Jay Mitchell and the power of flat response

[Jay Mitchell]

Any way we can get a frequency response chart?

I'll put one up soon, but it won't help you in the slightest.

That would be great to compare to existing Axe-FX favorites ...

Unfortunately it won't. Not only are there different definitions among manufacturers of what constitutes suitably accurate response data (mine is extremely rigorous), amplitude response (mistakenly called "frequency response") at a single angle relative to the speaker gives a woefully incomplete picture of how the speaker will sound. You need a lot more data than that, presented in much more detail than most manufacturers ever provide (especially for music-store crap), and - most importantly of all - you have to understand how to interpret that data. The latter part is something that even people who are paid to design loudspeakers never achieve.

 

[tlainhart]

Thanks for the reference - I wasn't aware of the manufacturer.

I didn't read that Jay gave an up or down re sound quality - just described who they are and his relation to them. But one of the posters seemed happy with the sound.

If folks are seriously looking for a more accessible option, Renkus-Heinz, as a company, got a nod from Jay back when we were on the old forums. Link.
I think only a handful of Axe-Fx forumers ever used their speakers though -- a "Sygma" SG121-2 and a CF121M-2 -- due to their comparatively-high prices.

Disclaimer: I've never used any Renkus-Heinz gear. I'd love to give it a shot, but for me, they're still out of my range.

Also, thanks much scotts for sharing the story!

 

[KG MD]

Just curious about your statement of " ... so accurate and flat." As Jay had mentioned in previous posts, how do you know this by just listening unless you have benchmark reference systems in a proper acoustic environment for comparison? Do you have signal measurements? Any way we can get a frequency response chart? That would be great to compare to existing Axe-FX favorites ...

I would like to echo this question, and I'm even more confused now that Jay posted a reply a few posts back saying the frequency response chart won't help. How do you know Jay's cabinet didn't just impart a pleasing quality to the signal? Also, it sounds like based on information that a manufacturer may provide customers, which may not be tested in a rigorous manner, that there is no way to tell ON PAPER what the best solution would be.
Very interesting thread, BTW.

 

[joeymexico]

If I had a design like that... well.. for sure I will sell it and forget all about the production, distribution, sales, mktg, customer service....etc.etc... just collect for your great idea... If that speaker sounds so cool it may be wise to test it with other Simulation gear and hear the difference... Thats the kind of ideas that revolutionize industries.... You are not inventing the speaker but you have created the perfect speaker match for a guitar simulation gear... cheers on that!!.. I would hire this man if I was Fractal owner... maybe for a project !!! pleassee hahaha....

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I'm even more confused now that Jay posted a reply a few posts back saying the frequency response chart won't help.

You won't be able to reliably identify sonic differences using "frequency response" plots from different sources, especially when the test conditions are not disclosed. Furthermore, amplitude response is only one part of the "frequency response" of a speaker. The other part is the phase response, and it matters profoundly. Why this is so is well beyond the scope of any explanation that can be typed in an online forum, but it is correct.

How do you know Jay's cabinet didn't just impart a pleasing quality to the signal?

Scott is reporting his experience. It is perhaps understandable that you are skeptical of his conclusions. Unfortunately, there is no way to substantiate them in an online forum, even though they are correct.

there is no way to tell ON PAPER what the best solution would be.

Only if the data is from a reliable source, contains much more information than on-axis amplitude ("frequency") response, and you understand what it means.

 

[dk_ace]

I would like to echo this question, and I'm even more confused now that Jay posted a reply a few posts back saying the frequency response chart won't help. How do you know Jay's cabinet didn't just impart a pleasing quality to the signal? Also, it sounds like based on information that a manufacturer may provide customers, which may not be tested in a rigorous manner, that there is no way to tell ON PAPER what the best solution would be.
Very interesting thread, BTW.

This is where using the internet for this stuff just completely breaks down. If you could compare the best of the music store gear to the best of what the pro audio world has to offer side-by-side, you wouldn't make such comments. These differences need to be experienced to be fully appreciated IMO. There's just so much more involved in this situation than what most people understand. If you could hear it compared, you would understand just how big and eye-opening the differences are. It's a much bigger difference than "this one's a little more flat than that one." You'll have to hear it for yourself to believe it probably, but the difference is far greater than that.

For those convinced they can achieve any conclusions based on the data sheets supplied by manufacturers in the "prosumer" world, you should really try this as a real world exercise. Those data sheets are so skewed that they're virtually useless IME. There is no standard way in which the data is provided from different companies (or even within one given company's line oftentimes). Other times, the data on the sheet is just wrong. Even when it's accurate, it's usually misinterpreted or inconclusive.

D

 

[KG MD]

You won't be able to reliably identify sonic differences using "frequency response" plots from different sources, especially when the test conditions are not disclosed. Furthermore, amplitude response is only one part of the "frequency response" of a speaker. The other part is the phase response, and it matters profoundly. Why this is so is well beyond the scope of any explanation that can be typed in an online forum, but it is correct.

Scott is reporting his experience. It is perhaps understandable that you are skeptical of his conclusions. Unfortunately, there is no way to substantiate them in an online forum, even though they are correct.

Only if the data is from a reliable source, contains much more information than on-axis amplitude ("frequency") response, and you understand what it means.

Jay, my understanding is "phase response" is what imparts that "clarity" of a tone that many describe (understanding that using descriptive terms for sound can be misleading). It seems to me that a well-designed speaker with limited phase cancellations, even if it lacked a flat response, would be more desirable than the other side - a perfectly flat response but substantial phase cancelations (I'm not even sure if this would be physically possible to create).
Thanks for your continued input.

KG

 

[KG MD]

This is where using the internet for this stuff just completely breaks down. If you could compare the best of the music store gear to the best of what the pro audio world has to offer side-by-side, you wouldn't make such comments. These differences need to be experienced to be fully appreciated IMO. There's just so much more involved in this situation than what most people understand. If you could hear it compared, you would understand just how big and eye-opening the differences are. It's a much bigger difference than "this one's a little more flat than that one." You'll have to hear it for yourself to believe it probably, but the difference is far greater than that.

For those convinced they can achieve any conclusions based on the data sheets supplied by manufacturers in the "prosumer" world, you should really try this as a real world exercise. Those data sheets are so skewed that they're virtually useless IME. There is no standard way in which the data is provided from different companies (or even within one given company's line oftentimes). Other times, the data on the sheet is just wrong. Even when it's accurate, it's usually misinterpreted or inconclusive.

D

I understand there is a substantial difference in "music store gear" and pro-audio quality gear. Perhaps I misread the OP's posts, but I thought he said he had done A LOT of comparing, with what many would consider "higher-end" products. In other words, he had put a significant amount of time and research into his current FRFR system. My comment was directed at the fact that, despite this, he experienced a SIGNIFICANT difference when comparing systems.

 

[AlbertA]

The only experience I've had with a sound system that Jay has been involved in has been in the IMAX Theater in Dallas (Webb chapel). This is by far the best sound I've ever heard on a cinema (I saw Batman Dark Knight). Very balanced I would put it. Not harsh in the high end like most cinemas.

 

[axel]

This is all very interesting reading, but I have one question. Are there any forum members, who specialize in flat response amplification, that can give the rest of us in the Fractal community their reccomendations on what the best FRFR active solutions would be for the Axe Fx, in a given price range? I would love to see someone, with the knowlege to support it, create a simple guide for us to use (ie. best options $500 or less, $500-$1000, $1000-$1500...) with some pros/cons. That would be so much more useful (IMO) than conversation focused on a great sounding speaker someone built, that is not for sale, or that most of us could not afford.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Jay, my understanding is "phase response" is what imparts that "clarity" of a tone that many describe

There is really no point in trying to discuss this further. It is easier to identify certain types of speaker misbehavior in the time domain. Phase response correlates - in very complex, counterintuitive ways - with that time domain behavior, whereas amplitude response by itself has no correlation with time-domain characteristics. I am not going to attempt a more detailed explanation than that, because it would consume far too much of my time, and it would not be understood regardless.

It seems to me that a well-designed speaker with limited phase cancellations,

The phase response of a speaker has nothing to do with cancellation. Cancellations are, by definition, features of amplitude, not phase, response.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I understand there is a substantial difference in "music store gear" and pro-audio quality gear. Perhaps I misread the OP's posts, but I thought he said he had done A LOT of comparing,

He has.

with what many would consider "higher-end" products.

Correct. And the "higher-end" products, in his experience, all handily outperformed the music store stuff.

In other words, he had put a significant amount of time and research into his current FRFR system.

He has.

despite this, he experienced a SIGNIFICANT difference when comparing systems.

As did I. My speaker is much more transparent, more neutral, and preserved transients much more accurately than Scott's monitor. I knew in advance that this would be the case, but I underestimated the effect those differences would have on a guitar signal. It's really a night and day difference.

 

[AlbertA]

There is really no point in trying to discuss this further. It is easier to identify certain types of speaker misbehavior in the time domain. Phase response correlates - in very complex, counterintuitive ways - with that time domain behavior, whereas amplitude response by itself has no correlation with time-domain characteristics. I am not going to attempt a more detailed explanation than that, because it would consume far too much of my time, and it would not be understood regardless.
.

I know your time is premium, but for those of us who do care about such things, it would be great if you elaborated on it.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Are there any forum members, who specialize in flat response amplification, that can give the rest of us in the Fractal community their reccomendations on what the best FRFR active solutions would be for the Axe Fx, in a given price range?

Do a search. There have been many threads exactly like the one you are requesting. This is not one of them.

 

[KG MD]

Do a search. There have been many threads exactly like the one you are requesting. This is not one of them.

While there are many threads where this is discussed, I'm not aware of any that have reached any consensus. Just look at the dramatic difference in opinion on the Atomic monitors - some love them, others immediately regret the purchase. In the wider guitar community, there isn't even what I would consider a consensus on whether digital modellers can accurately replicate a tube amp.
When this is considered, I feel it becomes easier to understand why others would be less than enthusiastic about making recommendations on an internet forum.

 

[zslane]

This is perhaps why most guitarists are intimidated/frustrated with FRFR at this stage in its development. To pick a good guitar cab you only need to be an experienced musician. To pick a good FRFR monitor you have to be a scientist. Once you begin spending more than $1000 on a guitar cab you are buying build quality and road worthiness, not sound quality. Not so in the FRFR world. Being adept at identifying what makes for an optimal sound reinforcement system requires a grasp of sound engineering that most musicians never acquire. Perhaps a day will come when the Best of Breed in FRFR sound reinforcement solutions is no more expensive or easy to find/purchase than a top-tier guitar cab, but in the mean time it will be a sort of fringe science enjoyed by a rare few.

 

[xrist04]

I've heard Jay's rig, in a small-combo context at a roadhouse type of venue. At that event, Jay brought his FRFR cab, and was also experimenting with using a pair of small line-arrays surrounding the FRFR cab in a W/D/W arrangement.

I thought it sounded great. But then, I was there for the music (and to meet Jay), and wasn't doing any critical listening - nor was this exactly a controlled environment! :-D

 

[LMO]

Do a search. There have been many threads exactly like the one you are requesting. This is not one of them.

There are a lot of threads on the topic, but I don't recall anything from someone who specializes in FRFR and makes specific recommendations. Most of the FRFR threads focus on the under $1K market: the stuff you can find in music stores. However, as you say, this is not that thread.

 

[tlainhart]

I would not expect to find a thread where consensus was reached about what was the best FRFR for a price range. Unfortunately the best you (and I) can do is to read the various opinions, find our price point, and start experimenting. I'd love to delegate authority to someone like Jay to just make the decision on what to get (as we have with Cliff), but he's not in that business. Arguably, that's the service the Tom is providing, but even there folks disagree. And they would disagree with Jay if he provided such a service. The good news is that there are lots of folks here offering their experience that we can learn from, Jay included.

Why not start a thread asking for folks to weigh in on where they are in the price spectrum of FRFR, and why?

While there are many threads where this is discussed, I'm not aware of any that have reached any consensus. Just look at the dramatic difference in opinion on the Atomic monitors - some love them, others immediately regret the purchase. In the wider guitar community, there isn't even what I would consider a consensus on whether digital modellers can accurately replicate a tube amp.
When this is considered, I feel it becomes easier to understand why others would be less than enthusiastic about making recommendations on an internet forum.

 

[LMO]

I wouldn't get hung up on the idea of consensus. After having read many posts on the subject I could easily list several different options to consider in price ranges up to $1K. Above that price range there are a very few posts that mostly relate how someone else (usually a "sound guy") told the poster that this brand is the best. Plus the stuff that scotts has posted, of course.

If I've missed some good posts I'd appreciate a link or search terms.