# Why FRFR feel different



## flint757 (Jun 5, 2012)

I hear all the time that frfr doesn't feel the same as a real cab hence some peoples apprehension for modellers and frfr setups. Even I notice a difference when going through my KRK's vs. going through my cab (but as the volume gets louder it is less distinguishable). So my question is, is there a scientific reasoning for why a guitar cab feels different? Is it the flat response? If so couldn't you use a parametric EQ to put the bump back in the sound?

What I am referring to is why does a cab feel like an "amp in the room" and an FRFR setup wouldn't?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jun 5, 2012)

I think you've already highlighted the major difference, which is how the speakers move the air relative to volume and position. Part of what makes an amp sound "good" is how it moved air, it's why cranked amps have that power, feel, and sound that's simply impossible to properly replicate at lower volumes in a live, in-room situation. If you crank that FRFR you'll start filling in what's "missing". 

Basically, a 12" speaker with horn (an FRFR) isn't going to push air the same way as four 12" speakers unless the volume is similar, even then, there's no promise it'll be the same.


----------



## vanhendrix (Jun 5, 2012)

This is a good question. I'm anxious to see what people have to say about the "amp in the room" effect. It's something we all feel but cannot truly describe


----------



## flint757 (Jun 5, 2012)

So your saying that with volume you can achieve basically the same thing? Is position less relevant to an FRFR setup? 

I just don't get it because I have 2 KRK RP8 G2's as my monitors/FRFR setup and I have a 2x12 so theoretically it should be the same amount of air moving wouldn't it? I hear the difference I just don't understand why there is a difference. It is perplexing me because I want to make a more optimum setup using my current cab, but I feel like this needs to be answered first because it'd be silly to make my cab more flat and full range if it is going to create the same result as my monitors.


----------



## ara_ (Jun 5, 2012)

Nice thread, just what I was looking for!
I'm considering switching from head+cab to Kemper+FRFR (have been considering for a long time, my co-guitarist is very sceptical...).
Do FRFR monitors beam less? 
The beaming of my 412 really annoys me, I either can't hear myself, or, if I take one step forward, right in front of the 412, I'm suddenly louder than everyone else.


----------



## Shask (Jun 5, 2012)

Using FRFR always bugs me when playing at home because it sounds like a recording of an amp instead of an amp. I am talking same basic volumes, which is a loud TV type volume.

I think a big reason is because in the room you have an amp and cab. You hear the cab. When you are using a modeler you are choosing a cab model and mic model. You don't listen to your amp with your ear an inch away from the speaker through an EQ filter like a mic. I think if you had cab models without a mic it might sound more like the amp in the room, but cab models/impulses are always associated with a mic...


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Jun 5, 2012)

^ agreed


----------



## ara_ (Jun 5, 2012)

Shask said:


> Using FRFR always bugs me when playing at home because it sounds like a recording of an amp instead of an amp. I am talking same basic volumes, which is a loud TV type volume.
> 
> I think a big reason is because in the room you have an amp and cab. You hear the cab. When you are using a modeler you are choosing a cab model and mic model. You don't listen to your amp with your ear an inch away from the speaker through an EQ filter like a mic. I think if you had cab models without a mic it might sound more like the amp in the room, but cab models/impulses are always associated with a mic...



What about band practice volume? And do you have any experience regarding the beaming?


----------



## TemjinStrife (Jun 5, 2012)

I think it's a function of the mic filter and the fact that you don't typically have your ear pointing at one tiny part of a cab.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 5, 2012)

Damn... Not sure whether or not I should sell my entire setup for a POD HD500 + FRFR speaker setup or Just get the POD and a power amp.


----------



## Winspear (Jun 5, 2012)

Shask said:


> Using FRFR always bugs me when playing at home because it sounds like a recording of an amp instead of an amp. I am talking same basic volumes, which is a loud TV type volume.
> 
> I think a big reason is because in the room you have an amp and cab. You hear the cab. When you are using a modeler you are choosing a cab model and mic model. You don't listen to your amp with your ear an inch away from the speaker through an EQ filter like a mic. I think if you had cab models without a mic it might sound more like the amp in the room, but cab models/impulses are always associated with a mic...



This is a good point. It makes me wonder, how would it be using an impulse that is captured with the mic further away, more like the ear? Granted, you'd be duplicating that effect unless you were sitting right next to the FRFR..


----------



## boltzthrower (Jun 5, 2012)

ara_ said:


> Do FRFR monitors beam less?
> The beaming of my 412 really annoys me, I either can't hear myself, or, if I take one step forward, right in front of the 412, I'm suddenly louder than everyone else.



Yes, in my experience FRFR monitors are much less directional than guitar cabs.

You could also try putting beam blockers on your guitar guitar cab. You'll need to re-EQ your amp, and might even need an outboard EQ to get it sounding right, but once you get it set up it makes a huge difference.


----------



## ara_ (Jun 5, 2012)

boltzthrower said:


> Yes, in my experience FRFR monitors are much less directional than guitar cabs.
> 
> You could also try putting beam blockers on your guitar guitar cab. You'll need to re-EQ your amp, and might even need an outboard EQ to get it sounding right, but once you get it set up it makes a huge difference.



A beam blocker would be a good idea, but I was considering switching to a Kemper because of other reasons as well (weight, all effects in one box, different sounds for different songs, home recording, eq switchable across all "channels"...), so this would only be another reason.
If I keep my Powerball II, I'll go for a beam blocker for sure!


----------



## TheKindred (Jun 5, 2012)

I don't have any direct experience with beam blockers.

Are they actually worth purchasing and installing or are they along the same lines as the Sonic Maximizer (i.e. pretty useless beyond very specific and almost negligible applications)?

It's pretty rare that I have ever actually seen one on stage. Are they primarily for for live application or beneficial for recording /micing purposes as well?


----------



## noUser01 (Jun 5, 2012)

Just to chime in here... theoretically, couldn't you build an FRFR 4x12 or 2x12 and get the best of both worlds? I'm sure there'd be a bit of compromise and it might not be FULLY FRFR but...

Also, I have to say regarding the "sounds like a recorded guitar and not an amp in the room" argument, I agree. That being said, you'd be surprised how much that can change with a bit of reverb, just a TINY bit makes a HUGE difference sometimes. Plus, to be honest, some tones just don't have that "amp" sound, whether dialed in to a real amp or a modeler. On the flip side, some tones just sound like a real amp whether or not it actually is.


----------



## Bevo (Jun 5, 2012)

Most of the shows I have been to have the guitars going into the PA and sound amazing. I think the big difference is the amount of air that moves and the tuning of the speakers in a close environment. 

A concert sounds much different than your jam.
At your jam your feeling the air move and the punch in your chest.
The PA is more like the concert, you have that volume but not that punch and air movement.

I have had lots of gear but now use the PA and HD, the loss of the punch was given up but the benefits are greater for how I use my system.


----------



## JPhoenix19 (Jun 5, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I just don't get it because I have 2 KRK RP8 G2's as my monitors/FRFR setup and I have a 2x12 so theoretically it should be the same amount of air moving wouldn't it?



Not really. The KRK's are more for near-field monitoring, right? That'd put it in a whole different ballpark of how it'd sound at band volume.  Or am I interpreting it wrong?


----------



## flint757 (Jun 5, 2012)

ConnorGilks said:


> Just to chime in here... theoretically, couldn't you build an FRFR 4x12 or 2x12 and get the best of both worlds? I'm sure there'd be a bit of compromise and it might not be FULLY FRFR but...
> 
> Also, I have to say regarding the "sounds like a recorded guitar and not an amp in the room" argument, I agree. That being said, you'd be surprised how much that can change with a bit of reverb, just a TINY bit makes a HUGE difference sometimes. Plus, to be honest, some tones just don't have that "amp" sound, whether dialed in to a real amp or a modeler. On the flip side, some tones just sound like a real amp whether or not it actually is.



Well in the axe-fx you can disable the mic and even if I leave the mic and cab on going through a 2x12 things just sound different. (in terms of feel)

Here is my thing about the putting frfr speakers in a 2x12 or 4x12, why would it sound more like a cab and less like frfr? That is the aspect I don't quite understand. I realize an actual frfr setup is tuned all the way down to shape and box size so there is that difference, but I don't get why that would push more air than a regular frfr setup. (same speaker should create the same amount of movement I'd think)



Bevo said:


> Most of the shows I have been to have the guitars going into the PA and sound amazing. I think the big difference is the amount of air that moves and the tuning of the speakers in a close environment.
> 
> A concert sounds much different than your jam.
> At your jam your feeling the air move and the punch in your chest.
> ...



But what creates that punch?



JPhoenix19 said:


> Not really. The KRK's are more for near-field monitoring, right? That'd put it in a whole different ballpark of how it'd sound at band volume.  Or am I interpreting it wrong?



No you would probably be right. Is this maybe why people seem to think there is a difference because most people are playing through monitors rather than full blown PA setups? The thing that confuses me is people use more frfr like speakers in a cab (not perfect) and it feels like an amp in the room, but you put it in a tuned box and all of a sudden (in my experience and what I seem to be reading all the time) it doesn't have that same feel. Is this simply because of the beaming and the EQ hump most guitar speakers have even when attempting to be close to frfr?


----------



## boltzthrower (Jun 5, 2012)

TheKindred said:


> I don't have any direct experience with beam blockers.
> 
> Are they actually worth purchasing and installing or are they along the same lines as the Sonic Maximizer (i.e. pretty useless beyond very specific and almost negligible applications)?
> 
> It's pretty rare that I have ever actually seen one on stage. Are they primarily for for live application or beneficial for recording /micing purposes as well?


 

You will want to take them off for recording, 'cause you know, they block the speakers, so you're very limited as far as mic placement goes. I have recorded with them on and it still sounded good, but probably not optimal.

In a live situation, generally I don't think it makes a difference to what the crowd hears because in most settings they just hear the PA anyways, but it will still sound better on stage (if you rely on your actual cabs and not a monitor).

I guess the main point of the beam blockers is rehearsal - the whole band hears the same thing (more or less), rather than ice pick highs from the front of the cab and muffled-ness from the side.

Sry for derail.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 5, 2012)

"Originally Posted by OIO 
i think the 'amp in the room' feel comes from the fact that an 'not-miced' amp doesnt have the dynamic compression that happens in the micing. not cause the speaker is for guitar or FRFR. it has to do with transients not frequency response. Id like to be corrected if its wrong assumption."

Saw this in the gear page so it is because of the model settings then? In this case if you miced an amp and cab then ran it through the same type of cab elsewhere would it also lose the "amp in the room" sound? Also, if this is in fact the case does this mean that it would in fact be possible with a Kemper or Axe-fx to dial out that tone? If I understand this notion correctly then it wouldn't matter if you used FRFR Pa type setup or a guitar cab as long as the volume was there for the moving air effect. 

It is all so perplexing since the only difference is what the speaker is placed in and the added tweeter.


----------



## walleye (Jun 5, 2012)

my philosophy: the audience doesn't "feel" your guitar cab on stage, they "feel" the sound coming out of th eFRFR FOH speakers, so learn to like what they have to like and get to know your new friend, frfr


----------



## flint757 (Jun 6, 2012)

Well I was considering taking my 2x12 putting a divider in it and putting some flat response speakers in it and then maybe add a tweeter in a separate smaller box with an L-pad for attenuation (and a crossover) so I can adjust it or just eliminate it all together (mainly because I have no clue where i'd put a tweeter in my 2x12). But then I'm thinking if it doesn't retain the same aspects we all love about cabs then whats the point. Note this only an option mostly for financial reasons because I don't want to by another set of near fields or a cheap PA (so not entirely for the feel or "best of both worlds" if that is even true). I'd like to get a really good FRFR setup that can get loud no problem and out of current setups the cab seems to always be louder.

Either way whatever I do it needs to be passive. So any passive PA's/FRFR that are good enough for shows and home that are out there? I've come across the Atomic Cab, Atomic CLR and Matrix Coaxial that aren't released yet (anyone have a date on that?), but almost everything else I've come across seem to be near field monitors which I don't need since I have the KRK's (although they seem to color my sound a bit). And on the other side of the coin I have come across the Delta Pro 12A, EVM-12l and Beta 12CX for my 2x12 idea with either an Eminence super tweeter or a piezo tweeter. Any other suggestions or ideas out of these choices would work best?

I'm still perplexed by it all, but it seems like no one has an exact answer so at best I can only assume that the loose and large nature of a cab must have a big effect on the tone we expect to hear out of an amp/cab setup.


----------



## Rook (Jun 6, 2012)

My take on this comes from a couple of angles:
1) The volume thing; many people use settings on things like the Axe FX which mimic the amp having the volume turned up. Having this feel at a low volume isn't 'natural' in comparison to a real amp and makes it seem a little strange. As you bring the volume up however you get the sort of dynamic response you're expecting.

2) When playing through near field monitors particularly, you're not going to feel it at all, we're talking about a very even sound ad actually pretty low SPL, the reason it seems as loud as it even does is purely because you sit 12-24" from the speaker at head height. 

3) Crossovers in FRFR setups won't help, you'll get subtly different dispersion patterns from either speaker - when they're both staring straight in your face as they're intended this isn't really noticeable, but if you stand somewhere else in the room it won't project like a huge 412, but like a 112 with slightly clearer high end.

4) The low end; many people, myself included, don't dial in low end like it naturally comes in a big tube amp. I find that rumbly, uncrontrolled low end that shakes the windows an pisses off te neighbours really very annoying and it's not really constructive to the live mix or my recordings. I bet if people made more generous use of the Depth or Resonance controls or EQ'd in some very low end on an EQ after their amp settings, the amp in te room feel woul be enhanced infinitely.

To be honest, it doesn't feel quite like playing a big tube amp through a 412 if you move out of the direct field for either speaker, however my Roadster sounded like utter crap at the kind of levels I play my guitar at at the moment, and for the trade-off of simply having to stand in front of my monitor (I very often sit) its not a huge deal.


----------



## 4Eyes (Jun 6, 2012)

simple reason - when using a cab, you hear amp through guitar speakers. when using FRFR you hear amp through guitar speakers captured by mic at certain position which takes out this "amp in the room" feel and make the guitar sounds more like recorded guitars, because that's the exactly the same way how the guitars are being recorded. that's the whole magic.

for me, as a hobbyist who play most of the time at home, I prefer the second way, because guitar sits better in the mix when practicing with other instruments or my favorite tracks. but yes, cranked amp through big cab is fun to play


----------



## noUser01 (Jun 6, 2012)

I feel like if you put FRFR speakers in a 4x12 it would help in a way. A typical FRFR setup doesn't have a wood/tolex construction for one. I think that would vibrate more than a bunch of plastic and metal. But then again, there are some FRFR's that are built similar to cabs... The other difference is people running an FRFR setup usually aren't running more than one or two speakers, usually one. Whereas 4 speakers in one unit could be different.

Again this is all just hypothetical, and could be completely wrong. I'm just brainstorming...


----------



## Bevo (Jun 6, 2012)

Lots of great ideas here but enough theory and time for practical exercise.

See if you can rent/borrow or even spend some time with your rig and the comparable PA speaker. Do an A/B to see what you feel is the good and bad points with each.

That will answer all your questions then you can update us!


----------



## 4Eyes (Jun 6, 2012)

you can't simply make a sound captured by mic to sound like the gutiar cab withou mic by putting FR speakers into a guitar cab. it does not work in this way. you guys have to consider that each mic has it's own characteristics and placement of the mic has the critical effect on the captured sound. you can't capture that amp in the room feel by one mic. you can capture something which is similar to this by using multiple mics in front of the cab and also by using ambient room mics, but I'm not sure if this kind of sound is suitable for all music styles. for example: single sm57 became an industry standard for rock/metal tones.

again it's up to you what are you after, but I thought that people should be after clear band sound, which can by achieved by micing instruments and putting them in the right place in the mix, instead of fap-ing on the amp in the room feel which in the band context causes mushy and not clear sound.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 6, 2012)

I didn't mean sonically amp in the room (tone changes when you move). I mean the push you feel, but apparently that is simply a numbers game ( volume, number of speakers and rms rating, correct?). I could care less about mic or no mic because I've played my 11r and axe fx through my amp and cab and my monitors. Despite the 'mic' it still feels like an amp in the room by my definition it least. My issue is I can't do both I either have to modify my cab or sell it all and by a good frfr setup that can reach louder volumes.


----------



## bhakan (Jun 6, 2012)

Why go to all the trouble of getting a FRFR system that sounds as good as your 2x12, when you already have a 2x12 that you like the sound of? If you get this huge FRFR system that can push the same amount of air as a speaker cab, it isn't going to be lighter than your 2x12, so why not just stick to your cab? (I may have missed some info though, as I only skimmed the last couple posts)


----------



## Tyler (Jun 6, 2012)

I for whatever reason prefer the sound of my FRFR rather than my old 4x12. Mostly cause of the versatility that it can sound like more than one type of cab, while a 4x12 is only gonna sound like that one specific one to an extent. If you want to push more air, you could always run stereo with the FRFR and get a similar feeling but it wont be the same. Sometimes its all a matter of trial and error to find out what you prefer


----------



## flint757 (Jun 6, 2012)

bhakan said:


> Why go to all the trouble of getting a FRFR system that sounds as good as your 2x12, when you already have a 2x12 that you like the sound of? If you get this huge FRFR system that can push the same amount of air as a speaker cab, it isn't going to be lighter than your 2x12, so why not just stick to your cab? (I may have missed some info though, as I only skimmed the last couple posts)



The cab is great with my amp and okay with the modellers. It feels like a cab either way, but the modeller's would sound better with some speakers that weren't tuned a particular way so they need to go regardless. I need some flat response speakers or a PA to achieve this. 



nellings6 said:


> I for whatever reason prefer the sound of my FRFR rather than my old 4x12. Mostly cause of the versatility that it can sound like more than one type of cab, while a 4x12 is only gonna sound like that one specific one to an extent. If you want to push more air, you could always run stereo with the FRFR and get a similar feeling but it wont be the same. Sometimes its all a matter of trial and error to find out what you prefer



Yeah i figure that's how things will go, but that is so expensive and time consuming


----------



## flint757 (Jun 7, 2012)

Fuck it, I think I get the why part now and my cab idea is really complicated and I'd have to tear it up so I'll just sell it and by a PA/frfr setup.

Any suggestions?

I've looked up Atomic, Matrix, Carvin TRX12N, Carvin PM153 and many more. So any suggestions on these or something else?


----------



## Tyler (Jun 7, 2012)

flint757 said:


> Fuck it, I think I get the why part now and my cab idea is really complicated and I'd have to tear it up so I'll just sell it and by a PA/frfr setup.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> I've looked up Atomic, Matrix, Carvin TRX12N, Carvin PM153 and many more. So any suggestions on these or something else?



If you want a good bang for your buck, Alto TS112a or 115a


----------



## flint757 (Jun 7, 2012)

nellings6 said:


> If you want a good bang for your buck, Alto TS112a or 115a



Yeah I've come across a couple threads about that it seems quite popular. It sounds like guitar center carries them so I'll probably just take my gear up there one day and try some different things out.

I believe it is powered though, any passive suggestions?


----------



## ara_ (Jun 7, 2012)

There is a passive version of the Alto TS series. (Alto Professional - TRUESONIC Series > TS115 for example)


----------



## walleye (Jun 7, 2012)

bhakan said:


> Why go to all the trouble of getting a FRFR system that sounds as good as your 2x12, when you already have a 2x12 that you like the sound of? If you get this huge FRFR system that can push the same amount of air as a speaker cab, it isn't going to be lighter than your 2x12, so why not just stick to your cab? (I may have missed some info though, as I only skimmed the last couple posts)



if you can replicate the sound of your 2x12 then you can feed that exact sound to the front of house speakers when you play live; the audience will hear exactly what you want them to hear, whereas if you used a real 2x12, the sound guy would capture some miscellaneous aspects of the cab and hope for the best. don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with micing up a cab live, it usually sounds fine, but if you can do better with IRs then do it


----------



## Eric Christian (Jun 9, 2012)

flint757 said:


> So my question is, is there a scientific reasoning for why a guitar cab feels different? Is it the flat response? If so couldn't you use a parametric EQ to put the bump back in the sound?
> 
> What I am referring to is why does a cab feel like an "amp in the room" and an FRFR setup wouldn't?



I'm white trash from the hills of Oregon but even my simple mind can understand the fact that a 4x12 cabinet, especially one driven by a tube amp projects a resonance and timbre that no powered monitor or modeler with cabinet sims can replicate. More than just hearing it, you also can feel it in your body. I would guess it has a lot to do with the wood the cabinet is made out of as well. Only when that same 4x12 is mic'd and fed into the house does that output sound the same to me.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 9, 2012)

Eric Christian said:


> I'm white trash from the hills of Oregon but even my simple mind can understand the fact that a 4x12 cabinet, especially one driven by a tube amp projects a resonance and timbre that no powered monitor or modeler with cabinet sims can replicate. More than just hearing it, you also can feel it in your body. I would guess it has a lot to do with the wood the cabinet is made out of as well. Only when that same 4x12 is mic'd and fed into the house does that output sound the same to me.



Yes but you doubled the number of speakers. I'm saying if a 2x12 with 2 speakers and 2 12 inch PA speakers were both being outputted the same thing (my modellers through my amp still have that same feeling maybe only to a slightly lesser degree if any) why don't they feel the same. It is irrelevant though i get it, it is more than one factor. It is the wood, dimensions, the overall fit, projection (beaming) and volume from what I've gathered online and this thread.


----------



## 4Eyes (Jun 9, 2012)

as I said earlier, you can't simply compare two different sounds. guitar cabinet itself and simulation of guitar cab *captured by mic* are two different things and they wont sound same or give you the similar feel, doesn't matter what size of speakers or how much of them will you use. mic acts like another EQ in the signal chain. if you are going to use cab simulation it will always be the simulation of the whole chain cab+mic, there is no technology which could emulate only cabinet itself, yet.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Jun 9, 2012)

If you were to theoretically make a realistic simulation of guitar speakers through a FRFR setup, you'd need to use a flat response measurement mic (expencive stuff) and flat response speaks (at least as flat as possible). You'd then have to make an impulse or something of that, and basically define that as "flat". Then you'd have to change the speakers to v30's or t75's or whatever you're simulating, make impulses of that without moving anything, and then have the software measure the diffence between the two. It should then apply only the difference to the signal, and then you'd have a fairly accurate representation of the speaker itself, rather than the mic'd sound of it coming through speakers.

You would also have to figure out things like speaker dampening and movement to make it truly realistic, but as far as tonality goes that should get you close.


----------



## flint757 (Jun 9, 2012)

^^^That would be a lot of work and money, but awesome.

And 4eyes your missing my point because I can run a cab sim (with the mic obviously) through my actual cab and it still feels different. The things I listed in my post prior are probably the explanation for those differences. IMO yes, if I pick V30 cab sim I'll get the mic too and I agree that will make it sound different than a V30, but moving around will still alter the sound. The simulation can't remove that since that is after the output, thus has no effect on the feel of what I'm talking about. It does change the feel, but it is still there even when the sim is through my cab (cabs not disabled) whereas through my monitors it disappears. So that being the case I'm 99% certain it has to do with speaker choice, material and the type of box it is in. It isn't an EQ problem otherwise you could theoretically dial it out with a parametric EQ (or it least I'd assume you could).


----------



## Bevo (Jun 10, 2012)

When I tried a bunch of PA cabs one thing I noticed was the headroom of a more powerful cab, I went powered cab.

The 1-200 watt range didn't have the punch or tone at higher volume.
I went 550w and never go over 25% which makes the sound feel effortless and powerful. 
Another benefit was the dynamic of picking hard/soft for tone or volume.

End of the day they are SS amps so don't cheap out on watts..


----------



## flint757 (Jun 10, 2012)

Okay so what power rating do you use because it seems like every speaker companies list several. Which one is the actual rating? I assume it is continuous, but then again I think even the rating on guitar speakers is peak. Sometimes they list RMS, peak, continuous, programming. As an example for this PA what power rating is the important one?

Alto Professional - TRUESONIC Series > TS115


----------



## walleye (Jun 10, 2012)

i think a big part of it is the different power capacity of each speaker type. a V30 is a 30 watt speaker (right..?), a qsc powered speaker is 1000 watts. hen you crank a v30 cab, the speaker quickly gets overloaded and starts spitting angriness (which everyone loves). for a FRFR to get to that level however is very undesirable, because a FRFR speaker breaking up loses its flatness and sounds pretty terrible in general. So on the one hand you have deliberate breakup of a guitar speaker (and thus the feel) and on the other you have great lengths taken to make sure the fRFR doesn't break up (thus its funtionality), and therein is your difference in feel.

^^this is all my own educated guesswork from what i know so far about it


----------



## flint757 (Jun 10, 2012)

V30 is more than 30 watts because I had a 4x12 for my Mesa with V30's and that would only equate to 120 and the amp is 150. Don't know off hand the power rating though.

I'm sure speaker breakup is also relevant, but cabinets built for metal are actually designed not to breakup because the tone comes from the amp itself and yet they still feel different. Speaker breakup is more common in blues than any other genre.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 10, 2012)

V30's are rated at 60 watts, I believe.


----------



## minty (Jun 30, 2012)

hi all, my first post, I'm also considering going Axe FX II and FRFR cab but as you all know there's little to no info out there yet, one thing I came across a while ago was this cab from Jet City, any of you guys heard of or seen this cab in the flesh?


----------



## flint757 (Jun 30, 2012)

I've heard it's a good cab, but not technically FRFR. It apparently is a good compromise though between cab and FRFR PA setup. If you want truly FRFR that is monitors/PA's.


----------



## minty (Jul 6, 2012)

I can't help thinking a couple of powered FR wedge monitors might be more useful than backline, as long as the PA is powerful enough to deal with audience levels


----------



## flint757 (Jul 8, 2012)

It's possible and the nice thing is if the PA setup on location happens to suck you now have a comparable backup.

I think I've decided to get the matrix gt1000fx and verve 12m passives for my new setup. I don't want powered speakers because I like the idea of having a power amp if I need to go through a cab or something. ALl that needs to happen now is I need to sell some shit. 










or max out a few credit cards


----------



## minty (Jul 9, 2012)

flint757 said:


> It's possible and the nice thing is if the PA setup on location happens to suck you now have a comparable backup.
> 
> I think I've decided to get the matrix gt1000fx and verve 12m passives for my new setup. I don't want powered speakers because I like the idea of having a power amp if I need to go through a cab or something. ALl that needs to happen now is I need to sell some shit.
> or max out a few credit cards




re the GT1000FX, are you going for the 2 unit high version?, apparrently it runs cooler and quieter than the 1U version, 
and they are the same price, I think I'll be getting the 2U


----------



## flint757 (Jul 9, 2012)

Yeah I'm thinking 2U it's just one more rack space and I'm not all that concerned with having a super condensed rig.


----------

