Has anyone opened up their CLR or Q12/CF12 & can tell us what drivers are in there?

[Hugomack]

Back to basics:

1.Axe FX is supposed to sound best with a totally non-flavoured, FRFR amp/cab/speaker that faithfully reproduces everything the Axe generates.

2. From there, everyone has debated which specific brand sounds best, a large section agreeing that the most expensive ones sound best.

3. Others (Lightning Boy for example), have sought alternatives, which is where we come to FRFR's that are specially oriented to the guitar.

This logic then loops back to Number 1; that Full Range, Flat Response is what's required....

Number 3. is what this thread is about - eg trying to understand what this specificity actually is, in the three products being put about as the best "FRFR" solutions. Maybe FRFR isn't after all what's required?

Aka: We don't need anything below 80Hz, making it easy to make a diminutive Thiele-Small vented cab like the new Matrix coming soon.

[/QUOTE

What are your thoughts about running bass guitar through for example the CLR (or the other small FRFR cabs)? When I play bass, it hasn't been possible to match drummer volume using the same cabs as with guitar. The EVMs sound great, but can't handle the bass at the same volume. Instead, I use (with my MAtrix GT800), two 2x12's loaded with E120's, through the horn unit crossover I made to enable my EVM's to make cab sims sound good.

 

[Thomas-Hawk]

IIRC, the un-powered CLR has the same system performance as the powered version in the free field.

I'm going to guess and say the powered CLR in free field mode, has no corrective DSP. I'm guessing the DSP is for Tilt and Backline modes.

Another guess, the things that make the CLR great are the choices for the LF and HF transducers, the physical design of the cabinets and the crossover.

With the powered versions of the CLR you get the added bonus of correctly matched amplifiers and the DSP for Tilt and Backline use.

Richard

Hey Richard,

You've got Tilt and FreeField backwards. It's the Tilt mode (wedge position) that is the "flattest" position with the passive CLR wedge, per Tom King. I would assume (and it's just that... an assumption) that the Tilt Mode on the DSP switch for the active version is not providing any corrective EQ.

The DSP in the active version seems to be quite an advantage over the passive version if the user plans on using the speaker in the FreeField or BackLine positions. In my testing with the passive CLR wedge, it sounded very different (expectedly so) in those positions compared to the Tilt (wedge) position.

 

[barhrecords]

Hey Richard,

You've got Tilt and FreeField backwards. It's the Tilt mode (wedge position) that is the "flattest" position with the passive CLR wedge, per Tom King. I would assume (and it's just that... an assumption) that the Tilt Mode on the DSP switch for the active version is not providing any corrective EQ.

The DSP in the active version seems to be quite an advantage over the passive version if the user plans on using the speaker in the FreeField or BackLine positions. In my testing with the passive CLR wedge, it sounded very different (expectedly so) in those positions compared to the Tilt (wedge) position.

Cool about the DSP and Tilt vs. Free Field.

I can definitely hear differences in the 3 settings too.

 

[Tom King]

Just for the record, there are a lot of assumptions being made in this thread about the CLR that so far are all wrong. Some of this information is propriety and will not be discussed by Atomic or anyone authorized by Atomic.

Atomic's goal in producing the CLR is to provide guitarists (and musicians, producers, etc.) with a level of performance not available in it's market. The spec we've provided that illustrates this is very accurate and is more detailed than what many others provide. I can understand that some would like to know all the details of what goes into a CLR but we maintain that what comes out of a CLR is more important.

-TK

 

[barhrecords]

Just for the record, there are a lot of assumptions being made in this thread about the CLR that so far are all wrong. Some of this information is propriety and will not be discussed by Atomic or anyone authorized by Atomic.

Atomic's goal in producing the CLR is to provide guitarists (and musicians, producers, etc.) with a level of performance not available in it's market. The spec we've provided that illustrates this is very accurate and is more detailed than what many others provide. I can understand that some would like to know all the details of what goes into a CLR but we maintain that what comes out of a CLR is more important.

-TK

Agreed!

Great product that far exceeded my expectations.

 

[pdup]

[/QUOTE

What are your thoughts about running bass guitar through for example the CLR (or the other small FRFR cabs)? When I play bass, it hasn't been possible to match drummer volume using the same cabs as with guitar. The EVMs sound great, but can't handle the bass at the same volume. Instead, I use (with my MAtrix GT800), two 2x12's loaded with E120's, through the horn unit crossover I made to enable my EVM's to make cab sims sound good.[/QUOTE]

The CLR is a six-string guitar cab. Nothing more or less.

 

[pdup]

Hey Richard,

You've got Tilt and FreeField backwards. It's the Tilt mode (wedge position) that is the "flattest" position with the passive CLR wedge, per Tom King. I would assume (and it's just that... an assumption) that the Tilt Mode on the DSP switch for the active version is not providing any corrective EQ.

The DSP in the active version seems to be quite an advantage over the passive version if the user plans on using the speaker in the FreeField or BackLine positions. In my testing with the passive CLR wedge, it sounded very different (expectedly so) in those positions compared to the Tilt (wedge) position.

Of course - you have a woofer and a tweeter which coils are inches apart ... correctly time-aligned via dsp in the amped version - nada in the non-amped. I still wonder why Atomic makes the non-amped version. I would keep the dsp and make it with a line-input w/o a poweramp.

 

[Tom King]

The CLR is a six-string guitar cab. Nothing more or less.

I'm not sure what you're basing this statement on. You must have missed the several reports from users on this board alone who have had superlative things to say about the CLR with, bass, synth, vocals and v-drums amongst other things. The CLRs also make great reference quality near-field or mid-field monitors that can compete with conventional near-fields in their same price range and beyond.

-TK

 

[Sixstring]

Back to basics:

1.Axe FX is supposed to sound best with a totally non-flavoured, FRFR amp/cab/speaker that faithfully reproduces everything the Axe generates.

2. From there, everyone has debated which specific brand sounds best, a large section agreeing that the most expensive ones sound best.

3. Others (Lightning Boy for example), have sought alternatives, which is where we come to FRFR's that are specially oriented to the guitar.

This logic then loops back to Number 1; that Full Range, Flat Response is what's required....

Number 3. is what this thread is about - eg trying to understand what this specificity actually is, in the three products being put about as the best "FRFR" solutions. Maybe FRFR isn't after all what's required?

Aka: We don't need anything below 80Hz, making it easy to make a diminutive Thiele-Small vented cab like the new Matrix coming soon.

What are your thoughts about running bass guitar through for example the CLR (or the other small FRFR cabs)? When I play bass, it hasn't been possible to match drummer volume using the same cabs as with guitar. The EVMs sound great, but can't handle the bass at the same volume. Instead, I use (with my MAtrix GT800), two 2x12's loaded with E120's, through the horn unit crossover I made to enable my EVM's to make cab sims sound good.

Ideally the Axe should be amplified in this way, an uncolored speaker / amplifier nether adding nor subtracting any frequencies in any given level. With respect to sound and understanding how subjective it can be I think it really boils down to what the end user is looking for. That said you will find camps within camps on this with regards to how a certain solution sounds and fits their application, FR vrs FRFR. We have already have seen this play out here on the forum.

Specs are one way of narrowing the selection process so if your playing in a register that requires a lower response (Bass) then a speaker and amp design that is up to the job is going to needed. If a cab is rated at a certain freq at a given level, once you go past that point the level falls off quite drastically hence low end volume deficiency you speak of. Obviously speaker design has a lot of factors to be taken into consideration and application is just one.

Price point, The more something costs to R&D the higher the price to the end user right? so for the most part a box with a higher cost (should) contain more R&D both in over all design and individual component design quality being included in this factor. If your looking for something like the CLR that has a lot of R&D deployed and has been put together in such a mannor that it will compete against other solutions that costing hundreds more seems like a big win. For those looking for something that for the money will be as flat as can be, containing a wide dispersion pattern and can double as reference monitors.

If you looking for something like Matrix that seems to be more guitar oriented and seems to be for some a lot easer to dial in for their needs is another win. Same with Xitone they have a sound and response that people like so it works for them based on their needs and budget.

 

[Tom King]

Of course - you have a woofer and a tweeter which coils are inches apart ... correctly time-aligned via dsp in the amped version - nada in the non-amped. I still wonder why Atomic makes the non-amped version.

Again, this information is NOT correct - actually the opposite is true:

From the Frazier White Paper - Coaxial Loudspeakers - Separating Fact from Hype. Describing the different configurations of coaxial loudspeakers:

Rear mounted HF drivers
"HF driver mounted on woofer backplate and coupled to a small horn nested in the woofer cone. This is one of the earliest layouts, and many popular loudspeakers have employed it. It has three distinct drawbacks: electronic delay must be applied to the woofer in order to achieve signal alignment, the directivities of LF (direct radiator) and HF (horn) sections are not well-matched, and the close proximity of the woofer cone behind the HF horn creates early HF reflections that usually result in very ragged HF response"

...

CLR Design
"HF driver in front of woofer cone, with HF horn centered in LF horn. This configuration can achieve signal alignment
with no electronic delay applied to either element, and the problems associated with this layout are minor and soluble, given
sufficient insight into acoustics. This is the configuration we have chosen for our CAT 40 CAT 50 product families"

Here's a link to the complete white paper: http://frazierspeakers.com/download/coax.pdf

To summarize, both the Active and Passive versions of the CLR are in signal alignment (no DSP used or required)

-TK

 

[Hugomack]

Thanks Tom. As when you were kind enough to answer some of my earlier questions, extremely helpful.

My keyboard player's looking for a better backline, especially for smal venues. So even though developed for guitar, sounds like a CLR would be good for that? I'm still not sure about bass guitar at rock drummer volume levels.

 

[pdup]

Again, this information is NOT correct - actually the opposite is true:

From the Frazier White Paper - Coaxial Loudspeakers - Separating Fact from Hype. Describing the different configurations of coaxial loudspeakers:

Rear mounted HF drivers
"HF driver mounted on woofer backplate and coupled to a small horn nested in the woofer cone. This is one of the earliest layouts, and many popular loudspeakers have employed it. It has three distinct drawbacks: electronic delay must be applied to the woofer in order to achieve signal alignment, the directivities of LF (direct radiator) and HF (horn) sections are not well-matched, and the close proximity of the woofer cone behind the HF horn creates early HF reflections that usually result in very ragged HF response"

Re. Mr Frazier:
Essential to the achievement of alignment between LF and HF signals is the choice of crossover filter topologies.
None of the currently popular alignments will yield an optimal impulse response. The use of any higher-order (12 dB/octave or more) symmetric (lowpass and highpass both have the same slopes) crossover will audibly degrade the ability of a loud-speaker to reproduce transient signals. Once again, Frazier, alone in our industry, acknowledges this fact and effectively
addresses the issue. Frazier loudspeakers are all configured so as to produce the best possible replication of transient
sounds. When a biamplified configuration is chosen, the DSP crossover parameters supplied by the factory are also opti-
mal. For this reason, it is essential to use the factory-supplied settings in order to preserve the unique ability of Frazier
loudspeakers to produce an optimized impulse respons.
Well, Mr. Frazier has to use dsp.

...

CLR Design
"HF driver in front of woofer cone, with HF horn centered in LF horn. This configuration can achieve signal alignment
with no electronic delay applied to either element, and the problems associated with this layout are minor and soluble, given
sufficient insight into acoustics. This is the configuration we have chosen for our CAT 40 CAT 50 product families"

Here's a link to the complete white paper: http://frazierspeakers.com/download/coax.pdf

To summarize, both the Active and Passive versions of the CLR are in signal alignment (no DSP used or required)

-TK

Sorry Tom, you have to go back to the drawing-board.
To time-align two speaker-units (covering different frequencies) their voice-coils have to be in the exact same plane (Re. the famous Tannoy concentric's that has no need for dsp regarding being a 100% coherent sound-source. If not, some tweaking can be made in a passive network - 100% in dsp.

But again, to produce a phase coherent audio wave, a coaxial driver will need to have a delay of several milliseconds applied to the signal fed to the tweeter. The precise time delay for a particular pair or trio can only be determined with careful measurement. Non coaxial or triaxial driven multi-way systems can never be phase coherent. This is a consequence of standard wave mechanics analysis.

There maybe is more behind your CLR than I can dechiffre just now.

Re. Mr Frazier:
Essential to the achievement of alignment between LF and HF signals is the choice of crossover filter topologies.
None of the currently popular alignments will yield an optimal impulse response. The use of any higher-order (12 dB/octave or more) symmetric (lowpass and highpass both have the same slopes) crossover will audibly degrade the ability of a loud-speaker to reproduce transient signals. Once again, Frazier, alone in our industry, acknowledges this fact and effectively
addresses the issue. Frazier loudspeakers are all configured so as to produce the best possible replication of transient
sounds. When a biamplified configuration is chosen, the DSP crossover parameters supplied by the factory are also opti-
mal. For this reason, it is essential to use the factory-supplied settings in order to preserve the unique ability of Frazier
loudspeakers to produce an optimized impulse respons.
Well, Mr. Frazier has to use dsp.

But, kudos.

 

[Tom King]

Sorry Tom, you have to go back to the drawing-board.
To time-align two speaker-units (covering different frequencies) their voice-coils have to be in the exact same plane (Re. the famous Tannoy concentric's that has no need for dsp regarding being a 100% coherent sound-source. If not, some tweaking can be made in a passive network - 100% in dsp.

But again, to produce a phase coherent audio wave, a coaxial driver will need to have a delay of several milliseconds applied to the signal fed to the tweeter. The precise time delay for a particular pair or trio can only be determined with careful measurement. Non coaxial or triaxial driven multi-way systems can never be phase coherent. This is a consequence of standard wave mechanics analysis.

There maybe is more behind your CLR than I can dechiffre just now.

But, kudos.

Sorry pdup, the voice coils do not radiate sound. Placing them in the same plane accomplishes nothing.

-TK

 

[pdup]

Tom, please don't adress this in the Lansing Heritage forum, DIY-audio or Audio Engineering Society for your own sake.
I'm ending the discussion here.

 

[Hugomack]

.... the voice coils do not radiate sound.

-TK

?

 

[Ned Flanders]

 

[Tom King]

Tom, please don't adress this in the Lansing Heritage forum, DIY-audio or Audio Engineering Society for your own sake.
I'm ending the discussion here.

I wouldn't be addressing this anywhere if someone didn't erroneously say that the HF and LF of the Passive CLRs weren't signal aligned. For the record, they are.

If anyone would like to learn more about this subject they can read chapter 17 of the "Handbook for Sound Engineers" authored by Jay Mitchell, the designer of the CLR. Here is a link to the book where you can also find his bio in the contributors section: Handbook for Sound Engineers - Glen Ballou - Google Books

-TK

 

[Tom King]

Thanks Tom. As when you were kind enough to answer some of my earlier questions, extremely helpful.

My keyboard player's looking for a better backline, especially for smal venues. So even though developed for guitar, sounds like a CLR would be good for that? I'm still not sure about bass guitar at rock drummer volume levels.

Here's a post from MisterE that sheds some light on the CLR and keyboards: http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/68915-my-atomic-clrs-gone.html#post846864

-TK

 

[Thomas-Hawk]

Just for the record, there are a lot of assumptions being made in this thread about the CLR that so far are all wrong....

So... my assumption that the Tilt DSP switch position not providing any corrective EQ for the Active CLR wedge is wrong? Hmmmm.... that would essentially mean that the Passive CLR is not flat then. No?

 

[brokenvail]

So... my assumption that the Tilt DSP switch position not providing any corrective EQ for the Active CLR wedge is wrong? Hmmmm.... that would essentially mean that the Passive CLR is not flat then. No?

I think that would depend on if you are talking wedge or cab. Because obviously with a cab "flat" would be when it is set to Back line