Schertler Jam 400 vs Schertler Roy

[jacm81]

This is a question for people who have owned (and gigged with) both a Schertler Jam 400 and a Schertler Roy.
I'm considering selling my Jam 400 and buying a Roy, just because, why not? I love the Jam 400 and if Schertler has somehow improved on it, I'm there. But is there really that much of a difference? The mixer on the Roy does look better, other than the fact that the inputs are now all down the left side instead of along the back like most mixers, and the AUX output is all the way over on the other side for some reason. But does it actually sound any better?
Also, can someone tell me how the headphone output on the Roy works? Is the mix in that the same as what's coming out the front of the amp, or is it also controlled by the AUX dials? Right now I run IEM's out of the AUX output on my Jam 400 via a Behringer P2. That works great but it would be nice to be able to just plug them directly into the amp, as long as the volume of each channel can still be adjusted independently of the main mix.

[stephenT]

Sure looks like the same amp as the 400, does Schertler mention any improvements in their advertising?

[jacm81]

Originally Posted by stephenT

Sure looks like the same amp as the 400, does Schertler mention any improvements in their advertising?

Not that I've seen. I saw someone else on here mention that the Roy had a different speaker configuration but it says right there on Schertler's website that they both have a '1” horn, two 8” subwoofers'.
It is selling for $600 more than the Jam 400 cost when I bought it. You'd think that would get you something, but the changes to the mixer alone don't seem to justify the extra cost.

[rockabilly69]

The speaker configuration is the same, but there are some major differences.

1) You get reverb, plus multiFX: This way you can choose just how much of either or of the reverb/delay you want in the mix for each channel. There's a decay control for the reverb which makes it much easier to dial in the best natural sounding sustain, And there are many more options for the delay times on the MultiFX side, and a doubler.

2) Adjustable DI out: I've been told many times by many soundboard engineers that the output of the JAM400 is extremely hot, so that would be nice to tone it down a bit so as not to overdrive any outboard system you're working with.

3) Semi Parametric EQ on first three channels: To me this is the best way to remove mud. And I wish my Jam400 had these!

4) Inserts on 4 channels: want to put a EQ or compressor into an individual channel this would be the spot!!!

5) Master Insert: want to put a EQ or compressor into an every channel this would be the spot!!!

6) Overload indicators on all mic and instrument channels!

7) 48V or 10V phantom power options on 2 channels!

8) Resonance controls on 2 channels with 2 different frequency points

9) Warm option on one channel

For more info here's the manual for the ROY https://www.schertler.com/public/dow..._roy_en%20.pdf

[jacm81]

Originally Posted by rockabilly69

The speaker configuration is the same, but there are some major differences.

1) You get reverb, plus multiFX: This way you can choose just how much of either or of the reverb/delay you want in the mix for each channel. There's a decay control for the reverb which makes it much easier to dial in the best natural sounding sustain, And there are many more options for the delay times on the MultiFX side, and a doubler.

2) Adjustable DI out: I've been told many times by many soundboard engineers that the output of the JAM400 is extremely hot, so that would be nice to tone it down a bit so as not to overdrive any outboard system you're working with.

3) Semi Parametric EQ on first three channels: To me this is the best way to remove mud. And I wish my Jam400 had these!

4) Inserts on 4 channels: want to put a EQ or compressor into an individual channel this would be the spot!!!

5) Master Insert: want to put a EQ or compressor into an every channel this would be the spot!!!

6) Overload indicators on all mic and instrument channels!

7) 48V or 10V phantom power options on 2 channels!

8) Resonance controls on 2 channels with 2 different frequency points

9) Warm option on one channel

That's great info. Thank you.

A lot of that stuff I'd probably never use, but some of it seems very useful.

Have you actually used a Roy? Or heard one? Do those added features make it drastically better sounding?

[rockabilly69]

Originally Posted by jacm81

That's great info. Thank you.

A lot of that stuff I'd probably never use, but some of it seems very useful.

Have you actually used a Roy? Or heard one? Do those added features make it drastically better sounding?

No, but I own a Jam 400 and a Jam 200 and the Jam 200 has very similar mixer and reverb to the Roy and they work great. The parametric EQ, warm switch, and switchable resonance makes a nice difference, and the adjustable DI XLR Out really helps. I also use the Aux return for a direct in for when I use a pedal board and totally want to bypass all the EQ and FX on the main channels (all that stuff is on my pedal board). But I wish my Jam 400 had the separate reverb/multiFX the Roy has, as there's many times when I wished for a better control of the reverb/FX mix for vocals. I could see the Roy being better sounding if you don't have outboard EQ or FX as you would be better able to shape you sound, or deal with problem frequencies better with the Roy. Since I have have good outboard EQ and FX on my pedal board, I have gotten by just fine with the Jam 400.

And if your Jam 400 has got enough power for you, which is the same as the Roy, and you don't need those other features for your gigs, why upgrade.

[Woodstock School Of Music]

The Roy uses the same components as their Arthur mixers , the Jam 400 has different components

[stephenT]

well, there is quite a difference, thanks rockabilly69

[jacm81]

Originally Posted by rockabilly69

And if your Jam 400 has got enough power for you, which is the same as the Roy, and you don't need those other features for your gigs, why upgrade.

I'm mainly wondering if vocal quality will be improved with the Roy. The Jam 400 does a pretty good job but it could certainly be better.

[Br1ck]

Is there a pole mount on the bottom? If there is, it would explain the controls on the side, so you could reach them pole mounted.

My Carvin AG 300 is configured like this. On the floor, you have control on top. on a pole, they are on the side.

[Al Acuff]

I owned a Jam 400 for a while and found it too limited for gigging.

An everything in one box solution that offers comparable or better sound quality PLUS system scalability is the HK Audio Nano 608i system. The Nano system makes it easy to get the speakers at whatever height you want, offers mono and stereo operation, and it weighs less than the Jam 400. There are several versions of the Nano system available depending on your needs.

[stephenT]

Five years of gigging w/ my Jam 400.

Of a dozen plus acoustic amps I've owned the Schertler is the only unit that's last beyond a half year. I use it as a stand alone acoustic amp and for acoustic duos that I do. Set up behind us on a short stool, no need for a monitor.

Always get compliments for the sound and even though it's heavy (48lbs), it's a one trip load in.

My experience w/ the Jam 400 is different from yours. Great piece o gear.

Originally Posted by Al Acuff

I owned a Jam 400 for a while and found it too limited for gigging.

[rockabilly69]

Originally Posted by stephenT

Five years of gigging w/ my Jam 400.

Of a dozen plus acoustic amps I've owned the Schertler is the only unit that's last beyond a half year. I use it as a stand alone acoustic amp and for acoustic duos that I do. Set up behind us on a short stool, no need for a monitor.

Always get compliments for the sound and even though it's heavy (48lbs), it's a one trip load in.

My experience w/ the Jam 400 is different from yours. Great piece o gear.

+1000 (although mine is setup with a pole mount).

[rockabilly69]

Originally Posted by jacm81

I'm mainly wondering if vocal quality will be improved with the Roy. The Jam 400 does a pretty good job but it could certainly be better.

Well there's only one real way to tell then

[lodi_55]

I just bought the Roy and never played the 400, so I'm not sure how much I can contribute.

But I've had Roy out to a few gigs and I'm very impressed. The onboard controls/mixer have been well documented (thanks, Rockabilly).

I haven't messed with the parametric controls yet, but having done so on other systems i know that can be huge.

I also love the "warm" setting on one channel. I play nylon crossovers so I that setting gives my guitars a nice well, "warm" tone without sounding muddy.

Anyways, I'm impressed so far and have some larger gigs coming out where I can test it at higher volumes.