Going to try FRFR again at a gig, but why is everything sounding so harsh?

The way I see it, you have a couple of options:

1. Build three slightly different versions of each patch (or just adjust one patch constantly for the circumstances) - one for live gig-level playing, one for satisfying low-level, playing at home volumes and the third for sitting well in a recorded mix.

2. Adjust the Global EQ to tame the frequencies causing the issue with the Q12a and keep all patches constant - you will also have to adjust the global eq for the direct out to FOH of that's the way you're going.


I chose to go with the latter, but still tend to brighten patches up slightly for recording purposes. Basically I have eq'd OUT 1 for our P.A (at gig volume) and separately eq'd OUT 2 for the Q12a (also at gig volume).
I then simply change the global eq's to flat for home playing and re eq them for live work - fairly simple.

If you are interested - for the Q12a, I do the following on the global EQ:

63 = -4.3db
125 = -5db
500 = +4db
4k = -6.5db
8k = -3.7db

This tends to equate to roughly what I'm hearing at home volumes, relatively speaking.

For the P.A (Mackie SRM 450's with sub):

125 = +2.5db
4k = -5db
8k = -4.8db

As you can see - even though they are both supposedly FRFR speakers, they still need to be eq'd differently.


For me, the big breakthrough came when I tamed the 4k frequency when going FRFR - I think you might find that this is the one you are referring to which has the high-mid nastiness at high volumes, cut back a little of the 8k and maybe add a mid-range hump and you'll possibly find yourself in similar territory to your amp.

Try it on the eq page of the amp block and see if it works for you

I'm happy to share patches with you if necessary

I hope this helps!

Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.
 
I've always found the Deluxe Verb to need the least tweaking. I'd start from scratch amp > cab > out. I like the Basketweave G12m 25 (Rw), and for OD I like the Tube Drive, drive anywhere between 10:00 and 3:00, tone at 12:00. If you can't get a good tone from there you have a problem!
My global eq for my CFR is:
125 - 2.0
250 - 2.47
2k + 1.65
4k + 2.15

The CFR should be very close to the Q12a.
 
Last edited:
Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.

Bodde - The above isn't really exclusively to do with FRFR and more about adjusting EQ for live-level playing.

Take for example any quality valve amp; you dial in what you think is an absolute killer practice tone at bedroom/moderate levels - then you go to a gig, crank the volume right up and all of a sudden you have to back off the treble, maybe increase mids a bit and possible tame the bass to achieve the same perceived tone and stop it sounding harsh.
Then you get home, turn down the volume again and the sounds a bit muddy, right?

All I'm doing with the global eq above, is pretty much what I'd do with the knobs on an amp to a degree, when going from sound that works great at home, to a sound that works great at gig volume.
 
(...)
My approach to get more guitar cab feel out of FRFR is another: Set the FRFR so, that the speaker will blast in the same direction, as a guitar cab will do. Normally a guitar cab ( let`s say a 2x12") will stand on the floor, speakers blast horizontal through your knees. so you hear the guitar Cabinet in most circumstances extremely off axis! Also the dispersion of a classical guitar speaker is much smaller than on a FRFR Monitor, especially the highs.

If you setup your FRFR Monitor the same, you may wanted to correct now the frequency response, because you loose much of the FRFR Pardigm, while hearing the FRFR Monitor also extremely Off axis - to much, as the wider dispersion of the beam (in reference to guitar cab) can compensate. For this, the CLR has the BL-filter as a generic correction. I much prefer a FFT room correction, but anyhow....

because ... the idea of "ideal FRFR" ends in rooms with "(far) away from acoustic ideal"
The difference hearing the Monitor OFF AXIS like a Guitar cabinet or "On Axis" in a Wedge position, beaming straight to your ears will make a big difference in "cabinet in the room" experience. While hearing Off Axis your ears will get much more room reflections in relation to the direct beam of the speaker!

That said, a small difference will always stay, because of different dispersions, Volume of the Box, resonance of the box, etc...

(...)

The "right" IR, monitoring FRFR in a OFF AXIS position and for that a correction of the frequency response brings me to very satisfying results, when it comes to "Cabinet in the room feel" with FRFR.

If the FRFR Monitor itself is no crap, this could be a way to try, if you want to get this "cab-feel" out of your FRFR.
Personally i use a Matrix Q12a and a old db M12-4 and i get really satisfying results out of both ...


Physical differences between FRFR-Monitors and Guitar Cabinets (dispersion, etc...) can not be tweaked out to zero differences! This is my conviction after experimenting the hell out in AB comparisons. That said it is also my my conviction, that you can come really close, but a highly understanding what exactly happens and how it works in the singular steps of the route is needed to get it:
[IR (Mix) of of MIC / position / Speaker / Cabinet] -> [FRFR-Moitor] -> [Monitor placement in the actual room] -> [acoustic influences of the room] -> [YOUR EAR]

That said, IMHO this is the reason on what Cliffs suggestion could be the right for some people! At the end: A guitar cab is no FRFR monitor. By physics! We have to accept that. The advantages AND maybe disadvantages of both systems!

Happily the Axe supports both routes the same! So, no limitations from FAS-side ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: LVC
Supersonic - you ADD 4k?! If that's the case, I would suggest we either have very different tastes in sound or the Q12a and the CLR are voiced quite differently :)

Still - variety keeps the world going round. I'm sure none of us would be 100% satisfied with another members set up from the get-go.
 
so much depends on which frfr speaker you use. so many of them just aren't flat. i don't have to do anything to make my rcf's sound amazing. my patches translate from my studio monitors perfectly. i do need to adjust the global eq on out 2 which gets sent to the pa - i pull out some top and bottom, because our pa speakers are a bit hyped in those areas. the matrix q12 is a bright speaker and sounds to me like it has a slightly hyped upper midrange. play some music through them at decent volume and adjust the global eq until they sound balanced. job done. so many people make the assumption that because a speaker is labelled as "frfr" that it has a flat response and any problems they encounter can't be the fault of the speaker and must be the fault of the axe, their tweaking abilities, or frfr in general.
 
Here's what I did when I first got my ultra....

1) I hired a rehearsal space for 4 hrs, took some high quality backings, laptop, AXE edit and my Ultra, Matrix and speakers and tweaked at band volumes, facing my speakers until I had some thing that worked. I also ran a separate output to the PA and tweaked the global outs until the FOH sound was ok.

2) I got together with a jam band of players who like to tweak their gear and further refined the patches.

3) I did the same thing at rehearsals with a band.

4) I made notes as to what worked at gigs and what didn't; tweaked at the next rehearsal and tested next gig.

5) I did this for patches for all the guitars that I own

It's a bit of work but I have now have patches that are optimized for live playing, for each individual guitar and sometimes for front or back pups. The result is that I can walk out the door, grab any guitar I fancy for the day and I'll have a bank of 10 or so live patches that work.

For practice at home I don't need to have an exact reproduction of my live cab sound. Straight into the mixer, roll on a little top and bottom for low volume practice and I'm good.

Failure to do this is why I think so many people get frustrated with any complex rig, Not just modelers. I used to do the same thing with my Quad preamp/A3/Tube power amp rig as well.
 
Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.
It really depends on what your attention is on when playing gigs. I only gigged a few times with a real amp and switched to the Axe soon after, so I don't actually miss anything here - because I never got used to it in the first place.
All I know is that going directly to FOH has a number of advantages I would never trade for any improvement in sound whatsoever.

1) I hear (almost) what the audience hears. Considering that most stage monitors in smaller venues are just crap to begin with, I can rest assured that the sound for the audience must be stellar if the sound coming from the stage monitors is already acceptable enough. If the dough already is tasty enough for you, just imagine how tasty the cake must be!

2) As I usually play on smaller venues, no matter if conventional rig or going direct to FOH, almost all I hear is the acoustic noise of the drumkit anyway. So why even bother to achieve incredible sound on stage, when I can't hear all the subtle nuances over the maddening loudness of the cymbals?

3) The sound guy will love you for not making insane noise on stage he has to compensate for by turning up everything else endlessly - when playing with other bands on events, we are almost always the band with the best sound (for the audience) at the lowest overall volume (which is never a bad thing... I like to actually hear dynamics and nuances in playing and not just generate a wall of white noise). Plus, sound definitely improves when the mixer is actually *able* to mix you.

4) Less backpain. Seriously, I'm young. I still need both my ears and my back for a long time.

5) Faster setup. Plug in the guitar, put the ethernet from the effects board in. Done.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.
This is true, definitely. But I think it helps to think about why you actually got the Axe in the first place - to have a portable all-in-one solution. Not using all the advantages it offers would be such a waste.
 
Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.

I got an AXE mainly for live use. Not much of a tweaker, but have spent some time in the studio trying to get a good tone at gig volume. When I realized that the tone sounded good in the mix with the rest of band, I was happy. Whenever I played alone, it sounded okay, but not great. But that's okay, because through the PA system (and the FOH at clubs), it will sound good with the rest of the band, and that was my goal in getting an AXE.

I wouldn't worry so much with all the advance parameters. Use the knobs you find on a regular amp, and you're good to go!

Good luck!

-PJ
 
Here's what I did when I first got my ultra....

1) I hired a rehearsal space for 4 hrs, took some high quality backings, laptop, AXE edit and my Ultra, Matrix and speakers and tweaked at band volumes, facing my speakers until I had some thing that worked. I also ran a separate output to the PA and tweaked the global outs until the FOH sound was ok.

2) I got together with a jam band of players who like to tweak their gear and further refined the patches.

3) I did the same thing at rehearsals with a band.

4) I made notes as to what worked at gigs and what didn't; tweaked at the next rehearsal and tested next gig.

5) I did this for patches for all the guitars that I own

It's a bit of work but I have now have patches that are optimized for live playing, for each individual guitar and sometimes for front or back pups. The result is that I can walk out the door, grab any guitar I fancy for the day and I'll have a bank of 10 or so live patches that work.

For practice at home I don't need to have an exact reproduction of my live cab sound. Straight into the mixer, roll on a little top and bottom for low volume practice and I'm good.

Failure to do this is why I think so many people get frustrated with any complex rig, Not just modelers. I used to do the same thing with my Quad preamp/A3/Tube power amp rig as well.

What has worked for me is getting the stems from our last EP. At home with my IEM I mute the main guitar track from the album, and tweak the AXE until it sits in the mix well. Since the in-ears are pretty flat, they translate well at live volume. Still, I've done the same thing: take everything to rehearsal and raise the volume. Maybe I had the Treble up a bit and cut slightly, but for the most part, the tone was spot on.

-PJ
 
Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.

It's annoying, and very much NOT plug and play with FRFR, at all. As I've stated in the thread, I've never been so frustrated trying to do anything with guitar.

The benefits are there, for sure. But man, it is frustrating bc it's so unintuitive and unlike how most guitar players are used to working. I really do want a power amp and cab, but as I mentioned, I paid so much for my current rig
 
Ps, it would be an awesome feature to have two or more global EQ settings. I guess I could use a GEQ Block per patch and make it global
 
Reading posts like this and this whole topic and similar topics that keep coming on and on really make me feel like loosing my faith in FRFR. By reading this you feel like you have to be some sort of science doctor to make it sound right. If you have to make this much effort to make it sound right is it all worth it? Don't get me wrong I love my Axe fx and most of the time I am happy with the results I get with guitar cabs and also with my monitor sound at home and love it for recordings but reading this and many other similar topics that you see all the time here don't make me want to jump into FRFR for live purposes.

I agree with the above FAS remark that FRFR might not be the route for everybody.

All true; but you don't need to do any of the stuff you were responding to at all. I don't.

What is apparent and should be obvious is that there is no general overall 'works for everyone' solution.

I could take 5 minutes with anyone one-on-one in person with my rig and show you what can be done. On the Internet over a forum? Doesn't work so well. It is akin to and not so different from going to a pro studio and hearing a good engineer with experience, knowledge and the right tools/room can do (ie. "wow, that sounds great!") versus the home recordist struggling to get a good tone from their SM57 and the amp in their closet with the same rig.
 
I'm still trying to get FRFR....but I just don't have any idea why things sound the way they do, haha.

I'm currently kind of AB-ing my FRFR rig to my pedals/amp rig.

I'm running a Deluxe reverb with volume at 3.5, bass @ 5, and treble @ 5.



Then, I'm running my axe into a matrix Q12a.

The FRFR just has different frequencies, particularly a MUCH, MUCH, more pronounced midrange. For example, when I pick hard on the D string, open, I get a really high pitched frequency with much more bite, per se, in the FRFR than I do through the combo amp.

I'm literally running my mids and treble of my amp models at 2.5 & 2.5, with low prescense, AND running a PEQ pre-cab with high and low passes (blocking).

Yet I get this SUPER pronounced, mid range & trebly bite.

I'm running a very bright guitar, but I've never thought of my Deluxe reverb as being super dark; everything is just so much harsher in the FRFR and I'm not really sure how to get rid of some of these frequencies, considering I'm already running a PEQ and actually EQing everything super low. (every amp, I usually leave controls around 5. but with my axe and FRFR, leaving things at 5 is insanely bright)

Amp models I'm trying to use are the Fender Double verb, deluxe verb, and Friedman BE.

What do you guys think? This gig is a duo thing, and it's really laid back, so I thought about bringing my Axe and trying to really dial in my tones between our sets/even songs, but yeah. Any tips on the whole FRFR thing? I know I'm not supposed to get my FRFR to sound like a guitar cab, but it's going to be backlining me hopefully at a lot of gigs, and I'd like for it to sound sort of good/not harsh on stage..

Ben

Before you give up on FRFR, and Cliff's correct - it's just not right for some folks (at the very least it requires a shift in perspective that might take some time to feel like it's a good thing), you should try another FRFR monitor.
I had a chance a few days ago to A/B my presets through my CLR and a Q12/GT1000 rig.
The Q12 simply didn't sound very good with my presets which are dialed in to sound pretty nice through studio monitors and the CLR.
The Q12 was exceptionally bright and didn't have much bottom end.
I had to use extreme Global EQ settings to get the Q12 sounding anything like the CLR.
I know the Matrix FRFR cabs have a real good rep around here, but that was my experience.

If you are going to continue using the Q12a then be sure to boost the bottom end and cut the top end - a lot - post Cab Block.
 
Last edited:
For me, when I'm struggling with EQ related issues, it helps to get a reference for my ears / brain.

I recommend playing some of your favorite full program material at gig volumes through your playback systems.

Then switch to the AxeFx and back and forth.

If you can get full program material to sound good, then you should be able to craft presets in the same ballpark. It won't be exact without mastering etc. but the general tones should be doable.

The goal here would be to get your AxeFx presets close to your favorite recorded tones by A/B comparison.

This is different than dialing things in and trying to attain an idealized tone you have "in your head".
 
I'll be interested to hear when you have tried my global eq settings for the Matrix cab to see if it has helped you like it does me - total breakthrough moment on the patches - especially cleans.
 
Before you give up on FRFR, and Cliff's correct - it's just not right for some folks (at the very least it requires a shift in perspective that might take some time to feel like it's a good thing), you should try another FRFR monitor.
I had a chance a few days ago to A/B my presets through my CLR and a Q12/GT1000 rig.
The Q12 simply didn't sound very good with my presets which are dialed in to sound pretty nice through studio monitors and the CLR.
The Q12 was exceptionally bright and didn't have much bottom end.
I had to use extreme Global EQ settings to get the Q12 sounding anything like the CLR.
I know the Matrix FRFR cabs have a real good rep around here, but that was my experience.

If you are going to continue using the Q12a then be sure to boost the bottom end and cut the top end - a lot - post Cab Block.

that was my experience too, compared to my rcf's. i didn't like them at all. they're not totally flat response. i'm sure people are getting great tones out of them, but a/b-ing them with other monitors was a bit of an ear-opener...in my opinion...
 
that was my experience too, compared to my rcf's. i didn't like them at all. they're not totally flat response. i'm sure people are getting great tones out of them, but a/b-ing them with other monitors was a bit of an ear-opener...in my opinion...

At a FRFR shootout last year we had a bunch of FRFR Monitors:

LD MON12A
QSC K12A
RCF NX12SMA
Marix Q12A
db M-12-4 Plus
db Flexsys 12FM
JBL PRX612
Atomic FRFR Cab
RCF ART 422

(and more, can`t remember all). They all sound different, but generally in a comparable "ballpark". The only Monitor, sounding completely different (with a big "oohmp" from lowend to low-mids) were the RCF NX12SMA. After all those "highest recommendations" here for this speaker at that time, it was personally the biggest surprise to me, because i thought - this Monitor would eat all the others for breakfast. It sounded good and could be the most loudest of all - no question. But to me, i was a bit dissapointed, because for me - these Monitors aren`t that transparent, as many think. After that i take a look into the manufacturer specs:

public.php

source: http://www.rcf.it/de_DE/c/document_...id=3384786&folderId=22494&name=DLFE-19002.pdf

Is this, what i was hearing? I don`t know ... but since that time i don`t give nothing about what people say about the sound quality of FRFR Monitors.

Personally i have a Q12a (and a db M12-4) and with respect, i can`t agree with some statements here, what i`ve read about them. But as i said: I won`t tell much about Monitors in future, because i learnded: DON´T BELIEVE WHAT`S WRITTEN ON FORUMS!

Back to topic: If you want to reference a monitor to it`s flatness, you should be extremely shure, that your reference will be, what you use it for: a REFERENCE! I don`t believe that a Monitor (take what you want) in a not optimized acoustics environment (room!) will let you reference anything ot tell something about Monitor quality, when it comes to FRFR quality / statements.
 
Back
Top Bottom