Anyone compared TS110A DBR10 L2M - views?

[edstar1960]

Has anyone directly compared using the HD500 or HD500X with the ALTO TS110A with the YAMAHA DBR10?

 

And has anyone compared either of those speaker options with using the HD500 or HD500x with the Line 6 L2M?

 

If so - what were your views - how did they compare?  Are the more expensive Yamaha and Line 6 speakers worth the extra?

 

Thanks.

[maxnew40]

For me the L6 Link digital connection on the L2 speaker is something that the others just can't offer. Also some of the speaker modes the L2 offers are not available on those other speakers. If any of the features are important to you it won't be good comparison.

 

-Max

[cruisinon2]

For me the L6 Link digital connection on the L2 speaker is something that the others just can't offer. Also some of the speaker modes the L2 offers are not available on those other speakers. If any of the features are important to you it won't be good comparison.

 

-Max

That was my rationale for getting my L2T...however, once the global EQ came along it leveled the playing field a bit, because you can't use it if you're connected via L6 Link. So it depends on what's more important to you, having the global EQ, or the ability to have different speakers modes saved with each patch, and to trigger the change on the fly with the POD...it's one or the other. Had I known the global EQ was coming, I would probably have looked into a less costly FRFR option...that being said, I love the way the thing sounds, and it is a convenient package...just costs a bloody fortune.

[edstar1960]

For me the L6 Link digital connection on the L2 speaker is something that the others just can't offer. Also some of the speaker modes the L2 offers are not available on those other speakers. If any of the features are important to you it won't be good comparison.

 

-Max

 

Sorry Max I should have been clearer with my initial post.  Obviously the L2M has the speaker modes and the L6 link options which will add a premium to the price - but I was looking at just the "sound" comparison between the different options - specifically the ALTO TS110A and the YAMAHA DBR10 - and then the "sound" comparison between either of those and the L2M ignoring the other proprietary options you get with the L2M.     By the way - I already have an L2M and I am interested in getting a second cheaper and lighter backup for use at rehearsals hence the question about the other two which seem to be mentioned a lot.   Also as Cruisinon2 has mentioned if I want to use the new GLOBAL EQ, I have to lose the use of L6 Link which takes away one of the big advantages of the L2M. 

 

I am just interested if anyone has done a direct comparison between the TS110A and the DBR10 and what they thought, and as a bonus whether anyone has compared them to the L2m and what they thought in that case too.

 

Thanks for chipping in though.   

[cclement]

I did listen to the DBR at GC when I bought my Altos. It's quite good. But for me, price was the big motivator. I don't gig with my band very often (it's just for fun), so I couldn't justify the costs of the Yamaha or Line6 speakers. Also for my needs, the L2M was a bit overkill.

 

YMMV.

[cruisinon2]

Admittedly, my FRFR experience is limited, and obviously no two speakers are ever going to sound identical...But hat being said, I would expect there to be somewhat less of a difference from one FRFR speaker to another, as compared to what you would hear if you were to run the same amp through a Marshall 4x12, and then a Boogie. I don't think that you would end up wildly disappointed with any FRFR set-up.

[edstar1960]

Admittedly, my FRFR experience is limited, and obviously no two speakers are ever going to sound identical...But hat being said, I would expect there to be somewhat less of a difference from one FRFR speaker to another, as compared to what you would hear if you were to run the same amp through a Marshall 4x12, and then a Boogie. I don't think that you would end up wildly disappointed with any FRFR set-up.

 

Thanks for your advice.   You would think FRFR would mean pretty much all will sound similar but unfortunately the budget brands often don't do true FRFR - they get the speakers to sound good by artificially boosting low and high end for DJ market for example.  I tried the Behringer B210D and found that it just introduced too much top end and even after dialling it back with the onboard EQ still could not get the resultant HD500 output sound to not sound either harsh or woolly - the mid-range sweet spot seemed to be totally elusive - and it has not quite got the volume to punch through the mix in a live band situation.  That's why I snapped up an L2M about 2 years ago when it was on offer and overall I like it a lot but still struggle with boomy bass or ice pick treble because I have to set my sounds up at home and then end up playing louder at rehearsal or live in different rooms with different floors. For example the rehearsal room we have really enhances the boom and bass end to the point that our last rehearsal when I was playing the low E and A strings on one of my patches it sounded more like I was playing bass guitar through a bass rig than an electric guitar through an FRFR speaker emulating a Marshall amp with a 4x12 cab.

 

I would like something lighter and more convenient for rehearsal and for smaller gigs.

 

Currently the speakers in question cost about the following in the UK stores inclusive of VAT (20% sales tax):

 

£219 TS110A

£283 DBR10

£462 L2M

 

The DBR10 has more input and routing options but I can live without them if that is the only difference - not worth the extra £64.  If the TS110A is loud enough for band use and sounds as good as the DBR10 then clearly that is the one to try, but would be nice to hear from anyone that has directly compared the two, just to be sure.  If not, then I guess I will have to find a local store that stocks both that can also demo them for me to hear for myself.   Plus, if neither are in the ballpark of the L2M in terms of "sound" produced then I probably won't bother getting one.

[JTSC777]

The Altos are good.They have made me quite a bit of money.If you are doing any travelling even out of town overnite gigs get the Yamahas . They are very very tough. I dont tour anymore almost all of my live gigging is local so for me the Altos are fine.

[cruisinon2]

You would think FRFR would mean pretty much all will sound similar but unfortunately the budget brands often don't do true FRFR - they get the speakers to sound good by artificially boosting low and high end for DJ market for example. 

 

In retrospect, I can see that being a problem for some stuff... I avoid anything specifically aimed at the "makin' beats" crowd, just on principle. lol. Not my scene... :P

[edstar1960]

In retrospect, I can see that being a problem for some stuff... I avoid anything specifically aimed at the "makin' beats" crowd, just on principle. lol. Not my scene... :P

Ha ha    :D     Unfortunately the budget active PA speaker market is aimed at the "makin' beats" crowd  ....    the online video reviews I found for both TS110A and DBR10 were made by DJs.     :D

[radatats]

£219 TS110A

£283 DBR10

 

wow... over here the TS110 is $199 and the DBR10 is $399.  No brainer, get a pair of TS110's for the price of one DBR10.

[CipherHost]

I just picked up 2 Alto TS 112As from GC last night. I put them on stands, L/R XLR to each from 500X. 500X master volume initially set at 12 o'clock, but I did crank it all the way at times. Boost off and volume set to 12 o'clock on TS 112As, but I did turn on Contour at times. Tried some Paul Hindmarsh patches designed for DT25 (great sounding patches through my DT25 by the way, best I've found for my taste even though I have not gone through them all yet). I changed the PREs to FULL amps. I was disappointed with the clarity and volume of the 112s. Buzzy, nasty high end. Tried empty patch and found the same results. Tried Global EQ to cut 8K and above. I don't think I understand what I am doing with EQs. I am in Direct/Studio mode though. (I did remove the L6 link as I believe that auto changes out of Studio/Direct mode)

 

I did adjust the volumes on the 112s and found there was a big jump in volume in the last part of the volume pot. I was too apprehensive to play with the 112 volume pots all the way up. They say it is rated at 800 watts but 400 for continuous play. That is why I started at 12 o'clock, which looks like the max for Line input. I did try them at 9 o'clock but not a big difference from 12 o'clock.

 

So then I tried adding a Brit P-75 (full amp) to a black patch. Not impressed with this either. The Divided 9/15 sounded better. I admittedly suck at creating patches. 

 

My Taylor acoustic with a blank patch sounded very nice and clear but not very loud. All the reviews I have read or watched all touted how loud these speakers were so I must be missing the boat. I'll have to try it with the Vintage Pre.

 

So now I will search Custom Tone for FRFR patches. I will try them soon to see how other folks designed them. I will try the 112s on the floor rather than on stands. 

 

I don't think I really know what I'm doing here! First time with active PA speakers. Any suggestions or patches you think will help would be appreciated. I only list the following as I know it makes a big difference in patch use. The guitars I have to work with are a 1988 Clapton Strat with Gold Lace PUs, a 1984 Les Paul Studio Standard with Tim Shaw PUs, a Penco Les Paul copy I bought around 1980 that I put EMG 81/85 PUs into and a PRS S2 Mira among others. (No Tele yet but I am working on that.) I would really like to create/have patches I can use in different situations, i.e., guitar-POD-DT or guitar-POD-PA, etc.

 

Thanks!

[cruisinon2]

So then I tried adding a Brit P-75 (full amp) to a black patch. Not impressed with this either. The Divided 9/15 sounded better. I admittedly suck at creating patches.

 

Anybody who tells you that they achieved instant tonal nirvana with the 500X is either an idiot savant, extraordinarily lucky, or lying through their teeth...and I'll bet heavily on the latter.

 

As a recent FRFR convert myself, the biggest difference I found with creating patches compared to my "traditional" rig, was mic choice. Despite being the "wrong" way to do it, I had been running in studio/direct mode with full models with my amp/cab rig already. No matter what I did, I could not get a usable tone with pre-amp only models and the "correct" output mode when running into a tube power amp and 4x12 cab. But with studio/direct, and a lot of experimenting with mic choice, I got what I needed. When I migrated to FRFR, I didn't really have to tweak very much, except for the mic choices...what I had been using for most patches with the amp/cab set-up didn't work at all for the L2T, but once I found the right mics, all was well.

 

Then I found Peter Hanmer's video tutorials on using the parametric EQ that were posted here recently...that was the last piece of the puzzle. Excellent videos, clearly explains how to use the parametric EQ'S to dial out that top-end fizz. Do a quick search and you'll find them...definitely worth watching.

 

You'll get there...just a lot of trial and error.

[cclement]

I've got the TS110A, and I've been experimenting with the Global EQ quite a bit. I'm 85% convinced that if I use the High Cut in the GEQ set to 9KHz, I get a much better sound overall. "Traditional" guitar cabinets typically don't have a huge amount of energy above 9KHz (they drop off steeply after about 5KHz), so using the EQ has tamed a bit of the overall fizzy top end, but still given me a good high-end for the squeeky-clean patches.

 

You might try that.

[CipherHost]

I tried it at 8 KHz this afternoon which worked out well. Thanks cclement! 

 

I hooked up the DT50 via L6 Link today with the 112s connected to the XLR outs of the POD. What I did not know is that after the "boot" process of the DT50, I can reset the output mode to Studio/Direct. I loose GEQ but will try using an EQ in the patch.