Matrix FR212 (passive & active)

The Q12 is a different product, rated for 8 ohms. The speaker is rated at 260w and although impedance wise, the amp bridged and speaker match up, putting 1000w into a 260w speaker may not be the best idea. Parallel mode as you described or just using one channel of the amp in stereo mode with the Axe output set as mono (Sum L+R) would both be ok.
Thanks so much.
I use the axe (stereo, not sum L+R) with 2 cable from output 1, to the Matrix setted in stereo mode...every patch is mono and i use only the channel A of the Matrix....
Is it better Parallel?
Thanks
Cello
 
The differences aren't huge. More accurate time and phase alignment in the DSP is the major thing as well as any slight eq adjustments, mainly in the area where the HF & LF frequencies crossover, although it's already quite good in the passive. The DSP in the active version will allow us to do some cool stuff though. As has been mentioned before, we could add a rough "bedroom mode" with some eq adjustments for Fletcher Munson. Some of the other stuff we'll let slip as we work on them and get them right.


Does this mean the DSP will receive software updates as new "modes" are available?
 
Stereo ... the ins and outs of a stereo cab.

will there also be a stereo Matrix 212 cab in the (near) future?

One of the things we get asked all the time is "Will you be doing a stereo version of xxx". It may sound a simple question, and it may even appear there is a simple answer, but from where we sit there are some issues with producing a stereo cab. I thought I would share with you some of our reasoning and company ethos on this.

Lets first talk about stereo itself as a concept. We've all sat at home with a hi-fi, two speakers arranged 15 feet apart, and a comfy chair in the center, making something akin to an equilateral triangle. The basic stereo concept is that for optimum stereo effect, you need to be about as far away from the speakers as the speaker are apart. You may have stereo speakers on each side of the computer monitor, and you sit around 18" away. However it is arranged, the basic triangle is maintained and you get a pleasing stereo effect.

As you have probably noticed, if you move the speakers closer together, narrowing the triangle, the stereo effect is reduced. If you take this concept into the guitar world and a typical 2x12" cabinet, assuming it was stereo, then the optimum listening distance would be around 18" away. Certainly, 30 feet away in the audience, any stereo effect would be negligble. In our humble opinion, if you want true stereo, the best solution is to buy two cabs, put one on each side of the stage and give your audince at least a fighting chance of hearing the effect.

OK, so maybe you say "OK, yeah, I get that, but I'd still like the sort of 'pseudo-stereo' option, it gives the sound a lot more space and air". That may be true close up on stage. But heres the thing; on an FRFR cabinet, that would involve providing two bass and two HF units. If you look at the stereo content of a typical guitar signal, most of it is in the upper registers, in other words its the HF unit that will be carrying a lot of the stereo information. If we provide 2 HF units, one each side of the cab, firstly the audience wont really get much in the way of stereo effect. Both signals will arrive in both ears, with equal loudness, similar timing.

What you will get is massive phasing issues, particularly when the cab is used in mono. Given that not all patches have stereo content, even if wired up in stereo, you would end up actually playing mono for a lot of the time. You now have two HF units producing the same signal, your entire audience is now hearing your sound from two, closely spaced sources. Depending on where they are standing, they will hear peaks and dips as the sound arriving at the ear either cancels or re-inforces the sound form the other driver. With peaks and dips at regular intervals up and down the HF spectra similar to the teeth on a comb, this is referred to as "comb filtering". Forget +-3db flatness on the signal, +-20db peaks and troughs are the order of the day. Dispersion figures become meaningless as the constructive and destructive interference creates dead spots all over the soundscape.

Theres no magic that will solve that. No DSP or amusing arrangement of drivers can get around the phyiscs of the matter.

One option would be to build a unit with THREE HF drivers, a pair at the sides for "pseudo stereo", and a centre one for mono mode. Thats not a route we have chosen to go just yet, and it would need an amount of DSP trickery to make it work properly.

To our minds, there is little point in providing the flatest possible response, the most carefully controlled dispersion and then pretty much destroying it by providing two HF drivers. The correct way to do stereo is to buy two cabs, and try and get some spacing between them on the stage. The more distance you can get, the better the effect will be to your audience. If you are restricted in space, use a mono FRFR cab and at least all you audience will get the same carefully crafted, evenly dispered, high quality sound.

It would be simplicity itself to make a "pseudo stereo" FRFR cab, but we'd feel like we were cheating you. Its not the right way to do it, we build our products with passion and integrity. No short cuts, no snake-oil. Its not that it can't physically be built, its simply that deep down, we know its not the right thing to do. Maybe one day we'll just call "uncle" and give in to the requests. For now we have enough on our plate delivering products like the FR212 which really do deliver an impressive and accurate response and let your audience really feel the energy and clarity.

I am sure there are other arguments, but thats our current thinking anyway, we hope it helps explain our position. Its not that we don't listen, its that we want to "do it right", even if that means turning away a little business in the process.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your great reply! really appreciate that. I can totally see your points and will read it over again.

In our humble opinion, if you want true stereo, the best solution is to buy two cabs, put one on each side of the stage and give your audince at least a fighting chance of hearing the effect.

I already have two Mesa Thiele EVM12 cabs combined with a Matrix GT1000. But they are fairly heavy and also I miss some of the clarity of the sound that I have at home through my studio monitors. Some of the details are missing with the Mesa's, especially when you use pitch shifters and and delays. I use those a lot. I can understand that having a stereo 212 cab is not the best solution for the players perspective on stage. But what do think about micing a stereo 212 cab with two mics when it comes to audience perception? Will there be much difference as opposed to micing two 112 cabs? Don't want to change all my stereo presets to mono presets. That kind of spoils the fun for me of making all those nice stereo patches and the great stereo options on the Axe II.
 
But what do think about micing a stereo 212 cab with two mics when it comes to audience perception? Will there be much difference as opposed to micing two 112 cabs? Don't want to change all my stereo presets to mono presets.

Honestly? Don't try and mic up an FRFR cab. Theres no point. The best way to get your AxeFX sound into the mixing desk and out of the PA is to use the XLR's on the back of the AxeFX. Thats what they are there for.

If the FRFR cab is any good, it will reproduce exactly what is being put in. You will gain nothing by mic'ing the cab. You may lose something though. Unlike a traditional cab which has one driver, you have two drivers typically. An LF and an HF. Mic placement will be at best tricky. If its a true coaxial driver you might stand a chance. If its got separate HF and LF drivers, you stand little chance of getting a good result unless you use two mics per side, one for the LF and one for the HF ... and even then, the best possible outcome is that with a lot of time and effort you will get a result close to, but not quite as good as the signal coming out of the AxeFX in the first place.

In short, if the PA needs a feed and you are using FRFR, send direct from the AxeFX.

If you are using a traditonal cab and part of your sound is the added tone from the traditonal cab, then sure, mic it up. FRFR is supposed to be a "what goes in, comes out with nothing added or taken away" so the best solution for feeding the PA is direct in.
 
If you are using a traditonal cab and part of your sound is the added tone from the traditonal cab, then sure, mic it up. FRFR is supposed to be a "what goes in, comes out with nothing added or taken away" so the best solution for feeding the PA is direct in.

Yes you are absolutely right about micing a FR cab. It has no use. I was talking more in general about micing a stereo 212 cab with two mics as opposed to micing two separate 112 cabs. Will there be much difference? Or is it no use to mic a stereo cab because the speakers are too close together (too much spillover)? Sorry for the confusion.
 
Ah, right, OK. Sorry for that :)

If mic'ing a stereo traditional cab, keep the mics close, the usual 1" or so from the grille, and mic both speakers in the same place, but as far apart as possible, for example, mic 2" out from the centre, mic the left speaker at the 9 O'Clock position, the right speaker at the 3 O'Clock position.

We all have our favourite place to mic a speaker, depending on the tone we are looking for out of the PA, just keep the mics well apart, to minimise spill.

Most 2x12 cabs use a common internal space, so there is more internal mixing of sounds going on, so you get less stereo seperation than you would with 2 1x12 cabinets stood next to each other.

Hope that helps.
 
Does this mean the DSP will receive software updates as new "modes" are available?

It's certainly something being considered. Whether the technical and cost hurdles are worth going through or whether it's simpler to just incorporate the "most popular" DSP features and have them fixed has to be looked at.
 
Has anyone received their cab yet and if so would you care to give it a review? I am really interested but I definitely want to hear what other users have to say. There is only one video on line for me to go by.
 
Has anyone received their cab yet and if so would you care to give it a review? I am really interested but I definitely want to hear what other users have to say. There is only one video on line for me to go by.

Hi,
Mine is on its way to my Home. Planned for tomorrow. For halloween party I have a gig, and I'd really love to use my 2X12 for that gig tomorrow evening ( I've already setup my patches with my q12, so i hope there won't be many differences)..
I'll let you know as soon as I can!

Cello
 
Awesome thanks Cello!
I really am hopeful... It would be great to be able to create patches for studio use and then use the exact patch for live!
 
Awesome thanks Cello!
I really am hopeful... It would be great to be able to create patches for studio use and then use the exact patch for live!

Yes, but it's the same thing i do with my Q12,(i create my patch home and the exact patch i use live to my q 12 and to the PA) but a lot LLOUDERRRRR!!!!!!
 
What happened to the Vertical 2 x 12 FRFR Active with the angled front that you showed teaser pictures of?? Thats the one I would buy.
 
What happened to the Vertical 2 x 12 FRFR Active with the angled front that you showed teaser pictures of?? Thats the one I would buy.

Unfortunately it didn't live up to our high expectations sound wise. The FR212 do a good enough job on their end.
 
Hey John, I could use a hand here. I'm trying to decide between the nl212 and fr212 right now. I have been using a traditional 212 cab but have decided its time to get more out of the Axe Fx as far as a more full and pure tone with clean and heavy presets. I have been leaning towards the fr212 even though the nl212 is more like what I have been using only much improved (and a ton lighter to carry). The reviews seem to be through the roof for the NL cabs. Can the fr212 be used with cab sims off or is it really designed to be completely digital with the Axe Fx and a good (Matrix) amp?
Thanks for the help!
 
Hey John, I could use a hand here. I'm trying to decide between the nl212 and fr212 right now. I have been using a traditional 212 cab but have decided its time to get more out of the Axe Fx as far as a more full and pure tone with clean and heavy presets. I have been leaning towards the fr212 even though the nl212 is more like what I have been using only much improved (and a ton lighter to carry). The reviews seem to be through the roof for the NL cabs. Can the fr212 be used with cab sims off or is it really designed to be completely digital with the Axe Fx and a good (Matrix) amp?
Thanks for the help!

Correct Brogen. The Fr212 is purely FRFR and will only work with cab sims. It's not lightweight but certainly competes with the lighter "standard" 2x12s out there.
 
I'm looking at getting a frfr cab. Do you have a preference between the nl212 or fr212 ? What's the difference in sound between them ? Are there any trade shows coming up where will be given a chance to try them ?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom