New FBT Verve 12Ma owner- Basic Tips?

Lkdog

Power User
Picked up a used FBT Verve 12Ma this week and it came last night.

I have done a lot of reading from searches here, and as with a lot of products, it has many fans and some detractors.

That said- I was just wondering if there is any basic consensus on setup on the FBT itself with regard to High/Low/VOL levels, or in use with the AXE FX II EQ-ing?

I have simply dialed through some stock presets so far. Very pleased overall so far. It is a beast in terms of sound output and clarity IMO.
I have the FBT levels all set at zero. Have done no EQ changes on presets or to global in AXE FX II.

Thanks.
 
BTW: Don't use patches made without the corrective IR WITH the IR in place and vice versa, the difference is drastic!
 
After some experiments I have decided to just use the Output 1 graphic eq to make my 12Ma sound more flat like my studio monitors. Using merlin's corrective cab seemed like too drastic of a change for me. YMMV.
 
Reading the last two posts is kinda funny. ;-))

I'm not sure what is funny in your point of view. Let me clarify a bit. My reaction was not aimed at the fact that there is a difference between using your corrective IR or not regarding the Verve.
I hear a (subtle) difference between my nearfields (I create my presets listening to the nearfields) and the Verve; however the sound-difference does not bother me. It's clear to me (reading all your posts about the Verve) that it does bother you. Maybe you have (very) sensitive ears and I do not have this. So I'm not sure if this is a blessing (to me) or not?

So when you are comparing different monitor-systems (or even nearfields) to each other, they all (should) sound exactly the same (to make a decision about what is a good speaker)? And if not; what exactly is the "reference/leading" speaker-system?
 
Last edited:
I was not trying to put you or your decision down. What I find funny is that you found the difference with the corrective EQ not drastic and Sam found it to be too drastic.
 
I was not trying to put you or your decision down. What I find funny is that you found the difference with the corrective EQ not drastic and Sam found it to be too drastic.

I think Peter is referring to this :) I doubt if he wants to critize you, your ears or your taste in monitors for that matter.

Jens

Edit: and he managed to say that himself too...

Yes; I understand now. Sorry for my reaction. I could use an excuse that it was late last night, however I failed to see the comparison between me and sam. Again my apologies.
 
I read through the corrective IR thread...............

Pretty interesting.

How is it that FBT website shows a frequency analysis for the 12Ma that is relatively flat?
One would assume they have state of the art frequency analysis equipment- or did they do it in such a way as to make it favorable?
No pronounced dip shown at 2500 or spike at 7000 in their report, but who knows...........

I do have mine off the ground sitting sideways angled slightly up on a combo amp stand.

Still sorting through its character with no corrections.
Compared to the Mesa F-50 I was using (in Effects loop) it is a huge step up, but still in honeymoon phase.

Will keep trying it out stock for now and do more critical A/B with my KRK monitors.
 
Last edited:
The problem with using the Verve without corrective EQ is that you may program your patches for them, but they won't work on most other systems then. And when you do your patches on flatter speakers they won't sound right on the FBT.
 
I don't know what FBT uses to measure. I told them my findings, even sent the wedge to them, and they say it's fine. So I sold it...
The curve RCF publishes for the NX12-SMA is spot on with my measurements (and ears).
 
The problem with using the Verve without corrective EQ is that you may program your patches for them, but they won't work on most other systems then. And when you do your patches on flatter speakers they won't sound right on the FBT.

Got it.
I do my preset tweaking via my KRK Monitors and Sennhieser HD600 headphones which seem to translate well to each other.

When moving to my Mesa F-50 1X 12 combo (effects loop) I tried Cab ON/Off, and AMP On/Off and everything in between. Not good results usually so decided to go to a "Flat" monitor solution.


I will need to see how the presets translate to the FBT Verve 12Ma's now with some critical listening.
 
I don't know what FBT uses to measure. I told them my findings, even sent the wedge to them, and they say it's fine. So I sold it...
The curve RCF publishes for the NX12-SMA is spot on with my measurements (and ears).

Yeah- saw that they did not give you any feedback. Odd, but understandable. Most people do not do the critical testing that you do and they probably did not want
any internal engineering design philosophy to get out in public.
They may have chosen a method to test that gives them the best outcome.
 
Reading the last two posts is kinda funny. ;-))

I agree Peter, that is pretty funny!

The problem with using the Verve without corrective EQ is that you may program your patches for them, but they won't work on most other systems then. And when you do your patches on flatter speakers they won't sound right on the FBT.

I agree. I had this problem with my 12ma, so now I am using studio monitors to build my tones instead. It seems to be making a big difference already. I can hear so much more detail now, and hearing that detail allows me to make subtle changes to get the tone I really want. These tones should hopefully translate well to PA systems that I plug into at different venues.

I still use the 12ma for my stage sound and often for the whole room. I made sure to A/B the 12ma with my monitors, and I used the Global EQ to try to get the 12ma to sound similar to the monitors' output.

Anyway, that's just how I do it, but I'm pretty happy with the system. Of course I'm sure the RCA NX12SMA sounds much better and flatter, and yes, I would really like to have one, but the 12ma is working well for me thanks to the great tools in the axe-fx (global eq among them) and the help and shared information from the community here on the forum.

Thanks Fractal, Cliff, and the community!
 
Leave the FBT's controls flat and use my corrective EQ IR in a cab block last in the chain.

+1000000000

Until trying Peter's IR, I didn't realize how muc the FBT's frequency response was effecting how I dialed in my patches.
Even if I dialed in on Studio monitors, I still just had tweak a bit on the FBT, and it would just never sound exactly how I wanted out of FOH.
Using Peter's IR, my Studio patches translate VERY close on my FBT's.
I can't say that I'm not SUPER curious about the RCF....but for the time being, Peter's IR is getting me outstanding results.

If you don't hear a huge difference when using Peter's IR, I would run through the steps again to make sure you have loaded it properly. Not trying to be insulting, it's just that it really does make a drastic change in the sound of the speaker, and I'd be surprised if anyone didn't hear it immediately.

(Customer testimonial over...oh, and thanks again Peter/Merilin)
 
Had 2 FBT Verve 12ma and was never happy with them. Gave in and bought 2 RCF NX12-SMA`s.
So much better overall and much easier to dial sounds on.
Also translates well to my Dynaudio BM6A MKII`s and vice versa
 
Back
Top Bottom