Jump to content
hideout

Headrush FRFR

Recommended Posts

Has anyone had a chance to check one of these speakers out?  The price is sure tempting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the FRFR112 since it was released. Sounds great with guitar and bass. Replaced Alto TS210.

The only difference between the FRFR112 and the Alto TS312 is the lack of preamps for direct mic connection (and the Headrush LOGO).

This info was extracted with great difficulty from the Alto/Headrush support team, and I documented that painful conversation both elsewhere on this forum and over on Gearpage.

Despite the somewhat misleading hype on the Headrush website, it really is a great sounding speaker.

 

EDIT: I highly recommend getting a short speaker stand (not the normal full height stand). Without the DSP that adds $300-500 to other speakers of this type, getting it off the floor makes all the difference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 @rd2rk

Given that you have experience with the issue, could you tell me if having the mic preamps affect the sound at all?. I mean the price difference between the HR FRFRs (8' and 12') ad the equivalent Alto versions (ts3) is significant. 

Are they constructed differently or the mic preamps cannot be bypassed so the FRFR version is flatter?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, mehegama said:

 @rd2rk

Given that you have experience with the issue, could you tell me if having the mic preamps affect the sound at all?. I mean the price difference between the HR FRFRs (8' and 12') ad the equivalent Alto versions (ts3) is significant. 

Are they constructed differently or the mic preamps cannot be bypassed so the FRFR version is flatter?

Thanks!

 

The preamp applies only to the microphone input that the Alto has that allows it to work with a mic level input.  The "flatness" of a speaker has nothing to do with the preamp or even the dual amp design really.  That kind of tuning is typically done through DSP processing between the dual amps used for highs and lows.  One of the differences that keeps the price lower on the Headrush as well as the Alto is that the DSP doesn't provide much for user contouring to be able to adjust it to different uses such as floor monitor versus pole mounting or speech applications or live music or recorded music as most of the more expensive speakers have.  The FRFR112 has a single simple adjustment that allows you to accentuate lows and highs (i.e. suppress mids).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to how well it would perform as a powered PA speaker as well as one for your modeler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DunedinDragon So does it mean that the HR FRFR and the Alto versions will produce identical output, given they ll be used at the line level and given that the only difference between them is the mic preamps? If that is the case why would anyone buy the more expensive HR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If preamps were not ever a factor in coloring the sound, there would only be one brand of preamp used in all mixing boards. Sound gurus argue endlessly over the characteristics of one preamp over another. Indeed, if it made no difference, why leave it out? That said, the only way to REALLY know is to A/B a TS312 and a FRFR112. Heck, throw in one of the more expensive brands with DSP. For your ears, it may turn out to be worth the extra money. The Yamaha DXR series is very popular.

 

As for using it as a PA speaker or general purpose monitor, as long as you're not plugging a mic straight in, it should work fine. The gist of my discussion with the Alto/HR staff was that the ONLY difference is the missing preamp. Over at Gearpage someone speculated that there was a difference in the crossover or speaker, but since Alto/HR refused to confirm that, and the published specs are identical (at least they were when I researched it), who knows?

 

All I can tell you is that the FRFR112 is loud as hell, stands up well to bass, doesn't seem overly boomy (see my rec about getting a stand), and sounds great with guitar. I'm happy.

 

BTW - don't know where you got your prices from, but at GC they're both the same price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mehegama said:

@DunedinDragon So does it mean that the HR FRFR and the Alto versions will produce identical output, given they ll be used at the line level and given that the only difference between them is the mic preamps? If that is the case why would anyone buy the more expensive HR?

 

My guess is there are some differences in the DSP tuning, but that's just a guess.  The regular Alto speakers are generally marketed toward the DJ crowd, so they may have tamed a bit of the bass on the FRFR....but that's just a guess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hideout said:

I'm curious as to how well it would perform as a powered PA speaker as well as one for your modeler.

 

I've never seen anyone using Alto speakers for a live band PA.  I see them a lot in Karaoke and DJ applications, but that's the regular Alto and not the FRFR.  Personally I'd want something with a bit more contouring ability if I were to use it as a powered PA speaker...at least in order to work appropriately with a sub woofer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we would need someone to do an A/B check to know for sure! In the UK the HR FRFR 112 AND 108 COST 299 AND 229 Pounds vs 262 and 210 for the Alto ts312 and ts308 respectively. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mehegama said:

I guess we would need someone to do an A/B check to know for sure! In the UK the HR FRFR 112 AND 108 COST 299 AND 229 Pounds vs 262 and 210 for the Alto ts312 and ts308 respectively. 

It's strange that this request appears in hundreds around the internet but noone really did it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Simon268 said:

It's strange that this request appears in hundreds around the internet but noone really did it....

 

Probably because it's so hard to find a brick'n'mortar store that has both. Also, I suspect that the difference would be subtle, hard to quantify in a store setting, and easily EQ'd.

My suggestion would be to try the cheaper alternative (the TS312 in your area). If it sounds good, buy it. That is, after all, the real bottom line - does it sound good to YOU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is a guy demo-ing a guitar speaker without having someone actually play a guitar through it? Why SAY this is different than the TS312 without actually running music through both? This has to be one of the stupidest AND most useless YouTube reviews EVER!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeah. An A/B Test would be really nice. I have my helix for about 4 days now and I’m very happy. 

But now I want to buy a pair of FRFR and on my list is the Alto 312 or the 310. In Germany the headrush cost a bit more than the Alto and not every shop has it. 

But I red some good stuff about the 310 and it should be „less boomy“...

Maybe the 310 is the best choice between the 312 and the headrush. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stephankay said:

...I want to buy a pair of FRFR and on my list is the Alto 312 or the 310. In Germany ...

Maybe the 310 is the best choice between the 312 and the headrush. 

My 310 arrived yesterday ... :-D :-D :-D

Since o got home pretty late i could only test it shortly.
This evening i'll give it more time....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't compare it to the Alto, but the Headrush sounds great. The knobs are a little cheap, but the important thing is the sound and it nails that. I kinda prefer it to my QSC K10 in that it isn't as hyped on the high end. It is better suited to my purpose of an FRFR for guitar rather than a general purpose PA speaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, njglover said:

Can't compare it to the Alto, but the Headrush sounds great. The knobs are a little cheap, but the important thing is the sound and it nails that. I kinda prefer it to my QSC K10 in that it isn't as hyped on the high end. It is better suited to my purpose of an FRFR for guitar rather than a general purpose PA speaker.

 

It's entirely possible that they DID make some guitar specific adaptations to the Headrush version vs the Alto version, but the support group isn't allowed to be more specific. Seems a silly way to go about it, considering how many people want to know. Anyhow, I'm happy with my FRFR112, sounds great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, stephankay said:

But I red some good stuff about the 310 and it should be „less boomy“...

Maybe the 310 is the best choice between the 312 and the headrush.

 

If you're worried about "boomy", get a short PA stand. That's what I have my FRFR112 on and it's not "boomy" at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've owned 3 PA/FRFR speakers over the course of owning the Helix.  A JBL Eon 610,  An Alto 312, and now the Headrush FRFR112.  To my ears,  the Alto sounds a little less accentuated in the mids.  Seems as if the Headrush is tuned for guitar more.  I liked all 3, but I sold the Alto 312 and only kept the JBL, so unfortunately I could not post an A/B comparison.  I will say this, I love the Headrush for the money, and it reproduces exactly what is put through it.  I've had a Kemper run through it as well, just to convince a friend to buy it as a cheaper alternative to a Friedman.  My take would be for you to buy it and try it.  $299 is a great price point for something that actually does what it says it is made for.  I do agree with the above post about getting it off the ground though.  Reduces the bass response some to eliminate some of the boominess.  Great sounding speaker for the Helix though.  

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, robsangg said:

To my ears,  the Alto sounds a little less accentuated in the mids.

 

Finally! Someone who's tried BOTH the FRFR112 and the TS312!

Since the mids is where the guitar lives, this would argue that there ARE some tuning differences between the HR and the Alto.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... which makes the Alto perfect for what I need.

I don't want a 'guitar speaker' but a reproduction of PA/FOH sound as close as possible. (Also it should serve as smal 'on the road amp' for my acoustic guitar)

:-D :-D :-D

 

Thank you very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Simon268 said:

... which makes the Alto perfect for what I need.

I don't want a 'guitar speaker' but a reproduction of PA/FOH sound as close as possible. (Also it should serve as smal 'on the road amp' for my acoustic guitar)

:-D :-D :-D

 

Thank you very much!

 

Rock on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought an Alto 312 purely as there were no Headrush in the UK at the time ( a few months ago).

I got an email today from GuitarGuitar saying they have now arrived ;) ... sorry ... too late LOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 9:44 AM, DunedinDragon said:

 

I've never seen anyone using Alto speakers for a live band PA.  I see them a lot in Karaoke and DJ applications, but that's the regular Alto and not the FRFR.  Personally I'd want something with a bit more contouring ability if I were to use it as a powered PA speaker...at least in order to work appropriately with a sub woofer.

 

Connecting any powered speaker to a powered subwoofer, at least the ones that I've seen, shouldn't be a problem at all.  As far as I know, they all have a built-in crossover so that their XLR outputs would have the appropriate frequencies being sent to the main speakers. In this scenario, you do not need that subwoofer contouring button. I know that a lot of powered speakers meant for PA use have a 'Subwoofer' setting but that is there if you choose to route the output to the sub via submix output on the mixing board. It keeps the mains from putting out too much low end and muddying up the mix.  This has the advantage of giving you more control over the low end content and adjust it to better suit the room. However, most small 4-8 channel mixers do not have this feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hideout said:

 

Connecting any powered speaker to a powered subwoofer, at least the ones that I've seen, shouldn't be a problem at all.  As far as I know, they all have a built-in crossover so that their XLR outputs would have the appropriate frequencies being sent to the main speakers. In this scenario, you do not need that subwoofer contouring button. I know that a lot of powered speakers meant for PA use have a 'Subwoofer' setting but that is there if you choose to route the output to the sub via submix output on the mixing board. It keeps the mains from putting out too much low end and muddying up the mix.  This has the advantage of giving you more control over the low end content and adjust it to better suit the room. However, most small 4-8 channel mixers do not have this feature.

 

Absolutely correct.  I just prefer to have more contouring options in order to be able to adapt the speaker to different scenarios.  Especially if the speaker is going to be used as a main front which is what you were referring to.  A high pass adjustment is only one of many contouring options I've found to be useful in these type of powered speakers.  One I've used often is the case in smaller, more intimate venues where there is no sub and it's not necessary to put the instruments through the PA, is to position my speaker behind me on a half height pole and remove the high pass filter.  In effect giving me a fuller low end to compensate for the lack of a sub and have my powered speaker act almost more like an augmented speaker to the PA for the guitar or keyboard.  I use it quite a bit that way for open mic and jam nights.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 2:36 PM, Simon268 said:

... which makes the Alto perfect for what I need.

I don't want a 'guitar speaker' but a reproduction of PA/FOH sound as close as possible. (Also it should serve as smal 'on the road amp' for my acoustic guitar)

:-D :-D :-D

 

Thank you very much!

 

I agree.  In the past my setup path was a GT-100 > guitar amp > guitar speaker > microphone > FOH.  I always felt like I needed a guitar amp in the chain in order to get the tone I was after.  I would tune my patches to what sounded good to me through my guitar amp ,and then let the microphone take it from there. 

 

Now that I have next generation modelers (Helix and GT-1000) which do a better job of amp modeling, I have made the transition to running the modeler direct to the FOH.  The audience is going to hear the modeler direct to the FOH, so I also want my personal monitor to sound exactly like a PA speaker,.  Using IEQs, IRs, speaker blocks, etc, I can adjust my patches so that they sound like a guitar amp when played through a PA speaker.  If my personal monitor were to be tuned to sound like a guitar speaker, then it might sound great to me as I'm playing, but the audience will be hearing something that sounds completely different.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a Headrush FRFR-108 delivered.

Not had much of a chance to play with it, but it has a much better build quality than I'd imagined, as I'd expected it to be quite flimsy plastic. It is small, well constructed, and reassuringly weighty for its size.

It's also epically loud! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use an EV ZLX series on a pole. I did have on the floor but needed the floor space. It works quite well for the cost. You do have to do some playing with the settings(pole VS. Floor) and I cut the bass just a hair more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using two Altos in stereo. One TS212 and one TS312. Combination works pretty well as they each have a different sound. Lots of tweaking but I have a well giggable sound and volume is no issue. If they're on the floor they do suffer with the coupling effect and become more boomy. They're great on stands or flight cases though. Must admit I had thought of trying a couple of Yamahas but the Altos are good value. Haven't tried the Headrush but I've heard its exactly the same bar the preamp. Interested to hear if anyone has compared the Altos to the Yamaha DRX's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One concern I have is that it's supposedly "Flat Response" but they also say it's "Tuned for guitar"... huh?   Ya can't have both, folks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hideout said:

One concern I have is that it's supposedly "Flat Response" but they also say it's "Tuned for guitar"... huh?   Ya can't have both, folks.

 

While "Full Range" usually means "the full range of human hearing", "Flat Response" seems to mean whatever the manufacturer wants it to mean. My understanding of "flat response" is that no part of the frequency spectrum is emphasized over other parts at any volume. There's usually a +/- clarifier attached in the specs, but that's the non-technical definition.

 

Earlier in this thread I stated that it sounds great for guitar, better than the TS210 that it replaced. Someone else said that they were buying the TS312 specifically BECAUSE it sounded more like a PA speaker. That really is the difference here. Are you wanting the speaker to more accurately reflect what your presets sound like FOH? Get the TS312/310/308. Do you want to get closer to the SITR sound without sacrificing the Full Range, wider dispersion and weight benefits over a traditional guitar cab? Get the FRFR112.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rd2rk said:

 

While "Full Range" usually means "the full range of human hearing", "Flat Response" seems to mean whatever the manufacturer wants it to mean. My understanding of "flat response" is that no part of the frequency spectrum is emphasized over other parts at any volume. There's usually a +/- clarifier attached in the specs, but that's the non-technical definition.

 

Earlier in this thread I stated that it sounds great for guitar, better than the TS210 that it replaced. Someone else said that they were buying the TS312 specifically BECAUSE it sounded more like a PA speaker. That really is the difference here. Are you wanting the speaker to more accurately reflect what your presets sound like FOH? Get the TS312/310/308. Do you want to get closer to the SITR sound without sacrificing the Full Range, wider dispersion and weight benefits over a traditional guitar cab? Get the FRFR112.

 

This is one of the reasons I really hate the term "FRFR" because the "flat response" part of that is so speculative.  Other than the Headrush you'll see the speaker manufacturers tend to avoid this term.  The reason being is this isn't the first time the "flat response" term has come under fire.  Back in the 90's and early 2000's the term was casually used a lot with studio monitors, however every studio monitor would sound different with the same source recording, so how could that make sense?

 

Well that's because what sounds "flat response" to one person doesn't sound "flat" to another.  It's a very subjective term that really means a lack of artificial coloration that would normally be added in consumer grade gear for audiophiles in contrast to a more pure representation for the studio.  One other thing that entered into the picture in studio work was the critical nature of how the speakers were positioned in and the room treatment order to have a natural response and not accentuate various frequencies.

Roll forward to today's live performance powered speakers and this explains a lot about what they try to achieve.  Ultimately the basic tuning of the speaker is reliant upon the manufacturer and the construction methods and materials used.  However you don't always have control over the placement and acoustic treatment of the room the speaker will be used in.  In live applications it's not reasonable that the speakers be tunable to room acoustics as that tends to be better handled by RTA processes at the sound board.  But the speakers can adjust tuning for various placement/deployment situations and potentially what it will be used for (live music, recorded music, speech, etc.).  So the value add for these speakers is in the DSP contouring options that will adjust for such things to address speaker coloration issues.  Those DSP contouring adjustments automatically tell you these speakers aren't "flat" because if they were you'd be stuck with that response regardless of how you placed them and what you used them for.

 

If I were to imagine some nomenclature for this I would probably elect to use Full Range Contoured Processing (FRCP) instead of FRFR as that's really more descriptive of what they're doing.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 11:57 AM, robsangg said:

To my ears,  the Alto sounds a little less accentuated in the mids. Seems as if the Headrush is tuned for guitar more.  

 

On 1/16/2019 at 1:36 PM, Simon268 said:

... which makes the Alto perfect for what I need.

I don't want a 'guitar speaker' but a reproduction of PA/FOH sound as close as possible. (

 

The headrush is not a "guitar speaker" just because it has a little more mids. It's still a full range box, much closer to the Alto in flavor than it is to any guitar speaker. Conversely, the ALTO is not necessarily a better representation of what a good PA does because it has less mids.... it could actually be the opposite because of that.

 

The big question here is "why" is the Alto "less accentuated in the mids"? Is it because the ALTO cuts them (with use of the contour) or is it because the Headrush BOOSTS the mids? IMO, you want the box the leaves the mids alone as much as possible... or is at least capable of setting up as such.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, codamedia said:

 

 

The headrush is not a "guitar speaker" just because it has a little more mids. It's still a full range box, much closer to the Alto in flavor than it is to any guitar speaker. Conversely, the ALTO is not necessarily a better representation of what a good PA does because it has less mids.... it could actually be the opposite because of that.

 

The big question here is "why" is the Alto "less accentuated in the mids"? Is it because the ALTO cuts them (with use of the contour) or is it because the Headrush BOOSTS the mids? IMO, you want the box the leaves the mids alone as much as possible... or is at least capable of setting up as such.

 

I agree.  It would also help to have a frequency response chart for these speakers so that we can get a better idea of how they actually reproduce input signals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, codamedia said:

 

 

The headrush is not a "guitar speaker" just because it has a little more mids. It's still a full range box, much closer to the Alto in flavor than it is to any guitar speaker. Conversely, the ALTO is not necessarily a better representation of what a good PA does because it has less mids.... it could actually be the opposite because of that.

 

The big question here is "why" is the Alto "less accentuated in the mids"? Is it because the ALTO cuts them (with use of the contour) or is it because the Headrush BOOSTS the mids? IMO, you want the box the leaves the mids alone as much as possible... or is at least capable of setting up as such.

 

1 hour ago, hideout said:

 

I agree.  It would also help to have a frequency response chart for these speakers so that we can get a better idea of how they actually reproduce input signals.

 

On 1/19/2019 at 9:42 AM, rd2rk said:

Are you wanting the speaker to more accurately reflect what your presets sound like FOH? Get the TS312/310/308. Do you want to get closer to the SITR sound without sacrificing the Full Range, wider dispersion and weight benefits over a traditional guitar cab? Get the FRFR112.

 

I believe that we are over-thinking this.

 

For those who are compelled to do so, I'm going to insert below a lengthy dissertation on the subject of FRFR speaker use by DunedinDragon in another thread. Thank you DD!

 

For the rest of us plug'n'play kids, the above quote of my own from earlier in this thread cuts to the core of what THIS thread was originally about.

NOTE that I said THIS THREAD, NOT the general subject. See below.

 

From the ever insightful DD, from this thread - https://line6.com/support/topic/34941-replacing-amp-with-frfr-for-live-never-using-foh/?tab=comments#comment-280438

    

"I appreciate the detailed post because it makes it much easier to respond to you.  You have no idea how rare that is around here...

 

I exclusively use a FRFR setup using a Yamaha DXR12 as my speaker.  I'm in an 8 piece band and we have a similar setup to yours in terms of a normal backline situation.  Although we commonly go direct into the mixing board with our instruments, there are several cases in which we only send the vocals, harmonica, and congas through the PA and depend on the backline stage sound for everything else in smaller venues.  My setup is the same either way in that I have my DXR12 on a half height speaker pole positioned behind me.  There's a lot of good reasons for doing it this way.  First, these monitors are designed to have a wide horizontal spread of sound and a much more limited vertical spread of sound.  If positioned in a wedge position either in front of you or behind you, your bandmates far to your left or right won't get much of the benefit due to what would normally be the limited vertical spread.  However, positioned upright on a pole it has exactly the same effect as a normal PA speaker as that what it is.  So in a smaller venue it simply augments the FOH speakers in that it has the same kind of long distance throw as a normal FOH speaker. It makes for the best of all worlds for both you, the audience, and your bandmates.

 

As far as going with a full FRFR setup, you'll likely need to make some adjustments to what you're used to with a conventional cabinet.  I've been doing this type of setup for so long (about 6 years now) that I get a bit frustrated when I use a cabinet because I'm so used to the clarity and definition of the FRFR speaker cabinets seem muffled to me.  I'm a bit concerned about your choice of speaker quite frankly though.  In the powered speaker market you pretty much get what you pay for, and the Headrush is more or less the lower end of the market.  You may be fine with it, and many people do use it, but it all depends on the style of music you play and how critical you are about exacting tones that you dial in.  We play a very wide range of genres including rock, blues, jazz, rockabilly, R&B/Funk, and I use a variety of guitars, so I'm pretty much OCD when it comes to getting the tone right for a given song.  If your band is more specific in genre it may not be that big a deal to you.

 

The best way I found to adapt to doing FRFR live is to think of it like I'm dialing in my sound for a studio session and what I'm trying to achieve is a studio sound live.  If you think of it that way you won't be thrown off by the whole "amp in the room" thing that bothers a lot of people, because there is no "amp in the room" sound in studio recordings.  This also means you'll need to be much more attentive to the things that are relevant to studio production such as compression, cabinets/IRs, mic usage, mic positioning, and EQ to get the finished, polished sound you would normally want in a studio.  You'll hear a lot about using high and low cuts due to the expanded responsiveness of a FRFR speaker, which is true to a certain degree, but not always a given depending on the amp, the cabinet, mic and mic positioning.  In effect you need to develop your ability to hear what frequencies are problematic and the different ways you can go about correcting them.

 

The biggest transition is in dialing in your tone.  It's important to be as near as you can to performance volume levels in order to not be fooled by the Fletcher-Munson effect.  And you definitely want to dial in your tones through the FRFR.  The main thing to remember is FRFR speakers are specifically designed for long projection of sound and will be much more harsh close up to the speaker.  This is the reason you don't seat people right in front of a PA speaker, because it takes a certain amount of distance to resolve the mix between the horn and speaker.  I normally stand 6 feet or more away from the speaker and often off axis to check my tone when I'm dialing it in.  My biggest issue is often getting too aggressive with high cuts.  What sometimes sounds right in isolation is far too muffled when combined with the rest of the band.

 

Hopefully that helps you or gives you some ideas about how to approach this."

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Not that there'll EVER be an end to new threads asking "What is the best FRFR speaker for use with modelers?"...........................;-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, rd2rk said:

 

 

 

I believe that we are over-thinking this.

 

i agree.

 

In theory everything is possible (up to both speakers over-amplify mids ... or under represent), but noone is going to make his PhD over two speakers of the lower mid price segment. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rd2rk said:

Not that there'll EVER be an end to new threads asking "What is the best FRFR speaker for use with modelers?"...........................;-)

 

Well, to be clear, as the OP, I never asked that.  

I’m merely curious about the Headrush.  

Im leaning towards the QSC CP8 because I’m not interested in something purpose built for something. In this case, modelers as the Headrush seems to be. I want something more flexible.  I guess I was just hoping that someone who’d tried them both could give an opinion on how the two compared to each other simply because the Headrush is so cheap.  I was Also hoping that folks posting would’ve posted about the FRFR 108 and not the 112.  Admittedly, I should have been more clear about that. 

 

Thank you all for your responses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 9:44 AM, DunedinDragon said:

 

I've never seen anyone using Alto speakers for a live band PA.  I see them a lot in Karaoke and DJ applications, but that's the regular Alto and not the FRFR.  Personally I'd want something with a bit more contouring ability if I were to use it as a powered PA speaker...at least in order to work appropriately with a sub woofer.

 Actually I was asking about the Headrush. Should’ve been more clear. Sorry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2019 at 8:26 AM, codamedia said:

 

 

The headrush is not a "guitar speaker" just because it has a little more mids. It's still a full range box, much closer to the Alto in flavor than it is to any guitar speaker. Conversely, the ALTO is not necessarily a better representation of what a good PA does because it has less mids.... it could actually be the opposite because of that.

 

The big question here is "why" is the Alto "less accentuated in the mids"? Is it because the ALTO cuts them (with use of the contour) or is it because the Headrush BOOSTS the mids? IMO, you want the box the leaves the mids alone as much as possible... or is at least capable of setting up as such.

 

I guess maybe I was a bit vague as to what I meant.  I've just owned both the Alto and Headrush.  They are both PA speakers, so you can put what you want through them.  Point I was trying to get across is that for $299, the Headrush holds it's own against more highly priced competition.  The Helix has enough customization options in it, that you can boost, or cut whatever frequencies you desire.  I just liked the Headrush better.  Sounded more like a 'guitar speaker' to my ears, but again that is personal preference.  I don't recommend anyone take my word off of a forum.  Go out and try it for yourself.  If you like the powercab, or friedman, or any of the multitude of other options better, that is what you should go with.  Just for $299, it does what it says it will do, although I challenge the 2000 watts it claims.  Volume levels are closer to a Fender Hotrod Deluxe maybe, an amp I've also owned, but the Headrush does get loud, and I use it for a small venue band, and run it to FOH.  Crowds are usually around 100 people, but I'm just using it as a stage monitor for myself.  FOH pa is doing the heavy lifting.  It will keep up with my drummer easily, who loves to be the loudest guy on stage, LOL.  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×