• TGP is giving away a Strat, Tele, and Jazzmaster. Click Here for full details.
    Click Here to upgrade your account and enter today!

So this is where we are...with "FRFR".

Messages
1,422
Meyer sound actually makes a monitor speaker specifically for FRFR guitar?
No.

That's the whole point. "FRFR" is a bunch of marketing BS. There is NO DIFFERENCE between a "FRFR" cabinet and a standard PA main/monitor cabinet.

For a modeller to sound as it should when using internal cab/power amp modelling, you need the most accurate reproduction you can get. The easiest way to achieve this is to use a high quality PA cabinet. The Meyer is one of the best on the market (similar to the JBL touring gear), so it does very well with modellers and profilers, and gets mentioned because one of the manufacturers uses it for public demos. The better the monitor cabinet you use, the more your sound will match what you will hear in FOH or recorded - which is the point of both a monitor and a guitar cabinet. The goal is for the monitor to NOT color or change the sound, but to reproduce the signal it is sent as accurately as possible.

The HR/Alto is one of the cheapest, poorest performing monitor cabinets on the market, yet they have successfully convinced guitar community that it is somehow "designed for guitar" by calling it "FRFR" and marketing it with a modeller.

PT Barnum was right, and the Headrush/Alto monitor is a great example.
 
Last edited:

JPenn

Member
Messages
1,808
i'm not gigging anymore, but when i did, i was using a helix & alto110.

when i started down the modeller direct route, i first purchased a zoom g3, and got a carvin powered 110 monitor from a friend. i was really unsure about it until someone posted a video on fb from a gig. i listened to it later when i got home and realized it sounded like me. after that, i started looking at the higher end products like helix & fractal.

one advantage i probably had over lots of folks is, i sang about 95% of the songs my band did during the night. i was more worried about trying to sing to the best of my limited abilities vs worried about my tone. i still tried to get the best tone i could, but really didn't nit pick it as much as i may have if i was just playing.
 

Gasp100

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
21,287
Cool, this is exactly where I want to get to with my Iridium. I think I'm just gonna give an Alto TS310 a try. I can return it if I don't like it...has to be better than my old Carvin, and for $245 wth!

If it works out, HX FX is next.
I have a set of older Adam A5's that I love. My direct rigs (and even mic'd amp) sound better out of my nearfields, but when I switch over the the Alto (or the Yamaha DXR10) those patches translate well. Likewise, my IEM mix which I test rigorously at home before bringing a rig to a gig also sounds great.
We use IEMs, rely on a decent amount of FOH but are primarily still a "backline" band where we have live kit (moderate volume drummer with decent dynamics), bass rig that also runs a DI and I primarily use my Alto behind me on the mixing table (sometime my Vox AC10 mic'd) and of course DI if I'm running a board like above.
The goal for me is to always make sure the DI + Alto can hang well with the AC10 mic'd in terms of tone, feel and "end user experience" (ie. ME). It's more than adequate and I've gigged with the Alto in dual guitar player bands as well where the other guitarist used a mic'd amp. My tone was always clear, crisp, defined and simply better.

Meyer or even CLR would be even better in this scenario, but they are hardly a requirement for my DI rig(s) to sound and feel great.
 

mbenigni

Member
Messages
7,770
If Altos were all I had really tried DI or modellers through, I think I would hate every modeller. I got some Altos for an emergency gig when my normal FOH and monitoring was out of reach. I thought since they are so cheap and the gig pay would actually cover the cost, I'd go ahead and do it and then I'd have them as backups. I never wanted to see or hear them again after that. They just sounded weird to me. Now having owned and used them at a gig, I can't be convinced of anything other than that they are very affordable. If people make them work and are happy, then more power to them.
If you think they suck then they suck for you, and the simplest solution is to send them packing. I'd just point out that it's possible to dislike a monitor on the basis that it's different than what you're accustomed to - and more importantly, than what you've programmed your presets for - and not necessarily because it sounds "worse" in any absolute sense. Yes, the cheaper Alto is almost certainly less accurate (flat) than a high-end monitor, but not necessarily less capable of producing any given guitar tone, provided you EQ the incoming signal accordingly.

(Also worth asking, amidst all the Alto-bashing: which Altos?)

Standard disclaimers: I'm a mere hobbyist, and also a cheapskate.
 

mbenigni

Member
Messages
7,770
For a modeller to sound as it should when using internal cab/power amp modelling, you need the most accurate reproduction you can get.
Ideally.

Pretending you have to have an absolutely flat broad-band powered cabinet to reproduce the sound of a conventional guitar cab, with a significant roll-off starting at around 5KHz, is disingenuous at best. Yes, shocker, better monitors will sound better. Lesser monitors - some of them - will also do a respectable job.

The HR/Alto is one of the cheapest, poorest performing monitor cabinets on the market, yet they have successfully convinced guitar community that it is somehow "designed for guitar" by calling it "FRFR" and marketing it with a modeller.

PT Barnum was right, and the Headrush/Alto monitor is a great example.
That may be true of the Headrush, but the Alto is just a cheap monitor. Man, some of you guys have a real bug up your butt about the mere existence of affordable products. There's a market, so what? I'm not playing Madison Square Garden tonight. In other news, I'm not going to push my commuter car off a cliff because it's not a Ferrari.
 

griggsterr

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
6,840
No.

That's the whole point. "FRFR" is a bunch of marketing BS. There is NO DIFFERENCE between a "FRFR" cabinet and a standard PA main/monitor cabinet.

For a modeller to sound as it should when using internal cab/power amp modelling, you need the most accurate reproduction you can get. The easiest way to achieve this is to use a high quality PA cabinet. The Meyer is one of the best on the market (similar to the JBL touring gear), so it does very well with modellers and profilers, and gets mentioned because one of the manufacturers uses it for public demos. The better the monitor cabinet you use, the more your sound will match what you will hear in FOH or recorded - which is the point of both a monitor and a guitar cabinet. The goal is for the monitor to NOT color or change the sound, but to reproduce the signal it is sent as accurately as possible.

The HR/Alto is one of the cheapest, poorest performing monitor cabinets on the market, yet they have successfully convinced guitar community that it is somehow "designed for guitar" by calling it "FRFR" and marketing it with a modeller.

PT Barnum was right, and the Headrush/Alto monitor is a great example.
Well then Meyer is certainly not the best of the best for a full range PA cab. Do they make fine stuff, sure. Going further down this hole will cause a complete derail of the thread. :)
 

griggsterr

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
6,840
No.

That's the whole point. "FRFR" is a bunch of marketing BS. There is NO DIFFERENCE between a "FRFR" cabinet and a standard PA main/monitor cabinet.

For a modeller to sound as it should when using internal cab/power amp modelling, you need the most accurate reproduction you can get. The easiest way to achieve this is to use a high quality PA cabinet. The Meyer is one of the best on the market (similar to the JBL touring gear), so it does very well with modellers and profilers, and gets mentioned because one of the manufacturers uses it for public demos. The better the monitor cabinet you use, the more your sound will match what you will hear in FOH or recorded - which is the point of both a monitor and a guitar cabinet. The goal is for the monitor to NOT color or change the sound, but to reproduce the signal it is sent as accurately as possible.

The HR/Alto is one of the cheapest, poorest performing monitor cabinets on the market, yet they have successfully convinced guitar community that it is somehow "designed for guitar" by calling it "FRFR" and marketing it with a modeller.

PT Barnum was right, and the Headrush/Alto monitor is a great example.
I do agree with what you are saying though. The Alto powered speaker is amazing until you try to ask it to do very much.
 
Messages
1,422
Ideally.

Pretending you have to have an absolutely flat broad-band powered cabinet to reproduce the sound of a conventional guitar cab, with a significant roll-off starting at around 5KHz, is disingenuous at best.
You're missing the point. If you EQ around a bad monitor cabinet, you no longer have a good reference to what is being recorded or sent to FOH.

If you're going to use junk, then why by a Kemper or Axe-FX in the first place?

That may be true of the Headrush, but the Alto is just a cheap monitor.
They are the EXACT SAME THING.
 

goredho

Member
Messages
77
I can understand the appeal of FRFR cabs and the product/marketing intelligence behind it. Forget sound altogether. I'm 49 and my formative years were spent listening to Pink Floyd, Zep, and later Van Halen and GNR. People of my age are old enough to have accrued some disposable income, and when we think live guitar, this is not what we see in our minds eye:



We see this:



A PA speaker on a stand or a wedge in the corner serving as an end table does not satisfy our expectations for what a guitar amplification system should provide on a visceral level.

Edit: For my use case, two powered PA speakers are the right answer, but as I look at options, I keep finding myself being drawn to FRFR cabs because they better fit what my mind has been trained to expect/want.
 
Last edited:

LikeLinus

Member
Messages
144
I've decided be Bi and go both ways, lol. I have an Axe-FX III with (2) Xitone 12's powered with by Matrix GT1000FX. But you would have to pry my Peavey 5150 Block Letter head and cabs from my cold dead hands. I did end up selling off most of my stomp boxes, but I'll never get rid of the 5150 because it sounds freaking amazing and there is no digital simulator that will ever create the tone it has. I know, call me crazy, but I love it. That said, I got the Axe, not as a replacement, but as a fun alternative. It's a spectacular piece of gear and I can get so many tones out of it! It's amazing for what it does.

But I've never had an FRFR and the Axe provide the tone that my 5150 w/ cab has. It's such a full, warm, and brutal sound. They try to replicate it, but they've never nailed it. I find the AXE and FRFR cabs to be a bit more bright. But I use both and love both for different reasons. If I didn't have the 5150, I probably wouldn't notice as much.
 
Last edited:

metropolis_4

Member
Messages
4,861
I'm either low maintenance in this realm, or I have terrible ears for tone. I'm still perfectly content with my cheap little Alto PA speakers. I've got one 8" and one 10" and they do what I need them to do.

I started going down a rabbit hole thinking about replacing them, but decided against it because I really didn't know what more I was looking for.
 

mbenigni

Member
Messages
7,770
If you're going to use junk, then why by a Kemper or Axe-FX in the first place?
A. I didn't. (Well, not recently anyway.)
B. $200 and it serves a purpose != "junk". :rolleyes:

They are the EXACT SAME THING.
Yes, but the marketing is not. Alto calls the TS310 etc. a "powered loudspeaker". Absolutely nothing about this indicates it's a guitar-specific product. (For that matter, nothing about the term "FRFR" is guitar-specific.)
 
Last edited:

mdubya

Member
Messages
1,010
If you think they suck then they suck for you, and the simplest solution is to send them packing. I'd just point out that it's possible to dislike a monitor on the basis that it's different than what you're accustomed to - and more importantly, than what you've programmed your presets for - and not necessarily because it sounds "worse" in any absolute sense. Yes, the cheaper Alto is almost certainly less accurate (flat) than a high-end monitor, but not necessarily less capable of producing any given guitar tone, provided you EQ the incoming signal accordingly.

(Also worth asking, amidst all the Alto-bashing: which Altos?)

Standard disclaimers: I'm a mere hobbyist, and also a cheapskate.
My Alto TX8 didn't sound great. But After I moved on (first the QSC K8, then the XiTone), I did miss some of its character, that "character" which some find lacking and call sterile in higher end monitors.

That said, I got the Presonus e4.5's for ~ $120 and they sound like having your head right up to the speaker of an amp, to me. Amazing little speakers, recommended by Fractal themselves, I should add.

The TX8 shined with my Tech 21 British pedal and with my Bad Monkey used for speaker sim. with my Maestro Fuzz. I think if I had my Alamo reverb tank in the mix and a looper pedal, I could have been set. This rig was the best low volume JTM 45 clone I ever played.

 




Trending Topics

Top