Tested some FRFR monitors... more to test next week

J

jwilms

Member
Hi all, I have my axe for a week now, but I'm following these forums for a few months now. I ordered the Axe and an FBT 12ma at the same time, since I read on these forums they are the best choice. Had the FBT two weeks befor the Axe... so used it a few times as monitor on a gig, and wow, I was blown away with the quality and loudness of it. Couldn't wait for the Axe to be shipped...

Some background: I Started and learned playing with the GT series off Boss,then I played for three years on a Vetta, so I know how to tweak. But sold it when I finally heard the growling of my first tube amp...
Now, since 6 years,I used to play (and still have) a Marshall 2555 with V30 marshall cab (with G-Major), and loved that sound, but recently was tired of lugging this beast around to every gig and rehearsal.

Now, back to the axe, it arrived on monday...

Now, I have been tweaking a lot since I have the axe (I took two weeks off at work to fully test it all, still have a week to go) and was not really satisfied with the FBT. It seems I need to use a lot off EQ to make it sound to a bit usable, to have it create a really nice crunch or clean sound with balls like my marshall did.
And I know you guys talking about the difference of miced sound vs real cab sound, but when I place my mics carefully before the Marshall stack, I also have a great
sound in the FOH... So it should also be possible with the AxeFX. With the FBT it seemed to sound always a bit to middy for the crunch sounds, and a bit too dark for the clean sounds. I could get where I wanted with a lot of EQ tweaking, but that was a little dissapointment. I don't have to tweak my Marshall with lots of post EQ changes to make it sound great, or a fender blackface , or bassman... They don't need al lot of post EQ tweaking to make it sound great so why would I have to do that with a tool that emulates(is this the right word ? sorry for my english if its not) these sounds... So little dissapointment here with the FBT..

Now,the story changes...

I have a friend who owns a Renting company. Yesterday I asked him if I could use one of his better monitors to compare against my FBT.
Plugged it in at home... WOW !! Couldnt stop playing for 3 hours !! unbelieveable.

Where I had to tweak and Eq and search different cabs and amps combinations to get a nice tone with te FBT, with this monitor it was totally different !!!

Just had to choose an amp and a cabinet, and it sounded GREAT and it sounded like that original tube combination was with me in the room.
A 4x12 sounded like a 4x12. A 2x12 blackface cab sounded like a 2x12 ...
Whether I choose a blackface, AC30, or a Brit800 or a energyball, USA, ... whatever. Every amp sounded great and every amp/cab had his own sound, but all great.
Didn't even care to add delay ,reverb or any other effect. Just amp and cab combinations made me smile... The sound was so real and nice I played hours with just amp/cab combinations. It was like being in a big music store with all great amps and cabs I could try and play with,just with the turn of a knob.

I create flightcases fo a living, and develop pedalboards etc specialized for guitar players, so I get to try a lot of amps and gear here, so I know how real tube amps sound.
Well with this monitor I could make every amp/cabinet combination in the axefx sound great and like I was playing the real deal !!(didn't try out all combinations,I would still be playing then, but I'm talking the most obvious combinations ...)

Now, the downside of this is that this monitor is out of my budget range (aprox $4500, it was a EAW NT59 ). So now I'm looking for the best I can afford. Already asked for this monitor to loan it , but in weekends they are mosly rented for big gigs and events he does and he only has 10 of them :-(

Next week, normally tuesday I have the CODA Audio AP12 here. I read in a post that someone whas pretty impressed with this one. I can have it to try out for a few days (via the same guy, who asked a demo model) and if I like it, the price would be around 1900 Euro. So I hope that this monitor can live up to the sound of the EAW. Otherwise... It will be very difficult to find a setup within my budget for the axe, since I'm spoiled now with that sound through the EAW...

So my conclusion is (until now ) that the AxeFx is WOW, great tool, and it's capable of creating great tones. But it needs great amplification to do this FRFR.

I'll keep you guys posted about my findings of the Coda...

btw, Great forum, already learned a lot fomr it !! Great to have my first post here.
 
Cool info for sure. But I don't think there will be to many people on the board here that will drop $4,500 on an FRFR monitor.
 
Thanks for the info. It's threads like this that make me think of the Fratomic. This EAW is not coaxial - just like the Fratomic - so there's hope yet. ;) I wonder to what level of monitor quality Tom and the gang referenced when they were developing and testing the FRFR. If the Fratomic compares to these upper echelon monitors we're all in for a treat!
 
Not trying to slam a $4500 monitor (especially when I haven't even heard it) but I would like to suggest that this monitor would not be suitable for axefx use. To obtain the performance they employ complex filters modeled with a dsp chip. Your axefx output signal would go through another A/D conversion and processing. Their spec sheet mentions 2 msec latency which would be added to the latency of the axefx (another 2 - 3 msec? not sure) and now latency is an issue. That being said, I'm sure it's a slammin' monitor for most other applications.

Again, I'm not trying to be negative, just trying to contribute to this great community. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Didn't have any problems with latency or anything else. But it is not about the monitor itself, but about the BIG difference between a high grade monitor and a standard monitor. How the monitor creates its big sound (with or without DSP) doesn't matter. (I thought we Axefx guys are the last persons who would say digital processing in sound isn't good)
Aparently the EAW also has very good AD/DA converters,and a good DSP to remove all bad sounds you can get because of a horn speaker or because of a not-coaxial design.
But again, its not about EAW, it could also be L'Acoustics (which I want to try also), or maybe, and hoping Coda Audio that delivcers this same high-end quality.

My post was just about that the axefx can create great sounds, but to do so, IMHO, you also need good amplification to get the best out of this thing.
And for me, that prove is made with A/B the axe with the FBT and the EAW.

Offcourse the EAW is freaking expensive, but like Cliff sayd, you get what you pay for. And in this case its not just about sound, but total build quality and reliability in worst case scenarios. And those renting companies need this quality...
 
jwilms said:
Aparently the EAW also has very good AD/DA converters,and a good DSP to remove all bad sounds you can get because of a horn speaker or because of a not-coaxial design.
Click to expand...
Without taking specific issue with respect to the EAW monitor, this needs correcting: no signal processing - DSP or otherwise - can correct the more serious problems caused by the geometry of the speaker design. The term "geometry" includes the locations and shapes of all the elements in a loudspeaker, including the enclosure, transducers, and horn(s).

My post was just about that the axefx can create great sounds, but to do so, IMHO, you also need good amplification to get the best out of this thing.
Click to expand...
That is correct. I've been saying the exact same thing for years.

Offcourse the EAW is freaking expensive, but like Cliff sayd, you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...
In a given case, that may or may not be true. Sometimes (perhaps more often than you'd think) "more expensive" doesn't mean "better." What is more reliably true is that you don't get what you don't pay for.

There are further levels of performance beyond what the EAW can produce, and it is not necessarily the case that realizing the higher performance will increase the cost. Whether that increased performance will be valuable to a given Axe-Fx user is an open question. I can say unambiguously that it is valuable to me.
 
Im interested in the EAW v Coda report.

I was the one impressed with the Coda when I tried it - though it was against RFC Art Series, QSC K12 nad 122, 12ma etc - nothing as high quality as the EAW.

That said, the Coda is a co-axial design so that should help.

I cant even justify the Coda price of £1300, though Im hoping for similar results from the Atomic. If the Atomic doesnt perform as I hope, Ill be saving for the Coda while making do with my SLA-2x12 for now.

The EAW is also 15" driver, not the 12" of the Coda and 12ma. This makes a difference too.
 
paulmapp8306 said:
I cant even justify the Coda price of £1300, though Im hoping for similar results from the Atomic. If the Atomic doesnt perform as I hope, Ill be saving for the Coda while making do with my SLA-2x12 for now.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to your and anyone elses review of the ARFR versus the Coda or EAW, or any other super high end monitor! :). And of course the reviews comparing the ARFR to the verves/qsc, etc.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
jwilms said:
Aparently the EAW also has very good AD/DA converters,and a good DSP to remove all bad sounds you can get because of a horn speaker or because of a not-coaxial design.
Click to expand...
Without taking specific issue wit respect to the EAW monitor, this needs correcting: no signal processing - DSP or otherwise - can correct the more serious problems caused by the geometry of the speaker design. The term "geometry" includes the locations and shapes of all the elements in a loudspeaker, including the enclosure, transducers, and horn(s).

My post was just about that the axefx can create great sounds, but to do so, IMHO, you also need good amplification to get the best out of this thing.
Click to expand...
That is correct. I've been saying the exact same thing for years.

[quote:4j8b14en]Offcourse the EAW is freaking expensive, but like Cliff sayd, you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...
In a given case, that may or may not be true. Sometimes (perhaps more often than you'd think) "more expensive" doesn't mean "better." What is more reliably true is that you don't get what you don't pay for.

There are further levels of performance beyond what the EAW can produce, and it is not necessarily the case that realizing the higher performance will increase the cost. Whether that increased performance will be valuable to a given Axe-Fx user is an open question. I can say unambiguously that it is valuable to me.[/quote:4j8b14en]
Jay. I'd love to see an affordable solution from you.

Never will, I read somewhere, not your cup of tea. But it would be wonderful to have an improved speaker without increased cost. ;)

How about a diy design plan with accessible components?
 
jwilms said:
So my conclusion is (until now ) that the AxeFx is WOW, great tool, and it's capable of creating great tones. But it needs great amplification to do this FRFR.

I'll keep you guys posted about my findings of the Coda...

btw, Great forum, already learned a lot fomr it !! Great to have my first post here.
Click to expand...
First of all welcome jwilms

I´ve stated over and over again the point what you just made - to get the best from the Axe Fx good FRFR amplification (monitors or IEM) is of key importance, and the pro monitors does not surpricingly run in circles around the consumer products, as they should do at their price point.
I for one got the Axe because of all the different possiblities for creating true tube amp tones and world class effects it offers in one 2 unit enclosure, BUT I wouldn´t have keept it if the tones were a compromise.
I´m very interested in hearing your finds once you get the Coda and perhaps other pro grade FRFR tested with the Axe Fx.
You are fortunate that you get to test your Axe Fx with these pro monitors and chose which is the best in a performance vs cost evaluation for you.
Enjoy and please report back.
RB
 
Dutch said:
Jay. I'd love to see an affordable solution from you.

Never will, I read somewhere, not your cup of tea. But it would be wonderful to have an improved speaker without increased cost. ;)

How about a diy design plan with accessible components?
Click to expand...

I've harbored a similar wish. With Jay's expertise I am sure this would, quite literally, rock.
 
I've thought about a Tannoy PowerV8 or PowerV12 ($2K and $3K Cdn), but I'm wondering if a less expensive path to something close might be their DC8i or DC12i with a separate power amp. The latter is not as "clean" a solution, and would require some mods for portable use.

jwilms, do you have access to any of the Tannoy solutions to evaluate?

Terry.
 
New guy here, Ultra ordered, sitting at door waiting for UPS.....

I have a pair of Radian RPX 112p's that I'm itching to try out with the Axe-fx. I don't have much in expectations for anything below 70hz with these boxes, but they are such a small footprint, and sound great on stage. Microwedges would be sooo sweet, but, well....they're not cheap.

Anyone using Co-ax boxes with the unit?
 
Dutch said:
How about a diy design plan with accessible components?
Click to expand...

"Working" on that very subject right now. In the early stage of selecting the right components.

It will probably move slowly, because I have very limited funding at the moment...

When the time's right, I'll open a specific thread. End of fall at best.

This is not my first DIY loudspeaker project (by far), but of course, I'd love to have an experienced engineer like Jay offering some insight (hint hint ;) ).
 
Dutch said:
Well, there are some Beyma coaxials that seem to be very good.

I like this one.
http://forum.speakerplans.com/compact-c ... page1.html

Although more of a guitar cab like appearance might be nice. And a means to angle it.
Click to expand...
Interesting. . . I have an old set of Tannoy 12" coaxials but but they are installed in a large cabinet (home stereo configuration). I wonder if something like this might work. I'd love to use them as a FRFR stage monitor, but I need them in a smaller package.

Terry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom