monitor 2" remains within ±3 dB from about 80Hz to just under 20K.

Got ya...I'd suppose I'm an idiot. As mentioned...1 sounds best to me most of the time. 2 seems to work if not. I have amended my original response. This is why I'll remain "Inspired" for many moons.

 

[unix-guy]

Got ya...I'd suppose I'm an idiot. As mentioned...1 sounds best to me most of the time. 2 seems to work if not. I have amended my original response. This is why I'll remain "Inspired" for many moons.

Whatever works, works

 

[macfly]

Whatever works, works

Yeah at the end of the day that's the ticket. I was gonna buy a Turbosound that's half the price because those are used in the PA for one band. Those were not available for months, so I got the EV, because those are used in the PA used with the other band. At stock settings the EV sounds better (it should, it was twice the price) so I'm good. Check me on this: I'd guess what I hear is that mon 2 comes off darker due to the boost from 100Hz to 1K. I misunderstood that as narrower frequency range when in fact it's just flatter. That make sense?

Apologies for taking this off topic...we now return to our regularly scheduled programming...

 

[unix-guy]

Yeah at the end of the day that's the ticket. I was gonna buy a Turbosound that's half the price because those are used in the PA for one band. Those were not available for months, so I got the EV, because those are used in the PA used with the other band. At stock settings the EV sounds better (it should, it was twice the price) so I'm good. Check me on this: I'd guess what I hear is that mon 2 comes off darker due to the boost from 100Hz to 1K. I misunderstood that as narrower frequency range when in fact it's just flatter. That make sense?

If you compare the red and yellow lines on the chart you'll see that the yellow (monitor 2) is the closest to an overall flat line. The red line (monitor 1) has a dip in the lower frequencies.

So whether you describe one as having a cut or the other as having a boost is probably just semantics.

To my thinking, monitor 2 is closer to flat so monitor 1 has a cut... But the end result is the same no matter how you describe it: monitor 1 has less low end than monitor 2.

I suspect monitor 1 is targeted at cases where you're getting a natural bass boost due to coupling with the stage/floor.

Both sound good to me.

 

[nneilboss]

I run stereo IEMS and let someone else worry about FOH sound . Don’t bother with FRFR anymore. Sounds pristine to me and I can hear myself

 

[Greg Ferguson]

If you compare the red and yellow lines on the chart you'll see that the yellow (monitor 2) is the closest to an overall flat line. The red line (monitor 1) has a dip in the lower frequencies.

So whether you describe one as having a cut or the other as having a boost is probably just semantics.

To my thinking, monitor 2 is closer to flat so monitor 1 has a cut... But the end result is the same no matter how you describe it: monitor 1 has less low end than monitor 2.

I suspect monitor 1 is targeted at cases where you're getting a natural bass boost due to coupling with the stage/floor.

Both sound good to me.

As an FYI…

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/electro-voice-pxm-12mp-report.167310/post-2345499 has an attached PEQ that's a first pass on flattening either Monitor setting.

 

[Tommy Tempest]

I'm sure it's been said, but I put a PEQ at the end of the chain before the out. Then I remove the harshness and boom, by cutting lows and highs, pretty much the way an FOH engineer would do. And crank the amp while adjusting the EQ. These days I'm using 2 EV T-221m wedges. I have them tweaked to sound like a guitar cab. low cut at 70, hi cut at 6to 8k depending on preset.

 

[316ms]

I'm sure it's been said, but I put a PEQ at the end of the chain before the out. Then I remove the harshness and boom, by cutting lows and highs, pretty much the way an FOH engineer would do. And crank the amp while adjusting the EQ. These days I'm using 2 EV T-221m wedges. I have them tweaked to sound like a guitar cab. low cut at 70, hi cut at 6to 8k depending on preset.

Those are passive? Which power amp do you use?

 

[macfly]

I run stereo IEMS and let someone else worry about FOH sound . Don’t bother with FRFR anymore. Sounds pristine to me and I can hear myself

This is why I don't pour over it being perfect. Most of the time I don't use one, but If i do, it's only for some stage fill...especially if the other guitar player brings an amp...I'm not listening to it anyway!

 

[dr bonkers]

Another observation I have after reading through this discussion. If you are trying to compare the experience of live in the room cab with a 1 mic position IR file through FRFR, it's like trying to compare a soft focus panoramic photo of a landscape to telephoto picture of the same landscape. You are making an incorrect comparison. You need to use a multiple mic position mix IR through FRFR to have a similar experience. Why? Because when you hear a cab, most players are not listening to the cab with their ear even with the speaker at a listening distance that most IR files are captured. You need an IR then that simulates the throw of the entire speaker at a similar distance to where you are used to listening to a cab. If you do that, your FRFR experience will be much closer if not indistinguishable.

 

[Feflicker]

Another observation I have after reading through this discussion. If yyou are trying to compare the experience of live in the room cab with a 1 mic position IR file through FRFR, it's like trying to compare a soft focus panoramic photo of a landscape to telephoto picture of the same landscape. You are making an incorrect comparison. You need to use a multiple mic position mix IR through FRFR to have a similar experience. Why? Because when you hear a cab, most players are not listening to the cab with their ear even with the speaker st a listening distance that most IR files are captured. You need an IR then that simulates the throw of the entire speaker at a similar distance. If you do that, your FRFR experience will be much closer if not indistinguishable.

That must be why I always use/prefer blended IRs. Makes sense.

 

[Tommy Tempest]

Those are passive? Which power amp do you use?

Currently I'm using a Matrix GT-1000. But I've used a few different powered FRFR cabs and the application is the same. I prefer this method because so many factory presets sound great and just need some tone shaping. And the nice thing about it is, for live applications, I can play through pretty much any cab and adjust quickly on the fly.

 

[316ms]

Currently I'm using a Matrix GT-1000. But I've used a few different powered FRFR cabs and the application is the same. I prefer this method because so many factory presets sound great and just need some tone shaping. And the nice thing about it is, for live applications, I can play through pretty much any cab and adjust quickly on the fly.

Great, reason I ask, I seem to like my matrix best at louder volumes with passive Yamaha monitor wedges vs my traditional guitar cabs, I should try your mentioned PEQ and perhaps I will move to my powered FRFR with IRs. I have not found it as aggressive and raw at louder volumes.

 

[DLC86]

Are CLRs available anywhere?

I have mines on sale but I'm in Italy, so I assume shipping would be pretty expensive..

 

[unix-guy]

I'm sure it's been said, but I put a PEQ at the end of the chain before the out. Then I remove the harshness and boom, by cutting lows and highs, pretty much the way an FOH engineer would do. And crank the amp while adjusting the EQ. These days I'm using 2 EV T-221m wedges. I have them tweaked to sound like a guitar cab. low cut at 70, hi cut at 6to 8k depending on preset.

Why not just use the Output EQ and you don't need to add a block to all the presets?

 

[316ms]

Why not just use the Output EQ and you don't need to add a block to all the presets?

I think it was in agreement with the mention (image below)