Fryette LXII + KPA

    I could not gain any information from the video, since there was an audio compressor or limiter killing all the dynamics of the amps.
    Did I hear that correctly?



    And there is another issue that's bothering me:
    I am always faced with esotheric voodoo and misleadings about the speaker impedance curve and the interaction with the power amp.


    What is true:
    Every speaker has an impedance curve.
    With solid state amps this curve is highly damped to create a linear frequency responce. This is what I would call an high interaction between the speaker and the amp.
    Tube amps damp much less and let the speaker live their natural frequency responce. I would consider this as low interaction, in difference to other experts.


    I do not qualify low or high interaction as good or bad, it's just aspects of sound.
    But I think it's funny that this interaction term has been invented decades ago and cited since then by experts and amateurs without questioning. Why is that? Well, it's a great marketing term!


    With tube amps and lower damping the speakers develop an emphasized high end, but even more a low end peak with a reasonable Q-Factor. This is why they will sound loose and spongy (dynamic?), while damped speakers sound tight and dry.



    What is not true:
    When someone states that the change in sound that you hear is not a change in frequency responce but a change in dynamics. Not true.



    What is kept secret:
    The non-damped behaviour of the speaker does not make the sound more dynamic. Also the tube amp does not add dynamics, when driven in the linear region.
    All what happens is that the speaker develops a different frequency responce, compared to the damped version. That's all! The tubes are not involved.
    This frequency responce is present at any volume, thus not dynamic. But it gives a more dynamic feel.
    The change in frequency responce can easily be created by a simple equalizer in front of a modern solid state power amp, even by an analog circuit for a few bugs.



    The profiles in the KPA have these frequency responces coded in the cabinet section.
    When you switch off the cabinet or select "MonitorCabOff", you still have these frequency responce aspects on your hand by adjusting the Monitor EQ.


    It is not my intention to talk against tube power amps, but I will fight against esotheric arguments and attributes to make tube power amps look different than they are.
    I will be happy to start a discussion about that, and to prove me wrong.

    Quote from mba

    Release the KPA poweramp we will see how it sounds.(and compare with our setup)

    Aye, Aye, I got tired of waiting and decided to purchase the Fryette. I considered the Matrix amp or going the FFFR route e.g. RCF but decided for what I do a separate amp and guitar cab or passive FFR would better suit me. Now I am holding out for the Kemper foot controller so the sooner that comes to fruition the better.

    Steven asked me to post this as he does not have his own profile set up here. Enjoy...


    Quote from ckemper

    I could not gain any information from the video, since there was an audio compressor or limiter killing all the dynamics of the amps.
    Did I hear that correctly?


    The only "compression" is the result of youtube compression. I believe I mentioned in the video that the viewers listening experience would be limited in that regard.




    I would agree with you as a general principal. In fact, a "laymans" level explanation of this very point was discussed in Volume II (the 11R demo) , and the discussion is also referenced in both Volume III (the KPA demo) and IV (the Pod HD demo). If we know what we are talking about in the first place, we must be fundamentally in agreement.



    Quote from ckemper

    What is not true:
    When someone states that the change in sound that you hear is not a change in frequency responce but a change in dynamics. Not true.


    What is kept secret:
    The non-damped behaviour of the speaker does not make the sound more dynamic. Also the tube amp does not add dynamics, when driven in the linear region.
    All what happens is that the speaker develops a different frequency responce, compared to the damped version. That's all! The tubes are not involved.



    Again I would agree in principal, and again, the technical discussion in Volume II stated this in very general terms. The point here, from my perspective, is that the discussion is not about "dynamic range" in the scientific sense. What is being discussed is "playing dynamic" and I was very careful in my choice of terminology here in describing how the player perceives the esoteric - to use your term - interplay between the components. It should also be noted that the player in general does not always understand the strict difference between frequency response as represented graphically and the subtle shift in frequency emphasis due to the interaction between components resulting from the impedance curve of the speaker and enhanced or suppressed by the speaker enclosure design and amplifier damping behavior. Scientific language often converys little to the player looking primarily to find their ultimate medium of expression and that there is in fact some basis for the acceptance of certain "esoteric" concepts that players perceive, if only intuitively. The only ones keeping "secrets" are the ones who cannot or choose not to accept the juxtaposition of the scientific and esoteric aspects of this discussion.





    Quote from ckemper

    This frequency responce is present at any volume, thus not dynamic. But it gives a more dynamic feel.
    The change in frequency responce can easily be created by a simple equalizer in front of a modern solid state power amp, even by an analog circuit for a few bugs.



    Spoken like a true acoustics professor :) However, even you are not immune to the presence of "feel" in such a conversation, naturally because no matter how you state it, the eoteric aspect is not always easy to express in scientific terms. Therefore "more dynamic feel" is a realistic attempt to convey a somewhat esoteric concept. Hopefully you'll pardon my wandering public speaking ability. I'm not at ease speaking with a camera in my face. Perhaps I can I look forward to your live video presentation in the near future for guidance?






    Quote from ckemper

    The profiles in the KPA have these frequency responces coded in the cabinet section.
    When you switch off the cabinet or select "MonitorCabOff", you still have these frequency responce aspects on your hand by adjusting the Monitor EQ.


    It is not my intention to talk against tube power amps, but I will fight against esotheric arguments and attributes to make tube power amps look different than they are.
    I will be happy to start a discussion about that, and to prove me wrong.


    I think the Monitor EQ argument is where our positions differ - and only in real world application. No EQ curve I have ever encountered, no matter how closely it resembles a static graphical representation, has been able to accurately represent the esoteric interaction between a tube amplifier and speaker cabinet driven by the complex signals generated by a guitar. At some point, a modeler will be able to do enough math to make it possible, but I suspect that's a long way off and current "esoteric" gear does it so much better right now.




    Despite that, it seems like we are more in agreement tnan not. It appears that where we differ is in application of various components and interpretation of results. Music appreciation and performance involves a lot of tactile and emotional interplay, and in that, I will continue to induldge my love for the gear that brings me the greatest satisfaction and inspiration. This in no way is any indictment of modeling gear, and I said as much very clearly in the introduction to each video, pointing out the relative strengths of each product. And I believe my appreciation for various aspects of the KPA is quite obvious, so hopefully you are simply nitpicking where I appear to be critical of the KPA and modelers in general. I don't think it is unfair for me to take the position that one can be impressed by technological advancement and keep one foot in the traditional or esoteric realm at the same time.


    So I guess, I have no need to try to prove you wrong when it's obvoious that you are simply trying to be very precise, whereas I am simply interested in trying to communicate with guitar players with whom I share a passion for instruments that inspire spontaneity.

    Edited 4 times, last by tubenut ().

    Hi Steve,


    Thanks for your anser.
    I agree with you in every aspect. See my comments below.


    My mission is to show that tube amps are not superior to other amplifying technics, but face to face (only!)
    Most people believe that tube amps do believe that tube amps to something magical that cannot be achieved otherwise.
    Some believe that tube amps have properties that is not understood by sience.


    There were a number of music business experts that truly adviced me to include a "glowing marketing tube" into the KPA like Roland and Korg (Vox) do.
    This would increase our success, because the "dump guitarists" would easier believe in the sound.
    Did you all know that all these marketing tubes have an orange LED underneath to make them glow? What a bad fake! There is at least one device that doesn't stop sounding when you pull out the tube!


    Unfortunately I am aware that these experts are right.
    But I have chosen the way to enlighten our users, which is the tougher path. So here I am!




    Quote from tubenut


    The only "compression" is the result of youtube compression. I believe I mentioned in the video that the viewers listening experience would be limited in that regard.


    The data (MPEG) compression does not bother me. I believe an A/B comparison is still possible even when done thru a non optimal data compression, since both signals pass the same static conversion. (Many people think differently about it).


    But I can clearly hear an automatic gain control - that is an audio compressor - of your recording device on all of these videos. It's adjusting the volume by many decibels. You can easily hear it when the background noise rises, when you stop playing guitar. I can hear it when you play guitar, too.
    This autmatic gain control heavily influences all dynamics and perceived frequency responces of the amps.
    It renders any A/B comparison impossible and useless.
    This hasn't been noticed by anybody even on other forums?



    Quote from tubenut


    I think the Monitor EQ argument is where our positions differ - and only in real world application. No EQ curve I have ever encountered, no matter how closely it resembles a static graphical representation, has been able to accurately represent the esoteric interaction between a tube amplifier and speaker cabinet driven by the complex signals generated by a guitar. At some point, a modeler will be able to do enough math to make it possible, but I suspect that's a long way off and current "esoteric" gear does it so much better right now.



    This is interesting. Did you really try to match a tube amp + cab to a SS amp + cab?
    There is no extensive math necessary. It is static.
    The complex signal of the guitar doesn't make it more complex.


    CK


    Chris - First of all THANK YOU for not giving in to the "fake 12AX7" advice. It was actually a good decision on your part. KPA buyers are probably more sophisticated than the entry level customer who might be fooled by this tactic and would resent being looked down upon by such a choice.




    Regarding the compression, there is none and the camera compression is disabled by the fact that the internal mic is not being used. We are using the line in as explained in the text. Also explained in at least one video is that the speaking mic is activated while I am talking and muted while playing. Undoubtedly you are hearing that mic being turned on and off at the beginning and end of each talking segment.I see in some instances that this can sound like compression release.




    We are getting lots of feedback about these, and let me say that we are getting a suprising amout of feedback from viewers asking how we were able to achieve such realistic sounds - even using the SS power amp - in thise vids. All one has to do is read the description section to understand that there is nothing special going on in our recording signal path. We are relying simply on the quality of the gear. But I have to say I am pleased with how well the D412 cab translated to "tape". I have been told this by recording engineers, but this is my first experience doing the actual recordng in house, and I am an amateur in that respect. I can also advise that the best way to learn what products like yours are really capable of is to disable all of the effects and cab/mic sims and learn the behavior of the amp models first. This was an essential step for us in order to effectively shorten the learning curve of 4 completely different modeling devices.




    By "math" I am speaking of the interpolation of the mic and cab sims. One virtual mic set at one virtual cab position is terribly insufficient given how much time an experienced recording engineer spends on mic placement in a recording studio. Then add local reflections, and then room reflections. I would not classify these as reverb effects - they must be part of the cab/mic sim algorithm in order to be effective and malleable. That we just placed an sm57 randomly in front of a cab and hit record was pure luck and we kept all videos the same in this regard in the interest of simplicity and pure laziness on the logic that we shouldn't do anything that the end user couldn't easily accomplish themselves. Therefore anyone should be able to duplicate our results easily.




    And yes, a complex guitar signal most assuredly makes capturing the amplified sound "to tape" more complex since power amp choice, cab choice, mic choice, and mic placement play a huge role in the end result - much moreso than adding reverb or delay in my personal experience.

    Chris - regarding 3 more of your points:




    1) Most people believe that tube amps do believe that tube amps to something magical that cannot be achieved otherwise.




    I am one of those who believe that tube amps do something magical. The difference is, I know why, and how to manipulate some of that "magic". I do not believe that this cannot be acheived otherwise (note the double negative), only that it is currently easier to do with existing tube "technology", and more fun for me - a 50s sci-fi throwback for whom glowing tubes and high voltage is a truly guilty pleasure. I also believe that you have a lot of work yet ahead of you - which I in fact encourage.




    2) There were a number of music business experts that truly adviced me to include a "glowing marketing tube" into the KPA like Roland and Korg (Vox) do.



    I am also one of those for whom the yellow/orange glow (the real one) is something to be embraced. Putting an LED in there to fake the tube glow is at the level of a used car salesman. "If you cannot sell the product on its merits, falsify the merits to close the deal". We have added an amber LED under the real, properly operating tube in 2 cases and for a legitimate reason - to let the customer know that the tube circuit is operating in instances where it is helpful to know and may be hard to tell if other parts of the circuit are working but the audio function is not. We also used blue LEDs to enhance the personality of the glowing tube area of the amplifier (in the Memphis amps). This info is shared as a disclaimer, mainly to say the following...




    As a fellow idealist who resists such crass marketing schemes and someone of obvious technical skill, I imagine you feel as I do about amp companies that promote switching power tubes even though the output transformer specification is fixed to a specific tube. In a way, I envy the promise of modeling technology in that it will be so easy for you to dispose of such entrenched BS marketing schemes as power tube switching that the end user has embraced beyond all logic or our ability to explain otherwise.



    3) My mission is to show that tube amps are not superior to other amplifying technics.




    Yet, you must depend heavily on and commit much time and financial expense in order to "emulate" every conceivable aspect of tube amp behavior and performance for the end result of proving a superior technology. I am not challenging your motive or mission. I am simply wondering if your mission statement might need to be reconsidered in order to make it more true to your actual endeavor, which I do find more exciting and admirable than that which you describe as your mission statement. :thumbup:

    Well gentlemen, this certainly has been an interesting exchange of views between two passionate manufacturers.


    I must say I'm keen to see the fifth part of Fryette's video series that's mentioned at the end of part IV.

    Quote from RobT

    Aye, Aye, I got tired of waiting and decided to purchase the Fryette. I considered the Matrix amp or going the FFFR route e.g. RCF but decided for what I do a separate amp and guitar cab or passive FFR would better suit me. Now I am holding out for the Kemper foot controller so the sooner that comes to fruition the better.


    Rob T,


    Still waiting for the Fryette? It is so silent about this new 1u Fryette. Any info here?

    Dada, After being told it was 2 weeks out when I purchased the LXII from the Axe Palace, I then read on the Fractal Forum and week or so later that the Axe Place was quoting 6-8 weeks. I sent an email off and received a confirming email from Nick at the Axe Palace that indeed it would be 8 weeks due to a "part availability". Since then, I haven't heard anything. I'm frankly not a happy camper and I'm on the verge of cancelling the order. If I had known it was going to be two months, I would have either gone the Retro Channel route or at the least not spent $1299.00 and waited until it was available.