In this video, I put the popular Headrush FRFR monitor up against the Friedman ASC 12. I gad to find out what the hype was all about and see how it stacked up against the Friedman.
How can they sound SO different if they both claim to be FRFR? Im listening through my Alesis MK2's and the difference is CRAZY. The Friedman was muffled and boomy while the Headrush was thin and midrange heavy. I get my pair of Headrush 108s in a few hours... Ill update when I run my Helix through them.
Bought pairs of them 10 months ago, for theirs size and weight, sound quality, pressure and loudness is amazing. Use for party's and karaoke events. Rms ≈ 800 Watts each. 1600 watts for pair. Weight only 8kg
LGPhotoArt.com The Friedman is geared for true and accurate sound; you can dial in your tone. If you want a real amp sound from an frfr, Friedman. The Headrush falls more inline with a PA for home use. They are both frfr, but they do different things. The world of frfr cabs is like different vehicles; essentially, they are all meant to do the same thing in sort, but they are all different in their own way. More specifically, consider the comparison between an off-road vehicle, vs a sedan, vs a sport bike. All three are modes of transportation, but all three are geared to transport in a specific way. Hope that helps.
@@spartan8390 thank you , but I did not ask for help :) Anyway, an FRFR that sounds like a PA is EXACTLY what I am after, so when I make my sounds I know how they will sound out of the FOH PA. I don't care to sound cool on stage but sound different from what anybody else in the public can hear. Unless you want to mic the cab, which for me it defeats a lot of purpose of using a modeler with IR's. Hope this helps equally.
OMG 2 - Headrush 112's are insane with my Ernie Ball 5 string 2MM. Right now I'm feeding a Spark practice amp. Gonna get a pedalboard & speaker stands. It will be a good PA. I heard people complaining about the bass, I'm using the Spark as a Bluetooth. Playing music thru it, gotta turn the bass almost off, booming(good)
@@thefam9179 old system weight 230lbs compared to say 80lbs 2 - Headrush 112’s.Sparky & my two pedals say 120lbs. My old system is punchier, but the weight & diff effects.
Thanks for taking the time out of your day to share this man! I really appreciate all your hard work dude! I'm a guy that just got a Helix LT so this is hitting home for me. The Headrush sounds good. I mean for $299 it absolutely kicks. But when comparing it to the Friedman - well you can hear the difference that extra $$ is paying for. Again, the Headrush sounds great & would do the job but the Friedman just rings "true" to my ears. The Headrush has the sound of the enclosure in it - the Friedman has the sound of its enclosure as well but this is where the difference really makes each stand out. The Friedman sounds like a real amp. The "feel" is there - you know - it really has balls! That's the difference. The Friedman sounds & feels like a real amp while the Headrush has that "plastic enclosure" sound. Again, the Headrush sounds great & at $299 would be easy to have a pretty kick ass stereo rig as you can buy 2 & still have cash left over when comparing with the Friedman. We're "guitar guys". We love tone & for a lot of us chasing tone is "funner" that actually finding it. I mean what's better than trying out gear? But think about it for a second. Does anyone at the venue (besides other "guitar guys") really care? Would the average fan be able to tell the difference? As long as the talent is there 90% of the audience doesn't care what you play through whatever. They don't care as long as it sounds good. So IMHO the Headrush sounds great & would make a great rig especially for us working musicians. The Friedman just plain old kicks ass in every sense - you can't deny that after hearing this. So it would depend on the musician & what needs you may have. I personally will put a couple of things on the back-burner because I've been leaning towards the Friedman already. This just pushed me off the edge. Again - the Headrush sounds great & it would be nice to have 2 & get that wide stereo spread. It would be a kicking rig, but for ME, I just love the Friedman & the feel & sound is worth the extra cash imo. So that's my 2 cents which is probably worth less than a popcorn fart at the movies. Love your channel dude! Thanks again! Keep doing the good stuff!!!!!!!🤘😁🤘
Brett, thank you for the kind words and insight. I agree with you. Here's 1 very respectful caveat - Whatever frfr a guitarist uses to monitor himself on stage, (even a cheap plastic unit) won't matter to an audience. However, if he dialed in his tone on that cheap plastic unit the audience/sound guy will suffer because the tone will most likely be pretty bad.
The Headrush allowed more mids to around 4k to be heard which gave it more clarity to my ears. The Friedman was warmer, but midrange wasn't there. I'm more of an midrange guy when it comes to hearing the guitar in context with a band. The sound guys love you more, but you probably get less AiTR with just a Headrush on stage. I use a PC+ and feel I get the best of both worlds, using it in frfr mode which LRS PC Creamback IRs.
Ryan Chansler ....I agree with you. You need to have the mids very present to cut through in a live situation. I do use a Friedman ASC-12, and its a matter of dialing in your modeler correctly with your FRFR of choice. What you hear in this video Is easily fixed with some EQ. I can tell you I love my Friedman, and of all the FRFR solutions I tried, the Friedman is the best....to my ears anyway, and I am very picky when it come to my tone. You will not get the “fullness” from the Headrush, because it’s just not capable. It is just a rebadged PA speaker unfortunately. However, in the end, the best product for you, is what sounds best to you. These solutions are more for personal monitoring anyway, because if your using a modeler, you not going to mic it, your going direct to FOH.
@@MrRycher I'm sure you can adjust the eq to get the same out of the Friedman, but here's my concern. We just heard the Headrush with frequencies around 500Hz to 4k that were not present in the Friedman. I'd have no problem sending the HR tone to foh as is. If it's truly frfr, then they'll be happy with what I'm sending them too. Buuuut, if I had the Friedman and I EQed it to sound the same, the signal I sent to foh would be bloated and grating around the 4k range. That's because the Friedman isn't as flat as most FRFRs. It may have more of that cab feel, but you have to be mindful about what you're sending foh. I used to set it so the global eq in my Helix would only affect the foh signal when I used my Powercab+ in flat mode because it isn't entirely flat response either.
Listening on a MB Pro 2016 15"built in speakers. The Head rush sounds brighter, Friedman seams warmer and can articulate the cleaner notes picked out of the chords.
For home practice, the Headrush is a good buy for an affordable FRFR but personally I'd rather save up for the superior Friedman FRFR speaker. If I am spending 2k plus on a Kemper or Fractal Axe FX III anyways may as well get quality cab speaker for it to sound close to real amps.
My big question would be: were the presets dialed in on the Friedman and then played through the Headrush? If so then you're obviously going to prefer the sound of the friedman because it's reproducing the sound that you we're expecting in the first place.
@@arnyarny77 monitors are a completely different animal. FRFRs give you gigging volume if you want to play in a band. Use monitors when recording and mixing in the studio and you get more accurate pristine sound, but you can't use them for gigging.
Wow, headrush sounds way more brittle and harsh while the Friedman isn't as cutting but sounds a lot more organic and real and responsive, you can feel the resonance on the palm mutes and stuff way better
Thanks for the comparison. I think the Freidman sounded much better on every sample. I was wondering about the headrush and your video confirmed my thoughts. I am very particular about my sound and believe the Freidman would make me happy. I have been considering a similar setup, so your video was great for me.
Is this a preset you designed with the Friedman and played through the Headrush? Or did you create and tweak a preset for each cab? While I understand the amp in the room part, its really comparing apples and oranges because the Headrush is not designed for that. And not tweaking a preset for each is not a fair test, much like you wouldn't use a factory preset without tweaking. People use the Helix in so many different ways. You like the wall of sound, big stage volume the Friedman gives, and thats fine, but not everyone is looking for that. I just need enough volume to monitor and keep the stage volume down and let the FOH do it's thing. For that, an frfr like the Headrush a better solution. I do appreciate your videos though, as I enjoy hearing different perspectives.
Hearing in my studio with adam speaker I agree with you. There is no contest here. I purchased a headrush 108 and I don't know how is going to sound but hearing this comparison, I am not very happy. Yes it is night and day.
Friedman !! Sounds amazing 👍🏻 I had to sell my Headrush because it sounded like a old radio 📻 so plastic sound .. a waste of money, better save a little more and go for the Fierdman .. 😤🤟🏻🇨🇱
While I appreciate what the guy is trying to do in the video, it isn’t a fair comparison. As an example, take any amp head and it’s going to sound radically through two different cabs… unless you start adjusting knobs to compensate. I’d rather see someone try to recreate the same tone through the two different cabs. Whether or not it can be done is going to tell the real story of the cab’s versatility. There’s just way too much at play in this situation- different speakers, different cab dimensions, different cab materials components, etc. So to just take a preset and run it through each FRFR without making adjustments only yields the results I’d expect- two different cabs, each with their own character.
Agreed, but I have the headrush. Sounds like it does on here to me. Its a kind harsh sounding two way speaker IMO. That said for $300 I'm using it till i figure out exactly what I want to do. Ive yet to hear someone really dial in a headrush to my liking. I don't hate them, just not really sold on it.
Aside from that, what tone is he using? Which processor? What does it sound like through Genlecs or anything of the sort? What if the tone just sucks to begin with? Too many variables..
Thanks for the comparison. The Friedman sounds to my ears is more like a guitar cab. Another FRFR cab to demo if you cab get one is the Xitone range of cabinets . They have both passive and powered versions and they sound stellar IMO. Be interesting to hear how they compare with the Friedman .
I've come to the conclusion that these 2 products are for different uses. If you want a monitor that'll let you know what you modeller will sound like FOH, then use the Headrush and switch off the flat EQ (as PAs don't have a flat EQ). If, however, you want to use your modeller to recreate loads of different amps types and still have the behaviour and feel of a traditional amp blasting at your back - perhaps even to the point of micing the cab up in an old-fashioned way - go for the Freidman. Both uses have benefits. For the Headrush, you get to hear something 'like' FOH tone as a monitor. For the Friedman, you might not get exactly FOH, but it will feel more amp-like and, especially if you mic it, it'll sound the way most amps do out front once the engineer's done their thing. Of course, even your modelled DI'd sounds will be tweaked by the FOH engineer so, there's that. I'm a strange blend of traditional and futuristic - I love a noisy growling speaker behind me, but I also like to be able to swap and change the amp powering that speaker whenever I feel the whim to do so. So I'd get the Freidman for behind me (and also a Headrush in front of me, 'cus I'm greedy. ;-)).
the mids on the friedman is too pulled back, it will get lost on the mix, one question though, did you try listening to the same kemper profile through studio monitors? if you did, which one sounded closest to the sound you heard from the studio monitors?
I’m listening to everything through my iPhone 14. The headrest sounded good and it sounded clear and the Friedmans sounded good and clear but the freedmen seems to have more of a smooth sound to the tone and the freeman also has a smoother nicer sound for the fax. The other one seems to take a little bit away.
I am really confused with those FRFR (Full Range Flat Response) were they really arent flat at all.Those are monitors that their job is to give the most accurate representation of what goes in them without coloring the sound....99% of them are plastic cause it doesnt color the sound as much as wood. Now wood is a different story.Its inconsistent based of density,type,weight etc and a huge example is guitar cabinets were most of them have Vintage 30 speakers and sound so much different to each other.So by having a so called FRFR monitor made like the Friedman YES it will sound more like a guitar cabinet but its not really a flat response.It will color your preset and when you plug to something else it will sound way different. So if i wanted an FRFR monitor for the purpose that they are made of,i wouldnt get the Friedman...and if i didnt want something FRFR and didnt mind the coloring but wanted a more guitar cab feeling i would just get a power amp and hook a real guitar cab on it.
I bought the Headrush frfr own it for 2 months from now at first I thought I made a mistake of buying it but later on I did some global eq tweaking on my Headrush pedalboard and finally getting some good tone I was looking for. Probably will save up for mission frfr speakers I hear a lot of good reviews about it. Great comparison thanks!
How are you running into the Friedman? I put the ToneX one from 1/4 to xlr into it and it will only give volume with reverb even if the capture doesn’t include it
was the headrush in flat response mode? I got 2 108 8" headrush for my Helix yea its a little dark probably not as dark as the 112 but i can global EQ the 1/4" out seperatly from the XLR out to my studio monitors inside the helix rack so after EQ ing some of the low end out of the headrush i got a damn good tone for my taste, dosent sound as good as running my Helix through a Marshall dual mono block 9200 to passive frfr but that aint cheap either, demo the 108's from headrush for $400 for a pair got nothing to lose.for $1800 bucks for a pair of Friedmans ill build a couple of baltic birch cabs and stick the guts to the headrush's in the mofo's still cheaper than one Friedman, Why is your outro music at earbleed level?? holy shit you about blew my head off!!!
I honestly beg to differ with your opinion. Here’s what I did. Right before you did your comparison I closed my eyes. The difference was very noticeable. And what I thought was the Friedman turned out to be the headrush. To me the Friedman sounded muddy and all bottom end while the headrush included more mid frequencies and seemed like it would be better to cut through the mix. Even the cleans seemed to have more clarity on the headrush. I used my positive grid spark amp to compare
Personally, I think the headrush sounded more transparent. However, you’re micing it wrong. FRFR are intended to fill a room so, they need to be mic’s at a distance, not at a foot away. Sure a wood cab will have more bass but, that can be fixed with EQ.
Converted my headcold to a vocal monitor and ordered the Friedman cabinet. Sounds like my 4x12 cabinet. I did everything to try to get that 112 to sound good but failed. It sounds fake…you are being nice about it! Lol
Your videos are phenomenal dude. I use a Headrush Pedalboard with a Headrush 112 FRFR. Lately im questioning my 112. It has such little bass compared to the other guitarist in my band who is using a regular amp and 2x12 cab. Your videos have helped me immensely. I think ill be working towards getting a ME Gemini.
That’s where quality comes in, not size. Size matters when all else is equal but it’s not equal here. E.g. an Electro-Voice 12MP easily drowns out a bass player when dialed in to do so. 2x12 is just two 12” speakers so one active speaker with twice the power will achieve pretty much the same, especially in real life. Just my experience.
Firstly just my opinion because to some degree tone is in the ear of the beholder along with the wallet. But actually your amp sounded muffled. The headrush (and I dont own one)was brighter but less full probably since it has no cabinet. But headrush was clearer tone. yours is pretty bassy if thats a word. And which headrush was it that you tested ? the 8 inch or the 12 inch? if your Friedman is running 12 inch speakers looks like it is then it should have been 12 compared to 12 and honestly you would buy 2 of these since then it would be stereo. I certainly wouldn't buy just one if I made that purchase. But tone is each to his own somewhat but i think if you had 2 of them and spaced them apart I think the headrush probably would have sounded much better. I have my eye on the Gemini 2 but I am thinking being able to space speakers apart is certainly something to consider. I think it will sound much different than 2 speaks close to one another in a little cab.
Have you tried a Powercab 112 Plus? Between that and the Headrush FRFR112. Wich One would you pick and why?? I really cant make up my mind haha THANKS!!
In a way, it seems what the reviewer is saying is the Headrush sounds ‘congested’, and I respectfully have to disagree. What I hear is the Friedman makes the model sound more like a guitar amp, so maybe more ‘authentic’, if you will, but the Headrush is more representative of what you’d hear coming out of the FOH. Of course likely you could EQ one to sound like the other and vice-versa.
I've heard 3 or 4 demos of the Friedman and it always sounds muddy. I have a Laney IRT-X and it's a little more than an FRFR speaker, but I'm looking to upgrade and nothing sounds very good on YT.
I have a HR112 and I'm happy with it,but it's seems to lack a bit on the high end, but I like that warm tone. Great for bass. I'm not sure what format you used for the audio file on the video?.MP3 or WAV? What guitar/fx did you use? , Just curious. thanks Glenn
Thanks for commenting. I used a wav file If you get a chance to put them both side-by-side in the same Room in front of you, you'll be amazed at the difference. This video does not do it Justice
Would be good to hear them compared in a mix. You can try out an amp in a store and think it sounds great but when you get it in a mix with a band it might not sound as good as it did in the store. Blending these with other instruments would be the true test IMO.
You have to redo this shootout. You are not using it right and with the intended product. Like using a screwdriver as a prybar, this is not a fair shootout. Use it correctly. Questions, did you use the contour button correctly? one setting is for floor mounting the other is for when it sits on a stand, the tone difference is big. many times I see these types of comparisons that just don't do good equipment justice, like using a tube amp on high gain with a tube screamer set to high gain, and putting it up against a rat peddal for a comparison, your going like the rat peddal although neither sound is good by itself.
Regardless, am quiet optimistic the headrush can deliver and it falls a lot on how good ones tone dialing skills are. If it sounds great in a mix and a good tool to give me an indication on how my tones sound from the FOH, I've got my bang for the buck.
What kind of volume levels were these at? Cause the Friedman really emulated a cranked stack. If that was at safe volumes, then I'm in love. (Could maybe emulate that in the Headrush with IRs?)
Great question. The volume is very safe. Pretty much personal practice volume. Regarding the Headrush, there's no IR that can fix how bad that thing sounds.
I don't know how anyone listening to this demo would choose the headrush. I don't own either at this point so I am not being biased. The Friedman sound way more like a guitar cab. Th headrush has a very thin and buzzy, nasal sound quality to it. As soon as I heard the 1st clip of the Friedman I said to myself "that sounds like a guitar cab" I don't think there is even a close comparison. However, the Friedman is way more money, that's true but it blows away the Headrush in my opinion
Headrush is more airy and bright, but the Friedman has great warm tones. for the price; Im buying the Headrush 112. Its good enough. Cheers man! Needed this!
The Friedman sounds bigger, the Headrush sounds like it has more mid-range probably due to the plastic resonance. Listening with a pair of Sennheiser HD600 headphones and heard what you heard, night and day. 100% agree with your comments & glad to see this demo before running out and buying 2 FRFR's for stereo. The Friedman is clearly my choice. Really good demo, thanks!
Posting the raw impression as asked prior to hearing yours and reading others. I like the friedman for the head cuttin’ distortion. Both have nice clean sounds, different but nice. The friedman seems like the better unit overall. However, it could be that the headrush just doesn’t sound good out of the box and the friedman does. So, I would love to see you reference mic these speakers and then set a corrective eq prior to output. Did you do any eq’ing to account for out of the box differences? I am hoping you didn’t because I can get two frfr-108’s for monitors and two frfr-112’s for a backline for $1000, just $100 more than a single friedman. So I really want the headrush to be able to perform better. Doesn’t have to win outright but better would be good. Update: So I just listened to your comments and read a few below. Two takeaways, being in the room made a big difference I believe and everyone, myself included, wants the headrush to sound better. I read below that you did not tweak the model you were using for either unit so my “out of the box” comment may still stand. Hoping some corrective eq gets a much better sound.
Joel Michael check out my reviews of the FR108 and see what you think. I own a SmallBox and I’m likely going to HX Stomp and Two FR108s based on my results from a Friedman SmallBox! That’s how much I like the HeadRush!
Pre-feedback thoughts: Assuming you had everything set in the middle, the Headrush sounds a little more crunchy and a bit brighter. The Friedman was beefier and warm. Both sound good. Without being in the room, it's hard to hear the actual levels and presence. I would totally consider the Headrush for the price and portability. I hate hauling equipment, so I have my eye on it. Post-feedback thoughts: You answered some questions about their presence. I hate that "nasally" plastic sound. It may not be worth the price since I value quality over convenience. I will need to test one out in person to know for sure.
Thanks for commenting. I would highly suggest putting them up against each other. You'll be surprised at how much better the Friedmen sounds and feels over the headrush
@@TONEWARSgearshow I mean with all due respect, you are asking for opinions. You're bound to find people that won't agree. Your choice isn't objective. I have the feeling that you won't have arguments to back up your preference (since it looks way too biased. Almost like you made sure you put the Headrush as bad as possible). But it is funny that you just answer to this complimenting the Friedman 😂, and not respond to those that respectfully gave their reasons why the Headrush sounded better. Are you being sponsored by Friedman? This honestly looks extremely biased.
@@TONEWARSgearshow Also think it's worth noting that you did not use the contour switch that boosts lows and highs on the Headrush. Why would you compare a unit that you don't really know how to properly get its potential :/ man
Hey, thanks for a great video. I am in the market for a powered speaker and these two came up every time. Friedman sounds more like a real amplifier with a cabinet. Head rush sounds like you mic out an amp that's playing through a PA.
My paused video thoughts. Honestly, I think the Friedman sounded better. BUT.... That doesn't mean I think it is better. I think that the hearing could get closer with EQ. I also think that the either speaker is great for different purposes. If you run Helix straight to front of house and just need a little on stage monitoring, Harish all the way. If your sound is dependent on a cabinet on stage, then you definitely need to invest in something like the Friedman. That's my opinion. Some guys will say that if you spend money on the helix why run it through crap speakers, my response to that is after saving/spending on a helix, there just might not be enough cash left over. Especially if music is not a source of income and just a hobby. My 2 pennies.
Great review. Good job not trash talking either product but expressing your findings. Great honest review. I'd like to stand in front of a Friedman and feel what you're feeling. Also, I agree with the studio monitors suggestion. I recently got myself a nice set and find that my live tone is well represented by studio monitors over my Frfr. With the monitors it seems whatever I create at home translates fairly well to pa. Thanks again.
@@prestobeen thank you for commenting. Full disclosure, I use the Friedman at home and/or jam sessions with friends. On stage, I use IEM's , so no monitor needed. That said, the tones that I dialed in on the Friedman translate very well through every PA system of played through so far.
Friedman was warmer and at the same time a bit crisper on the high’s. I have the headrush and it works but I’m liking what I’m hearing on this video from the Friedman.
I know this is an older video, but the Freidman still looks to be a viable option in 2024. I've been looking for a good option for my FM3, and I don't like my PowerCab at all, so I figured I'd just get a good solid state power amp and drive a regular guitar cabinet. That said, what do you think of the Freidman 5 years later? I don't believe they actually market it as a FRFR, as it has a Celestion guitar speaker in it right? Thanks!
Thanks @@TONEWARSgearshow 🙂 The Fender ToneMaster then? Interesting. I wouldn’t have expected that; not for metal tones anyway. I’ll take a look at it 👍🏻
Dude, everytime I have a question about a sound or a product, my first reflexe is to go on your youtube channel and check if you have made a video about that. Thank you for your honesty i learned a lot thanks to you. I have the Helix, I make my sounds with headphones, played on monitoring speakers (a pair of yamaha HS5), the sound is so dead... It's perfect in a mix, like a backing track for example, but it's so dead when playing alone or with other musicians or a singer... So now I brought back to my appartment my dear old Blackstar amp and use it with my Helix by bypassing the preamp of the Blackstar and using the Mesa Mark IV simulation preamp on the Helix. The sound is waayyyy better and alive. Right now I'm just waiting to afford the Friedman ASC12 (the Gemini is to expensive) (sorry for bad english i'm a french dude)
@@TONEWARSgearshow Ok thanks I'll check this out ! Right now i'm using the power amp and the cab of my Blackstar, with the preamp simulation of the Helix. I haven't tried this at loud volume yet, next month I'll play with my band, with a drummer etc, so I'll see how it goes in a "band situation". But the biggest question I have is what should I choose between a Frfr cab (like the Friedman Asc12 with wood) or a "real" cab (like a 1x12 Mesa for exemple) ? I play metal and heavy sound too, so I defer to your advices.
It's like with every different kind of cab and setup, it's gonna sound different, that's why you have the wonderful parametric eq, dial it in the way you want and what sounds good to you, does it sound nasalily? Dial out those certain mid freqs to get it where you want it. Everyone, I mean everyone should take the time to learn how eq frequency bands effects sound in music, and not just guitar either, learn all instruments. you have to understand how to use an eq and to use it properly..
Hey Jared, I just got the Friedman ACS 12 for a Kemper/helix dual rig ( yes , I’m still tinkering with that) . I have hopes based partially upon your endorsement which I know I can trust. I originally ordered a power cab, it was DOA. But anyway thanks
The Friedman is thick and rich sounding. with that specific profile i bet the Headrush would sound better in the mix though. Thanks for doing these i am considering getting that friedman, right now im using the yamaha frfr. They sound great but only at loud volumes, when turned down it looses headroom/dynamics that a real cab provides.
I paused. The Head Rush sounded way better with heavy distortion and sounded more authentic where the Friedman sounded muffled and void of life. Clean was pretty close, but the Head Rush had more life, however on the whole chord strum at the very end the Friedman had a nicer smoother soothing sound.
I’ve tried both and the Friedman was miles better IMO. Just sounded more full and warm. The Headrush sounded really good to me at lower volume but got completely lost when I took it too band practice even with the Axe Fx cranked and the Headrush at 11 (yes it goes to 11 lol). Also it was very bottom heavy and not in a chugging good way but like a bass way. Unfortunately I never used the Friedman at higher volumes and sold it but now I’m getting another after the Headrush being so disappointing with the band. Granted we do play really loud tho. I hope the Friedman will be able to do the job.
Thanks for commenting. I'm sure the Friedman will do the job for you. It has never let me down so far. The Headrush is just a very boxy bassy sounding unit. There's no articulation
not going to criticize this a/b but i would think in addition to the a/b between the Friedman and Headrush, would be to have and a/b/c with C being the direct recording from your modeller to DAW. i have a tech21 power engine 60 that i used for a very long time with various modellers beginning with the Line6 X3 Live and forward to Helix. I eventually got a Headrush FRFR-112 because it was a more focused and directional stage monitor setup and for that it works extremely well. What the audience hears at gigs is 95% out of the house PA. I always get compliments on my guitar tones and textures. If not using a real amp rig, i pack both Tech21 and Headrush and use one or the other depending on gig situation. i.e., if i'm playing a club that doesn't have the greatest PA, i will use the Tech21 because it's open back and sounds better coming off the stage like a real open back amp. if the room and venue are such that the PA will be doing all the work then I use the Headrush.
Hi Tone Wars, Was the HeadRush contour switch On or OFF when doing this video..??? (note) Contour EQ switch helps compensate for excessive lows and mids on some stages
@@TONEWARSgearshow Thanks for the reply, because the headrush contour switch boost 3db of bass & treble to warm it up bit to calm the harshness of the mid frequencies, Also the Friedman ASM 12 has a low cut switch @ 100hz, probably off giving the Friedman a more warmer tone...is my guess...!!
@@TONEWARSgearshow Thank you... I just bought 2-headrushes frfr108 (stereo setup) for my modelers, (Kemper, Axefx II, Positive G's Bias Rack & my Helix rack.. P.S...I agree with you from another video in using studio monitors for the best sound for modelers ( I have a Pair of Presonus E8 for that)...again thanks...
Don't know how it sounded on ur end, but I thought the headrest sounded better. But who knows. You really didn't play enough and with enough variety to giv an honest evaluation. But the fact your hearing it live where as im hearing it on youtube raises the question of how accurate you tube is
My two cents, not that my opinion means much, to me it's more a matter of getting the gear that I can fit in my budget. Many years (late 70's, 80's) ago I was stuck using amps that at the time were considered 2nd class, ie: peavey, crate, etc. Then I got my first Vox! So I just purchased two of the HeadRush FRFR-108's to run stereo. Later when my budget allows me I'll go get the better gear. Though everyone seems to like what they hear for now. Good video, thanks for posting it.
Thanks for commenting, and you're opinion DOES matter! That's what this is all about. Enjoy your gear, and when the time is right, you'll find something you'll like even more
Thx for the great video, I'm currently looking for a FRFR solution for my AX8. The Friedman sounds bigger and warmer than the Headrush with a better low end - but that could also be a bad thing if the warms and clarity comes from a non linear behaviour of the Friedman. It would be so great if you could add a pair of reference studio monitors, like Adams A7X to the comparison (also miced). That would allow us to decide if the Friedman or the Headrush give a better FRFR reproduction of the designed patch. What do you think? What is your experience with patches that you dialed in with the friedmans, do they sound as good when you send them directly from your modeller to a front of house system?
They both sounded good, but VERY different. What I would like to hear is a patch dialed in to sound its best using each cabinet. If I plug my Marshall head in to an EVH 4x12, I'm going to dial the knobs differently than if I had the Marshall head plugged in to an Orange 4x12.
PR0_ GABBY exactly bud! You nailed it! My experience with my FRFR108 has been different. Not nasal and for 400 for a pair, hard to beat! Granted I have not used the Friedman and I have no doubt it’s great, however I can’t see it being 4x the money better. I own a SmallBox for example, is it 4x better than a good Marshall ... no it’s not. It’s a great amp and I’m not going to sell it, but we are talking small increments in quality here. Most of that can be made up by using your ears and tweaking. No disrespect to Tone Wars, but once I thought Friedman was the cure all... as you know in terms of Tone, your never cured lol !
Headrush was far more bright than the friedman. That can be good or bad. Depends. 2 different cabs need 2 different eq settings. If you want a warmer tone coming out the headrush, adjust eq to achieve that then run that same tone through the friedman. The friedman will probably sound muddy and dark. Like I said, 2 different cabs need 2 different eq settings. Then there is the contour button on the headrush. Was that used or not? I can make my headrush 112's sound very warm or bright.
I heard just the opposite of that,the Headrush sounded Wide and Fat,and the Friedman sounded Muffled!! It helped that you deadened the room also! Nice Shootout!!
Your right. I got a pod go about 6 months ago.. Bought an alto 12" speaker. Said to be on par with the headrush. Thought it would be better than my studio monitors. NOPE!!! My monitors are just plastic sterling MX8's.. $300. Kept the Alto. Use it as a wedge at Church.
You fail to mention which Headrush FRFR you were comparing against - the 108 or the 112. Also, I get that the Headrush was borrowed, but I'm pretty sure that leaving that big pick shaped sticker on the grill didn't do the sound any favors.
One thinig, you have been playing the Friedman for a while now and all your settings, effects and levels are fine tuned to your friedman. You will definitely feel like the headrush is not gonna respond as well as your friedman but perhaps with some adjustements it could.
One point that everyone seems to be missing is that the reviewer created these patches on the Friedman, which he owns. Then he plays those exact same patches on the Headrush. I wonder what would happen if he created the sounds on the Headrush and then played them back on the Friedman....It's like getting a suit made for one person and then putting it on someone else and saying the it doesn't look as good on the other person. Something to take into consideration.
I use a headrush 108 with a pod hd500 and I think is is very good value for the price. It sits in the mix well. I also think that if you are spending 2 grand on a kemper then you should get a good quality speaker to replicate the sound to kemper quality. That's not going to be a Headrush at £200.
Interesting to see what you said you heard in the room, because none of that came through to me in the video. The Friedman sounded very muffled and the headrush sounded ok, but nothing special. You certainly have me thinking though.
OK, i agree with you what the woody sound of the Friedman is concerned, but if you mike the Friedman ( live ) and the the PA-service uses fiber-type speaker cabinets?
![Do You Need FRFR For Your Modeler? [Here's why I stopped using FRFR]](/img/n.gif)
One thing to note is the headrush is about $300 new and the friedman asc 12 is about $900. That's something to consider.
4 years later, and the Friedman ASC 12 is now $1400.
I couldn’t agree more.
I like the Headrush better, I thought it sounded more open, Friedman sound muffled to me - I had Friedman before and it gets drowned in the mix
Exactly.
shows you dont know about amps lol headrush sound like a radio
Definitely the headrush, the mids is definitely just what is awesome about this speaker!
I really liked the Friedman. Seemed more natural to me. The headrush sounded like a cheap bluetooth speaker. Might be my headphones. Lol
How can they sound SO different if they both claim to be FRFR? Im listening through my Alesis MK2's and the difference is CRAZY. The Friedman was muffled and boomy while the Headrush was thin and midrange heavy. I get my pair of Headrush 108s in a few hours... Ill update when I run my Helix through them.
How did it go?
@Kevin Reagor He never bought it.
Bought pairs of them 10 months ago, for theirs size and weight, sound quality, pressure and loudness is amazing.
Use for party's and karaoke events.
Rms ≈ 800 Watts each. 1600 watts for pair. Weight only 8kg
The lack of mid tone and character from the Friedman is disappointing, especially given the price.
LGPhotoArt.com The Friedman is geared for true and accurate sound; you can dial in your tone. If you want a real amp sound from an frfr, Friedman. The Headrush falls more inline with a PA for home use. They are both frfr, but they do different things. The world of frfr cabs is like different vehicles; essentially, they are all meant to do the same thing in sort, but they are all different in their own way. More specifically, consider the comparison between an off-road vehicle, vs a sedan, vs a sport bike. All three are modes of transportation, but all three are geared to transport in a specific way. Hope that helps.
@@spartan8390 thank you , but I did not ask for help :) Anyway, an FRFR that sounds like a PA is EXACTLY what I am after, so when I make my sounds I know how they will sound out of the FOH PA. I don't care to sound cool on stage but sound different from what anybody else in the public can hear. Unless you want to mic the cab, which for me it defeats a lot of purpose of using a modeler with IR's. Hope this helps equally.
Seems to me that if you're going to spend $900 for a frfr guitar speaker that colors your tone you might at well just... Buy an amp. 🤷♂️
@@mrburns366 pretty much what you said.
It sounded more darker.
I sold my friedman and kept my headrush 112. I like the headrush better.
Is the smaller speaker HR worth a thought? Maybe 2 for stereo vs one 12”? Thanks for your thoughts...
OMG 2 - Headrush 112's are insane with my Ernie Ball 5 string 2MM. Right now I'm feeding a Spark practice amp. Gonna get a pedalboard & speaker stands. It will be a good PA. I heard people complaining about the bass, I'm using the Spark as a Bluetooth. Playing music thru it, gotta turn the bass almost off, booming(good)
What do you like more about it?
@@thefam9179 old system weight 230lbs compared to say 80lbs 2 - Headrush 112’s.Sparky & my two pedals say 120lbs. My old system is punchier, but the weight & diff effects.
Actually, both do a good job, the headrush seems to have more mids and cut through a mix better...
Neverland.Thomas totally agree!
It’s also got a contour switch that’s boosts the lows and highs. I’m not sure if Jarrod used that of if he left it flat.
I agree.
The headrush sounded crisper and cleaner to me .
Thanks for taking the time out of your day to share this man! I really appreciate all your hard work dude! I'm a guy that just got a Helix LT so this is hitting home for me. The Headrush sounds good. I mean for $299 it absolutely kicks. But when comparing it to the Friedman - well you can hear the difference that extra $$ is paying for. Again, the Headrush sounds great & would do the job but the Friedman just rings "true" to my ears. The Headrush has the sound of the enclosure in it - the Friedman has the sound of its enclosure as well but this is where the difference really makes each stand out. The Friedman sounds like a real amp. The "feel" is there - you know - it really has balls! That's the difference. The Friedman sounds & feels like a real amp while the Headrush has that "plastic enclosure" sound. Again, the Headrush sounds great & at $299 would be easy to have a pretty kick ass stereo rig as you can buy 2 & still have cash left over when comparing with the Friedman. We're "guitar guys". We love tone & for a lot of us chasing tone is "funner" that actually finding it. I mean what's better than trying out gear? But think about it for a second. Does anyone at the venue (besides other "guitar guys") really care? Would the average fan be able to tell the difference? As long as the talent is there 90% of the audience doesn't care what you play through whatever. They don't care as long as it sounds good. So IMHO the Headrush sounds great & would make a great rig especially for us working musicians. The Friedman just plain old kicks ass in every sense - you can't deny that after hearing this. So it would depend on the musician & what needs you may have. I personally will put a couple of things on the back-burner because I've been leaning towards the Friedman already. This just pushed me off the edge. Again - the Headrush sounds great & it would be nice to have 2 & get that wide stereo spread. It would be a kicking rig, but for ME, I just love the Friedman & the feel & sound is worth the extra cash imo. So that's my 2 cents which is probably worth less than a popcorn fart at the movies. Love your channel dude! Thanks again! Keep doing the good stuff!!!!!!!🤘😁🤘
Brett, thank you for the kind words and insight. I agree with you. Here's 1 very respectful caveat -
Whatever frfr a guitarist uses to monitor himself on stage, (even a cheap plastic unit) won't matter to an audience. However, if he dialed in his tone on that cheap plastic unit the audience/sound guy will suffer because the tone will most likely be pretty bad.
I thought that the Headrush was more open sounding...Friedman sounded like it had a blanket tossed over it.
hahaha, that's partially true in this case :p
The Headrush allowed more mids to around 4k to be heard which gave it more clarity to my ears. The Friedman was warmer, but midrange wasn't there. I'm more of an midrange guy when it comes to hearing the guitar in context with a band. The sound guys love you more, but you probably get less AiTR with just a Headrush on stage. I use a PC+ and feel I get the best of both worlds, using it in frfr mode which LRS PC Creamback IRs.
Ryan Chansler ....I agree with you. You need to have the mids very present to cut through in a live situation. I do use a Friedman ASC-12, and its a matter of dialing in your modeler correctly with your FRFR of choice. What you hear in this video Is easily fixed with some EQ. I can tell you I love my Friedman, and of all the FRFR solutions I tried, the Friedman is the best....to my ears anyway, and I am very picky when it come to my tone. You will not get the “fullness” from the Headrush, because it’s just not capable. It is just a rebadged PA speaker unfortunately. However, in the end, the best product for you, is what sounds best to you. These solutions are more for personal monitoring anyway, because if your using a modeler, you not going to mic it, your going direct to FOH.
@@MrRycher not according to the manufacturer they say its not a rebranded alto, and its supposed to be voiced for guitar.
@@MrRycher I'm sure you can adjust the eq to get the same out of the Friedman, but here's my concern. We just heard the Headrush with frequencies around 500Hz to 4k that were not present in the Friedman. I'd have no problem sending the HR tone to foh as is. If it's truly frfr, then they'll be happy with what I'm sending them too. Buuuut, if I had the Friedman and I EQed it to sound the same, the signal I sent to foh would be bloated and grating around the 4k range. That's because the Friedman isn't as flat as most FRFRs. It may have more of that cab feel, but you have to be mindful about what you're sending foh. I used to set it so the global eq in my Helix would only affect the foh signal when I used my Powercab+ in flat mode because it isn't entirely flat response either.
To my ears I preferred the Friedman. It sounded more the way I would tailor my tone.
I like the headrush for the dirty sound and Friedman for clean sound. Add a little boost at 2.5khz and the headrush will sound the same in clean.
Listening on a MB Pro 2016 15"built in speakers. The Head rush sounds brighter, Friedman seams warmer and can articulate the cleaner notes picked out of the chords.
For home practice, the Headrush is a good buy for an affordable FRFR but personally I'd rather save up for the superior Friedman FRFR speaker. If I am spending 2k plus on a Kemper or Fractal Axe FX III anyways may as well get quality cab speaker for it to sound close to real amps.
My big question would be: were the presets dialed in on the Friedman and then played through the Headrush? If so then you're obviously going to prefer the sound of the friedman because it's reproducing the sound that you we're expecting in the first place.
As he stated: "The Friedman sounded very close to the direct recording". So it was dialed in against an interface, not a cab + mic, most likely.
What justifies 800 for a tiny cabinet that Freeman that's basically just a speaker in a cabinet
So you think studio monitors are better than the headrest? Monitors like the Yamaha? I been contemplating those Yamaha for years
@@arnyarny77 monitors are a completely different animal. FRFRs give you gigging volume if you want to play in a band. Use monitors when recording and mixing in the studio and you get more accurate pristine sound, but you can't use them for gigging.
Wow, headrush sounds way more brittle and harsh while the Friedman isn't as cutting but sounds a lot more organic and real and responsive, you can feel the resonance on the palm mutes and stuff way better
Thanks for the comparison. I think the Freidman sounded much better on every sample. I was wondering about the headrush and your video confirmed my thoughts. I am very particular about my sound and believe the Freidman would make me happy. I have been considering a similar setup, so your video was great for me.
Is this a preset you designed with the Friedman and played through the Headrush? Or did you create and tweak a preset for each cab? While I understand the amp in the room part, its really comparing apples and oranges because the Headrush is not designed for that. And not tweaking a preset for each is not a fair test, much like you wouldn't use a factory preset without tweaking. People use the Helix in so many different ways. You like the wall of sound, big stage volume the Friedman gives, and thats fine, but not everyone is looking for that. I just need enough volume to monitor and keep the stage volume down and let the FOH do it's thing. For that, an frfr like the Headrush a better solution.
I do appreciate your videos though, as I enjoy hearing different perspectives.
This is a Kemper profile. No tweaks. The profile was created by Reampzone at a studio. I just selected it and did the episode
I just Uploaded an episode that explains this
Hearing in my studio with adam speaker I agree with you. There is no contest here. I purchased a headrush 108 and I don't know how is going to sound but hearing this comparison, I am not very happy. Yes it is night and day.
Friedman !! Sounds amazing 👍🏻 I had to sell my Headrush because it sounded like a old radio 📻 so plastic sound .. a waste of money, better save a little more and go for the Fierdman .. 😤🤟🏻🇨🇱
While I appreciate what the guy is trying to do in the video, it isn’t a fair comparison. As an example, take any amp head and it’s going to sound radically through two different cabs… unless you start adjusting knobs to compensate. I’d rather see someone try to recreate the same tone through the two different cabs. Whether or not it can be done is going to tell the real story of the cab’s versatility. There’s just way too much at play in this situation- different speakers, different cab dimensions, different cab materials components, etc. So to just take a preset and run it through each FRFR without making adjustments only yields the results I’d expect- two different cabs, each with their own character.
Agreed, but I have the headrush. Sounds like it does on here to me. Its a kind harsh sounding two way speaker IMO. That said for $300 I'm using it till i figure out exactly what I want to do. Ive yet to hear someone really dial in a headrush to my liking. I don't hate them, just not really sold on it.
Aside from that, what tone is he using? Which processor? What does it sound like through Genlecs or anything of the sort? What if the tone just sucks to begin with? Too many variables..
Totally!
Thanks for the comparison. The Friedman sounds to my ears is more like a guitar cab. Another FRFR cab to demo if you cab get one is the Xitone range of cabinets . They have both passive and powered versions and they sound stellar IMO. Be interesting to hear how they compare with the Friedman .
Thank you for commenting and the heads up regarding the Xtone cabs. I'll look them up
I've come to the conclusion that these 2 products are for different uses. If you want a monitor that'll let you know what you modeller will sound like FOH, then use the Headrush and switch off the flat EQ (as PAs don't have a flat EQ). If, however, you want to use your modeller to recreate loads of different amps types and still have the behaviour and feel of a traditional amp blasting at your back - perhaps even to the point of micing the cab up in an old-fashioned way - go for the Freidman.
Both uses have benefits. For the Headrush, you get to hear something 'like' FOH tone as a monitor. For the Friedman, you might not get exactly FOH, but it will feel more amp-like and, especially if you mic it, it'll sound the way most amps do out front once the engineer's done their thing. Of course, even your modelled DI'd sounds will be tweaked by the FOH engineer so, there's that.
I'm a strange blend of traditional and futuristic - I love a noisy growling speaker behind me, but I also like to be able to swap and change the amp powering that speaker whenever I feel the whim to do so. So I'd get the Freidman for behind me (and also a Headrush in front of me, 'cus I'm greedy. ;-)).
the mids on the friedman is too pulled back, it will get lost on the mix, one question though, did you try listening to the same kemper profile through studio monitors? if you did, which one sounded closest to the sound you heard from the studio monitors?
I’m listening to everything through my iPhone 14.
The headrest sounded good and it sounded clear and the Friedmans sounded good and clear but the freedmen seems to have more of a smooth sound to the tone and the freeman also has a smoother nicer sound for the fax.
The other one seems to take a little bit away.
I am really confused with those FRFR (Full Range Flat Response) were they really arent flat at all.Those are monitors that their job is to give the most accurate representation of what goes in them without coloring the sound....99% of them are plastic cause it doesnt color the sound as much as wood.
Now wood is a different story.Its inconsistent based of density,type,weight etc and a huge example is guitar cabinets were most of them have Vintage 30 speakers and sound so much different to each other.So by having a so called FRFR monitor made like the Friedman YES it will sound more like a guitar cabinet but its not really a flat response.It will color your preset and when you plug to something else it will sound way different.
So if i wanted an FRFR monitor for the purpose that they are made of,i wouldnt get the Friedman...and if i didnt want something FRFR and didnt mind the coloring but wanted a more guitar cab feeling i would just get a power amp and hook a real guitar cab on it.
I bought the Headrush frfr own it for 2 months from now at first I thought I made a mistake of buying it but later on I did some global eq tweaking on my Headrush pedalboard and finally getting some good tone I was looking for. Probably will save up for mission frfr speakers I hear a lot of good reviews about it. Great comparison thanks!
You'll definitely be better off switching to the Mission
@@TONEWARSgearshow for now I'll stick to my Headrush until I have money saved up and for sure will get the mission 212
@@enricodedios2561 it'll be worth it. Keep me posted. Test the Mission against the Friedman and the ISP Vector
How are you running into the Friedman? I put the ToneX one from 1/4 to xlr into it and it will only give volume with reverb even if the capture doesn’t include it
was the headrush in flat response mode? I got 2 108 8" headrush for my Helix yea its a little dark probably not as dark as the 112 but i can global EQ the 1/4" out seperatly from the XLR out to my studio monitors inside the helix rack so after EQ ing some of the low end out of the headrush i got a damn good tone for my taste, dosent sound as good as running my Helix through a Marshall dual mono block 9200 to passive frfr but that aint cheap either, demo the 108's from headrush for $400 for a pair got nothing to lose.for $1800 bucks for a pair of Friedmans ill build a couple of baltic birch cabs and stick the guts to the headrush's in the mofo's still cheaper than one Friedman, Why is your outro music at earbleed level?? holy shit you about blew my head off!!!
The Headrush doesn’t have any other mode than FRFR.
I honestly beg to differ with your opinion. Here’s what I did. Right before you did your comparison I closed my eyes. The difference was very noticeable. And what I thought was the Friedman turned out to be the headrush. To me the Friedman sounded muddy and all bottom end while the headrush included more mid frequencies and seemed like it would be better to cut through the mix. Even the cleans seemed to have more clarity on the headrush. I used my positive grid spark amp to compare
Personally, I think the headrush sounded more transparent. However, you’re micing it wrong. FRFR are intended to fill a room so, they need to be mic’s at a distance, not at a foot away. Sure a wood cab will have more bass but, that can be fixed with EQ.
Converted my headcold to a vocal monitor and ordered the Friedman cabinet. Sounds like my 4x12 cabinet. I did everything to try to get that 112 to sound good but failed. It sounds fake…you are being nice about it! Lol
Your videos are phenomenal dude. I use a Headrush Pedalboard with a Headrush 112 FRFR. Lately im questioning my 112. It has such little bass compared to the other guitarist in my band who is using a regular amp and 2x12 cab. Your videos have helped me immensely. I think ill be working towards getting a ME Gemini.
That’s where quality comes in, not size. Size matters when all else is equal but it’s not equal here. E.g. an Electro-Voice 12MP easily drowns out a bass player when dialed in to do so. 2x12 is just two 12” speakers so one active speaker with twice the power will achieve pretty much the same, especially in real life. Just my experience.
Headrush by a country mile. Funny, I thought the Friedman sounded nasal .The exact opposite to what you noted. The Friedman sounded really thin
Firstly just my opinion because to some degree tone is in the ear of the beholder along with the wallet. But actually your amp sounded muffled. The headrush (and I dont own one)was brighter but less full probably since it has no cabinet. But headrush was clearer tone. yours is pretty bassy if thats a word. And which headrush was it that you tested ? the 8 inch or the 12 inch? if your Friedman is running 12 inch speakers looks like it is then it should have been 12 compared to 12 and honestly you would buy 2 of these since then it would be stereo. I certainly wouldn't buy just one if I made that purchase. But tone is each to his own somewhat but i think if you had 2 of them and spaced them apart I think the headrush probably would have sounded much better. I have my eye on the Gemini 2 but I am thinking being able to space speakers apart is certainly something to consider. I think it will sound much different than 2 speaks close to one another in a little cab.
Have you tried a Powercab 112 Plus? Between that and the Headrush FRFR112. Wich One would you pick and why?? I really cant make up my mind haha THANKS!!
The HR works great compared to my studio monitors.
idem !
In a way, it seems what the reviewer is saying is the Headrush sounds ‘congested’, and I respectfully have to disagree.
What I hear is the Friedman makes the model sound more like a guitar amp, so maybe more ‘authentic’, if you will, but the Headrush is more representative of what you’d hear coming out of the FOH.
Of course likely you could EQ one to sound like the other and vice-versa.
I've heard 3 or 4 demos of the Friedman and it always sounds muddy. I have a Laney IRT-X and it's a little more than an FRFR speaker, but I'm looking to upgrade and nothing sounds very good on YT.
Yeah, that UA-cam compression really does knock the highs down quite a bit sometimes
I have a HR112 and I'm happy with it,but it's seems to lack a bit on the high end, but I like that warm tone. Great for bass. I'm not sure what format you used for the audio file on the video?.MP3 or WAV? What guitar/fx did you use? , Just curious. thanks Glenn
Thanks for commenting. I used a wav file
If you get a chance to put them both side-by-side in the same Room in front of you, you'll be amazed at the difference. This video does not do it Justice
I found that the headrush has a lot more high-end fizzle/harshness that the Friedmann doesn't have. huge price difference tho
Lotsa cash? Friedman. Budget? HR. Not bad at all. I bet you could dial in a similar tone to the F with the HR. Thanks for the comparo.
Would be good to hear them compared in a mix. You can try out an amp in a store and think it sounds great but when you get it in a mix with a band it might not sound as good as it did in the store. Blending these with other instruments would be the true test IMO.
Friedman didn’t sound much better to me to justify the price difference
the Friedman sounded full and warm. The Headrush seemed very bright and almost brittle sounding. My personal taste leans more towards the Friedman.
You have to redo this shootout. You are not using it right and with the intended product. Like using a screwdriver as a prybar, this is not a fair shootout. Use it correctly. Questions, did you use the contour button correctly? one setting is for floor mounting the other is for when it sits on a stand, the tone difference is big. many times I see these types of comparisons that just don't do good equipment justice, like using a tube amp on high gain with a tube screamer set to high gain, and putting it up against a rat peddal for a comparison, your going like the rat peddal although neither sound is good by itself.
Regardless, am quiet optimistic the headrush can deliver and it falls a lot on how good ones tone dialing skills are. If it sounds great in a mix and a good tool to give me an indication on how my tones sound from the FOH, I've got my bang for the buck.
Dude , you're comparing a $219 unit to one that costs a grand ? That's like pitting a Zoom G3XN against a Boss GT1000...
I would have liked to hear them at diff. volume levels. Maybe I will find out in the second half of your video? Headrush after the first round!!!
I thought the Headrush sounded more open and clear, where the Friedman sounded muffled and closed off a bit.
I have totally been waiting for a comparison/contrast like this! Thank you for all you do in making “real” videos.
Jason Lewis, thank you so much for the kind words. Seriously, I really appreciate it
The Friedman in this specific test with this specific mic is superior, period.
I totally liked the headrush dirty tone. The Friedman has it on the clean.
What kind of volume levels were these at? Cause the Friedman really emulated a cranked stack. If that was at safe volumes, then I'm in love. (Could maybe emulate that in the Headrush with IRs?)
Great question. The volume is very safe. Pretty much personal practice volume.
Regarding the Headrush, there's no IR that can fix how bad that thing sounds.
I don't know how anyone listening to this demo would choose the headrush. I don't own either at this point so I am not being biased. The Friedman sound way more like a guitar cab. Th headrush has a very thin and buzzy, nasal sound quality to it. As soon as I heard the 1st clip of the Friedman I said to myself "that sounds like a guitar cab" I don't think there is even a close comparison. However, the Friedman is way more money, that's true but it blows away the Headrush in my opinion
Headrush is more airy and bright, but the Friedman has great warm tones. for the price; Im buying the Headrush 112. Its good enough. Cheers man! Needed this!
can I trust a mic, UA-cam compression or my headphones? Your ear is not my ear. But your review is insightful, thanks!
the voice of reason! big thumbs up, the video comparison was pretty bad and sounded super biased...
The Friedman sounds bigger, the Headrush sounds like it has more mid-range probably due to the plastic resonance.
Listening with a pair of Sennheiser HD600 headphones and heard what you heard, night and day.
100% agree with your comments & glad to see this demo before running out and buying 2 FRFR's for stereo.
The Friedman is clearly my choice. Really good demo, thanks!
I like the brightness of the headrush!!!! Just my preference
Posting the raw impression as asked prior to hearing yours and reading others. I like the friedman for the head cuttin’ distortion. Both have nice clean sounds, different but nice. The friedman seems like the better unit overall. However, it could be that the headrush just doesn’t sound good out of the box and the friedman does. So, I would love to see you reference mic these speakers and then set a corrective eq prior to output.
Did you do any eq’ing to account for out of the box differences?
I am hoping you didn’t because I can get two frfr-108’s for monitors and two frfr-112’s for a backline for $1000, just $100 more than a single friedman. So I really want the headrush to be able to perform better. Doesn’t have to win outright but better would be good.
Update: So I just listened to your comments and read a few below. Two takeaways, being in the room made a big difference I believe and everyone, myself included, wants the headrush to sound better. I read below that you did not tweak the model you were using for either unit so my “out of the box” comment may still stand. Hoping some corrective eq gets a much better sound.
Joel Michael check out my reviews of the FR108 and see what you think. I own a SmallBox and I’m likely going to HX Stomp and Two FR108s based on my results from a Friedman SmallBox! That’s how much I like the HeadRush!
Pre-feedback thoughts:
Assuming you had everything set in the middle, the Headrush sounds a little more crunchy and a bit brighter. The Friedman was beefier and warm. Both sound good. Without being in the room, it's hard to hear the actual levels and presence. I would totally consider the Headrush for the price and portability. I hate hauling equipment, so I have my eye on it.
Post-feedback thoughts:
You answered some questions about their presence. I hate that "nasally" plastic sound. It may not be worth the price since I value quality over convenience. I will need to test one out in person to know for sure.
Thanks for commenting. I would highly suggest putting them up against each other. You'll be surprised at how much better the Friedmen sounds and feels over the headrush
@@TONEWARSgearshow Why do you only respond to comments complementing the Friedman, but not the Headrush?
@@SpectorEuro4 Because I don't wanna argue with people
@@TONEWARSgearshow I mean with all due respect, you are asking for opinions. You're bound to find people that won't agree. Your choice isn't objective. I have the feeling that you won't have arguments to back up your preference (since it looks way too biased. Almost like you made sure you put the Headrush as bad as possible). But it is funny that you just answer to this complimenting the Friedman 😂, and not respond to those that respectfully gave their reasons why the Headrush sounded better.
Are you being sponsored by Friedman? This honestly looks extremely biased.
@@TONEWARSgearshow Also think it's worth noting that you did not use the contour switch that boosts lows and highs on the Headrush. Why would you compare a unit that you don't really know how to properly get its potential :/ man
Hey, thanks for a great video. I am in the market for a powered speaker and these two came up every time. Friedman sounds more like a real amplifier with a cabinet. Head rush sounds like you mic out an amp that's playing through a PA.
The Friendman sounded better but I bet you could make the headrush sound great with tweaks.
My paused video thoughts. Honestly, I think the Friedman sounded better. BUT.... That doesn't mean I think it is better. I think that the hearing could get closer with EQ. I also think that the either speaker is great for different purposes. If you run Helix straight to front of house and just need a little on stage monitoring, Harish all the way. If your sound is dependent on a cabinet on stage, then you definitely need to invest in something like the Friedman. That's my opinion. Some guys will say that if you spend money on the helix why run it through crap speakers, my response to that is after saving/spending on a helix, there just might not be enough cash left over. Especially if music is not a source of income and just a hobby. My 2 pennies.
Great review. Good job not trash talking either product but expressing your findings. Great honest review. I'd like to stand in front of a Friedman and feel what you're feeling. Also, I agree with the studio monitors suggestion. I recently got myself a nice set and find that my live tone is well represented by studio monitors over my Frfr. With the monitors it seems whatever I create at home translates fairly well to pa. Thanks again.
@@prestobeen thank you for commenting. Full disclosure, I use the Friedman at home and/or jam sessions with friends. On stage, I use IEM's , so no monitor needed. That said, the tones that I dialed in on the Friedman translate very well through every PA system of played through so far.
Friedman was warmer and at the same time a bit crisper on the high’s. I have the headrush and it works but I’m liking what I’m hearing on this video from the Friedman.
I think the headrush is supposed to be compared with behringer, ANT, ALTO, Harley benton or something like that, no a Friedman which costs 3x more
I know this is an older video, but the Freidman still looks to be a viable option in 2024. I've been looking for a good option for my FM3, and I don't like my PowerCab at all, so I figured I'd just get a good solid state power amp and drive a regular guitar cabinet.
That said, what do you think of the Freidman 5 years later? I don't believe they actually market it as a FRFR, as it has a Celestion guitar speaker in it right? Thanks!
Try the Fender FRFR. It's the best so far
Thanks @@TONEWARSgearshow 🙂 The Fender ToneMaster then? Interesting. I wouldn’t have expected that; not for metal tones anyway. I’ll take a look at it 👍🏻
@@babtanian no problem. I tried it out and was surprised at how good it was
Dude, everytime I have a question about a sound or a product, my first reflexe is to go on your youtube channel and check if you have made a video about that. Thank you for your honesty i learned a lot thanks to you.
I have the Helix, I make my sounds with headphones, played on monitoring speakers (a pair of yamaha HS5), the sound is so dead... It's perfect in a mix, like a backing track for example, but it's so dead when playing alone or with other musicians or a singer...
So now I brought back to my appartment my dear old Blackstar amp and use it with my Helix by bypassing the preamp of the Blackstar and using the Mesa Mark IV simulation preamp on the Helix. The sound is waayyyy better and alive.
Right now I'm just waiting to afford the Friedman ASC12 (the Gemini is to expensive) (sorry for bad english i'm a french dude)
Thank you so much for the kind words! I really appreciate it.
If you really want to make the helix sound great, try a KSR PA50 with a cab.
@@TONEWARSgearshow Ok thanks I'll check this out !
Right now i'm using the power amp and the cab of my Blackstar, with the preamp simulation of the Helix. I haven't tried this at loud volume yet, next month I'll play with my band, with a drummer etc, so I'll see how it goes in a "band situation".
But the biggest question I have is what should I choose between a Frfr cab (like the Friedman Asc12 with wood) or a "real" cab (like a 1x12 Mesa for exemple) ?
I play metal and heavy sound too, so I defer to your advices.
@@lebebop1682 i would go with a tube poweramp and real cab for the best, most realistic sound
It's like with every different kind of cab and setup, it's gonna sound different, that's why you have the wonderful parametric eq, dial it in the way you want and what sounds good to you, does it sound nasalily? Dial out those certain mid freqs to get it where you want it. Everyone, I mean everyone should take the time to learn how eq frequency bands effects sound in music, and not just guitar either, learn all instruments. you have to understand how to use an eq and to use it properly..
Try over $1800 in Australia. Which makes the choice hard. For any option.
Hey Jared, I just got the Friedman ACS 12 for a Kemper/helix dual rig ( yes , I’m still tinkering with that) . I have hopes based partially upon your endorsement which I know I can trust. I originally ordered a power cab, it was DOA. But anyway thanks
Looks quite obvious from the video, that the Mic placement wasn't consistent. Also, not sure why testing is being done off the ground.
You are totally right these Amps should be on the floor!
The Friedman is thick and rich sounding. with that specific profile i bet the Headrush would sound better in the mix though. Thanks for doing these i am considering getting that friedman, right now im using the yamaha frfr. They sound great but only at loud volumes, when turned down it looses headroom/dynamics that a real cab provides.
Iron word truth HeadRush is great dialed in.
I'd be interested to see how the Friedman compares to the Line6 L2M
I paused. The Head Rush sounded way better with heavy distortion and sounded more authentic where the Friedman sounded muffled and void of life. Clean was pretty close, but the Head Rush had more life, however on the whole chord strum at the very end the Friedman had a nicer smoother soothing sound.
I heard the exact opposite the headrush sounded more open the Friedman sounded muffled
I’ve tried both and the Friedman was miles better IMO. Just sounded more full and warm. The Headrush sounded really good to me at lower volume but got completely lost when I took it too band practice even with the Axe Fx cranked and the Headrush at 11 (yes it goes to 11 lol). Also it was very bottom heavy and not in a chugging good way but like a bass way. Unfortunately I never used the Friedman at higher volumes and sold it but now I’m getting another after the Headrush being so disappointing with the band. Granted we do play really loud tho. I hope the Friedman will be able to do the job.
Thanks for commenting. I'm sure the Friedman will do the job for you. It has never let me down so far. The Headrush is just a very boxy bassy sounding unit. There's no articulation
not going to criticize this a/b but i would think in addition to the a/b between the Friedman and Headrush, would be to have and a/b/c with C being the direct recording from your modeller to DAW. i have a tech21 power engine 60 that i used for a very long time with various modellers beginning with the Line6 X3 Live and forward to Helix. I eventually got a Headrush FRFR-112 because it was a more focused and directional stage monitor setup and for that it works extremely well. What the audience hears at gigs is 95% out of the house PA. I always get compliments on my guitar tones and textures. If not using a real amp rig, i pack both Tech21 and Headrush and use one or the other depending on gig situation. i.e., if i'm playing a club that doesn't have the greatest PA, i will use the Tech21 because it's open back and sounds better coming off the stage like a real open back amp. if the room and venue are such that the PA will be doing all the work then I use the Headrush.
The Friedman sounded more like a real amp coming out of a real cabinet to me.
Thanks for commenting. If you get a chance to check one out, you'll love it
That’s exactly what’s wrong with it!
Kosta Giann just curious why you see that as the problem? Wouldn’t you expect a product like this it to sound like a real guitar amp? I
Hi Tone Wars, Was the HeadRush contour switch On or OFF when doing this video..???
(note) Contour EQ switch helps compensate for excessive lows and mids on some stages
Hello, good question. Honestly, I can't remember. Off maybe?
@@TONEWARSgearshow Thanks for the reply, because the headrush contour switch boost 3db of bass & treble to warm it up bit to calm the harshness of the mid frequencies, Also the Friedman ASM 12 has a low cut switch @ 100hz, probably off giving the Friedman a more warmer tone...is my guess...!!
@@IamTheDustDevil I did have the low cut set to "on" on the Friedman
@@TONEWARSgearshow Thank you... I just bought 2-headrushes frfr108 (stereo setup) for my modelers, (Kemper, Axefx II, Positive G's Bias Rack & my Helix rack..
P.S...I agree with you from another video in using studio monitors for the best sound for modelers ( I have a Pair of Presonus E8 for that)...again thanks...
Don't know how it sounded on ur end, but I thought the headrest sounded better. But who knows. You really didn't play enough and with enough variety to giv an honest evaluation. But the fact your hearing it live where as im hearing it on youtube raises the question of how accurate you tube is
My two cents, not that my opinion means much, to me it's more a matter of getting the gear that I can fit in my budget. Many years (late 70's, 80's) ago I was stuck using amps that at the time were considered 2nd class, ie: peavey, crate, etc. Then I got my first Vox! So I just purchased two of the HeadRush FRFR-108's to run stereo. Later when my budget allows me I'll go get the better gear. Though everyone seems to like what they hear for now. Good video, thanks for posting it.
Thanks for commenting, and you're opinion DOES matter! That's what this is all about.
Enjoy your gear, and when the time is right, you'll find something you'll like even more
I’m thinking these frfr systems make electric guitar magnetic pickups sound like piezo Pickups. It’s not a bad sound, just different.
Thx for the great video, I'm currently looking for a FRFR solution for my AX8. The Friedman sounds bigger and warmer than the Headrush with a better low end - but that could also be a bad thing if the warms and clarity comes from a non linear behaviour of the Friedman. It would be so great if you could add a pair of reference studio monitors, like Adams A7X to the comparison (also miced). That would allow us to decide if the Friedman or the Headrush give a better FRFR reproduction of the designed patch. What do you think? What is your experience with patches that you dialed in with the friedmans, do they sound as good when you send them directly from your modeller to a front of house system?
Great points and questions. The tone I dialed in with the Friedman ASC 12's translates really well in the studio and thru FOH.
They both sounded good, but VERY different. What I would like to hear is a patch dialed in to sound its best using each cabinet. If I plug my Marshall head in to an EVH 4x12, I'm going to dial the knobs differently than if I had the Marshall head plugged in to an Orange 4x12.
PR0_ GABBY exactly bud! You nailed it! My experience with my FRFR108 has been different. Not nasal and for 400 for a pair, hard to beat! Granted I have not used the Friedman and I have no doubt it’s great, however I can’t see it being 4x the money better. I own a SmallBox for example, is it 4x better than a good Marshall ... no it’s not. It’s a great amp and I’m not going to sell it, but we are talking small increments in quality here. Most of that can be made up by using your ears and tweaking. No disrespect to Tone Wars, but once I thought Friedman was the cure all... as you know in terms of Tone, your never cured lol !
Was the contour switch off or on; on the headrush? Anyone who has a headrush knows it makes a difference!
Do you have the switch pushed in or out?
@@Westw00do Out! It’s a matter of taste tho!
@@leswadley6792 I use it exactly the same
Headrush was far more bright than the friedman. That can be good or bad. Depends. 2 different cabs need 2 different eq settings. If you want a warmer tone coming out the headrush, adjust eq to achieve that then run that same tone through the friedman. The friedman will probably sound muddy and dark. Like I said, 2 different cabs need 2 different eq settings. Then there is the contour button on the headrush. Was that used or not? I can make my headrush 112's sound very warm or bright.
I heard just the opposite of that,the Headrush sounded Wide and Fat,and the Friedman sounded Muffled!! It helped that you deadened the room also! Nice Shootout!!
Your right. I got a pod go about 6 months ago.. Bought an alto 12" speaker. Said to be on par with the headrush. Thought it would be better than my studio monitors. NOPE!!! My monitors are just plastic sterling MX8's.. $300. Kept the Alto. Use it as a wedge at Church.
Thanks for commenting. Yeah, I'm all about playing through monitors nowadays. They just sound better and you get that great stereo separation
Friedman scoops the mids. Headrush emphasizes the mids. Both e.q. can be shaped to taste
You fail to mention which Headrush FRFR you were comparing against - the 108 or the 112. Also, I get that the Headrush was borrowed, but I'm pretty sure that leaving that big pick shaped sticker on the grill didn't do the sound any favors.
One thinig, you have been playing the Friedman for a while now and all your settings, effects and levels are fine tuned to your friedman. You will definitely feel like the headrush is not gonna respond as well as your friedman but perhaps with some adjustements it could.
Ok, so the HR is 2000w vs friedman at 500w. Have you compared these two at band volume? Which one would drown the other out? My money is on friedman.
One point that everyone seems to be missing is that the reviewer created these patches on the Friedman, which he owns. Then he plays those exact same patches on the Headrush. I wonder what would happen if he created the sounds on the Headrush and then played them back on the Friedman....It's like getting a suit made for one person and then putting it on someone else and saying the it doesn't look as good on the other person. Something to take into consideration.
Thanks for commenting. Actually, I didn't "dial in" anything. I simply chose a profile and played it
headrush has a contour button to fatten up the sound wondering if you used it for the shoot out
I use a headrush 108 with a pod hd500 and I think is is very good value for the price. It sits in the mix well.
I also think that if you are spending 2 grand on a kemper then you should get a good quality speaker to replicate the sound to kemper quality. That's not going to be a Headrush at £200.
Interesting to see what you said you heard in the room, because none of that came through to me in the video. The Friedman sounded very muffled and the headrush sounded ok, but nothing special. You certainly have me thinking though.
OK, i agree with you what the woody sound of the Friedman is concerned, but if you mike the Friedman ( live ) and the the PA-service uses fiber-type speaker cabinets?