Feel: Cab vs FRFR

DLC86

Fractal Fanatic
I've been using for more than 3 years a pair of Atomic CLRs, they are great when playing in our treated rehearsal room or in largish venues, but I find that when playing in small pubs (90% of the gigs I do these days) they just don't cut thru as I wish, especially since there's lots of ambience reflections in those situations and it seems my guitar doesn't "glue" with the other unmic'd instruments.

So I decided to buy again a traditional cab and a power amp and today these were delivered at my door.

_20190107_225057.JPG

Just tried them for a couple hours and I have to say I'm blown away by this Fender BB212 cab (despite being powered by the cheapest power amp I could find - Harley Benton GPA-400), it's really versatile, it seems the (what fender calls) semi-open back configuration handles both low gain and high gain tones quite well. I'm also surprised by how good my presets created for FRFR translate to this setup.

But most importantly, I'm blown away by the difference in feel between a real cab and the CLRs+IRs.
I've always struggled to get a nice round attack and sustain (especially on clean tones) with FRFRs, speaker comp has helped in that department but when I fine-tuned it for ovedriven tones there wasn't enough compression for cleans, and viceversa when tuned for cleans, distorted tones had too much compression. This also seemed to vary with volume too, probably cuz the speakers in the CLRs compress too.

With this cab I instantly got the feel I love, just the right amount of compression and sustain at any volume and any gain. It also allows me to lower the gain without losing this feel and this is a good thing, me thinks.

Maybe it's just the honeymoon for the new purchase, maybe I just missed the "amp in the room" after 4 years, but I think I'll always carry this cab with me from now on, and maybe I'll blend it with IRs thru CLRs for a killer best-of-both-world setup.

What do you all think about this subject? Do you experience any difference in feel between the two?

PS: just to be clear, I'm not talking about the difference in the frequency response of "amp in the room" vs mic'd sounds, I'm speaking of dynamics, what you feel under your fingers and the reaction of the tone to your picking hand.
 
Last edited:
Yup, in smaller bars where the backline gear has to carry the room, I always use a traditional cab. Sometimes on larger stages too.
 
I’m unclear how a speaker cab is going to change the sustain of your instrument, other than in terms of physical interaction with the strings/pickups, which is really just a result of sound pressure, or efficiency of the driver, which again would just be a function of sound pressure over a given area, both of which could be greater over a certain area than a more uniform dispersion of a FRFR cabinet.
 
I’m unclear how a speaker cab is going to change the sustain of your instrument, other than in terms of physical interaction with the strings/pickups, which is really just a result of sound pressure, or efficiency of the driver, which again would just be a function of sound pressure over a given area, both of which could be greater over a certain area than a more uniform dispersion of a FRFR cabinet.
Well, probably sustain isn't the right word but I'm not sure I'm able to describe it correctly. I usually think everything is measurable and hence can be replicated/simulated, but this time I can't put my finger on it so I'll just describe what I perceive.

Basically when I play thru FRFR there's something that makes me tend to dig harder with the pick and increase the gain, the way I hear it is there's a certain (unnatural IMHO) ratio between the attack of the note and the decay which seems much lower, notes don't feel alive unless I'm playing at really high volumes.
The cab on the other hand makes me feel just more relaxed and connected to the sound, that ratio seems more even. Every note stands out no matter the force I use on the right hand and no matter the volume (unless it's really low).
That's why I talked about compression too cuz it just seems compression to me, but what the speaker comp parameter does is not quite the same.
 
Last edited:
I do this as well and love it. I use a DV Mark Neoclassic 2x12 open back cab (weighs about 25lbs) powered by a SD Powerstage 170, and it’s always flanked by one or two clrs. This is best setup I’ve had with the AxeIII/AX8 for me, since I’ve been gigging with them since 2012. I love the flexibility this rig affords me. The sound is just glorious with CLRs alone and that DV Cab is very neutral, playing well with FRFR into it, or no cabs as well. All combined is just heavenly. YMMV
 
Yup, in smaller bars where the backline gear has to carry the room, I always use a traditional cab. Sometimes on larger stages too.

I always assumed you were 100% FRFR....Interesting. Just goes to show how many options there are with this technology and what sounds good is good.
 
After messing with it a bit more this morning I think the difference I hear could be just that the guitar speaker has a slower response to transients compared to the CLRs.
And now I wonder if the new compliance parameter in the axe fx III (which I still don't have) could be the answer..

PS: non-MPT IRs help a bit in this regard but something's still missing
 
Makes me wonder if it doesn't come down to the horn driver in the CLR (or any other FRFR) responding faster to pick attack, than a (much larger) speaker can.
 
Makes me wonder if it doesn't come down to the horn driver in the CLR (or any other FRFR) responding faster to pick attack, than a (much larger) speaker can.
It could be it, but I suspect that also the woofer is faster than typical guitar speakers. I guess fast transient response is something desirable in the hi-fi/FRFR world, so maybe the slower attack of guitar cabs is something that should be simulated by modelers.
Looking forward to try that compliance control.
 
I would guess it could come down somewhat to the efficiency of the speaker more than anything, and often the cabinet, but that would be more applicable to a sealer or ported cab.

I’ve always found that some real cabs just felt/sounded really stiff at lower volume levels, as they were designed to be moving a certain amount of air, so when playing at lower volumes they often just didn’t sound “right”, then I’d switch to different speakers, like a low watt greenback, and get a rather different response at same input wattages.

I’m not an expert on loudspeaker design, but I think that much of the compressive effect comes at higher volume levels, when driving a speaker harder.

Personally, I find the biggest differences just in terms of dispersion when I play with a cab vs a clr. I only have a 1x10 Princeton these days, but, when I have that amp on the floor and I stand there and play it, I get way less highs than my clr, even in backline positon, BUT, if I tilt the Princeton back a bit, so it’s pointing at my ears, it’s night and day more highs and punch. Same output levels, just going in different directions. As it gets louder, it gets to where it actually becomes a bit too much for me, while I find the CLR can be at pretty high levels and stays a bit “smoother” for lack of better term.

As such, I think much of the differences in cab vs wide dispersion FRFR units come down to sound pressure at a given frequency over a given area. A cab which is pretty “beam-y”, paired with a speaker with some spikes in its response, can sound very different at a certain listening position, for better or worse. Some of those imperfections in freq response of certain speakers actually can be thought of as a desirable character though, which over time have been found to work well for certain tones or styles.

I find overall though that with a little tweaking I can make my clr sound identical to my Princeton at a certain listening position, even though one is open back 1x10 and the other is a FRFR. I could sit there eyes closed, and not tell which is which, but it certainly takes a little dialing in both to sound the same. Obviously more ways to tweak the CLR/IR than than the basic tone stack on my Princeton 68.

What it really comes down to though is if the cab sounds good in the room, and you simply plug it in and play, then it is good.

It’s not about what is better, it’s aboit what gives the tone one is after with the least amount of effort, so if a given cab/speaker can deliver than, then it’s a fantastic choice.
 
I would guess it could come down somewhat to the efficiency of the speaker more than anything, and often the cabinet, but that would be more applicable to a sealer or ported cab.

I’ve always found that some real cabs just felt/sounded really stiff at lower volume levels, as they were designed to be moving a certain amount of air, so when playing at lower volumes they often just didn’t sound “right”, then I’d switch to different speakers, like a low watt greenback, and get a rather different response at same input wattages.

I’m not an expert on loudspeaker design, but I think that much of the compressive effect comes at higher volume levels, when driving a speaker harder.

Personally, I find the biggest differences just in terms of dispersion when I play with a cab vs a clr. I only have a 1x10 Princeton these days, but, when I have that amp on the floor and I stand there and play it, I get way less highs than my clr, even in backline positon, BUT, if I tilt the Princeton back a bit, so it’s pointing at my ears, it’s night and day more highs and punch. Same output levels, just going in different directions. As it gets louder, it gets to where it actually becomes a bit too much for me, while I find the CLR can be at pretty high levels and stays a bit “smoother” for lack of better term.

As such, I think much of the differences in cab vs wide dispersion FRFR units come down to sound pressure at a given frequency over a given area. A cab which is pretty “beam-y”, paired with a speaker with some spikes in its response, can sound very different at a certain listening position, for better or worse. Some of those imperfections in freq response of certain speakers actually can be thought of as a desirable character though, which over time have been found to work well for certain tones or styles.

I find overall though that with a little tweaking I can make my clr sound identical to my Princeton at a certain listening position, even though one is open back 1x10 and the other is a FRFR. I could sit there eyes closed, and not tell which is which, but it certainly takes a little dialing in both to sound the same. Obviously more ways to tweak the CLR/IR than than the basic tone stack on my Princeton 68.

What it really comes down to though is if the cab sounds good in the room, and you simply plug it in and play, then it is good.

It’s not about what is better, it’s aboit what gives the tone one is after with the least amount of effort, so if a given cab/speaker can deliver than, then it’s a fantastic choice.
Obviously there would be differences among various type of speakers in relation to power applied. Some will be stiffer than others and each one will sound best within an optimal range. But as I said in my previous post, probably it's not compression but the transient response which is quite different in the FRFR.

However you're right in saying that the biggest difference is the dispersion, that's why in my comparisons I made sure the soft attack of the cab wasn't just an illusion given by some high frequency roll off, I pointed directly at my head with an amp stand and also tried various eq settings.

When I first bought the CLRs I managed to make them sound really close to my old cab too, but at the time I just tried to match the frequency response, didn't put too much attention into the dynamic side of things, it was during these years of use that I got able to discern those qualities/faults.

As I have a bit of time I'll try to figure out how to make a (pseudo)scientific test to isolate what I'm hearing.
 
I also have to wonder about the sensitivity of the woofer (over its amplitude range) vs. the sensitivity of the horn tweeter over its amplitude range. If the sensitivity of the tweeter horn is greater at lower volumes (than the woofer) but then gets closer to the woofer's sensitivity at higher volumes, could this affect the audible perception of the transient response of the pick attack. Or does the frequency response of either or both change depending on how loud it is? But I don't know anything about this stuff, so I am just shooting in the dark.
 
I also have to wonder about the sensitivity of the woofer (over its amplitude range) vs. the sensitivity of the horn tweeter over its amplitude range. If the sensitivity of the tweeter horn is greater at lower volumes (than the woofer) but then gets closer to the woofer's sensitivity at higher volumes, could this affect the audible perception of the transient response of the pick attack. Or does the frequency response of either or both change depending on how loud it is? But I don't know anything about this stuff, so I am just shooting in the dark.
I get what you're saying but probably you used the wrong word.
Sensitivity of a speaker by definition is the sound pressure level it emits with 1W of power applied.
Maybe you're still talking about transient response? I don't know if that changes at various levels but it likely does.
While frequency response stays pretty much the same.
 
I have used both. I still prefer a real cab and matrix amp. To me, it does feel and sound better/different - So I know what you mean and it is hard to describe. I know there are a ton of people here who swear by FRFR- and that's great ! I personally prefer the sound and feel of a real cabinet.
 
I get what you're saying but probably you used the wrong word.
Sensitivity of a speaker by definition is the sound pressure level it emits with 1W of power applied.
Maybe you're still talking about transient response? I don't know if that changes at various levels but it likely does.
While frequency response stays pretty much the same.

No, I meant sensitivity. If the woofer and the tweeter have differing sensitivity curves over their respective "volume range" then at different volumes, they would have a different volume ratio to each other. So let's say the tweeter is more sensitive at lower volumes than the woofer: that would mean the upper frequencies would be louder in respect to the woofer at lower volumes.

Add to that that the magnet for the woofer is larger (with more mass to get moving) and takes more voltage to get moving. In the case of a transient spike (like the pick attack), the tweeter could reproduce that spike faster than the woofer. The pick attack for that instant in time would then be only coming from the tweeter and not the woofer. Without the full frequency spectrum being reproduced in that moment in time, it makes sense that it would be a bit shrill and too "immediate".

Or maybe I am clueless :eek:)
 
What's everyone's experience with FRFR for hard Rock and/or metal? I'm more than likely gonna get a sealed XiTone MBritt made 2 inches deeper for extra punch but I'm wondering how well it would work if I'm playing small bars and having to fill the room with the thing. Obviously these speakers get really loud, but can anyone attest to the sort of vibe that it has in a situation like this?

I figure it's either a custom Xitone or a Recto 2x12 but then I'd have to find a power amp.
 
No, I meant sensitivity. If the woofer and the tweeter have differing sensitivity curves over their respective "volume range" then at different volumes, they would have a different volume ratio to each other. So let's say the tweeter is more sensitive at lower volumes than the woofer: that would mean the upper frequencies would be louder in respect to the woofer at lower volumes.
Not to be picky but there's no such a thing as "sensitivity curve".
Sensitivity, as I said earlier, is just the equivalent of the efficiency of the speaker, how many dB SPL it spits out at a given wattage.
AFAIK the efficiency of the speaker is pretty linear (at every doubling of the power the sound pressure goes up by ~3dB) until you reach the physical limits of the speaker or until compliance (which I still haven't understood exactly what it is) comes into play.

What you're describing here is compression I think, which could be different indeed, as you say, between woofer and tweeter but in a good quality powered speaker I expect the designer already took this into consideration.

Anyway I don't think a CLR (or any full range monitor) exhibit any compression at a reasonable volume for its specs, but I could be wrong.

Add to that that the magnet for the woofer is larger (with more mass to get moving) and takes more voltage to get moving.

That's why the woofer is usually connected to a much more powerful power amp than the tweeter.

In the case of a transient spike (like the pick attack), the tweeter could reproduce that spike faster than the woofer. The pick attack for that instant in time would then be only coming from the tweeter and not the woofer. Without the full frequency spectrum being reproduced in that moment in time, it makes sense that it would be a bit shrill and too "immediate".
Here you're basically saying that the tweeter has a faster transient response than the woofer and you're probably right, even though I don't have the knowledge to be sure about that, maybe only someone like Cliff or Jay Mitchell could give us an answer.
And I think a good designer should take this into consideration too when making the time alignment (unless physics forces to find a compromise in this task)

The only thing I'm pretty sure of at this point is that the whole system of a full-range speaker (woofer+tweeter) has a faster transient response than the average guitar speaker since the first is (or should be) designed to be as close as possible to a theoretical "perfect speaker", the latter quite the opposite.
 
Last edited:
I think the 'amp in a room' has no mic in the chain, just guitar->amp->cab , and that's the essential difference.

For live work I intend to do both at once as you suggest -
with 'amp in the room' (no IR) signal going to a standard cab, while the IR 'cab' signal goes everywhere the signal from a real mic would have been sent - PA and monitors. best of both worlds.
 
People mic up their amp in a separate room, then put on headphones, then record an entire album with no complaint about amp in the room, or anything else like that. Why is that any different?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ESW
Back
Top Bottom