Thinking of switching from FRFR

[loydall]

Hi. My setup is pretty simple - HX stomp and the Headrush FRFR. 

 

I appreciate the Headrush isn't the best FRFR but it seems to do the job to a point. But - there's just something I'm not quite happy with. It's just something that's niggling me when I'm dialling in patches. Now - it might well be that I'm rubbish at putting together decent patches but there's something about the sound of the Headrush that can sometimes rasp or, just not sound organic/real enough.

 

Sometimes it sounds great though - more on cleaner sounds.

 

I'm also finding the Stomp sometimes difficult to get consistent volume levels and eq levels across my patches (I know this sounds silly - just go through them and set them equally.. but then you edit a patch and things change etc..)

 

So - I'm wondering if simplifying things a little might help - go down a more pedal platform amp route and run the stomp without amp + cab patches. That way I get a consistent amp sound and let the Stomp act purely as a set of fx pedals.

 

I'm just finding dialling in patches at home and then playing them at volume at rehearsal can result in quite unexpected sounds (I do know about how frequencies play at different volumes but the whole process/impact seems more pronounce on a FRFR speaker than just turning up a guitar amp.

 

I'm sort of tempted by a katana artist amp and running the stomp in 4cm.

 

Or maybe go full clean channel tube amp and run the Stomp 4CM again.

 

Would I regret switching from the FRFR or is it worth switching to a more conventional amp set up for easier dialling in of (and more predictable) volume and EQ across my patches?

[kraftybob]

Another option is to use the HX preamp models and effects and then run directly into the FX return of an amp. The amp then is simply the power amp and cab while the HX does the rest.  This way you can still choose from all the amp models in the HX. 

[loydall]

1 minute ago, kraftybob said:

Another option is to use the HX preamp models and effects and then run directly into the FX return of an amp. The amp then is simply the power amp and cab while the HX does the rest.  This way you can still choose from all the amp models in the HX. 

 

Yeah - thought about this as well.

 

I think I just want to simplify the whole process and get something more predictable and natural sounding.. We've got a few tunes where I get heavily into weird FX so the Stomp is awesome but for the most part it's fairly classic amp sounds.

[kraftybob]

You mentioned about setting patches at home, and then they sound different at rehearsal.  I would expect that going amp and 4CM would solve some of that, but you might still have effect levels to deal with.  I have the Helix LT (for just over a month) and setting patch levels at performance volume is the one thing that I've heard from multiple people on here as well as a few YouTube videos.  Others with more experience will have to chime in, but I'd hate to see you change your rig only to run into the same level issue.

[cgar18]

2 hours ago, loydall said:

Hi. My setup is pretty simple - HX stomp and the Headrush FRFR. 

 

I appreciate the Headrush isn't the best FRFR but it seems to do the job to a point. But - there's just something I'm not quite happy with. It's just something that's niggling me when I'm dialling in patches. Now - it might well be that I'm rubbish at putting together decent patches but there's something about the sound of the Headrush that can sometimes rasp or, just not sound organic/real enough.

 

Sometimes it sounds great though - more on cleaner sounds.

 

I'm also finding the Stomp sometimes difficult to get consistent volume levels and eq levels across my patches (I know this sounds silly - just go through them and set them equally.. but then you edit a patch and things change etc..)

 

So - I'm wondering if simplifying things a little might help - go down a more pedal platform amp route and run the stomp without amp + cab patches. That way I get a consistent amp sound and let the Stomp act purely as a set of fx pedals.

 

I'm just finding dialling in patches at home and then playing them at volume at rehearsal can result in quite unexpected sounds (I do know about how frequencies play at different volumes but the whole process/impact seems more pronounce on a FRFR speaker than just turning up a guitar amp.

 

I'm sort of tempted by a katana artist amp and running the stomp in 4cm.

 

Or maybe go full clean channel tube amp and run the Stomp 4CM again.

 

Would I regret switching from the FRFR or is it worth switching to a more conventional amp set up for easier dialling in of (and more predictable) volume and EQ across my patches?

I have a helix lt and one out is going to headrush and another is going into my seymore duncan power 170 into my balckstart 212.I think you might like the Seymore into a 212 cab its clean and has 3eq knobs and volume so I can tweak a bit of low and highs with out changing the helix patches.I like the way it sound coming thru both I have it close to sounding like each other,but I can use the 212 for more bass sound and the headrush for highs.

 

[rd2rk]

2 hours ago, loydall said:

Hi. My setup is pretty simple - HX stomp and the Headrush FRFR. 

 

I appreciate the Headrush isn't the best FRFR but it seems to do the job to a point. But - there's just something I'm not quite happy with. It's just something that's niggling me when I'm dialling in patches. Now - it might well be that I'm rubbish at putting together decent patches but there's something about the sound of the Headrush that can sometimes rasp or, just not sound organic/real enough.

 

Sometimes it sounds great though - more on cleaner sounds.

 

I'm also finding the Stomp sometimes difficult to get consistent volume levels and eq levels across my patches (I know this sounds silly - just go through them and set them equally.. but then you edit a patch and things change etc..)

 

So - I'm wondering if simplifying things a little might help - go down a more pedal platform amp route and run the stomp without amp + cab patches. That way I get a consistent amp sound and let the Stomp act purely as a set of fx pedals.

 

I'm just finding dialling in patches at home and then playing them at volume at rehearsal can result in quite unexpected sounds (I do know about how frequencies play at different volumes but the whole process/impact seems more pronounce on a FRFR speaker than just turning up a guitar amp.

 

I'm sort of tempted by a katana artist amp and running the stomp in 4cm.

 

Or maybe go full clean channel tube amp and run the Stomp 4CM again.

 

Would I regret switching from the FRFR or is it worth switching to a more conventional amp set up for easier dialling in of (and more predictable) volume and EQ across my patches?

 

I had the same problem. It seems a higher end DSP enabled PA speaker like the Yamaha DXR series is very popular. If you're really wealthy there are special purpose FRFR boxes like Atomic CLR. I would like to try the Powercab+, but money.......I wound up getting a brand new Egnater Tweaker 15/112 for half the cost of the Powercab+, and I'm really happy (for now :-)).

 

I have some presets that run straight into the FX Return - mostly high gain stuff - and some that use 4cm and a Helix mid gain amp that switches with the Tweaker set really clean (Fender settings), like a second channel. I also have some straight up rock'n'roll type presets that are just FX in 4cm to the Tweaker set up like a Marshall. The Tweaker is a very flexible amp.

 

Something a lot of people are doing is using a 1 or 2-12 guitar cab with a class D amp like the Powerstage. I've got an EHX .44 Magnum as a backup (in case a tube blows) that I haven't got around to trying yet.

 

So I'm happy right now with the Tweaker (12ax7/6v6) and although I'd like to try the Powercab+, I fear that what I didn't like about the FRFR112 (and my Alto TS210) is the tweeter. The FRFR112 is crossed over at 2khz and the Alto at 2.5khz, so it's really hard to eq out that nasty raspy sound without just killing the overall tone. And while the Powercab is designed for the job, it's got a (defeatable) tweeter, I just don't know.....Lotto Lotto Lotto

[spikey]

Like differences in cars, washing machines, and horses- there are differences in FRFR speakers too. Have you tried a Power Cab Plus yet?

[loydall]

2 hours ago, spikey said:

Like differences in cars, washing machines, and horses- there are differences in FRFR speakers too. Have you tried a Power Cab Plus yet?

 

Also like cars, washing machines and horses - there's only so many of them you can buy before the wife starts asking questions.... especially horses.

 

I've heard the Power Cab Plus struggles a little for volume when in a band with a reasonably loud drummer?

[amsdenj]

HX Stomp into a single FRFR like Headrush, JBL EON610, etc. is a simple and flexible setup. I suspect one reason we have trouble getting consistent tones out of setups like this is dealing with too much mid-scoop. Fender amp (and model) tone controls and Fender single coil guitars have a lot of mid scoop. This creates a nice deep, bright, rich clean tone. But it can be really hard to get that tone to cut through a dense mix, and distortion can be muddy and fizzy at the same time. 

 

PA speakers can also add more mid scoop. If you put the speaker on the floor, you'll get a pretty big bass boost due to coupling between the woofer and the floor. And the horn can be pretty bright and less directional than we are use to. 

 

Guitar is all about the mid range. This is why a tube screamer work so well with Fender Strats and amps - it provide a big mid boost that recovers some of those scooped out mids. So if you're having trouble getting a good, consistent tone out of HX Stomp and a PA-speaker FRFR, you might explore controlling the mids by bringing the bass and treble down a little. Try to do this physically first - with the cabinet placement in the room. Use a stand or speaker pole to get the speaker off the floor to eliminate that bass coupling. Position the speaker so the high end is focused where you want it. 

 

If that's not enough, then the next place to look is cab/IR low and high cuts. As you cut lows and highs, you are actually focusing more on the mids. With EQ its almost always better to cut what you don't want then it is to boost what you do want, its called subtractive EQ. Boosts can sound less natural and create headroom problems. 

 

If that's still not enough, you might try using global EQ to tailor the tone for the room. Some additional more focused EQ cuts and boosts could really make that simple FRFR sound great. Use references with a guitar amp tone you really like to find a good baseline tone, and then use global EQ to make slight adjustments for particular situations.

 

The thing I like about modeler into FRFR is the flexibility. You can get a lot of tones out of a simple setup including acoustic tones. I use a Variax and FRFR is a must for me. I also play acoustic guitar and mandolin through Helix and FRFR is necessary for that too.

 

 

[gunpointmetal]

You might just be missing that good old AMP IN THE ROOM sound. With FRFR patches, (I'm sure you know this) you gotta think of it as a full studio signal chain, then you gotta think about how many albums or even live sound is the guitar just getting a mic on the cab and that's it. Most will have compression, EQ, and various other "tricks" after the microphone to get the sound you're used to hearing on a record or a major concert experience. Without that, sticking a mic on a cab probably has some "ugly" stuff going on that an engineer or sound guy would fix further down the line. I would highly recommend and amp with an FX loop so if you do want to get more flavors in there, you can go 4CM or into the FX loop. If you want a "pedal platform" and not have to worry about multiple cables, maybe the HXFX would be a better fit than the STomp. 

[loydall]

5 minutes ago, amsdenj said:

HX Stomp into a single FRFR like Headrush, JBL EON610, etc. is a simple and flexible setup. I suspect one reason we have trouble getting consistent tones out of setups like this is dealing with too much mid-scoop. Fender amp (and model) tone controls and Fender single coil guitars have a lot of mid scoop. This creates a nice deep, bright, rich clean tone. But it can be really hard to get that tone to cut through a dense mix, and distortion can be muddy and fizzy at the same time. 

 

PA speakers can also add more mid scoop. If you put the speaker on the floor, you'll get a pretty big bass boost due to coupling between the woofer and the floor. And the horn can be pretty bright and less directional than we are use to. 

 

Guitar is all about the mid range. This is why a tube screamer work so well with Fender Strats and amps - it provide a big mid boost that recovers some of those scooped out mids. So if you're having trouble getting a good, consistent tone out of HX Stomp and a PA-speaker FRFR, you might explore controlling the mids by bringing the bass and treble down a little. Try to do this physically first - with the cabinet placement in the room. Use a stand or speaker pole to get the speaker off the floor to eliminate that bass coupling. Position the speaker so the high end is focused where you want it. 

 

If that's not enough, then the next place to look is cab/IR low and high cuts. As you cut lows and highs, you are actually focusing more on the mids. With EQ its almost always better to cut what you don't want then it is to boost what you do want, its called subtractive EQ. Boosts can sound less natural and create headroom problems. 

 

If that's still not enough, you might try using global EQ to tailor the tone for the room. Some additional more focused EQ cuts and boosts could really make that simple FRFR sound great. Use references with a guitar amp tone you really like to find a good baseline tone, and then use global EQ to make slight adjustments for particular situations.

 

The thing I like about modeler into FRFR is the flexibility. You can get a lot of tones out of a simple setup including acoustic tones. I use a Variax and FRFR is a must for me. I also play acoustic guitar and mandolin through Helix and FRFR is necessary for that too.

 

 

 

Yeah thanks - I have my FRFR on a low-down speaker stand for rehearsal and then on a higher stand for live. i generally start with my IRs or Cabs low cut at 100 and high-cut down to about 4.5 and work from there.

 

I have actually managed to tame it pretty well but there's still something not quite right - plus the variation in volumes I still seem to get. It's not that bad.. just something that's niggling me.

 

And yes - I play acoustic through HX Stomp into the FRFR as well and have to say it sounds fantastic.

 

[DunedinDragon]

1 hour ago, loydall said:

 

Yeah thanks - I have my FRFR on a low-down speaker stand for rehearsal and then on a higher stand for live. i generally start with my IRs or Cabs low cut at 100 and high-cut down to about 4.5 and work from there.

 

I have actually managed to tame it pretty well but there's still something not quite right - plus the variation in volumes I still seem to get. It's not that bad.. just something that's niggling me.

 

And yes - I play acoustic through HX Stomp into the FRFR as well and have to say it sounds fantastic.

 

 

You do realize the variation in volumes won't be fixed by any difference in speakers.  That's the function of the different amp models behaving the way different amp models are supposed to behave.  You'd have the same problem if you were switching between real amps of different wattages.  The difference being you can adjust the channel volumes on the different amps models to level them out in the Helix and not lose any tone.  But you do need to bear in mind that ANY EQ is nothing more than a way to add or lower volume in a specific frequency range.  That can result in a louder overall volume.

I think you're just running into the fundamental differences between traditional cabinets and powered speakers.  Even on a traditional cabinet you'll get the same sound once you mic it and send it through the PA.  I'm suspecting that you may be standing too close to your cabinets when you play and are getting overwhelmed by the horn.  I always give myself 5 or 6 feet of distance and usually stand a bit off-axis.  This is one of the reasons you wouldn't normally want to sit directly in front of the FOH speaker cabinets.  They needs some space to blend the two speakers.

I think you'll also find you get a much less problematic sound and have to apply much less EQ when you blend microphones on a cabinet.  The most common combination you tend to see is an MD421 dynamic mic and a R121 ribbon mic.  That's a VERY common combination in IR packages.

[spikey]

 

 

 

1

7 hours ago, loydall said:

 

Also like cars, washing machines and horses - there's only so many of them you can buy before the wife starts asking questions.... especially horses.

 

If you are buying gear without your better half knowing beforehand you are going about it all wrong in the 1st place. 

[spikey]

 

 

 

 

7 hours ago, loydall said:

 

I've heard the Power Cab Plus struggles a little for volume when in a band with a reasonably loud drummer?

 

Two things here, get a drummer that knows "dynamics" and you won't have a drummer issue, and FYI my PC+ pair is loud as hell when I want them to be.

[loydall]

Follow-up on this. I managed to get an Egnater Tweaker 40 112 at a ridiculously good price. Tried it out last night with the Stomp in 4CM and absolutely love it. Just running the Egnater clean and letting the Stomp do its thing - obviously replacing the amp/cab/ir patches with a loop out to the amp. I found it so much easier to dial patches in and the sound of that amp is just incredible - I'm now getting the tones I was looking for but unable to get with the Headrush. As far as I can see there are 2 possible reasons for the Egnater (to my ears) sounding better than using the Headrush:

 

1: I'm rubbish at dialling in amp/cab combos - this could well be the case but I did have a good read-up on the subject and thought I'd got reasonably close with the Headrush but still not quite what I wanted.

 

2: The Headrush doesn't quite compliment the Helix - or at least it makes it harder to tame the sound it produces. I appreciate there are other active PA speakers which may do a much better job.

 

What I'm really pleased with is that the Stomp sounds even better than I thought it was - it really is seriously impressive. With the Headrush the majority of OD/Distortion patches sounded harsh and produced a muddled sound - through the Egnater pretty much all of them sound good. I feel I've just gained a whole load of new pedals. Even reasonably overdriven/distorted guitar sounds still have that wonderful clarity to them but with that sort of, what I call "chewiness" I was looking for. I was going through all of my existing patches removing the amp/cab blocks and every one of them sounded so much better.

 

Obviously this is all personal taste but for me this is a huge improvement - I get consistency of amp tone and volume (but also still get tweaking/voicing options with the amp). This does raise the question, for me, whether I'd be better off with the HX FX unit rather than the Stomp... 

[HonestOpinion]

11 hours ago, loydall said:

Follow-up on this. I managed to get an Egnater Tweaker 40 112 at a ridiculously good price. Tried it out last night with the Stomp in 4CM and absolutely love it. Just running the Egnater clean and letting the Stomp do its thing - obviously replacing the amp/cab/ir patches with a loop out to the amp. I found it so much easier to dial patches in and the sound of that amp is just incredible - I'm now getting the tones I was looking for but unable to get with the Headrush. As far as I can see there are 2 possible reasons for the Egnater (to my ears) sounding better than using the Headrush:

 

1: I'm rubbish at dialling in amp/cab combos - this could well be the case but I did have a good read-up on the subject and thought I'd got reasonably close with the Headrush but still not quite what I wanted.

 

2: The Headrush doesn't quite compliment the Helix - or at least it makes it harder to tame the sound it produces. I appreciate there are other active PA speakers which may do a much better job.

 

What I'm really pleased with is that the Stomp sounds even better than I thought it was - it really is seriously impressive. With the Headrush the majority of OD/Distortion patches sounded harsh and produced a muddled sound - through the Egnater pretty much all of them sound good. I feel I've just gained a whole load of new pedals. Even reasonably overdriven/distorted guitar sounds still have that wonderful clarity to them but with that sort of, what I call "chewiness" I was looking for. I was going through all of my existing patches removing the amp/cab blocks and every one of them sounded so much better.

 

Obviously this is all personal taste but for me this is a huge improvement - I get consistency of amp tone and volume (but also still get tweaking/voicing options with the amp). This does raise the question, for me, whether I'd be better off with the HX FX unit rather than the Stomp... 

 

I use a Line6 L2m as my primary stage monitor with my Helix. I also have the smaller Headrush FRFR-108 for grab and go jams. Both of them work well although I agree it is trickier to dial in presets using an FRFR. At some point I will probably get a PowerCab+.  I prefer the FRFR approach because my results on stage are closer to what the audience is hearing through the FOH and the amp/cab models are truer to the originals. Using a guitar amp/combo though is a perfectly acceptable alternative and there are plenty of players like yourself who prefer that sound and feel and the fact that it often requires less tweaking. There is no "one" way to best use modeling technology, at least not yet. It is largely still a matter of personal preference.