Any more experiences with Friedman ASM10 (or ASC10)?

Gasp100

Power User
Looking very closely at the ASM or ASC10 vs. a CLR NEO MKII. This is extremely important to me, please try both and report back ASAP and tell me which to buy :)

EDIT: Oh, and does the ASC10 have a pole mounting cup or NOT? All websites say yes, one person who actually owns the damn thing says definitely NOT.
 
I have the ASC 12 and just checked out a buddies ASC 10. The ASC is not pole mountable. Maybe the ASM is, but not the cab version. I have the CLR as well, and side by side they are very different. The CLRs are very full range sounding next to the Friedman which is designed to sound more like a guitar cabinet. It depends on what kind of experience you want out the speaker. If you want a very loud studio monitor, go with the CLR, if you want a less hi fi sound, the Friedman would be the choice.
FWIW, the CLRs are now dedicated "Big" monitors in my studio and I use the Friedman for gigs. Sounds created on my studio monitors (Adam or CLR) translate well to the Friedman.
 
If you dial in some more high cut in the cab block I’d assume the CLR can sound similar ?

The Friedman perhaps has a bit less high end by design, as does a guitar speaker, but I could see this being an issue in that you wouldn’t know how bright the tone really is.

Might sound great coming from the Friedman, but if you then send it to FOH and hear all that high end the Friedman is rolling off it could be ice pick city.
 
Except he stated above that his presets translate well from the Adam's/CLR to the Friedman, so that would lead me to believe that the opposite should be true as well. Just my logical thinking getting the best of me.
 
The Friedman is a completely different beast than the CLR. Its more than just an eq curve and Its not that it is rolling of high end. There is a lot more than that going on. It feels different too. Between the two you have a different power amp, different drivers, different cabinet and construction and the Friedman is not coaxial like the CLR.

The CLR is a fantastic speaker. To my ears though, it is just too hi fi sounding for stage use. This is of course just my personal opinion based on what I want to hear. I admittedly love the sound of traditional cabs/speakers on staqe at gig volume, and have never bonded with a FRFR monitor trying to reproduce a guitar sound. It's always just "off"". I"m also tired of lugging traditional cabs and power amps around to amplify my AxeFX or AX8 . The Friedman cab fits my needs well, so I use it. That being said, a lot of players like a more full range monitor or at least don't mind it enough to care and are happy with a CLR type of system for gig use. To each there own....If it sounds good. it is good. I now use my CLRs as a second, very loud (LOL) set of studio monitors.

I typically will create my presets on the Adams or the CLRs and then just quick check it on the Friedman. They always translate well. My live presets generally do not have as much highs and/or lows than say, a recording preset, but it isn't drastic.
 
Wow, extremely helpful and thanks for taking the time. I've owned the CLR in the past but it has been years. Not only did they sound great with AxeFX, they were AMAZING mains for a killer PA...
I'm torn, I have to admit. I feel that my patches are pretty fantastic even through my current lowly Alto TS110a. I'm sure through the CLR they would be killer. But at the same time, I am drawn to the "guitar-centric" vibe of the Friedman. I was looking very close at the ASC10, but the ASC12 looks almost exactly the same (but heavier). I know the knock on the ASM12 is that it's heavy, unwieldily to carry and slipperly LOL.
But the ASC12 is a regular cab version, right?
I'm also taking a second look @Xitone who seem to have gotten great reviews, but I've never tried their stuff.
 
The ASC being a cab is a lot easier to carry. Even the 12" isn't stupid heavy. Both the ASC 10 and ASC 12 sound great.
The Xitone stuff is good as well. I don't own one, but I tried a friends a few months ago.
Good luck with your search.
 
I have a CLR for years and have had a ASC-10 for a week.

I haven’t had a chance to crank them side by side but my first take is the ASC is boxy and muddy sounding... like a cab.

However, I haven’t tried dialing in new patches, testing with an acoustic, or tried them with my band yet. Hopefully it fares better or it goes back.
 
I have a CLR for years and have had a ASC-10 for a week.

I haven’t had a chance to crank them side by side but my first take is the ASC is boxy and muddy sounding... like a cab.

However, I haven’t tried dialing in new patches, testing with an acoustic, or tried them with my band yet. Hopefully it fares better or it goes back.

That’s how I found the CLR, boxy and shrill! Funny how we all hear things different. Damn!
 
I typically will create my presets on the Adams or the CLRs and then just quick check it on the Friedman. They always translate well. My live presets generally do not have as much highs and/or lows than say, a recording preset, but it isn't drastic.

But presets dialed in on the Friedman will not necessarily sound good through the FOH. Therein lies the danger if you are running direct to FOH.
 
But presets dialed in on the Friedman will not necessarily sound good through the FOH. Therein lies the danger if you are running direct to FOH.
Not true at all. They still translate very well, sometimes better. Far more depends on the FOH system and the FOH engineer than what the presets were created on in my experience. The reason I create on studio monitors is because that's where I generally work with the Axe other than live. I want the sounds to be usable for recording as well without a lot of tweaking so my workflow is quick and easy when using the Axe. I have created several fine sounding presets on the Friedman that have translated wonderfully to FOH.
My best advice is to create presets on what you have and turn it up load when tweaking. I feel that the biggest problem with guys creating presets is they create in a low volume, controlled environment and then use it in a live venue where everything is different. Different FOH, different room, speakers and eq's applied. etc.
 
Maybe if you know what you are doing. If you don't, and you don't have the appropriate amount of hi-cut and lo-cut, it might sound fine on the Freidman because it will naturally attenuate the highs. But then you send that same signal to the FOH (that should reproduce those highs) and it could sound shrill.
 
I think we all sometimes get a little too caught up in worrying what the sound guy get 100%. They are paid to mix and make the band sound good. Not every venue is the same, not every PA is same, not every soundguy is the same. I used a qsc k12 for a decade, never heard a peep from a sound guy, lots of guys hate them. I switched to the CLR since a deal came up and I thought it sounded better to me.
 
Maybe if you know what you are doing. If you don't, and you don't have the appropriate amount of hi-cut and lo-cut, it might sound fine on the Freidman because it will naturally attenuate the highs. But then you send that same signal to the FOH (that should reproduce those highs) and it could sound shrill.

Agree. Try to get a good acoustic sound of the Friedman then send it to the PA. Even if you can get the Friedman to sound good, the raw signal will too bright in my monitor, IEM or PA.
 
I'll stress it again, patches should be dialed in at gig volume. If you dial in a sound at low volume, and then take it to a gig and run it loud through a PA or monitor, it will sound overly bright and super boomy. I don't care which monitor it is. Say hello to Fletcher-Munson. The Friedman at stage volume doesn't roll off highs or lows, there are plenty there if you want them. If anything, the midrange remains more prevalent than on wedge monitors. At least what I have found. I've used most of the options out there at one point or another and to my ears the Friedman just sounds better to me across the frequency spectrum. But, I'm not looking for a studio monitor on stage. YMMV.
 
Hmmm, trying to understand the difference between:
a. rolling off highs and lows
b. "the midrange remains more prevalent than on wedge monitors"
 
Hmmm, trying to understand the difference between:
a. rolling off highs and lows
b. "the midrange remains more prevalent than on wedge monitors"

Hi’s and lows are in the upper and lower spectrum of the usable frequency range. Midrange is in the middle. You probably know this already. ;)
 
I am pointing out that rolling off the highs and lows is the same thing as boosting the mids (i.e. having them more "prevalent"). I am trying to point out that the Freidman is not flat, and if you adjust your tones using it as a reference, you could end up with shrill highs and that won't sound good through a good FRFR system. I am not ignoring FM, I am assuming that the tones are being dialed in at gig volume as they should be.
 
I am pointing out that rolling off the highs and lows is the same thing as boosting the mids (i.e. having them more "prevalent"). I am trying to point out that the Freidman is not flat, and if you adjust your tones using it as a reference, you could end up with shrill highs and that won't sound good through a good FRFR system. I am not ignoring FM, I am assuming that the tones are being dialed in at gig volume as they should be.

Meh. I don’t buy it. My Friedman sounds good and it sounds good when I plug into our PA. What does that tell you? I never jumped on the whole “your speaker needs to be flat to sound good” bandwagon. My decisions are made”real world” and I go with what works there, not on paper.
 
I used to run both the CLR and a ASM on stage at the same time. Thought it sounded pretty dang good. The Friedman seemed to fill in the low end thump I was looking for.
 
Back
Top Bottom