After 10 years, I'm done...

OK. Call me stupid. But, you know what was going on? I was running output 2 (w/ cab) to FR212 and output 1 (no cab) to The EVM 2 x 12. The Cab block, for whatever reason, adds a lot of level vs the output w/ no cab. I haven't tested yet but it appears it could be 3-5dB. Hence, the FR212 is a LOT louder than the EVs, both from same amp, both using GT1000. Once I evened out the levels (dropping the FR212 by 4.5 dB), most of that overwhelming bass & high end went away. IOW, it was simply a lot louder but, for whatever reason, it was the bass and hi-end that seemed overly accentuated. Now, I've got that FR212 sounding darn close to the EVs w/ no EQ.

So, more research to be done... I'd love to see the FR212 be the solution. Don't want to give up all those great IRs. So far, we're moving in the right direction! The FR212 is definitely a LOT better than all the other FRFR solutions I've tried. But, I've not tried the CLRs
 
krcassid said:
Once I evened out the levels (dropping the FR212 by 4.5 dB), most of that overwhelming bass & high end went away. IOW, it was simply a lot louder but, for whatever reason, it was the bass and hi-end that seemed overly accentuated.
Click to expand...
Fletcher-Munson will do that. :)
 
krcassid said:
I need to spend some more time with the FR212. It isn't "bad" but in my environment, it's needing a lot of EQ for every IR I've tried. Might just be my environment. I don't have to EQ the EVMs at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah I get it, if I'm just using greenback ir's for example I would prefer to use my guitar cab, I guess it's more forgiving and what we are all more used to. The sound of different amps is less apparent with a cab as has been discussed so much on this forum. You've got to be happy with what you hear yourself.
 
I am running the Axe FXII XL into a Matrix GT800FX into 2 EVM12L cabs that I built, and It sounds great. I leave poweramp and cab sims on all the time and just tweak out a little of the bottom end in the cab block. I have never tried the Axefx through monitors, but I was always a 12" guitar cab guy and always EVM12Ls. It still sounds good to me.
 
krcassid said:
Once I evened out the levels (dropping the FR212 by 4.5 dB), most of that overwhelming bass & high end went away. IOW, it was simply a lot louder but, for whatever reason, it was the bass and hi-end that seemed overly accentuated.
Click to expand...
At the relatively minor level differences you're talking about I doubt the Fletcher-Munson effect explains it all. I also imagine the "overwhelming bass" your hearing is a pressure buildup in your room once you cross a certain db threshold.

Nevertheless, it's good to know it's starting to come together for you.
 
benvigil said:
At the relatively minor level differences you're talking about I doubt the Fletcher-Munson effect explains it all. I also imagine the "overwhelming bass" your hearing is a pressure buildup in your room once you cross a certain db threshold.

Nevertheless, it's good to know it's starting to come together for you.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I mentioned above that I think the FR212 may just be too "big" a solution for my studio, maybe great for a big room? That cab is very big, very deep, full back, ported in front. I've never liked closed back cabs because bass always seems too much.

Still, I'm hopeful that I can dial in the FR212. I love the sound of the EV 2 x 12s but, post above is correct: it is a bummer to lose the use of IRs and, unlike Andrew above, The EVs with Cab sims on generally do not work for me w/o a fair amount of EQ. My hope is that I can find an EQ setting for the FR212 that works for me, across the board, and allows me to use IRs. But, I've got the cake (EVMs), just seeing if I can have the icing too... Keeping in mind that this is an experiment for "cab in the room" + IRs, a lot to ask, and a bit of a contradiction, right? However, my recorded and live sounds (still FRFR to board or FOH) always sound great with the Axe and I am very happy w/ the Matrix/ EVM solution .

Buying another Matrix GT1000 today. Going to try running outputs of real amps thru load boxes (Palmers) to the Matrix/ EVMs. A lot of my older amps, particularly the EF86 variety, just do not have the head room I need. My vintage AC15s and AC30s have near-zero headroom. So, what happens when you take the output of an AC30 on 3 (still cleanish but starting to get hairy) and give it the balls of the Matrix? I tried this running my AC30s thru the Power section of my Hiwatts. It was good but EL34s are not EL84s. I want to see if the Matrix can give me the same awesome headroom with a real amp going thru it. Where is our new Load Box??

Soon?????
 
For the record, speakers don't cause pressure buildup at any volume.
 
Glad I bumped into this post. I had been using an axe-fx through a Mesa 2:90 to 4x12’s for many years and ALWAYS got compliments on my tone. Kinda bummed, my Mesa recently blew. I thought I’d try the matrix thing and at first the tone was harsh and sterile. No character. Of course, I needed to enable and power amps now. That fixed some stuff. So now I want to run FOH and live cabs. I found a video on YouTube that showed pretty much what I am going for. Sorry, I’m still a forum noob so can’t post links yet but I f you copy/paste “Playing the Axe-FX II Direct to FOH & With Onstage Cabs” into YouTube search, his vid will be on top. It is the G66 channel.

I tried his method with good success. I have an A/B switch and tested against my dual rectifier and I am happy with the result. I actually think the axe-fx through matrix to my 2x12 sounds better than the real dual rec. Happy accident I think... also did an a/b through a powered monitor as a start for the FOH tone. Good start there too...

I’m getting to a question I promise...

One thing in the video that I referred to above that has me just a little worried. He says to turn the output from the Axe-fx to the matrix ALL the way up. Then use the matrix attenuators as your main stage volume. I did that and it sounds great. I just want to be sure I’m not going to blow anything up...

Anyone else running this way?
 
badmagick said:
One thing in the video that I referred to above that has me just a little worried. He says to turn the output from the Axe-fx to the matrix ALL the way up. Then use the matrix attenuators as your main stage volume. I did that and it sounds great. I just want to be sure I’m not going to blow anything up...
Click to expand...
As long as you don't crank the Matrix attenuators high enough to blow your speakers, you'll be fine.
 
The signal light on the matrix doesn’t stay constantly lit. Sounds like that’s a good thing according to the manual...
 
badmagick said:
Glad I bumped into this post. I had been using an axe-fx through a Mesa 2:90 to 4x12’s for many years and ALWAYS got compliments on my tone. Kinda bummed, my Mesa recently blew. I thought I’d try the matrix thing and at first the tone was harsh and sterile. No character. Of course, I needed to enable and power amps now. That fixed some stuff. So now I want to run FOH and live cabs. I found a video on YouTube that showed pretty much what I am going for. Sorry, I’m still a forum noob so can’t post links yet but I f you copy/paste “Playing the Axe-FX II Direct to FOH & With Onstage Cabs” into YouTube search, his vid will be on top. It is the G66 channel.

I tried his method with good success. I have an A/B switch and tested against my dual rectifier and I am happy with the result. I actually think the axe-fx through matrix to my 2x12 sounds better than the real dual rec. Happy accident I think... also did an a/b through a powered monitor as a start for the FOH tone. Good start there too...

I’m getting to a question I promise...

One thing in the video that I referred to above that has me just a little worried. He says to turn the output from the Axe-fx to the matrix ALL the way up. Then use the matrix attenuators as your main stage volume. I did that and it sounds great. I just want to be sure I’m not going to blow anything up...

Anyone else running this way?
Click to expand...
I didn't like the Matrix, so I'm still using my Mesa 2 Fifty for power on stage. I run my AXE volume at 50%. I wonder if 100% is better. At 50 I get to turn the Mesa 2 50 up and possibly get more tube saturation.
I do go directly to FOH mono.
 
Last edited:
Yeah that’s how I ran my 2:90 for years up until it went on me. Its opposite of what I am used to. Makes some sense though when I read about the noise floor. I didn’t like the matrix at first either. Actually, for me anyway, turning the axe output all the way up made a real difference. I was just nervous about hurting the amp. Would really suck to find out live. I digging it now.
 
badmagick said:
Yeah that’s how I ran my 2:90 for years up until it went on me. Its opposite of what I am used to. Makes some sense though when I read about the noise floor. I didn’t like the matrix at first either. Actually, for me anyway, turning the axe output all the way up made a real difference. I was just nervous about hurting the amp. Would really suck to find out live. I digging it now.
Click to expand...
I will give it a try. But I'm leaving FOH at 50%. It may be too hot of an input for the board.
 
Hi, I just watched that video, and it occurred to me that there may be a function that could be added that would solve some of the issues that method produces. I didn't like the fact that you had to move what would normally be post-cab effects (reverb, delay, etc) to pre-cab. So (and maybe this is already do-able, I don't have any experience running the two output method, but what if you could have a cab block that is the inverse of the cab block you're using. You'd put that on a separate line, tied in just before the other line goes to the output (if that makes any sense). One problem that I could see might be that the two lines might sound different because of the inversion/nulling happening after the effects. Also, I would have made this its own thread, but I don't post much, haven't posted in a long time, and couldn't find where I would start a new post. D'oh!


[/QUOTE]
 
chris said:
why?
Click to expand...
Well, you've got me there. I guess I was thinking of what I think is typically done in the studio, you mic the cab, then apply delay and/or reverb. I know one reason delay and reverb are typically? post-amp, so as to avoid adding distortion to delays and reverb and cluttering the sound, but I guess there's no reason it can't be done post-amp and pre-cab. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom