Atomic CLR vs. Matrix Q 12a vs. Camper 112 CX

    Yesterday I sat together with Günter Haas for a little shootout.
    He brought his Matrix Q 12a and a Camper 112 CX that was sent to him for evaluation purpose. We had planned to evaluate these against one of my Atomic CLR's


    Although we're both from Hamburg we hadn't met before so let me first say that it was a real nice afternoon sitting together with Günter and chatting about music, gear and many other things.
    A real pleasure. Thank you for that, Günter! ;)


    Günter has an immense experience as a musician, and he is a very versatile session player for more than 20 years so it was fairly clear that I would do the filming and he would do the playing.
    He had also brought his 1966 Stratocaster which is a beautiful and very expressive guitar. All recordings were done with that beauty.


    We positioned the three cabs side by side in the middle of my living room, Matrix center, Atomic to the right, Camper to the left.
    Günter played riffs and phrases, and I did filming and switching betweeen two amp on the fly with the use of an A/B box.


    My personal impressions are as follows:
    1. Atomic CLR was the loudest. It was dialed back a bit to match the Q 12a (which was maxed) in loudness. Kemper was set to -15dB and we went pretty loud.
    2. Atomic CLR in backline position with the preset switch set to 'BL' had a little less bass than the Q 12a.
    3. Atomic CLR was then changed to wedge postition with the preset switch set to 'TILT'. In this position it was significantly more bass heavy and actually had more bass than the Q 12a.
    4. Both CLR positions and presets were pleasing to the ear (I liked the wedge/tilt) more but in respect to fidelity I was surprised about the drastic changes that the Atomic showed compared with the unaltered Matrix Q12. (And I can't help asking: When Atomic claims fidelity comparable to studio monitors, what is true fidelity now? BL or TILT with its huge bass boost. I didn't see this documented in the CLR manual either).
    5. But the focus here is, of course, guitar amplification . Actually when the CLR was in wedge/tilt position, it was REALLY hard to tell which is which and I had to get close to the cabs several times just to make sure which one I was hearing. They were nearly indistinguishable. Awesome, both the Q 12a and the CLR.
    6. Now for the Camper 112 CX. We had had very high hopes for this one, but it was a real disappointment. Why? Because it is so quiet that you NEVER EVER can dream of keeping up with a moderate drummer. Either we had a defective unit or KPA-solutions really have to re-work the poweramp of this one completely. To match full power on the Camper we had to turn down the Matrix to 9:00 - 9:30 of its volume pot which is ridiculously quiet.
    You can clearly notice we turned down in that part of the video as the cam mic captures a lot mor of Günter's string attack.
    7. Apart from the missing loudness though, the Camper is a nice cab. So PLEASE RE-WORK the poweramp of this.
    8. Is there a winner? Hmm, I don't think so. What I have learned though is that the Matrix Q12a is absolutely up to par with the CLR. Also it is lighter than the CLR and I like the form factor very much. Should I need another gigh quality stage monitor with a more amp like form factor i would seriously consider the Matrix.


    Feel free to comment and have fun watching the vid!


    [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_E2oha1l-Y[/YOUTUBE]


    P.S: I don't know what YT did to the audio. Theres some phasing happening in the YT video that is not on the original video.

    Thanks for the effort, but the setup, as presented in the video, doesn't allow sound inferences (pun intended). By doing what you did, you introduced a lot of confounding variables which make it unnecessary hard to judge what's going on:


    - all monitors should be kept the same distance from the room boundaries, the Camper is significantly closer to the wall than the CLR, which probably contributed to its "exaggerated" bass response
    - all monitors should be placed at ear height or at the very least tilted upwards, not firing past your calves. What you did was assesing their off-axis response coupled with lots of uncontrolled reflections from the floor
    - the same, standardized stimulus should be applied to all monitors, e. g. the same licks played over and over again or - better yet - played by a looper or even white noise. Otherwise its impossible to differenciate between playing nuances which varied and the response from the speakers
    - how did you normalize SPL between the monitors? A few dBa difference can skew the whole comparison.


    That being said, judging by the video, whatever differences there are left, they don't appear to be day and night.

    We did intentionally no scientific approach like you demand here.
    We only want to pass on our experience, being in the room and playing, and the cam is only accompanying documentation.
    Still the results IMO are very clear about the Matrix and the Atomic being on par and I think the vid shows it, too.
    I think Günter will chime in later, too.

    Like Ingo said, we didn't want to do any scientific tests in a laboratory... what we had was a typical rehearsal room or live-situation, all cabs on the floor under the same conditions. That's were FRFR-cabs normally will do their job, in my studio I'm using my Kemper with 2 Klein & Hummel studio-monitors, on bigger tours the KPA is going straight into the desk and I'm using UE-11 pro-in ears, that's a different story.


    By the way: in my studio the experience between CX and Q12a was exactly the same (both cabs isolated from the floor, nearly linear and dry room), the Q12a was amazingly louder, the CX had a nice tone with a big bass-boost. No wonder, because the CX is a lot bigger than the other cabs ;)


    We used the same profiles (Morgan AC 20, Armin's '57 Fender Deluxe and Egnater Tweaker) and exactly the same settings, I tried to play similar stuff. For the CX we had to turn down the volume of the Q12a a lot.


    Maybe the video is not able to transfer 100% of our test (the horrible YT-phasing included....), but what Ingo wrote is our common impression and we spent the whole afternoon comparing the cabs. I had several days more to compare CX and Q12a.


    I finally would buy the Q12a again, I liked the CLR, too, but it's a bit bigger and more heavy, the CX is much too quiet and too big for my purpose. I'm also missing a volume-control on the cab whereas Q12a and CLR have one.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    first name: Guenter / family name: Haas / www.guenterhaas.de

    Edited once, last by guenterhaas ().

    Thanks to you both for your little shootout. At least I know I haven't jumped to the CLR only to be upped by something better. I like the formfactor of the slightly smaller (and how much lighter) Q12a. Paul

    Hi Guys,


    thanks for the test.


    One thing I do not understand : An audio level is a relative thing. The KPA was set to -15dB. You still had15dB to go....why could you not just turn up the KPA volume for the CX?
    The other cabs might have a more sensitive input, meaning they require a lower signal level to go to max. power and yes, the other cabinets have a volume control after the KPAs volume control, but shouldn't the attainable sound pressure level count and not the level on a certain volume control position of one unit or the other ?


    Or is there a reason to keep the KPA volume at -15dB I overlook ?


    Tilman


    P.S. : I just read an email from Günter in which he pointed out that he found the CX even too quiet with the KPAs volume turned to max. compared to the other cabinets. Every time I test a CX with an old iPOD and its very low output signal level I am half deaf, but we really might have to work on the power amps sensitivity for the hard rockers ^^ .
    Thanks again.

    What do you, Ingolf and Guenther (and everyone else with hands-on experience) think about the idea of using two CLRs as studio monitors? Do they hold up to (or indeed surpass) dedicated studio monitors in their price range?

    Quote from Sportsfreund

    What do you, Ingolf and Guenther (and everyone else with hands-on experience) think about the idea of using two CLRs as studio monitors? Do they hold up to (or indeed surpass) dedicated studio monitors in their price range?

    This could be an idea for a 2nd pair of monitors if you want to hear your recordings very loud, in a normal studio-situation I prefer two very good nearfield monitors like the Klein & Hummel O110 I use. They are very linear and ears don't get tired, even if you listen to them for a long time, nevertheless they're very "honest" and they'll point out every weakness in the mix. For lower frequencies than 58 Hz (O110 = 58 Hz to 20 KHz) I can add my ADAM Sub 8-sub-woofer .


    Tilman: I'm far away from being a loud guitar-player or a hard-rocker. ;) In fact I don't like to play very loud, I don't want to damage my ears (they're still very well), because my main work is -besides being a session-player- producing, mixing and writing. For example: the next days I'll be working on a recording with a classical orchestra (Babelsberger Filmorchester). I'm used to work at low audio-levels and live I'm either playing with the KPA or small combos/amps (Fender Blues Junior 15W, THD Univalve 15W, Dr. Z Maz. sen. 38W). On big tours I'm using the KPA with in ears (UE-11 Pro) and without any amps. Live I'm also playing all acoustic guitars (nylon, steel string & baritone steel string) through the Kemper. For me a FRFR-cab should do the same job on rehearsals and smaller stages when I'm playing without in ears.


    For me the CX is just a bit too quiet for its size and weight, and if you use a FRFR-cab, it's comfortable to have some reserves left if you need them. Because the CX was the biggest cab of all and quite heavy, too, it wouldn't be bad to have a more powerful slave. I recently bought the KPA Powerhead and the built in 600W-slave is very light, I hardly can feel a difference to the normal KPA. So, why not giving more power to a relatively heavy cab or changing the input sensivity?


    By the way: Ingolf and myself had the same opinion about the sound of the CX, it was excellent.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    first name: Guenter / family name: Haas / www.guenterhaas.de

    Edited once, last by guenterhaas ().

    I really appreciate Ingolf and Gunter for your time and effort doing this shoot out. I am in the process of choosing a FRFR cab, and your experience and perspective here are very valuable to me.


    Thanks so much!

    PRS Singlecuts
    Kemper PowerHead/Remote



    Quote from skoczy

    When you turn the knob on KPA, you wake up the captured souls of tube amps living inside.

    Quote from guenterhaas

    the CX had a nice tone with a big bass-boost.


    I don´t think so. The CX doesn´t boost anything. The low-end is just deeper than the low-end of the Q12a. I haven´t heared or measured the CLR yet, so I can only speak about the Q12a and the CX.


    In my opinion a FRFR (full range flat response) should amplify as the name inplies: full range flat response. The lower e-string is 82 Hz. If you play flat tunings it´s lower (D=73 Hz, C=65 Hz). That is the frequency, I want a FRFR at least -3 dB under flat. The CX is -3 dB at 60 Hz and -1,8 dB at 82 Hz. I don´t understand, why other FRFR amps and cabs start at 150 Hz or higher.


    I tested the CX at some rehearsals with a very loud drummer. Marcus Engel of 9mm is one of the loudest drummers of germany. No problem at all with the CX. Yes, it needs a little more input but it´s definitly not that quiet.

    Quote from Gitarrenschlumpf

    I tested the CX at some rehearsals with a very loud drummer. Marcus Engel of 9mm is one of the loudest drummers of germany. No problem at all with the CX. Yes, it needs a little more input but it´s definitly not that quiet.

    Like we said: we didn't do any technical research, we just took the 3 most popular FRFR-cabs and compared them. We both can hardly imagine that the CX would survive a very loud drummer, but that's not the point anyway: the other two cabs were just MUCH louder at a smaller size, the Q12a had a full and eye-to-eye-CLR-sound, although the cab is very compact and the smallest one.


    For the scientists some technical information (I'm sure Ingolf knows everything about his CLR's):


    Matrix Q12a:
    - frequency bandwith nominal: 40-20.000 Hz
    - size (in cm): 37,5h x 45,5w x 28,5d
    - weight: 15.9 kg
    - slave (RMS/peak): 260/520 W
    - sound dispersion nominal: 80h x 80v degrees
    - 1x12" coax-speaker
    - very solid surface (strong, P.A.-like vanish, speaker protected by iron grid)


    Camper 112 CX:
    - frequency (-3 dB): 60-20.000 Hz
    - size (in cm): 43h x 56w x 30d
    - weight: 17 kg
    - slave (RMS/peak): 200/400 W
    - 1x12" coax-speaker
    - nice-looking, but not very solid surface (standard speaker textile, pleather in nice "Kemper-green")

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    first name: Guenter / family name: Haas / www.guenterhaas.de

    Thx for the report. I got to listen to a Camper 112 (I'm not sure whether it was a CX though?) I did not have much time to test it in a proper way... but what I remember: it was loud as f*** :D But maybe the CLR and Q12 are even louder :D
    It would be interesting to see how they compared with everything maxed (I know that can't do that @home though :D) - e.g. I use a Behringer EPQ900 at rehearsal... when the KPA is maxed there isn't really an audible difference from volume 4++. With the axe-fx2 the behrigners volume control was more sensitive -> the Axe had a lot less (dafuq,.... can you say "a lot less" :D?) output to drive the poweramp.

    MJT Strats / PRS Guitars / Many DIY Guitars -- Kemper Profiler Rack / Kemper Remote / InEar

    Quote from Gitarrenschlumpf


    I tested the CX at some rehearsals with a very loud drummer. Marcus Engel of 9mm is one of the loudest drummers of germany. No problem at all with the CX. Yes, it needs a little more input but it´s definitly not that quiet.


    I really don't want to diss the CX. But with the Kemper output set to -15 dB (and if I set more output and slave through some FOH guys already start to complain how my signal is too hot for the desk) it was so ridiculously quiet it wasn't even funny.
    I have stated in my first post that this unit might have been defective as I cannot believe somobody playing at such low volume.
    In this case our impression can be easily rectified in the near future. I think it would be best if Tilman or you checked this unit and compared it against something 'comparable' and you'll see what we mean.
    Later on this test shootout can easily be revised.
    As for the linearity of the Q12a: I trust my ears. The Q12a sounded completely balanced through the whole range of guitar signal we fed into it.
    So did the CLR and so did the CX.

    Great work!


    CLR and Matrix on par except on price (in Europe). Lovin it :)


    And the Matrix bonus is its made in the UK (not China) And uses a Class A/B amp (not Class D)