[James-T]

Thought it was high time to compare side by side my digital rig (FRFR K12 powered monitor) versus my SF Vibrolux.

Both rigs are being pushed by a vintage MXR Micro Amp set at 3 o'clock (3/4). The Vibrolux has been blackfaced and has a boost mod as well. The boost was activated to give a hint of grit to the cleans.

This is interesting because the guitar's tone gets compressed by the powered monitor (and probably the amp modeller), which makes it sound like it's switched over from Jerry's rig to Bobby's rig. In fact I think the better mix is with the rhythm through the Fractal and the lead through the vintage amp. But I'd really like to hear thoughts from the community on this one.

The next experiment is to go side to side witrh powered monitor versus a power amp and 2x12 cab. I'm guessing that loosen's things up quite a bit tone wise.

Should I go digital for my gig this Friday night, or lug my Vibrolux? Bigger venue with a killer sound system being supplied.



Peace,

James

[PurpleTrails]

I tend to agree with your assessment of the vibrolux sounding better on the lead stuff, the fractal on the rhythm. And I think there is a bigger upside to the sound of the lead on the vibrolux than to the rhythm on the fractal, so I guess I am in the lug the tube amp out there camp.

Then again, when you're playing someplace where you don't have the dead quiet background you're working with here, and in front of an audience that isn't likely to be as picky as we are, will it really matter which one you bring?

[ccw3432]

Nice new guitar too! I really like the Viborlux leads quite a bit. Really nice clear tone and warmer than the Fractal. However the Fractal kind of reminds me of Jerry's tone during his last couple of years when he was playing Bolt through the PA. It doesn't exactly nail that later tone but there are definitely some of the same qualities I hear with the higher notes especially. There's a certain crispiness in it that I really like.

I like the rhythm sound on both, but if your other guitarist is doing a compressed Bobby tone the less compressed Vibrolux may serve the music better. So what are the specs on that Vibrolux (year, speakers, any mods?)?

[playingdead]

Coming at this from a different angle, James ... I have a Vibrolux Reissue that I put a pair of JBL K-110s in once upon a time ... that amp, played by itself, had the most beautiful and pleasing sound to it, something about the 10" speakers and the wattage just sounded terrific ... by itself. When I played it with the band, the guitar sounded thin and didn't cut through the mix of the instruments.

That lead me to a Twin head and a pair of E-120s which, by itself, sounded harsh, but in the mix, worked perfectly.

Then I went down the Fractal road ... using custom IRs of my E-120s and K-110s, and found exactly the same scenario -- playing the guitar by itself, using the IRs of the K-110s was much sweeter sounding and more pleasing than the E-120s, which sounded harsh ... but using it live, the K-110s sounded thin and did not cut.

The trouble with the scenario of comparing the Fractal played in a room by itself through a powered QSC monitor and judging the sound against a tube amp in the room is they are different beasts ... the Fractal is supposed to sound like a miked tube amp ... and it does that very well. The purpose of the QSC is to monitor the tone ... and with the QSC positioned like a wedge onstage I guarantee you will hear yourself better than you will with a 2X12 or 3X12 of E-120s behind you ... all that sound is blowing by you while the QSC is in your face.

My goal with the Fractal was to have my dialed in guitar sound be 100 percent consistent from venue to venue, system to system ... no need to tweak, grab knobs, use the bright switch or otherwise try to get it sounding "right" on stage ... because I knew it sounded "right" at the board. And the monitoring is always very consistent from my position onstage ... I hear myself perfectly and the guitar sounds right. But recording that sound coming out of the QSC might not sound "right" ... it's being reproduced from a woofer and horn instead of a single guitar speaker, the dispersion is different in the room, there are a million variables.

I ultimately decided that my end goal was better monitoring and consistent guitar tone to FOH, and that's what the Fractal allows me to do. I am now using an Atomic CLR coaxial wedge for my monitor and it is awesome. But at the end of the day ... I want it to sit properly in the mix and it does that well.

Really, to go apples to apples, it would be better not to push the sound into the Fractal and handle the entire signal within the Fractal, and then take that direct output as the comparison to the Vibrolux miked as it would be to the PA ... this is for the scenario I was after, which was sound in the room. Just jamming at a rehearsal or playing at home ... hell, I like my 68 Princeton.

I know I post this clip frequently, and this is actually the AxeFX Ultra, and I am using the 2 now ... nonetheless, that's the tone I wanted and it's sitting in the mix just right, to my ears. Twin simulation, spring reverb simulation, E-120 IRs, direct to FOH. I just don't have to change or touch or dial in a thing at gigs now, I plug the guitar in and get the same tone every time.



Bottom line ... the tone that sounds warm and pleasing to your ear is not necessarily the one that will sit in the mix like you want it to ... in my experience, it's harsh and bright but once it's enveloped with all the other instruments and acoustics, it sounds right.

[James-T]

Good advice Vic. I think I may give it a go with the QSC as a monitor, I'll use a different patch anyways which fattens up the tone. The patch I used was to compare apples to apples (something close to the Vibrolux). The thing about the demo, is when the Fractal lead first cuts in, it does sound sterile and up close, but my ears quickly grow accustomed to it and then, its like, well this sounds just fine.

I may experiment and run my 2x12 just for front of stage fill, because I don't have 2 QSC's and I know the placement of the PA will leave not as much of me right up front as perhaps there could be. But I hear you on the monitor position. I think it will make a huge difference on the stage. Last time we played that venue the stage sound was simply mud, but the recordings, both in the audience and from the board came out just fine. It's a cavernous 2 story space.

BTW that patch I used was your sweeter sounding K120's, but I have lots of patches with the E120's. On their own they sound more like direct through the PA, but get rid of the JBL honk, which gives me listening fatigue within a few songs typically because I do rehearse with the K12, and its really an easy tool to show up with at rehearsal.

BTW the Vibrolux has some vintage non JBL speakers in it. I know folks on this board give them a bad rap - but my amp tech/ guru has only seen one pair in existence and loves them. To me the sound very similar to a JBL 120.... and gets my strat very close to a sweet E72 tone.

What inspired you to ditch your K12's in favour of the Atomics? I've heard mixed reviews of the Atomics. You obviously groove on them. How are they in comparison?



Peace,

James

[playingdead]

The tube powered Atomic cabinets were not so great ... the CLR is a dedicated FRFR speaker with 2 class D amps. I had two K12s go bad on me -- I have pushed them hard since 2009 so I suppose that is not that bad.

Jay Mitchell designed the Atomic CLR, he is the guy who helped me with the JBL IRs off my own cabinets back in 09. The consensus is it's a step up from the QSC, especially for guitar as it's coaxial, and probably just a step below the Meyers, which cost a fortune. I am really happy with it onstage. It's 500 watts and plenty loud, different DSP EQ curves for whether it is used as a wedge or a cabinet.



They also make it as a cabinet.

http://www.atomicamps.com/products.htm

I still use a K12 where the cabinet used to be for front stage fill in larger venues.

[James-T]

To be fair to the demo, I mic'd the Monitor to compare how it sounds in the room (like a PA speaker in the room) to the VL which is also mic'd with the same microphone. It's an interesting experiment, and I'm glad I did it. It's just a different vibe. Not better, not worse, just different. I still prefer playing with a speaker cab or amp, but am quickly drifting towards using the monitor instead. I think in the larger venue this weekend it will be a better setup for sure. And the fractal really likes higher end guitars. LOL. Both this guitar and my ARIA Rev Sound II sound great through it. Particularly the Rev Sound because it has high fi super low output pick-ups. They are a great match for the Fractal.

I did a quick comparison to a direct line recording out of the Fractal and putting a mic in front of the monitor and surprise surprise, its splitting hairs telling the difference. Basically there are three ways to record the Fractal. What you hear out of a FRFR monitor (like a PA), what you hear direct line in, and using a power amp and guitar speakers - which a lot of Fractal users groove on - including the owner of the company - or at least that's my understanding.

A lot of our gigs are at smaller places in rural areas with out a large PA so we rely on the PA just for vocals. I think the monitors throw out sound a lot differently than a 2x12 guitar cab, and if you are behind one, well, you just can't hear it well enough if you are a drummer, so I can see why folks like using a power amp and their own cabs. Or if you have the $ to have a monitor and a stage fill out through 2 separate K12's. I know my 2x12 JBL's can focus and throw sound easily to the back of a club in smaller settings, and I also use a 1x12 E120 open back cab for smaller places.

.....Like if the house speakers are Mackie thumps (like the Bowen Island pub - here where I reside) why wouldn't you rather use a JBL's rather than direct your guitar though second rate PA speakers?

Peace,

James