Friedman ASM-12

lqdsnddist said:
I was glancing at the PDF manual and it looks like you want the gain on the monitor above the half-way setting for optimal performance, and then for playing quieter you just run the output of the Axe at a low level. Is this what people are doing ? and/or, if you turn the gain way down on the ASM, does it not sound quite as clear at low volume ?
Click to expand...
I think it's definitely easier when running stereo to control the volume in quieter situations by running the ASM at slightly above half way and then adjusting the output from the Axe-Fx. I believe when someone is playing louder the signal to noise ratio is possibly improved by setting the output to at least half way up from the Axe-Fx. Maybe just try it both ways and see what works best in your situation.
 
lqdsnddist said:
Any updates on this ?

I just picked up a used ASM12 on Ebay for a pretty nice price, and part of my applications for it does include some lower volume playing later at night. One of the benefits of FRFR is supposed to be they sound good, and consistent, at both quite levels and also high gig levels.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's sounding great now even at low volumes. I figured out that a lot of the factory IRs are very dark sounding. Once I loaded some that are more to my liking and bumped the treble and/or presence up on some presets, everything sounds great.

For playing at low levels, I like to keep the ASM at 50%, the AX8 output set at 25% (9 o'clock) and then control the overall volume in the "mixer" section of the amp block. Still sounds better loud though :)

If you want some free IRs to try, I think these are fantastic...at least for rock and metal:

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...lses-since-s-preshigh-and-theyre-free.947395/

Scroll through the thread a little and find the Tropicana IR. I think it's the best of the bunch, and possibly the best I've heard.
 
bloodninja said:
Yes, it's sounding great now even at low volumes. I figured out that a lot of the factory IRs are very dark sounding. Once I loaded some that are more to my liking and bumped the treble and/or presence up on some presets, everything sounds great.

For playing at low levels, I like to keep the ASM at 50%, the AX8 output set at 25% (9 o'clock) and then control the overall volume in the "mixer" section of the amp block. Still sounds better loud though :)

If you want some free IRs to try, I think these are fantastic...at least for rock and metal:

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...lses-since-s-preshigh-and-theyre-free.947395/

Scroll through the thread a little and find the Tropicana IR. I think it's the best of the bunch, and possibly the best I've heard.
Click to expand...

Cool! Make sure you mess with the CAB block settings on hard rock/metal amps. The "Dephase" specifically is one adjustment that makes a huge difference when I'm playing thru the ASM-12. I usually have it between 4 and 5. It is basically a "real" button because it makes things sound more like a real amp. :)

Cliff's comments:
  • "Close-mic'd speakers can sound "phasey" because you are in the near field. When sampling the near field of any source the frequency response and beam pattern is rough. This occurs due to multiple spherical waves arriving at various phase angles. These multiple waves come from the various modes of the speaker, internal cabinet reflections and from other speakers in the cabinet. In the far field the response is more uniform because the wavefronts get flatter and the phase angles converge. The De-Phase parameter removes some of the phasiness due to multiple wave arrival using a complex FFT technique."
 
romanianreaper said:
Cool! Make sure you mess with the CAB block settings on hard rock/metal amps. The "Dephase" specifically is one adjustment that makes a huge difference when I'm playing thru the ASM-12. I usually have it between 4 and 5. It is basically a "real" button because it makes things sound more like a real amp. :)
Click to expand...

Crap, the AX8 doesn't have a Dephase parameter! I guess they left it out since it's CPU heavy.

Oh well, I'm still happy now with the tones I'm getting.
 
bloodninja said:
Crap, the AX8 doesn't have a Dephase parameter! I guess they left it out since it's CPU heavy.

Oh well, I'm still happy now with the tones I'm getting.
Click to expand...

:) That's great you are able to get a great tone already. Really to me, the biggest adjustment is taming mids but with each firmware update, that has become less of an issue. The best thing with firmware updates has been less reason to tweak.
 
Have had the Friedman and the Axe Fx XL+ for a few months. Really impressed with the tone and feel of the ASM. It feels boomy when you first start playing with it, but as you become used to the speaker it goes away. I hope that makes sense. When played moderately loud it sounds beautiful. Great at low and high volumes. Best investment I've made in gear ever!
 
CT76 said:
Has anyone done a true side by side comparison with the ASM12 and ACTPRO-12M ?
Click to expand...

From what I gather, the Friedman has different components, including Friedman cab, different drivers, etc. I'd imagine it would sound considerably different from the B52 product, but that's just speculation.

I really don't think it's just a rebadged B52 ACTPRO-12M.
 
CGZG said:
Have had the Friedman and the Axe Fx XL+ for a few months. Really impressed with the tone and feel of the ASM. It feels boomy when you first start playing with it, but as you become used to the speaker it goes away. I hope that makes sense. When played moderately loud it sounds beautiful. Great at low and high volumes. Best investment I've made in gear ever!
Click to expand...

I agree that it goes away as you get used to it, but I'm still wondering if my patches tweaked on the Friedman will sound too a bright if I run direct to FOH.
 
bloodninja said:
I agree that it goes away as you get used to it, but I'm still wondering if my patches tweaked on the Friedman will sound too a bright if I run direct to FOH.
Click to expand...

Since the CLR is considered the "reference" monitor, I can give you my take on the ASM-12.

I have a CLR Neo and ASM-12 on the floor in my practice space as we speak. I can say with truthful certainty that the bass is no heavier on the Friedman than it is on the CLR. In fact, they sound very similar when I move back and forth, the ASM-12 seems to have a bit smoother top end, not necessarily less high end, just smoother, and the CLR has a somewhat hollow sound to it. When making a preset, I cut some low end whether I was using the CLR or the ASM-12. I was swapping the same presets (Quickrod and IIC++) back and forth and felt that if there was any tweaking to be done, it was very minimal, the ASM-12 just sounded better with mid and mid/high gain presets. That's my take and I stand by it. I'm keeping the ASM-12 and selling the CLR, I like the Friedman a bit better since I mostly live in the mid gain arena, just wish it was 20 lbs. lighter!!:)
 
I have 2 Asm's and they rock! Plenty of methods in the Axe to tame the low end which is excellent when used judiciously!

@pat6969 I would offer to buy your Neo for a grab n go rig,.. but at the rate they need work I would never trust it live.
 
pat6969 said:
Since the CLR is considered the "reference" monitor, I can give you my take on the ASM-12.

I have a CLR Neo and ASM-12 on the floor in my practice space as we speak. I can say with truthful certainty that the bass is no heavier on the Friedman than it is on the CLR. In fact, they sound very similar when I move back and forth, the ASM-12 seems to have a bit smoother top end, not necessarily less high end, just smoother, and the CLR has a somewhat hollow sound to it. When making a preset, I cut some low end whether I was using the CLR or the ASM-12. I was swapping the same presets (Quickrod and IIC++) back and forth and felt that if there was any tweaking to be done, it was very minimal, the ASM-12 just sounded better with mid and mid/high gain presets. That's my take and I stand by it. I'm keeping the ASM-12 and selling the CLR, I like the Friedman a bit better since I mostly live in the mid gain arena, just wish it was 20 lbs. lighter!!:)
Click to expand...

I liked the ASM better than the CLR too...
 
pat6969 said:
Since the CLR is considered the "reference" monitor, I can give you my take on the ASM-12.

I have a CLR Neo and ASM-12 on the floor in my practice space as we speak. I can say with truthful certainty that the bass is no heavier on the Friedman than it is on the CLR. In fact, they sound very similar when I move back and forth, the ASM-12 seems to have a bit smoother top end, not necessarily less high end, just smoother, and the CLR has a somewhat hollow sound to it. When making a preset, I cut some low end whether I was using the CLR or the ASM-12. I was swapping the same presets (Quickrod and IIC++) back and forth and felt that if there was any tweaking to be done, it was very minimal, the ASM-12 just sounded better with mid and mid/high gain presets. That's my take and I stand by it. I'm keeping the ASM-12 and selling the CLR, I like the Friedman a bit better since I mostly live in the mid gain arena, just wish it was 20 lbs. lighter!!:)
Click to expand...

Yeah this is wild... you read so many varying opinions on these two. I've read that the ASM-12 is hollow in the mids or "scooped" a number of times. I guess the only way to know is do what you did and try them both side by side. Thing is can't the hollowness no matter the speaker be addressed with EQ? I think I'd prefer the Friedman. So you don't think the Friedman is too boomy or hollow huh? I'm more like you and like mid to low gain tones.
 
Last edited:
The ASM sounds good to my ears. I think a break in period is a good idea before you judge it completely and this may have something to do with some of the people not liking them. I came across a thread some time ago mentioning that Mr Friedman himself did say they need to break in. I've never heard a CLR but I have a hard time imagining anyone not liking the sound I'm getting with the ASM. It's all in the IR you choose and the EQ'ing it seems to me.
 
ejecta said:
Yeah this is wild... you read so many varying opinions on these two. I've read that the ASM-12 is hollow in the mids or "scooped" a number of times. I guess the only way to know is do what you did and try them both side by side. Thing is can't the hollowness no matter the speaker be addressed with EQ? I think I'd prefer the Friedman. So you don't think the Friedman is too boomy or hollow huh? I'm more like you and like mid to low gain tones.
Click to expand...

When I A/B'd back and forth the bass was nearly identical. I was using my Quickrod preset posted in the AX8 section (with an OH Bogner 2x12 GB IR) with the cab block crossed over at 80 and 8500. I did not alter the EQ at all when I was comparing and the biggest difference I heard was the ASM-12 smoothed out the high end. It wasn't lacking for highs, just smoother sounding than the CLR. There was a harshness/brittleness to the high end of the CLR. As for hollowness, I only heard that when I engaged the CLR, almost like the speaker was too deep inside the cab, for lack of a better explaination. Now keep in mind this was a mid gain patch (some might call it high gain) and I much preferred the ASM-12 in this respect. I auditioned a couple clean presets quickly and the difference was minimal (save the CLR hollow sound). To me it seems the Friedman excels with some gain in the preset, it sounds very "cab like" and is absolutely not scooped. If anything, I find it very slightly mid range tuned, very present and up front. For the record, I really wanted to keep the CLR, it is 20 lbs. lighter, but to me, it just didn't sound as good.

I did just purchase a Matrix FR10 to try, I'll compare that the the ASM-12 when it get's here. If the Friedman was 20 lbs. lighter, I wouldn't even look in another solution.
 
I have the Friedman, a CLR and a Neo and 2 XiTone's. They all rock in my opinion. Don't think you could go wrong with any of them. That being said I keep the Friedman at rehearsal. It sounds great but to awkward and heavy to lug around. I keep the CLR's at home to create presets on. So far presets I create on them translate best live to the PA's I've played on. Myself and the sound guy's have had to make zero changes to the eq on my AX8 or my channel on the board. The XiTone's are what I use for gigging. I use them as backline in stereo. They sound great, are lightweight and built like freaking tanks. They can take the abuse of gigging so they get that duty. But again I'm extremely happy with all of them.
 
bishop5150 said:
I have the Friedman, a CLR and a Neo and 2 XiTone's. They all rock in my opinion. Don't think you could go wrong with any of them. That being said I keep the Friedman at rehearsal. It sounds great but to awkward and heavy to lug around. I keep the CLR's at home to create presets on. So far presets I create on them translate best live to the PA's I've played on. Myself and the sound guy's have had to make zero changes to the eq on my AX8 or my channel on the board. The XiTone's are what I use for gigging. I use them as backline in stereo. They sound great, are lightweight and built like freaking tanks. They can take the abuse of gigging so they get that duty. But again I'm extremely happy with all of them.
Click to expand...

Funny, I have the exact same setup(minus the Friedman....) .I believe the best all around deal is with xi tone...but as you say, can't really lose with any
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom