Atomic Reactor FR vs Verve 12ma

[jiagap]

At this point, it is wrong of me to ask how the K10 sounded?

The k10 sounded great to me

 

[Sixstring]

I'm curious to know which sounded better to all that were involved... the Reactor or the Verve 12mA?

 

[raz]

I'm curious to know which sounded better to all that were involved... the Reactor or the Verve 12mA?

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

I thought my Atomics felt less stiff, but I was the only one who seemed to think so.

If I needed to amplify my iPod, I'd choose the FBT-12ma's. I'm seriously considering the K-10s for a small rehearsal PA. If I was inclined to switch, I'd go to FBT-8ma's just for the size and weight. But I'm not inclined to switch.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

 

[alchemist]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

Yes, I've come to that conclusion as well. So once we've established that the speakers are all in the same ballpark, other criteria come into play when considering a purchase: availability, price, size, weight, input options, reliability, maintenance, warranty, service, etc. And there's clear differentiation in these products when you apply the above criteria to the speakers in the shootout.

 

[Brian G]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

I couldn't agree more - assuming that the options under consideration are of fairly good quality and reasonably neutral.

I've used a QSC HPR-122i for quite a while now, and a few months ago I also received a pair of Adam A7's for use in a smaller (bedroom-scale) room. I've paid careful attention to how my patches translate on both of these, and I also play a wide range of music through both. (No, I'm not going to go into detail on the differences, as these two are in different locations, and have never been in the same room together, nor have I been able to measure them under similar circumstances. And they have different design objectives, from a manufacturer's point of view.)

I've also briefly tried out a Yorkville E10P, which I was able to audition in the same room as my principal audio speakers. It was far better than some other Yorkville monitors I've heard; seemed to me it's biggest limitation was in the area of transparency, as opposed to frequency response.

Unless you're going to lash out for a much higher-end solution, and assuming you own or are considering monitors of the quality level discussed in this thread, you have the tools in the Axe FX to negate minor deviations in frequency response.

Also, anybody who plays out changes the acoustical environment at each new location, it's not like these monitors are only used in one location where the variables are constant.

(A bit off topic, I happened to have an an opportunity to briefly audition a pair of ADAM S4X-H's yesterday, in a room that is fully acoustically designed and treated, and that I know well. And I was able to use test tracks that I'm very familiar with. A pair of these is many times the price of what we're discussing here, but they were pretty interesting, to say the least. :twisted: Sorry for the digression.)

 

[felken]

Just bought a set of K10's and have been using KRK Rokit 5's in my guitar room that is about 14x11 feet with the rokits on the shorter wall skewed to one side and the back of the rokits about 6 inches off the wall, the room has not been optimized acoustically. The rokits are for personal monitoring and recording obviously. I bought the K10's for a rehearsal space PA and to use one if needed as a monitor for me and my axefx if playing out. I threw a K10 on the floor behind me on the angle side as a monitor would be used. I have not used any other speakers yet with the axefx so...

My impressions after only about 20min of playing which is all the time I had last night is the K10 was a bit brighter. It seemed a little eq would be needed to make it equal to the rokit in that orientation and placement. The sound from the K10 was punchy, defined and pleasant. I don't see them not working for this application of sourcing axefx sounds and the size/weight, warranty etc are good. The sound coming out of the K10 compared to the rokit would have worked for me without tweaking it to match the rokit, it was not a night and day difference where one speaker sound would fit and the other not but they were different.

I wanted to share this as I suspect there are many like me searching for info so here is a little bit more.

My conclusion and hunch is any decent reproduction speaker should work with the axefx with some minor adjustments to eq etc to tailor it to ones tastes.

 

[sprint]

This confirms my experience with Behringer KX1200s that I've been using for basement playing. I've tried other more expensive solutions (i.e. Yorkville NX25P) and was easily able to EQ the KX1200s to be equal (or the other way around since I like the low end of the KX1200s (15 in driver)). I have not come accross anything yet the blows away what I'm using so much that it seems worth the expense. I've been almost ready to take a leap of faith on the Atomics but I have not seen enough "wow" posts comparing them to other solutions to push me over the edge on purchasing 2 of them and getting rid of the KXs. Guess I'll plan to make my next investment in a new guitar since I'm not unpleased with my current FRFR setup (just obsessively gassing about getting something better).

Posts like these ( http://forum.thestompbox.net/archive/in ... -3200.html , http://forum.thestompbox.net/archive/in ... -3289.html , http://forum.thestompbox.net/archive/in ... -4451.html , ) prompted me to buy 2 Kx1200s a couple of years ago for $250 each. May sound like a joke but they really perform well for me as a non-mobile solution (I don't think they'd travel well).

 

[jiagap]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

Yes, I would agree. My ignorance is bliss. I thought all 4 options were great, so it did seem to boil down more to issues of weight, size, how you were going to use them etc. I was glad to see and hear the fratomics up close and in person, as I had been very tempted from the hype. But seeing them in action, while a great sounding piece, there was nothing about them that soooo pushed me to not be satisfied with my 8ma's - so that will save me some money!

I love the size and weight and performance of the 8ma's for me, however I wish they had a small handle on them for carrying - that is one drawback. But they are light enough that I can manage the cumbersomeness of not having a handle. And for any of you concerned that the 8ma's would not cut through with a full band, they are very mighty - much more than you would expect by looking at them - and their bass response is also better than you would expect by just looking at them.

But all 4 are great options IMHO.

It was nice to meet you raz (Brett) and enjoyed your "crossroads" playing. And thanks again MKeditor (Michael) for inviting me.

-richard

 

[felken]

I think if I buy a dedicated monitor it will be an 8ma.

Can you comment on any perceived differences between the coax speakers vs the separate horn speakers up close, like 4-10 feet?

 

[Tone Seeker]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

Interesting, and I have to say that I'm surprised that many of you seem to have shifted your view of this level of FRFR product. Personally, I found the K10 too coloured when I tested it in my home studio. My crude attempt to match it to my studio monitors using the AxeFX Output EQ required adjustments ranging from +2.3 db to +4.7 db (63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db), and it still sounded too coloured to me. Maybe I'm really picky, or maybe I'm fussing about more than I should be.

I was the one who brought the 8ma's. <snip>

I was surprised at how different patches would sound better or worse or just different through the different monitors. But I think with some Axe tweeking, just about any patch could sound great through any of these options.

Based on jiagap's comments it seems to me that using one of the tested solutions without taking steps to linearize it will lead to difficulties matching either to studio monitors or FOH. That's not to say that AxeFX patches through one of these won't sound good in isolation. You will of course make patch adjustments to render a good sound through the monitor. However, your patches may not translate well to a flatter FRFR device and, depending on where your monitor is non-linear and by how much, you may end up "fighting" it whereas a more linear system would simplify patch creation.

Terry.

 

[Gasp100]

I got my (used) Atomic FR in today. I'm very happy with the decision to try this configuration again. I have it raised on a nice, stable platform about 5" off the ground and it really sounds excellent very LOUD and very soft as well. It sounds really balanced at any volume and the bass response is very full, tight and "together". It just sounds really smooth and really musical with all of my patches. As I posted today on TGP, I'm finding the built in cab sims are working GREAT, better and easier to work with than the Red Wirez imho at this point. And now that I'm "tweaking" my patches on the Atomic FR, when I flip back to my Adam A5's I'm finding I prefer them there too, so that's a bonus.
Anyway, I'm sure all of the FRFR solutions in this range will work great with the AxeFX.

 

[felken]

Looking at the adjustments you made it seems most were only 0.5 to 1 db different band to band with only the 4k one bumped significantly more than the others. It seems like you would have very close to the same results if the only frequency bumped was 4k ~2db and the rest left at ~0.0 db.

Did you do this matching attempt by ear? What was the setup? As Jay has pointed out speaker placement and surrounding geometry is not negligible.

Not trying to start an argument, just looking at your data made me wonder.

I doubt I am as critical as some others may be regarding the linearity of the speaker choice because I figure I will be tweaking patches as time and experience occur to refine it close enough for my tastes. The notes, feel and rhythm are way more important to me than 1-2 db of a certain band in general.

[quote="Jay Mitchell":3as5zlif]

Neither sounded better than the other, nor better than the QSC-K10's or the FBT-8mas. We heard no sonic variances among the speakers that wouldn't have been cancelled out by quick tweaks to the test patches.

This is a very interesting result, and it should provide encouragement to anyone who wants to go FRFR without breaking the bank. The implication is that, if you own one of the speakers from the comparison and are dissatisfied with the sounds of your presets, you'll get much more dramatic improvements working with the Axe-Fx than from replacing your speakers. I've had that suspicion for some time now.

Interesting, and I have to say that I'm surprised that many of you seem to have shifted your view of this level of FRFR product. Personally, I found the K10 too coloured when I tested it in my home studio. My crude attempt to match it to my studio monitors using the AxeFX Output EQ required adjustments ranging from +2.3 db to +4.7 db (63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db), and it still sounded too coloured to me. Maybe I'm really picky, or maybe I'm fussing about more than I should be.

I was the one who brought the 8ma's. <snip>

I was surprised at how different patches would sound better or worse or just different through the different monitors. But I think with some Axe tweeking, just about any patch could sound great through any of these options.

Based on jiagap's comments it seems to me that using one of the tested solutions without taking steps to linearize it will lead to difficulties matching either to studio monitors or FOH. That's not to say that AxeFX patches through one of these won't sound good in isolation. You will of course make patch adjustments to render a good sound through the monitor. However, your patches may not translate well to a flatter FRFR device and, depending on where your monitor is non-linear and by how much, you may end up "fighting" it whereas a more linear system would simplify patch creation.

Terry.[/quote:3as5zlif]

 

[Tone Seeker]

Personally, I found the K10 too coloured when I tested it in my home studio. My crude attempt to match it to my studio monitors using the AxeFX Output EQ required adjustments ranging from +2.3 db to +4.7 db (63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db), and it still sounded too coloured to me. Maybe I'm really picky, or maybe I'm fussing about more than I should be.

Looking at the adjustments you made it seems most were only 0.5 to 1 db different band to band with only the 4k one bumped significantly more than the others. It seems like you would have very close to the same results if the only frequency bumped was 4k ~2db and the rest left at ~0.0 db.

I didn't list the bands that were left at zero, 250Hz, 500Hz and 1KHz ( 63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 250Hz 0db, 500Hz 0db, 1KHz 0db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db). Sorry about that. The gap was 4.7 db.

Did you do this matching attempt by ear? What was the setup? As Jay has pointed out speaker placement and surrounding geometry is not negligible.

This was done by ear. My home studio is 12'x11'. Unfortunately it's not treated, but it is quite dead. I compared the test K10 to one of my studio monitors (Dynaudio BM5A), which are the closest thing I have to a reference. They and the K10 were off the floor, at my ear level while seated, about 4' up.

I used the word "crude" purposefully. I need to move this kind of testing / matching to the next level. BrianG has given me some very good suggestions for how to do that.

Not trying to start an argument, just looking at your data made me wonder.

They are good questions to ask, and I hope this gives you a better context for my comments.

As further perspective, I have been frustrated with my live tones for quite some time. I like to record when I play live (direct AxeFX feed) and along the way I noticed that the same tone played back later over my studio monitors sounded noticeably better. It was no surprise then, to hear what I didn't like once again, when I switched in my live FRFR solution as the playback monitor.

Terry.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Interesting, and I have to say that I'm surprised that many of you seem to have shifted your view of this level of FRFR product.

My view has not shifted. I won't be using one of them myself. It is surprising to me that, so far, nobody has reported dramatic differences among them.

 

[Tone Seeker]

[quote="Tone Seeker":2avdxvhp]Interesting, and I have to say that I'm surprised that many of you seem to have shifted your view of this level of FRFR product.

My view has not shifted. I won't be using one of them myself. It is surprising to me that, so far, nobody has reported dramatic differences among them.[/quote:2avdxvhp]
jiagap actually has, but his is the only feedback of this kind I've noticed. It will be interesting to read MKeditor's report, once he pulls everything together.

I was the one who brought the 8ma's. <snip>

I was surprised at how different patches would sound better or worse or just different through the different monitors. But I think with some Axe tweeking, just about any patch could sound great through any of these options.

Terry.

 

[jiagap]

But please keep in mind, out of the four of us, I knew the least about the fine art/science of discerning all the frequencies, spacings and locations of the set up, tones, atmospheric pressures, carpet color, and body odors in the air influencing the sounds we listened to. So, don't put much stock in my opinions. :lol:

And the forth guy, David, I do not think is on this forum.... his input would be nice to hear too.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

But please keep in mind, out of the four of us, I knew the least about the fine art/science of discerning all the frequencies, spacings and locations of the set up, tones, atmospheric pressures, carpet color, and body odors in the air influencing the sounds we listened to.

Audible differences is audible differences. It takes no technical knowledge to recognize differences, only to accurately describe them.

 

[Smilzo]

Audible differences is audible differences.

Yes. But ears must be educated to listen. I learn a lot from techincians, they force me to listen to hidden aspect of sound/playing that were unfocused in my ears/head. :mrgreen:

 

[felken]

That makes more sense, thanks for the info. I suspect for me at least and maybe others it will take experimentation to arrive at the "best" solution since the response plots of the speakers are not available generally unless someone finds the data somewhere and the data was captured in the correct fashion. Unfortunately, my funds are limited so I will likely "suffer" (lol) with whatever I end up with.

I did notice the freq response specs on the K10's are -6db which seems like a lot to me, but I have not read anything negative about them in online reviews etc... Quite the opposite actually.

One question in general I have is how much deviation is generally tolerable before the FOH is off if the patches are dialed in using the monitor? I would think some rule of thumb, gained from experience knowledge would perhaps be helpful in dialing in patches in a bit of a compromised way for those that want to use their own studio monitors to dial them in and then plug into whatever PA is used. Thoughts??

[quote="Tone Seeker":3mbfmq1i]Personally, I found the K10 too coloured when I tested it in my home studio. My crude attempt to match it to my studio monitors using the AxeFX Output EQ required adjustments ranging from +2.3 db to +4.7 db (63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db), and it still sounded too coloured to me. Maybe I'm really picky, or maybe I'm fussing about more than I should be.

Looking at the adjustments you made it seems most were only 0.5 to 1 db different band to band with only the 4k one bumped significantly more than the others. It seems like you would have very close to the same results if the only frequency bumped was 4k ~2db and the rest left at ~0.0 db.

I didn't list the bands that were left at zero, 250Hz, 500Hz and 1KHz ( 63Hz +3 db, 128Hz +2.3 db, 250Hz 0db, 500Hz 0db, 1KHz 0db, 2KHz +2.7 db, 4KHz +4.7 db, 8KHz +2.7 db). Sorry about that. The gap was 4.7 db.

Did you do this matching attempt by ear? What was the setup? As Jay has pointed out speaker placement and surrounding geometry is not negligible.

This was done by ear. My home studio is 12'x11'. Unfortunately it's not treated, but it is quite dead. I compared the test K10 to one of my studio monitors (Dynaudio BM5A), which are the closest thing I have to a reference. They and the K10 were off the floor, at my ear level while seated, about 4' up.

I used the word "crude" purposefully. I need to move this kind of testing / matching to the next level. BrianG has given me some very good suggestions for how to do that.

Not trying to start an argument, just looking at your data made me wonder.

They are good questions to ask, and I hope this gives you a better context for my comments.

As further perspective, I have been frustrated with my live tones for quite some time. I like to record when I play live (direct AxeFX feed) and along the way I noticed that the same tone played back later over my studio monitors sounded noticeably better. It was no surprise then, to hear what I didn't like once again, when I switched in my live FRFR solution as the playback monitor.

Terry.[/quote:3mbfmq1i]