Is a Friedman ASM12 really that much better than a QSC K10?

Crash-VR

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,058
I have a QSC K10 and an AX8 they seem to work great together. I'm about to invest in more PA equipment. My plan is for a Mackie 14 channel board and two more speakers. I was originally going to just buy two more K10's and use my current one as a monitor, but now that I have the AX8 and plan to use it as my primary rig, I was thinking that maybe I should get one K10 and a Friedman ASM. I play in another band that has two K12's as mains and two K10 and monitors.

I guess my issue is that I want to have the best sound possible when recording and performing. If I dial in my presets to sound their best through the ASM will my sound suffer through the mains? Should I just dial in and monitor my guitar though the same speaker as the Mains? But I practice multiple hours a day and have been through countless tube amps searching for "my" tone. If the Friedman will make me practice and perform better because my tone really inspires me, then it doesn't seem like it will matter too much if the tone out of the Mains is slightly different.

I'm curious what other people would do in my situation...
 

p.snail

Member
Messages
785
I only have experience with qsc's, BUT I think the Friedman is intentionally tuned to sound more like a guitar cab and therefore less flat than the K series.

As far as the main sounding different, it will. But to be fair if you were using an amp, the main would sound different any way. I am assuming you would just run the ASM12 right off your AX8 and then to the board. If that's true then you can always adjust the channel eq to compensate any changes. (Probably necessary per room anyway).

Not much help, but if are looking for more of a guitar cab feel, the Friedman is most likely the better choice.
 

Crash-VR

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,058
I only have experience with qsc's, BUT I think the Friedman is intentionally tuned to sound more like a guitar cab and therefore less flat than the K series.

As far as the main sounding different, it will. But to be fair if you were using an amp, the main would sound different any way. I am assuming you would just run the ASM12 right off your AX8 and then to the board. If that's true then you can always adjust the channel eq to compensate any changes. (Probably necessary per room anyway).

Not much help, but if are looking for more of a guitar cab feel, the Friedman is most likely the better choice.
Thanks. Yeah, I will probably more likely remain content with the AX8 if It sounds more like a real guitar cab. I might need to use it as a vocal and acoustic monitor, basically THE monitor for the whole band. That's why I wanted two more K10's. One on the floor in front as a monitor and two mains. This is a system we would use for small to medium 100-200 person venues that don't have a system. I could probably convince the Drummer to bring one of his JBL's as a monitor so I could use the ASM as guitar only.
 

JoeB63

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
13,732
If I dial in my presets to sound their best through the ASM will my sound suffer through the mains?
Yes, it will. I got to play a Friedman today (actually, 2 of them in stereo) with an AXE-FX, Kemper and Helix. The Friedman ASMs are very bass heavy and somewhat dark in character. We compared them to a Yamaha DXR10 (which is close to the QSC K-series -- I own both). If you dial in tones on the Friedman, they will be too bright and thin on bass when you plug into the K10s.

The Friedmans sound good, but while they had a big bassy sound, they really didn't sound/feel much more like a guitar cab than the Yamaha does. You'd definitely have to fine tune your patches specifically for the Friedman. Note they are very large and heavy too.
 

Deuterium

Member
Messages
1,029
Purely my humble opinion, here, but I am a big proponent of a coaxial-based FRFR, versus a 2-way component setup (which is what the Friedman is). In my experience, the single point-source dispersion of a coaxial-based FRFR just sounds more natural, and more like a traditional guitar speaker/cab. The off-axis arrangement of the mid-range cone driver and HF tweeter in a typical 2-way component setup just sounds too "hi-fi" for my ears. I may just be overly sensitive to it, but with a 2-way FRFR, I can "hear" the localized separation of the HF driver, especially when moving slightly off-center to the speaker's sweet-spot. This just doesn't happen (for me) with a coaxial FRFR.

I highly recommend the XiTone wedges or cabs. However, the Atomic CLR also qualifies as a coaxial arrangement.
 

guitarsan

Member
Messages
177
Purely my humble opinion, here, but I am a big proponent of a coaxial-based FRFR, versus a 2-way component setup (which is what the Friedman is). In my experience, the single point-source dispersion of a coaxial-based FRFR just sounds more natural, and more like a traditional guitar speaker/cab. The off-axis arrangement of the mid-range cone driver and HF tweeter in a typical 2-way component setup just sounds too "hi-fi" for my ears. I may just be overly sensitive to it, but with a 2-way FRFR, I can "hear" the localized separation of the HF driver, especially when moving slightly off-center to the speaker's sweet-spot. This just doesn't happen (for me) with a coaxial FRFR.

I highly recommend the XiTone wedges or cabs. However, the Atomic CLR also qualifies as a coaxial arrangement.
Also why you should be considering Mission Engineering's Gemini FRFRs. So underrated here and elsewhere and it is badass. I own one.

They have mono and stereo versions, they're coaxial as described above, AND they have a blend switch - go from guitar cab sound to FRFR sound or anything in between. So you can have BOTH what the Friedman offers along with what a standard FRFR offers in frequency response of the cab.

I use mine with a Helix and it's awesome.

http://missionengineering.com/?product_cat=active-amplifiers

 

Deuterium

Member
Messages
1,029
Also why you should be considering Mission Engineering's Gemini FRFRs. So underrated here and elsewhere and it is badass. I own one.

They have mono and stereo versions, they're coaxial as described above, AND they have a blend switch - go from guitar cab sound to FRFR sound or anything in between. So you can have BOTH what the Friedman offers along with what a standard FRFR offers in frequency response of the cab.

I use mine with a Helix and it's awesome.
Forgot about Mission Engineering. Agreed. Another excellent solution.
 

Crash-VR

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,058
Man those things are pricey. In sure I'll go that route eventually. For now I'll stick with QSC and the 0% financing at Sweetwater. The big question 2 more K10's or two K12's?
 

Highgain

Member
Messages
69
Those are very good questions.

Those "Mission Engineering's" stuff and "XiTone" seem greast, just like here in Germany the "Blueamps" (see: www.blueamps.de).
Very pricey, and hardly any very to be tested.


I am thinking of Yamaha DXR 10 or 12 or the DSR 112, which seem to be very compareble to your QSCs!
 

Adam Zaiger

Member
Messages
446
I have been trying out the AX8 with a K10 and having a VERY difficult time. Many of the presets sounded absolutely horrible, but making some adjustments (especially with reverb time and level) and seems to be getting closer. I'm still wondering how much better it would sound with something like the CLR or Gemini. Has anyone made this specific jump and can comment?
 

burningyen

Member
Messages
14,699
I moved from a K10 (with the Jay Mitchell mod) to a CLR. The treble and upper mids mellowed a tad, and the tone didn't change drastically as I moved my head on- and off-axis. If you haven't done the Jay Mitchell mod to your K10 you might also notice the pick transients sounding more realistic and less swallowed up.
 

Highgain

Member
Messages
69
What is the point in FRFRs, if you have to adjust the tone for your sound, but the signal going to the FOH isn't the way it should be for the PA?
I would find it much cooler to have a tone, that can be used like this for me AND the audience.
 

Crash-VR

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,058
I have been trying out the AX8 with a K10 and having a VERY difficult time. Many of the presets sounded absolutely horrible, but making some adjustments (especially with reverb time and level) and seems to be getting closer. I'm still wondering how much better it would sound with something like the CLR or Gemini. Has anyone made this specific jump and can comment?
I guess I don't expect factory presets to ever sound good. They are good templates to start with though. I started with headphones before the K10, when I went to the K10 it was a revelation. Of course, I'm building my own presets, and comparing them to my bc audio tube amp as a reference point. It works well. When I first did that I had to add a lot of depth and master volume to fill the tone. The more advanced parameter's that are so easily accessed in Axe 8 edit really helped too. The tones appear to be in there you just need to

It really does make me want to try a monitor that's a little more tuned towards modelers.
 

Gearzilla

Member
Messages
4,176
But I practice multiple hours a day and have been through countless tube amps searching for "my" tone. If the Friedman will make me practice and perform better because my tone really inspires me, then it doesn't seem like it will matter too much if the tone out of the Mains is slightly different.
What I would recommend is to buy a Friedman and to check it out for yourself. I was at JoeB63's and was the person who brought the Axe-Fx and the Friedmans. @LeftyASAT brought the Helix.

If your going between monitors your always going tio have eq differences which you can accomodate for with a few styles of patches in advance with varying eq or you can dial it at soundcheck with your feeds.

My experience of the sounds was different than Joe. To me the normal speaker cabinet sounded the worst. We didn't run the Axe-Fx through it however. The Yamaha sounds good but has less projection and sounds thinner than the normal cabinet or Friedman. The Friedman is very big and full sounding and really fills the room. However you might have to readjust your patches if they're already dialed in with lots of bass with headphones or smaller FRFR speakers.

It's all subjective, and that's why I recommend hearing for yourself in person because online clips aren't as revealing, and you can't account for how the modelers are adjusted for the comparisons.
 

DunedinDragon

Member
Messages
947
What is the point in FRFRs, if you have to adjust the tone for your sound, but the signal going to the FOH isn't the way it should be for the PA?
I would find it much cooler to have a tone, that can be used like this for me AND the audience.
Generally speaking you shouldn't be adjusting tone on the FRFR's. Many of the upper end units don't even have tone controls such as the DXR12 which I use. It does have some presets such as a setting for 'monitor' to overcome the bass buildup on a floor monitor. But other than that it's frequency response is standard and flat.

The adjustments should be made from the modeler. That way what you sent to the FOH and what you hear through your monitor will be the same. Sometimes this can be tricky since a typical guitar cabinet has a much more limited frequency response range than does an FRFR, but that can and should all be handled from within the modeling unit so the FOH speakers (which have similar ranges) will match the stage speaker.

In my case I set up these sort of things globally in the unit, but they could also be addressed on a patch by patch basis.
 

DunedinDragon

Member
Messages
947
My experience of the sounds was different than Joe. To me the normal speaker cabinet sounded the worst. We didn't run the Axe-Fx through it however. The Yamaha sounds good but has less projection and sounds thinner than the normal cabinet or Friedman. The Friedman is very big and full sounding and really fills the room. However you might have to readjust your patches if they're already dialed in with lots of bass with headphones or smaller FRFR speakers.

It's all subjective, and that's why I recommend hearing for yourself in person because on line clips aren't as revealing, and you can't account for how the modelers are adjusted for the comparisons.
There's no doubt the Friedman will sound fuller because it's sound radiation pattern is that of a cabinet speaker (cone-like), not a powered PA monitor which has a much more directed radiation pattern (rectangular). The directed radiation pattern of a PA speaker has some advantages in being able to sit more controllably in the stage mix without the volume for example.

But it still always comes back to trying to get the sound on stage that best represents what the audience is hearing, so testing these things by themselves without a PA in the mix won't accurately represent that.
 

Gearzilla

Member
Messages
4,176
There's no doubt the Friedman will sound fuller because it's sound radiation pattern is that of a cabinet speaker (cone-like), not a powered PA monitor which has a much more directed radiation pattern (rectangular). The directed radiation pattern of a PA speaker has some advantages in being able to sit more controllably in the stage mix without the volume for example.

But it still always comes back to trying to get the sound on stage that best represents what the audience is hearing, so testing these things by themselves without a PA in the mix won't accurately represent that.
Cool. Though look at the question I quoted to respond to with my answer. Additionally I think if Joe added a sub speaker at home it would get closer to a bigger sound. I also think the speaker cabinet would also sound better once the speakers response is factored into the equation.
The Friedmans are a bit heavy, but not as bad as dragging a Shiva or Bad Cat around town.

I also believe that Joe wasn't really into an Atomic CLR that he either owned or tried out.

People are going to have different taste and that is why someone really needs the hands on aspect to cut through the varied subjective responses. --imo of course. :)
 
Last edited:

JoeB63

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
13,732
What I would recommend is to buy a Friedman and to check it out for yourself. I was at JoeB63's and was the person who brought the Axe-Fx and the Friedmans. @LeftyASAT brought the Helix.

If your going between monitors your always going tio have eq differences which you can accomodate for with a few styles of patches in advance with varying eq or you can dial it at soundcheck with your feeds.

My experience of the sounds was different than Joe. To me the normal speaker cabinet sounded the worst. We didn't run the Axe-Fx through it however. The Yamaha sounds good but has less projection and sounds thinner than the normal cabinet or Friedman. The Friedman is very big and full sounding and really fills the room. However you might have to readjust your patches if they're already dialed in with lots of bass with headphones or smaller FRFR speakers.

It's all subjective, and that's why I recommend hearing for yourself in person because online clips aren't as revealing, and you can't account for how the modelers are adjusted for the comparisons.
Agreed that the Helix didn't sound good through the guitar cab. That was surprising, because my Kemper sounds great through my guitar cabs. I should have demonstrated that. Next time.
 




Trending Topics

Top