Interesting FRFR story..

[stingrayPete1977]

I think a lot of people are thinking these FRFR cabs are just like the crappy old tops they've got lying around. 

 

[CameronJ]

10 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

I think a lot of people are thinking these FRFR cabs are just like the crappy old tops they've got lying around. 

 

I fear you may have hit the nail on the head here.

[BigRedX]

Does a bass cab really go lower than a good quality FRFR? It might look like it on paper, but you have to remember that most of what we perceive below 40Hz is implied by the harmonics being generated and not by the fundamental itself because most cabs simply aren't cable of reproducing these frequencies at any great volume.

My Line6 Helix into a single RCF745 has replaced the huge Tech Soundsystems and EBS rig that I was previously using. With the RCF745 set up as a wedge the opportunities for positioning and dispersion on stage are superior to what I was getting previously which means lower on-stage volumes; and the new set up occupies about a quarter of the van space.

[lemmywinks]

1 hour ago, LukeFRC said:

A lot of PA cabs are designed to cross over to subs. 
A bass cab will often go lower than a PA cab, because it's designed not to be crossed over. If you want low end then this is a good thing.
Some of the nicer PA cabs discussed in this thread are designed to go lower and run without subs. This means you get a DSP controlled bottom end (more controlled than your bass cab) and the high mids/highs are coming out of a much nicer driver too compared to your Bass cab

 

We have the RCF 735 cabs as tops, however they are full range and before we bought subs they handled a full 5 piece band with bass and keys without breaking a sweat. Serious full range sound at high volumes from two compact speakers, I don't think a band can do any better for £1.5k. I would be happy just using one as a FRFR cab on any stage I play, in fact you would barely get them ticking over. Trust me, most bass cabs won't touch a single 735 for low end at volume.

The QSC I use is configurable to cross over at different frequencies (or not at all) as well as having DSP presets for different usage scenarios.

[stingrayPete1977]

29 minutes ago, lemmywinks said:

 

We have the RCF 735 cabs as tops, however they are full range and before we bought subs they handled a full 5 piece band with bass and keys without breaking a sweat. Serious full range sound at high volumes from two compact speakers, I don't think a band can do any better for £1.5k. I would be happy just using one as a FRFR cab on any stage I play, in fact you would barely get them ticking over. Trust me, most bass cabs won't touch a single 735 for low end at volume.

The QSC I use is configurable to cross over at different frequencies (or not at all) as well as having DSP presets for different usage scenarios.

Yep. 

[Al Krow]

@CameronJ But why bother if there is zero need, and I and my band are perfectly happy with my current set up? I have a couple of perfectly good bass rigs. 

At the end of the day in smaller venues audiences and band mates don't give two hoots about nuances of bass tone. They care about how good the band is, how tight we are, how good a set we are playing, and how good our vocalists are. No one is EVER going to say or think 'if you only had an FRFR for your bass player that would have made all the difference and we would be inviting you back!' 

My challenge to you, my friend, if I am allowed one in return, is that you join a band and see if what I say rings true?

And now that I have bass gear I'm very happy with, for what it's worth, the only challenge I'm really interested in is how do I become a better bass player? Swapping an excellent bass rig for an excellent FRFR is not going to make much, if any, difference to me on that. Spending time on left hand technique and ghost notes however, just might!

Edited April 18, 2018 by Al Krow

[CameronJ]

53 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

@CameronJ But why bother if there is zero need, and I and my band are perfectly happy with my current set up? I have a couple of perfectly good bass rigs. 

At the end of the day in smaller venues audiences and band mates don't give two hoots about nuances of bass tone. They care about how good the band is, how tight we are, how good a set we are playing, and how good our vocalists are. No one is EVER going to say or think 'if you had only had an FRFR for your bass player that would have made all the difference and we would be inviting you back!' 

My challenge to you, my friend, if I am allowed one in return, is that you join a band and see if what I say rings true?

And now that I have bass gear I'm very happy with, for what it's worth, the only challenge I'm really interested in is how do I become a better bass player? Swapping an excellent bass rig for an excellent FRFR is not going to make much, if any, difference to me on that. Spending time on left hand technique and ghost notes however, just might!

This is fair. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Improving ones musicianship should always be a high priority, I agree. But the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

The plus points for a good FRFR setup can make the whole gig that much more enjoyable - when we enjoy playing we tend to play better right? If band members are able to hear themselves better because of the angle of the monitor wedges they’ll play better and with fewer distractions. If band members are hearing themselves better they can afford not to have to turn up so loud, leading to less stage volume and, as a byproduct, less bleed into stage mics. Whoever is in charge of the mix now has less to worry about. Everyone is a little less stressed. All of these factors are huge in small gig environments. A monitor alone isn’t going to get the band more gigs but the knock on effect of a well implemented monitoring system might.

Of course people care about how tight the band is, how good your set is and the quality of the vocalists but to say that the quality of your sound in a small venue isn’t important or that people don’t care is a nonsense. If anything it matters more in the smaller venues because the audience are being sonically blasted at much closer range. Most audience members may not care about the nuances in tone between a P bass vs a J bass but they’ll definitely appreciate being able to hear everything clearly without being uncomfortably slammed by SPL. 

BTW I’m not in insinuating that your bands are guilty of this, just making a general point . Nor do I have a vested interest in getting you to sell all your amps and cabs in favour of going the monitor route. I do, however, feel the need to offer another side to the argument when blanket dismissive assumptions are made about FRFR without first hand experience!

And we both know that me joining a band would be incredibly impractical given my schedule but if I could join a gigging band my current setup would make the whole process that much easier.

[Al Krow]

Hey buddy - no one is making 'blanket dismissive assumptions are made about FRFR without first hand experience' - you've missed the point of what I am saying entirely if you think that.

You've also clearly assumed I have no first hand experience of FRFR? Well let me correct that - both my bands are already using RCF FRFR speakers for our PA and as I mentioned earlier one of our guitarists has just bought an Alto TS212 to put his £1,200 Helix through. (Jury's still out on whether that is going to be better than our other guitarist's Roland Blues Cube, I suspect the Blues Cube is going to win out).

There's an easy way to make sure that a band is not playing too loud and everything can be heard clearly - just make sure you do a proper sound check before you start.

FRFR speakers are an option for sure and a good one, but when you keep trying to suggest that it's a better option than dedicated quality bass rigs and will make a real difference to an audience's experience of a band if a bass player plays through FRFR at smaller venues instead of a quality bass rig, I find I'm struggling to take that seriously. It's maybe a bit unfair for me to raise the practical gigging experience point again, but actually in terms of the 'first hand experience' you refer to, in my books that's the only experience that really counts in terms of what is going to work or not work in a live band mix and surely that's fair?

Edited April 18, 2018 by Al Krow

[Al Krow]

55 minutes ago, CameronJ said:

And we both know that me joining a band would be incredibly impractical given my schedule but if I could join a gigging band my current setup would make the whole process that much easier.

Btw - if you're auditioning for a band any time soon, take a Fender bass (or something that looks similar - I could lend you a pre 2015 Berg**) and something that looks like a bass amp (you could maybe borrow my Markbass combo - guitarists are always impressed by them).  First impressions and all that  

** actually bin the Berg. There was another very erudite thread recently and apparently you can do pretty much anything on a Squier bass and they are obviously a dead ringer for Fenders 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Al Krow

[lemmywinks]

For some reason guitarists really do like MarkBass gear, I think the bright colour confuses them. 

[BigRedX]

19 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Btw - if you're auditioning for a band any time soon, take a Fender bass (or something that looks similar - I could lend you a pre 2015 Berg) and something that looks like a bass amp (you could maybe borrow my Markbass combo - guitarists are always impressed by them).  First impressions and all that  

I know your comment wasn't completely serious, but in 40+ years of playing in bands I've never once come across this attitude outside of this forum (i.e. in real life).

[CameronJ]

7 hours ago, Al Krow said:

Hey buddy - no one is making 'blanket dismissive assumptions are made about FRFR without first hand experience' - you've missed the point of what I am saying entirely if you think that.

My statement was in itself a blanket one, my bad. I was primarily referring to the comments re: these high end monitors being unable to consistently match (and indeed outperform) traditional bass rigs for heft/tone etc. when the components inside them mean that in fact they can - quite comfortably.

Your other points are fair and valid!

If I audition for a band any time soon and the name on the headstock of my bass stops me from getting the gig then I’m clearly auditioning for the wrong band. Either that or my playing stinks. Which will be the real reason for me not getting the gig 

Edited April 19, 2018 by CameronJ

[stingrayPete1977]

An RCF cab costs less than a comparable bass rig yet can handle just as much bottom end but with a more nuanced sound if you want it, I can't see how that's not better? 

Would I change my existing rig, no, would I buy an extra RCF735 instead of a bass rig if mine broke or was stolen, 100% yes. 

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 26, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[CameronJ]

1 hour ago, Jus Lukin said:

Demolish? What is this, wrestling trash talk?! 

I think you may have misunderstood my post- it had nothing to do with comparing BF to RCF, but was simply about whether FRFR is 'better' in the simplest sense, which of course, entirely depends. The reasons it makes sense for me to have still a 'rig' are unrelated to the frequency response.

Originally just about FRFR, this thread is veering towards an RCF worship session, and while it may be limited to here and similar threads, it's starting to whiff of flavour of the month, like Barefaced has been, and Markbass before it- like the SFT before the VT bass, etc etc. I'm convinced the RCF products are great, no doubt about that, but like any other solution, they can't ever be a magic bullet which suits everyone in every situation. A grand-slam to find the ultimate champion who can kick everyone else's butt really would be going about things the wrong way!

Fair play, there no doubt are still situations where FRFR may not be the most practical solution.

Also, point taken re: the borderline religious zeal with which my posts in particular were written! I was somewhat aware in the writing of some of my posts that they would come across that way. My only excuse being that it’s the byproduct of having finally acquired a rig that has genuinely ridden me of any amp related GAS. Now if only I could find the same nirvana with basses...

Edited April 19, 2018 by CameronJ

[stingrayPete1977]

24 minutes ago, Jus Lukin said:

Demolish? What is this, wrestling trash talk?! 

I think you may have misunderstood my post- it had nothing to do with comparing BF to RCF, but was simply about whether FRFR is 'better' in the simplest sense, which of course, entirely depends. The reasons it makes sense for me to have still a 'rig' are unrelated to the frequency response.

Originally just about FRFR, this thread is veering towards an RCF worship session, and while it may be limited to here and similar threads, it's starting to whiff of flavour of the month, like Barefaced has been, and Markbass before it- like the SFT before the VT bass, etc etc. I'm convinced the RCF products are great, no doubt about that, but like any other solution, they can't ever be a magic bullet which suits everyone in every situation. A grand-slam to find the ultimate champion who can kick everyone else's butt really would be going about things the wrong way!

If you mic a Barefaced bass rig and put that through the RCF it would faithfully recreate that, and many variations on that plus vocals, guitar, keys etc etc etc. 

It costs less too. 

[EBS_freak]

Just to clarify, there shouldn't be any RCF worship here - the word RCF could be replaced with any competitor brand... Yamaha, QSC, EV whatever... HOWEVER when it comes to the RCF 735 and 745... they are stand out cabs because of these things -

VC size and resultant performance of the drivers and the horns that they are used are not used in any other ABS cabs - they are only usually found in wooden cabs.

VC size and resultant performance of the drivers and the horns that they use are not found in any other cabs at this price point.

VC size and resultant performance of the drivers and the horns that they use are not found in any other cabs of this weight.

Smaart shows the DSP to be a true FRFR with a pink noise test - and these cabs will actually handle so much lows that a lot of users could (and do) use them without a sub.

So those two cabs in particular are cabs that should not exist - and therefore are worthy of mention because for the reasons above, they smack all others (comparable but ultimately non comparable) into the ground. 

Are RCF the cabs the best in the PA world? No. Far from it. Are the 735 and 745 the best compared to their non-existent competition? I'd say so. If that makes them flavour of the month, I'd say given the reasons above, it's fully justifiable.

Edited April 19, 2018 by EBS_freak

[EBS_freak]

24 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

If you mic a Barefaced bass rig and put that through the RCF it would faithfully recreate that, and many variations on that plus vocals, guitar, keys etc etc etc. 

It costs less too. 

Just to be a pedant... micing up the a Barefaced rig would give you a "studio"-esque take on the sound that comes from a Barefaced rig. You have the inherent sound of the mic and the fact that it is taking just one point of the cab and the sound that is produced rather than the sound of a cab as a whole.

But yeah, would agree with the rest.

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 26, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 26, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, Jus Lukin said:

The same could be said of the Barefaced though- they seem as flat as any passive PA cab I've experienced.

That's all perfectly reasonable and as I said, I don't doubt that the RCFs are great. The specs of my systems are great too, and suit me down to the ground- I don't think RCF want to beat me up because of it!

I just think it is worth a mention that FRFR is great if one needs or wants Full Range Flat Response. It's not just plain old better by default for all- using amp sims for a percentage of my gigs, I'm actively going out of my way to stop the system as a whole providing FRFR, because it sounds and feels more appropriate in context. I guess my point is that FRFR can be great, but may or may not be a worthwhile endeavour depending on need. RCF wedge-able monitors are great, but other options do exist!

As flat as any passive PA - maybe - but certainly not as flat as any cab that is given a helping hand with DSP to control the actual resulting response. It's a bit of a cheat really - you could actually manufacturer a pretty poor cab and fix most of the problems with DSP.

I don't think anybody is running anybody's systems down. They are just different approaches to the same problem. Some people will want FRFR, some people may not. As I stated above, what it does enable you do is to get that studio processed sound into your live rig. I think you are confusing the real thing behind FRFR in your statement, "I'm actively going out of my way to stop the system as a whole providing FRFR, because it sounds and feels more appropriate in context." The point is, if your rig is exactly like you like it, if I miced it up and profiled it with my Kemper, it would sound exactly the same as your rig miced up. The reason? My FRFR cab is not changing the sound coming out of the Kemper. If you put the Kemper back into your Barefaced cab, you would get the sound signature of that Barefaced cab changing the sound. FRFR doesnt mean your bass sounds flat or sterile... it just means that it has no impact on the sound that is being fed into it. You not using FRFR to get your sound from your rig is fine... but my model of your rig requires FRFR to not colour that modelled sound of your rig.

Put it like this, if you were to put a Trace through your Barefaced speaker, it would sound like a Trace through a Barefaced speaker. If you were then to put an Ampeg through your Barefaced speaker it would then sound like an Ampeg through Barefaced speaker. You may actually prefer the sound of a Trace through a Barefaced speaker but prefer the Ampeg through an Ampeg speaker... so you'll have to cart that around too. I can model all that with my Kemper and a FRFR cab... and not have to carry the Barefaced or two amps around.... in fact, I could take as many virtual amps and cabs as I need... and the resultant sound through the PA would be exactly the same. Whats not to like about that?

Your RCF monitor comment seems to have no context to the rest of your post?

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, Jus Lukin said:

I'm not meaning to single anyone out on that, just picking it up from the over all tone of the thread. Great that you've found what works for you- I think part of why it works for me is that I can act as if I am buying and using lots of different amps!

I suppose the bass equivalent of what I'm doing is one of those Line 6 modeling basses- just doesn't appeal to me in the same way though!

The tone of the thread can be pretty much dictated by the title. I don't quite know what you would be expecting!

The modelling thing has only really been nailed in the last few years... and the software in the current modellers are still being improved month by month to incorporate better fx and more models etc.

The Line 6 modelling bass is now old technology... and carrying around a few basses is certainly different to carrying around a few backline rigs, both in terms of size and weight. 

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 26, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, Jus Lukin said:

True, although whatever works is fine with me! As far as how flat to go, I'm sure the Barefaced could be more neutral, as could any passive PA speaker, but that's certainly as flat as I need, though.

Not seriously, no, I was just joshing at some of the terms used. Pete said RCF would demolish Barefaced without breaking sweat, I figured that's why you went with 'smack all others into the ground' shortly after! Just seemed incongruously Hulk Hogan-esque, given the subject matter!

No, I get it- a lot of the time I do want an uncoloured sound, so the FRFR setup is ideal. When I don't want that it also means I can use an amp sim accurately. When I do, I'm invariably adding a step to the chain which reduces the frequency range of the signal and adds dips and bumps to the response, as an amp and cab would. That signal is still presented as-is, but the overall effect is that the system as a whole sounds and feels much more like a more traditional amp. It's saved me a lot of space, if nothing else! If we were discussing whether a Barefaced could be considered FRFR that's another thing, but in my experience they are no less accurate than my passive PA speakers and have a wider response, so I'm happy to consider them so in real-world use.

Interesting FRFR Story...

Well, we're still on the subject, and I suppose a degree of brand deification ought to be expected in just about any thread round these parts! 

Everybody's gear is their gear and if it works for them, so be it. I'm always interested in what other people are doing as it may inspire me to do something different.

RCF demolish a Barefaced? Well, I guess that depends on which RCF, which Barefaced... and whether you want the colouration of a bass cab, or the FRFR of a PA cab. My smack all others into the ground wasn't directed at Barefaced or any particular manufacturer to be honest - I wasn't even thinking about Pete's comments either than I wrote it. The reason I wrote it, performance, weight and price wise, there is simply not a competing product offered from any other manufacturer whether they be predominantly PA manufacturers or bass cab manufacturers or crossover (like Barefaced?). To some extent though, the Hulk Hogan comparison actually hangs true. The components in those particular two models outclass those from cabs even more than double the price. That pretty hulk in my book.

In regard to BF and your passive speaker cabs - they probably are comparable... but I'm very wary of passive cabs being branded as FRFR for reasons I've mentioned earlier. I just don't think it's possible to engineer a flat response cab anywhere near that of a cab with DSP. Sure, you could add DSP pre the amp that drives the passive speaker... but again, more shizzle to carry around.

As opposed to brands being mentioned in threads - it's natural - thats what makes the stuff we write about more real world. People like stuff. People don't like stuff. Some people can justify why they rate stuff... others just rate it because they own it and very protective if what they have bought is then brought into question on a forum. I think that's a fair observation isn't it?

[stevie]

It's an observation that those asking for advice about equipment would do well to bear in mind. The "I own one therefore it must be good" response it fairly commonplace around these parts.

On the passive/active question, I'd say it is perfectly possible to engineer a passive flat response cab that performs as well as an active one with DSP. But you need to start out with very good components and not stint on the passive crossover/shaping circuitry. Nowadays, it's a lot easier, and probably less expensive,  to do it with DSP.