Uad Ox Box Vs Suhr Rl Ir

Discussion in 'Digital & Modeling Gear' started by eternally found, Sep 5, 2019.

  1. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    I'm sure this has been discussed, and I'm sure there are other places on the internet, but is there one on TGP? Point me to it if I'm missing it!

    I've been on the Kemper train for a while now, and I really do like it, but there's about 5% missing, it has to do with compression, front end, and feel. I have a Matchless Spitfire, played it the other day for about 30 minutes and it felt like home. I'm thinking it's time for a load box with real amps again (currently living in a situation where actual real amps are not practical).

    Anyways, I've been doing some serious deep dives on these two and I'm heavily leaning towards the OX. I wanted to hear from folks that have or use both and wouldn't mind sharing! My hesitation with the Suhr unit is that I already had their non IR version and didn't like what it did with my amps. It didn't feel right and I had one heck of a time with find "the right" IR in the box. Not to mention latency, needing a computer, etc. So here I am considering the OX (and the new Suhr RL IR). Pros for the RL are price for sure, and the tweak ability. Pros for the OX, simplicity! I'm not a "tweaker" and I've enjoyed every minute of the UAD stuff I own, use, and have used. They make phenomenal stuff!

    Anyone that's had experience with both mind sharing which they prefer and why? Thanks so much!
     
  2. marshall2553

    marshall2553 Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,457
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Location:
    NC
    I've had both and really preferred the Suhr. I like being able to load my own IRs and I personally think the load on the Suhr "feels" and sounds better. I used them at home both through monitors and guitar cabs. Through monitors I thought they were pretty close. Through a guitar cab though, running the line out of the Suhr into a SS power amp sounded way better than using the OX's attenuator. If you're primarily using it for FRFR/recording that may not be much of a concern.

    The OX definitely wins on features and convenience though. The OX's editor is pretty slick and probably easier to find your tone with than sifting through bunches of IRs (assuming you don't already have some IRs you know you like). I don't like spending tons of time tweaking, so I know it can be frustrating finding an IR you like. But the factory Celestion IRs on the Suhr are good and there aren't enough of them to give you option overload, so you don't have to go down that rabbit hole if you don't want to. The OX editor requires an iOS device while managing IRs on the Suhr is just like dragging and dropping files to an external USB drive from your computer. I think that just comes down to personal preference.

    In the end I sold both and went with the Boss TAE. The TAE is in the same ballpark as the OX in terms of price and features, I'd definitely give it a look if I was considering the OX. I loved the Suhr RL and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it, but the TAE gives me everything I want in one box and sounds great. My only gripe with the TAE is that it only has four slots for user IRs.

    Edited to remove erroneous iOS requirement for OX editor.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2019
    eternally found likes this.
  3. -Empire

    -Empire Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,896
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2016
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    How were you monitoring the Spitfire? How do you monitor the Kemper?
     
  4. bigfoamfinger

    bigfoamfinger Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,284
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    I had the Ox and I really loved it. It sounded great with headphones, and the features were awesome: Room control, built in Reverb Delay and Comp, ipad/ios software where you can tweak mics and placements. What I don't like about the Ox is that basically the back half of the unit is useless (SPDIF, USB, Footswitch) because UA has done NOTHING in terms of updates to this device. I also didn't like the price point: for that tag you can get another boutique amp or a nice guitar (used).

    I have a RL IR coming next week and I'm excited to try it out, and hopefully it stays, but I could see myself going back to the Ox if it doesn't work out
     
  5. MixMinisterMike

    MixMinisterMike Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2015
    Location:
    USA
    It's iPad, Mac, and Windows for the editor.
     
  6. marshall2553

    marshall2553 Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,457
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Location:
    NC
    Oops, is that a recent change? I got mine right when they were released and I was thinking the editor was iOS only or iOS/Mac only at the time. Could just be my crappy memory though.
     
  7. MixMinisterMike

    MixMinisterMike Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2015
    Location:
    USA
    Nope your memory is good.
    Windows was added this summer.
    @Drew @ UA has posted that they are still working on updates to the Ox, but they seem to have a significantly slower pace of development than their digital products.
     
    Drew @ UA and marshall2553 like this.
  8. MaxTwang

    MaxTwang Member

    Messages:
    2,186
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Sounds to me like the OX may be worth a try if OP has tried the RL and wants an all in one with comp, eq, rev and delay AND the OP hasn't been satisfied with the IR rabbit hole. I have both and unless there are specific IRs you love and intend to use I'd recommend trying the OX for something different that may work better than what you have already tried.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2019
  9. Drew @ UA

    Drew @ UA Member

    Messages:
    166
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    To the OP, let me know if I can answer any specific questions you might have. Happy to help!
     
    MaxTwang likes this.
  10. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Thanks for chiming in Alex! Monitoring the Kemper through my small studio set up (UAD and Focals). Amp was just in the room, I get it’s an entirely different experience, but my whole goal is to get my amps to do what the Kemper is doing, hence a load box. I’ve also been using the Kemper live, but I’m considering and HX Stomp as well for those applications. I’m not using $1500 worth of the Kemper, I use the same profile (which happens to be of my amp)... anyways, lots of thoughts! You have any for me? At the end of the day I’m still going to use a full pedalboard, so it’s figuring out a few different ways to use it in a few different situations.

    Price is the biggest concern for me. The OX is actually more appealing. I’m really not interested in the IR rabbit hole. Simplicity wins every time for me, but maybe I’m overthinking the RL. I’ll be really interested to hear your thoughts on the RL! Follow up for sure.

    Great input! On the other hand, I’m wondering if it was just the whole IR in the box thing, not necessarily the load. But again, not super stoked on the rabbit hole.

    Man thank you so much for the reply! I will absolutely reach out. I read above that updates are in the works, do y’all have any idea of when those will be released?
     
  11. bigfoamfinger

    bigfoamfinger Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,284
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    I get it, I don't plan on falling down the IR rabbit hole either. I'm assuming/hoping that most of the stock IR's in the Suhr will be more than enough for my needs. If anything I will only add a few more IR's, but that's it. The Ox is pretty awesome though!
     
    eternally found likes this.
  12. cclement1968

    cclement1968 Member

    Messages:
    8
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2019
    @eternally found You may or may not have already seen this... but the gents over at That Pedal Show did a great comparison video of the OX and Roland TAE. Not a shoot out, but a nice dive in to features and why you might want one over the other.
     
    eternally found likes this.
  13. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Keep a homie posted!
     
  14. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    I did see this! Thanks for the heads up. I need to watch it again.
     
  15. Drew @ UA

    Drew @ UA Member

    Messages:
    166
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Nothing to announce now... it'll be out when it's ready. A bit vague but OX's tones are curated by James and he tweaks until he's happy and then the DSP guys do their thing etc. A rough estimate.. should be by the end of year if not sooner.
     
  16. -Empire

    -Empire Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,896
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2016
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I suspect that the “5%” you mentioned was mainly due to the different monitoring paradigms, i.e. live cab in the room with you (real amp) vs. cab mic’d up in another room monitored through studio monitors (Kemper).

    I just don’t want you to spend a bunch of money on a load box for no reason. If you do end up getting a load box, I suggest making a Kemper profile of the amp with the load box. Towards the end of the Kemper profiling process, there is a button you can press that switches between the real amp and Kemper profile. Since the amp will be hooked up to the load box with no volume in the room and you’ll be monitoring both through the studio monitors, it’s a true apples-to-apples test.

    I did this exact test with my amps and Palmer load box units maybe 4 years ago. Closed my eyes, hit the button a bunch of times so I didn’t know which was which, tried to guess which was which while playing. Could not tell. That was the end of real amps for me.

    HX Stomp is a great unit, but when run through your studio monitors, will suffer from the same “issue” as Kemper, i.e. no live cab in the room with you.
     
    eternally found likes this.
  17. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Man that’s good feedback! Thank you Alex, I greatly appreciate it.
     
  18. Ed DeGenaro

    Ed DeGenaro Supporting Member

    Messages:
    20,001
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    Malibu
    I'll chime in...I've done this loading since 88 when Rivera installed a couple of bigass resistors in my rack.
    Subsequently I used Hot Plates for it.
    When I wanted direct recording I got a few of the original Palmer's.
    Then I used a iso cab as a load.
    Then a cab wrapped in bedding ala VH1.
    Last time I've been out on your I used a 5 watt single EL84 head with a load.

    Anyways I pondered getting the Ox for a year before I pulled the trigger...absolutely love it. Have since I got it 8 month ago.


    While I was pondering getting the Ox the Boss was announced and for half the price of the I would've used it.
    That said I'm so over IRs.

    Also I run the Ox via tislink into the Apollo.
    Guitar goes first in the IK Axe I/o then from the reamp out into the amps.
    I use the axe I/o as booster if needed and for my DI signal. Prefer it as reamp box to any of the ones I tried.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2019
    Drew @ UA likes this.
  19. TheWayfarer84

    TheWayfarer84 Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Location:
    NC
    I’m in the camp that preferred the RLIR and some of that comes down to simplicity, but I’m also enjoying the tones I get more too.

    It took me a few hours to load up what I wanted and pull out what I didn’t on the Suhr. Now I have a great range of cab/speaker combos and I don’t have to mess with it again. At least not for a long, long time. The OX’s editor is indeed powerful and a wonderful tool - but you can loose hours tweaking and re tweaking. It’s well thought out and works well, but a little daunting too. I do feel like you have to do some tweaking to maximize the cabs.

    What was really the nail in the coffin for me was the attenuator. You cannot bypass it completely and it had a negative impact on my amp. Both in tone and feel. Not a problem if using it solely for DI/recording but a bummer if you want to switch between cab and DI without unplugging everything.
     
  20. eternally found

    eternally found Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Have you tried the RL IR? This is great info!
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice