Suhr Reactive Load Vs Two Notes Vs Rockcrusher

[Kapo_Polenton]

That's why I say take the load type out of the equation. Get the signal right out if the amp with the ISO line out before it even hits the attenuator. This way at least you know you are getting what actually hits a real speaker. That said, I am back to real speaker micing.

But you can't "take the load out of the equation"- just because you put the ISO line out box 1st after the head, the amp still reacts to whatever it's being loaded with, downstream, so to speak... and that affects that line out sound. Even if the line out box is right after the head's speaker out. And it makes a big difference (the load). The difference between a decent reactive load and a resistive load is quite big, your grandma could hear
it. ok, my grandma....

The difference in sound between different reactive loads is also there- kinda like the difference between a V30 and a greenback, it's that noticeable.

Don't take my word for it, test it for yourself- use a hotplate or some other resistive load, and your line out, and record a clip, using an IR in a plug in in your recording program for speaker sound. Then plug in a couple real cabs and each time record the same riff (still using the line out box, pre cab and IR's for speaker sim... The cab is only for loading) listen to how the tone changes, between the resistive load and the different speaker/cabs being used for load.

I will try this.... but I guess that means I wasted my cash on the Suhr line out box because I thought it would be the quiet solution to recording!

 

[TrueTone500]

Why the redundancy? Just place a mic (or two) in front of your cabinet, then into your DAW. Or... MESA Traixis > Effects > Two Notes > DAW. Does Two Notes not have power amp simulation?

 

[petethorn]

That's why I say take the load type out of the equation. Get the signal right out if the amp with the ISO line out before it even hits the attenuator. This way at least you know you are getting what actually hits a real speaker. That said, I am back to real speaker micing.

But you can't "take the load out of the equation"- just because you put the ISO line out box 1st after the head, the amp still reacts to whatever it's being loaded with, downstream, so to speak... and that affects that line out sound. Even if the line out box is right after the head's speaker out. And it makes a big difference (the load). The difference between a decent reactive load and a resistive load is quite big, your grandma could hear
it. ok, my grandma....

The difference in sound between different reactive loads is also there- kinda like the difference between a V30 and a greenback, it's that noticeable.

Don't take my word for it, test it for yourself- use a hotplate or some other resistive load, and your line out, and record a clip, using an IR in a plug in in your recording program for speaker sound. Then plug in a couple real cabs and each time record the same riff (still using the line out box, pre cab and IR's for speaker sim... The cab is only for loading) listen to how the tone changes, between the resistive load and the different speaker/cabs being used for load.

I will try this.... but I guess that means I wasted my cash on the Suhr line out box because I thought it would be the quiet solution to recording!

Hmm? I don't understand, sorry- it is!

 

[voodooel34]

I just got the Suhr reactive load. I'm running through my torpedo cab for a silent practice solution. I'm really impressed with the results. I've used this on two of my amps and it really captures the feel and tone well.

 

[PBGas]

Two-Notes for me. From having one previously, I've got another one on order. It works great and the feature set on it is fantastic. The new cabs they have put out are amazing!

 

[petethorn]

I just got the Suhr reactive load. I'm running through my torpedo cab for a silent practice solution. I'm really impressed with the results. I've used this on two of my amps and it really captures the feel and tone well.

That's a great setup. Try running into a powered monitor (I use the Atomic CLR), instant bitchin tone at any volume.

 

[thiswaythatway]

Thanks for info gents. I'm reading up on all these units. It seems like they ALL do a good job. I do like the idea of having 1 unit do silent recording as well as act like an attenuator. The one thing I don't like about the Rockcrusher is with the EQ, I know I would be screwing with it too much and just never be happy and blame myself. I'd rather just use a good sounding IR and be done with it.

Now this Power Station.....it's an attenuator, a power amp, AND you can use it for silent recording as well?

 

[davyped]

Got my Reactive Load last week to use with my PT100SE and have been using Redwirz. After reading this thread, I purchased some Ownhammers (thanks Pete for making me spend more $$. ), the Ownhammers IR's really kick ass. Doubt I will go back to the Redwirz IR's.

Dave

 

[crwnedblasphemy]

About 5 years ago I was trying my webber mass line out into ir, and it was okay, not good. Now I just run preamp out of my 5150 50 watt into Wall of Sound. Sounds great. Plus, just plug a 1/4" plug into the headphone jack, and it bypasses the speakers for silent recording.

Can't do this though with my Splawn, so kinda interested in the Suhr. But for $100 more the Fryette looks cool too.

 

[gibson5413]

I grabbed the Suhr Reactive Load a few weeks back. It works great for low volume recording. No more killing my ears and the family with high volume from the Electra Dyne. Between this and the Kemper I should be set.

 

[High Hunting]

My regular Rockcrusher has a reactive load same as the Suhr and Two Notes. Would it be better just getting the Mesa Cabtone and running that into Two Notes software for final adjustments or is that just a bad idea or waste of money since your using 2 cab simulators? Petes sound is great just with the Suhr but seems like a lot of tweaking to make it sound good unless the Suhr is that good.

 

[eljodon]

I've been using the Aracom Dual Rox with dual with foot switchable lead and rhythm volume for over 3 years. I also use it as a load for running my amps into a power amp and it sounds great. I've used many including the Two Notes Torpedo Reload, Ultimate attenuator and many other ones. The Aracom sounds the best to my ears. I returned the Torpedo because the Aracom sounded better and I was looking for a 2nd attenuator so I can record 2 amps at the same time, but it didn't compare with the Aracom.

 

[DG335]

That's why I say take the load type out of the equation. Get the signal right out if the amp with the ISO line out before it even hits the attenuator. This way at least you know you are getting what actually hits a real speaker. That said, I am back to real speaker micing.

But you can't "take the load out of the equation"- just because you put the ISO line out box 1st after the head, the amp still reacts to whatever it's being loaded with, downstream, so to speak... and that affects that line out sound. Even if the line out box is right after the head's speaker out. And it makes a big difference (the load). The difference between a decent reactive load and a resistive load is quite big, your grandma could hear
it. ok, my grandma....

The difference in sound between different reactive loads is also there- kinda like the difference between a V30 and a greenback, it's that noticeable.

Don't take my word for it, test it for yourself- use a hotplate or some other resistive load, and your line out, and record a clip, using an IR in a plug in in your recording program for speaker sound. Then plug in a couple real cabs and each time record the same riff (still using the line out box, pre cab and IR's for speaker sim... The cab is only for loading) listen to how the tone changes, between the resistive load and the different speaker/cabs being used for load.

This is EXACTLY my experience.

I have an Aracom attenuator which acts as a reactive load box, attenuator and line out. It has a high cut function which corrects for some of the top end loss that commonly occurs with attenuators. On = more high end, Off = less high end.

I ran the line out directly from the line out on my Friedman JJ100 to my Torpedo CAB (I did not use the line out on the Aracom)

I connect the Aracom to the speaker out on the JJ100 and set the Aracom to load.

When I switch the high cut filter on/off on the Aracom the difference is still very apparent in the signal.

How can this happen if the Aracom is not in the signal path and the line out is directly from the JJ100???

Well it's because the high cut changes the load and that effects the amps tone.


So you can't assume that using a direct line out from the amp will be the BEST tone. The sound coming out of the amp is dependent upon the load applied. You need the best load for your amp that most closely mimics the cab you would be using. If you research the Suhr reactive load, you will see they did their due diligence trying to mimic a greenback cabinet load as closely as possible. If I didn't already have the Aracom I would own the Suhr.

The load is the most critical part of the equation.

 

[DG335]

That's why I say take the load type out of the equation. Get the signal right out if the amp with the ISO line out before it even hits the attenuator. This way at least you know you are getting what actually hits a real speaker. That said, I am back to real speaker micing.

But you can't "take the load out of the equation"- just because you put the ISO line out box 1st after the head, the amp still reacts to whatever it's being loaded with, downstream, so to speak... and that affects that line out sound. Even if the line out box is right after the head's speaker out. And it makes a big difference (the load). The difference between a decent reactive load and a resistive load is quite big, your grandma could hear
it. ok, my grandma....

The difference in sound between different reactive loads is also there- kinda like the difference between a V30 and a greenback, it's that noticeable.

Don't take my word for it, test it for yourself- use a hotplate or some other resistive load, and your line out, and record a clip, using an IR in a plug in in your recording program for speaker sound. Then plug in a couple real cabs and each time record the same riff (still using the line out box, pre cab and IR's for speaker sim... The cab is only for loading) listen to how the tone changes, between the resistive load and the different speaker/cabs being used for load.

This is EXACTLY my experience.

I have an Aracom attenuator which acts as a reactive load box, attenuator and line out. It has a high cut function which corrects for some of the top end loss that commonly occurs with attenuators. On = more high end, Off = less high end.

I ran the line out directly from the line out on my Friedman JJ100 to my Torpedo CAB (I did not use the line out on the Aracom)

I connect the Aracom to the speaker out on the JJ100 and set the Aracom to load.

When I switch the high cut filter on/off on the Aracom the difference is still very apparent in the signal.

How can this happen if the Aracom is not in the signal path and the line out is directly from the JJ100???

Well it's because the high cut changes the load and that effects the amps tone.


So you can't assume that using a direct line out from the amp will be the BEST tone. The sound coming out of the amp is dependent upon the load applied. You need the best load for your amp that most closely mimics the cab you would be using. If you research the Suhr reactive load, you will see they did their due diligence trying to mimic a greenback cabinet load as closely as possible. If I didn't already have the Aracom I would own the Suhr.

The load is the most critical part of the equation.

 

[Orren]

I have not tried the Suhr Reactive Load (love to though!) or the Rockcrusher, but I've been getting good results with the Mesa Boogie CabClone. I find that it's speaker simulator circuits are pretty good too, although you obviously don't get nearly as many options as with IRs. That said, I've got the RedWirez IRs, and think the CabClone is better than the ones from that collection I've tried.

Orren

 

[Kapo_Polenton]

Personally, listening to rockinchippy's clips ( a guy with great amps and top notch gear), if I notice a difference in the tone quality between when he mics with an sm57 and when he uses impulses (regardless of the load), I have to conclude as I have with my own trials, that a real mic still beats impulses.

Pete Thorn is so far the only guy who's clips to me, sound how I would want them to sound. Most other people's clips sound "soft" or "round" if that makes any sense. The detail and the bite I find is in most cases, what is missing. I think this might be a plus for lead work and lead tracking, but detracts from the rythm. I keep getting close but no cigar when it goes up against the mic. (with my setup anyway) To me, a combined setup of a real mic and impulses is still what would work best.

 

[jtp337]

I just want to say thank you to everyone that has posted in this thread. Very useful information.

 

[SHOOTOUT!]

Interesting thread... sounds like Mr Thorn above is essentially saying his Suhr reactive load matches the impedance of the cab best i.e.

http://www.soundsmith.com/fake2B.html

However, different cabs, different curves... hmmm.

I have Two Notes Torpedo VB101 (resistive) though the new Torpedo Studio can switch between resistive and reactive. I would be interested to run a Suhr Reactive Load before the Torpedo VB101 using the latter just for the same impulse responses, and check out the difference.

Someone with a Torpedo Studio could also demonstrate the differences (Two Notes Reactive vs Two Notes Resitive as per that unit at least) as the unit can switch between the two types of loading.

 

[Viljami]

It would be nice to hear an A/B test between the Suhr and the Two Notes using the same ir.

 

[The Lo Lands]

Personally, listening to rockinchippy's clips ( a guy with great amps and top notch gear), if I notice a difference in the tone quality between when he mics with an sm57 and when he uses impulses (regardless of the load), I have to conclude as I have with my own trials, that a real mic still beats impulses.

Pete Thorn is so far the only guy who's clips to me, sound how I would want them to sound. Most other people's clips sound "soft" or "round" if that makes any sense. The detail and the bite I find is in most cases, what is missing. I think this might be a plus for lead work and lead tracking, but detracts from the rythm. I keep getting close but no cigar when it goes up against the mic. (with my setup anyway) To me, a combined setup of a real mic and impulses is still what would work best.

When only using IR with a load box for recording guitar tracks, a high end (tube) preamp and AD convertor is also very important to get real convincing guitar tracks with great depth, warmth and dynamics! When you have mediocre preamps and AD convertors the results with IR will also differ. And the difference between a mic or a IR is not that big in a real mix in my experience.

For recording guitar tracks i have a Torpedo Reload and a Suhr RL and i'm using Ownhammer IR. From the Reload and RL line out i go straight into a Universal Audio 2-610 tube preamp and from the UA preamp into a RME AD convertor. If i go straight into the RME AD convertor without the UA preamp the sound lacks serious depth and warmth. A lot of people think that by using a (reactive/resistive) load box with line out and go straight into a AD convertor (or their computer sound card) is doing the job well with IR. I disagree, always use a good preamp, the same as by using a preamp with real mics in front of your guitar cabinet. It makes a big sonic difference... ask Pete ;-)