Just Tried My New QSC K10.2 with the FM9

Funny, I played through a bunch of FRFR speakers before getting the 108 and was very happy with it with my HX Stomp. Going to use one for the FM9 I'm on a wait list for.
 
SweetPete said:
Big improvement how? I've got a pair of the 108s and I'm not completely happy with them. Have been considering the QSC's. Thanks!
Click to expand...

The Headrush 108 has a big problem with its EQ and bass. When I first got mine, I loved the exaggerated bass, but I quickly learned that on the ground or even elevated on my couch, I couldn't dial out the amount of bass of the 108. Even dialing the settings back on my modeler, it was hard to fix that problem with the 108. Its a common complaint against the 108/112s.

The K10.2 has a much flatter response, so if I tweak something on the FM9, that's what I'm going to hear. It also has a Aux input for an MP3 if you want a backing track or to play music which the 108 doesn't have, 2 Mic inputs, and an onboard mixer with delay and I believe reverb. I haven't tried the mixer yet, but its a nice extra feature.

The K10.2 is over twice the cost of the 108, so of course you're getting what you pay for. But if you want a cheaper option, I've heard the QSC CP series are good and they're very similar with the exception of the digital screen mixer and number of inputs.

I tested the Yamaha equivalent of the QSC (original DXR) next to the K10.2 just playing music through my phone, and I much preferred the QSC too. The Yamaha to me had a more high-fi "clean" sound, while the QSC sounded more natural...The QSC has better input options than the Yamahas do too IMO.

I may record some clips sometime this week to give an idea of how it sounds. To me, even at a low level, I think it sounds like a good traditional cabinet replacement.
 
Ron_R said:
Funny, I played through a bunch of FRFR speakers before getting the 108 and was very happy with it with my HX Stomp. Going to use one for the FM9 I'm on a wait list for.
Click to expand...

The 108 is the second FRFR speaker I've owned besides the 5 inch JBL FRFRs I have on my desk for monitors with my computer. I don't have a ton of experience with FRFR speakers, but I hate the exaggerated bass of the 108. For the price, they're ok, but you're better off spending a little extra and getting a better speaker with an aux cable and one that you can control the mix with better. Tried some other brand of 12+ inch floor monitors at a jam space I use, and so far, the QSC's sound better than those too. With the QSC, I'm also able to play at really low volumes now without losing any of the clarity or "ooomph."

In my opinion, if you're going to spend the money on a Helix or FM9, you might as well get a good cabinet to play through since its going to be what you ultimately hear. If not, you're losing out on the accurate emulations the FM9 (or Helix) provides.
 
JJDon said:
The Headrush 108 has a big problem with its EQ and bass. When I first got mine, I loved the exaggerated bass, but I quickly learned that on the ground or even elevated on my couch, I couldn't dial out the amount of bass of the 108. Even dialing the settings back on my modeler, it was hard to fix that problem with the 108. Its a common complaint against the 108/112s.

The K10.2 has a much flatter response, so if I tweak something on the FM9, that's what I'm going to hear. It also has a Aux input for an MP3 if you want a backing track or to play music which the 108 doesn't have, 2 Mic inputs, and an onboard mixer with delay and I believe reverb. I haven't tried the mixer yet, but its a nice extra feature.

The K10.2 is over twice the cost of the 108, so of course you're getting what you pay for. But if you want a cheaper option, I've heard the QSC CP series are good and they're very similar with the exception of the digital screen mixer and number of inputs.

I tested the Yamaha equivalent of the QSC (original DXR) next to the K10.2 just playing music through my phone, and I much preferred the QSC too. The Yamaha to me had a more high-fi "clean" sound, while the QSC sounded more natural...The QSC has better input options than the Yamahas do too IMO.

I may record some clips sometime this week to give an idea of how it sounds. To me, even at a low level, I think it sounds like a good traditional cabinet replacement.
Click to expand...

Sound is such a personal experience!

When I owned the Axe Fx II, I had a custom made FRFR 12" speaker and it really sounded amazing. After I got rid of all of that, and went back to amps, I missed the flexibility of the digital solutions, and used a few with the 108 and I was actually quite impressed. Before I purchased the 108. I had gone to GC and listened to a bunch of FRFR systems, and I didn't quite see what the more expensive units had to offer. I also didn't have that bass response issue you did with the 108. If anything, I found the opposite to be true.

I may take you up on getting something better, though. One thing I did like was the light weight of the 108. I'll take another look. Thanks for the input!
 
Ron_R said:
Sound is such a personal experience!

When I owned the Axe Fx II, I had a custom made FRFR 12" speaker and it really sounded amazing. After I got rid of all of that, and went back to amps, I missed the flexibility of the digital solutions, and used a few with the 108 and I was actually quite impressed. Before I purchased the 108. I had gone to GC and listened to a bunch of FRFR systems, and I didn't quite see what the more expensive units had to offer. I also didn't have that bass response issue you did with the 108. If anything, I found the opposite to be true.

I may take you up on getting something better, though. One thing I did like was the light weight of the 108. I'll take another look. Thanks for the input!
Click to expand...

The 108s are good for the price and you can't expect to have a lot of options with it since its only $200. I just think that at higher volume levels, it loses a lot of clarity and is boomy when played on the ground. If you plan to upgrade, a comparison is always good to see what you like. I saw a lot of people suggesting the DXRs, and I just didn't like them compared to the QSCs.

The K10.2 is definitely heavier than the 108, but its not that much larger dimensions wise Its about 10 pounds heavier. If you went with the K8.2 or CP8, those are about the same size as the 108 in both dimensions and weight. I wanted the extra headroom, so I just went with a 10 inch speaker.

A used QSC CP8 goes for close to what a new 108 goes for, so if you do plan to upgrade, I'd try comparing that to the 108 to see how you like them.
 
I have a CLR to run in stereo with my Headrush. I run it upright to deal with the extra low end. The CLR is supposed to be ultra flat, and if true, the Headrush is lacking high end.

But I have to say I love how they sound together.
 
I have been using a pair of 108's with my FM3 and FM9 at practice for months now. The boosted low end does get in the way sometimes (depends on the song), and there is some harshness to the treble that I find displeasing. I recently switched to running through a regular 4x12 powered by a tube amp power section (via FX return) and am pleased with the results. I still like the 108's due to their convience and size, but the experience has me curious as to what else is out there. I want to try a couple 1x12's with f12-x200's in them...
 
JJDon said:
View attachment 93420

Haven't cranked it past two yet either. The QSC is a big improvement over the Headrush 108 I had before and makes the FM9 sound great. I've mostly been playing it through headphones or a pair of 5 inch JBL FRFR speakers.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine just got a pair of the QSC, and is using them with his AX8. Previously he used a pair of the Headrush 108 then quickly switched to the 112 speakers because the 108s couldn’t keep up with his bands. The 112s were louder but I didn’t think they were very pleasant sounding, even though he’s well experienced with sound systems and had them EQ’d.

The QSC run circles around the Headrush speakers in every way. They are much more neutral sounding, they have plenty of power in reserve and are still pretty compact. He is very happy with them, especially when I’ll have been listening and wander up during break to congratulate, and thank him, because they sound that much better.

Onstage, when I’m playing with him using my FM9 and two EV PXM-12MP speakers, I hear a little difference in sound, but it’s like the difference of two types of guitar amps and cabinets … different but a nice blend and both are crisp and clear. I like mine and if I was looking I’d definitely go for the QSC.
 
ezvictor said:
I’ve been using a qsc k12 since my axe fx standard. Sounds really good to me. Always has. When I play live and use it as a floor wedge, I set the hpf to “external sub” and it really cleans up the low mess.
Click to expand...
@ezvictor

What a clever idea. I have just recently started using my QSC K10’s as an FRFR so I can take advantage of the FM3 & 9 modeling. I previously was playing through a Mesa Boogie MkV 25 and using the FM mainly as a pedal board for effects. After trying the QSCs I was a little disappointed that they are so bass heavy. Through trial and error I finally was able to tame a lot of the bass by changing the settings on the back to Vocal Boost for HF and Normal for LF. I also used the Output 2 Graphic EQ under Global settings to dial out a little more bass. But I never thought about switching the LF adjustment on the QSC to send the really low ranges to the non-existent sub. This may allow me to put some of the other adjustments back into a more normal range.

Thanks for mentioning that. I will give it a try tonight. 👍

BTW. After I got the QSC’s dialed in, I really like the way they sound. More functionality with the FM modeling and they move plenty of air just like an amp, but with more range. Cheers!
 
I thought I would share this post that someone typed up regarding the K10.2. I use this as an FRFR as well and struggled with what DSP eq to use. I always felt like the default had too much low end even with the sub crossover engaged. I switched to the studio monitor setting which was much better, but also much thinner sounding. Based on the post below that I am sharing, it seems that we should be making the following EQ adjustment on the back panel if using the default setting. According to this guy, it gives the flattest response…

The QSC 10.2 is a nice monitor, but it's not close to 'flat' at the standard setting, especially in the low end where it really matters. Look at the graph below, it's basically +4db in the OCTAVE between 80hz and 160hz!
To make a long story short, every adjustment you make to your settings in your modeler is skewed by your perception of the sound through the 10.2 monitor.

I've posted this graph for 10.2 users before. I took the measurements myself with an Earthworks QTC40 using ground plane measurements in a reflection free environment of almost 26ms.
I recommend to use these settings if you're doing any critical adjustments of your modeler with a 10.2 monitor.
K10.2 with and without EQ.jpg



As far as issues with direct comparisons with your Xitone monitor, you don't know what you don't know.
It's not safe to assume that because something cost X number of $ that equals flat frequency response.

Here is a graph of my 10.2 monitor with a Yamaha HS8 monitor, note the extended octave of usable frequency range available in the HS8 between 40-80Hz. The correlation is very good with the exception of 250-500hz, and that's within 2db. These are my measurements as described above.

HS8 vs. 10.2 w:EQ.jpg



Below is a picture of various monitors while making comparisons of the original source (various amps and speakers) to the individual monitors, using a Kemper and direct profiles of the amps.
This isn't the final placement for the whole thing, it's from when I was setting up.
I've spent a few days testing in different environments like this, comparing multiple studio monitors and live performance monitors with the real thing (original amps and cabs), making efforts to standardize the monitor placement in various rooms to make decisions on preferred IRs.

How you go about standardizing a test environment that works for you is up to you, nothing is ever perfect. But making sure at least one reference monitor is performing as flat and optimally as possible, with measurement verification, is the first step to making any informed comparison.
 
Imagine that - a $1,000 speaker sounds much better than a $250 speaker. ;)

I tried the 108 and didn’t care for it. For an 8”, I liked the QSC CP8 much better. Seemed to have better clarity and good bass response for guitar without being “woofy” or boomy.

For a step up in output, I really like my DXR10s. I have a pair of those and wow. Much much better than the 108s. And while I haven’t tried the K10.2s, I would expect they would even be a step up from my Yamahas.
 
For PA speakers and monitors, I use all QSC. I love them.

One thing to mention about a topic in this thread, if you are using the feature for an external subwoofer to lower the bass in your monitor, you are still sending that same amount of low end to the FOH. I would suggest modifying your presets to take it out. Otherwise, you are leaning on a a soundman to take it out to clean the mix up out front. My theory is, get it right at the source.
 
JasonE said:
For PA speakers and monitors, I use all QSC. I love them.

One thing to mention about a topic in this thread, if you are using the feature for an external subwoofer to lower the bass in your monitor, you are still sending that same amount of low end to the FOH. I would suggest modifying your presets to take it out. Otherwise, you are leaning on a a soundman to take it out to clean the mix up out front. My theory is, get it right at the source.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I had not thought of that. I’ll give that some serious consideration. 👍
 
My place of employment (A/V company) has a dozen K12’s, 10’s and 4 8’s for small events. I only recently borrowed one for my FM9 for the first time and it sounded excellent. Not like an amp, per se but a lot more like you hope you sound coming g out of a good PA. Now I need to borrow 2 and do that in stereo :):D

But what I really need to do is compare the 3 models…
 
I strongly recommend making the eq adjustments on the speaker listed above to flatten it out and tame some of that base. I don’t need to use the subwoofer trick since I made that adjustment. You can do it right on the back of the speaker in the EQ section.
 
OP,
What are your feelings about the CP series, specifically the 8" and 12"? The K10.2's must be able to produce quality sound for the price tag. Was wondering if the QSC quality also reaches back towards their CP series...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom