Put My SoloAmp Up Against A Full Blown Bose L1 System Last Night

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

I miked it from fairly close. I can't recall, at this point, whether I used one of my Audix dynamic mics or an Earthworks omni-directional condenser mic.

So how are you getting along with that Cole Clark guitar, Ken? I hope the honeymoon isn't over already.

Gary

Hi Gary,

Thanks for the info on your SoloAmp lower-octave recording! The SoloAmp is amazing for its size!

I love my Cole Clark and wouldn't part with it. It's mighty fine as is when plugged into my SoloAmp with no additional gear to buy or tweak. Just as Italian Bearclaw Spruce could be the next must-have guitar-top tonewood, could Cole Clark be the next big carefree gig guitar?

Regards,

Ken

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

I miked it from fairly close. I can't recall, at this point, whether I used one of my Audix dynamic mics or an Earthworks omni-directional condenser mic.

So how are you getting along with that Cole Clark guitar, Ken? I hope the honeymoon isn't over already.

Gary

If you used a cardioid microphone placed very close to the SoloAmp, the proximity effect would have exaggerated the bass response. Also, the size of the room is a factor.

[DavidE]

I can't borrow my friend's Soloamp since it's in for repair. He said it's gotten VERY noisy. Curious to see if there's anything wrong with it.

[DavidE]

"It really seems that folks here are trying to bend the Bose and the Fishman to do things they simply weren't designed to do. That's kinda a drag because honestly understood they are both VERY clever designs and do what they do amazingly well. Asking the Fishman to behave like the Bose is nothing more than hammering a square peg into a round hole."

I'm just trying to figure out how the Soloamp does for an acoustic duo like my Bose. Weren't they both designed for that?

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by DavidE

"It really seems that folks here are trying to bend the Bose and the Fishman to do things they simply weren't designed to do. That's kinda a drag because honestly understood they are both VERY clever designs and do what they do amazingly well. Asking the Fishman to behave like the Bose is nothing more than hammering a square peg into a round hole."

I'm just trying to figure out how the Soloamp does for an acoustic duo like my Bose. Weren't they both designed for that?

The SoloAmp (with a mixer) will work out well for an acoustic duo as does your Bose. I think folks can get too involved in specifications and sound dispersion characteristics and miss the point that these are compact and easy systems to transport and setup. If the Bose sounds better and is more useful to some players than the SoloAmp, then its three-times costlier price tag is worth it to those players! I'd say a potential buyer of these systems should audition both of them in the same room at the same time to gain a perspective on the usefulness these systems have for a particular act's needs.

Regards,

SpruceTop

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by DavidE

I'm just trying to figure out how the Soloamp does for an acoustic duo like my Bose. Weren't they both designed for that?

Well no not really

The Bose is designed specifically to act as a "Personal PA" system that uniquely serves as a personal monitor as well. It's true line array design provides for dispersion that really makes it one of a kind. The "Personal PA" banner is further supported by the inclusion of a crossover and a sub. The Bose by design is not specifically nor conceptually engineered as an "acoustic guitar" system. Far from it as it can cover a lot of ground. It's linage is strictly a "PA" system. That's not to say it can't make a great system for guitarist as it obviously can but it comes to the game from a completely different angle.

The SoloAmp was designed specifically for "Acoustic Guitarist" and in fact by comparison would make a very poor bass amp where the Bose would handle that with relative ease. The acoustic guitar and more importantly the giging acoustic guitarist provides some unusual challenges and the Fishman meets those challenges very efficiently. It's light, it's easy to setup, it's eq points are well chosen for guitar, it's reverb where not a Lexicon 480 is voiced really well for guitar and (I know from experience) works well in the live environment. All of that and overall the SoloAmp sounds really good with very little tweaking.

The Fishman despite what some here feel is design without a sub because (as I've mentioned before) frequencies below 100 Hz (sub territory) are not primary frequencies needed for MOST acoustic guitarist or vocalist for that matter. I emphasis the word most because there's always exceptions to that rule. Michael Hedges would be one who most notably had sub-like response from his guitar.

The Bose is a PA system. The Fishman is an Acoustic guitar amp that also conveniently handles a single vocalist (albeit very well).

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

I'd say a potential buyer of these systems should audition both of them in the same room at the same time to gain a perspective on these systems usefulness for a particular act's needs.

Amen to that.

The one caveat however is the Bose especially with the little controller box thingy is clearly a deeper device. It needs to be properly gained staged and is fairly unforgiving if it's not, one needs to make sure there isn't some wild preset curve loaded, the reverbs are deep and it's easy to call up something entirely inappropriate ect, ect.

I went to 3 GC's when auditioning these things and all 3 Bose systems where woefully displayed and setup. The sales guys who are all fairly nice kids couldn't run that box if there life depended on it. It took 30 minutes or more for me to start to dialing in something even remotely appealing. Not that the Bose is not capable...it certainly is. It just takes longer to dial in.

The Fishman was pretty much plug and go.

[SpruceTop]

Another thing to consider is that a duo could buy two SoloAmps for a grand less than the Bose L1 Model II with T1 system. Whether this would have any more utility or not to an acoustic duo when compared to a Bose system would be based on various factors important to the players.

Regards,

SpruceTop

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

Amen to that.

The one caveat however is the Bose especially with the little controller box thingy is clearly a deeper device. It needs to be properly gained staged and is fairly unforgiving if it's not, one needs to make sure there isn't some wild preset curve loaded, the reverbs are deep and it's easy to call up something entirely inappropriate ect, ect.

I went to 3 GC's when auditioning these things and all 3 Bose systems where woefully displayed and setup. The sales guys who are all fairly nice kids couldn't run that box if there life depended on it. It took 30 minutes or more for me to start to dialing in something even remotely appealing. Not that the Bose is not capable...it certainly is. It just takes longer to dial in.

A nice thing about the Bose system's T1 box is that it can store "Scenes" or EQ and Effects settings for various venues that the performers have already played in. Then, upon their return to a particular venue, the act need only hit the appropriate Scene preset to recall all that venue's previously stored PA settings. Cool!

Regards,

SpruceTop

[bobc]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

Well no not really

The Bose is designed specifically to act as a "Personal PA" system that uniquely serves as a personal monitor as well. It's true line array design provides for dispersion that really makes it one of a kind. The "Personal PA" banner is further supported by the inclusion of a crossover and a sub. The Bose by design is not specifically nor conceptually engineered as an "acoustic guitar" system. Far from it as it can cover a lot of ground. It's linage is strictly a "PA" system. That's not to say it can't make a great system for guitarist as it obviously can but it comes to the game from a completely different angle.

The SoloAmp was designed specifically for "Acoustic Guitarist" and in fact by comparison would make a very poor bass amp where the Bose would handle that with relative ease. The acoustic guitar and more importantly the giging acoustic guitarist provides some unusual challenges and the Fishman meets those challenges very efficiently. It's light, it's easy to setup, it's eq points are well chosen for guitar, it's reverb where not a Lexicon 480 is voiced really well for guitar and (I know from experience) works well in the live environment. All of that and overall the SoloAmp sounds really good with very little tweaking.

The Fishman despite what some here feel is design without a sub because (as I've mentioned before) frequencies below 100 Hz (sub territory) are not primary frequencies needed for MOST acoustic guitarist or vocalist for that matter. I emphasis the word most because there's always exceptions to that rule. Michael Hedges would be one who most notably had sub-like response from his guitar.

The Bose is a PA system. The Fishman is an Acoustic guitar amp that also conveniently handles a single vocalist (albeit very well).

I know the SoloAmp may not have been designed for an acoustic duo, but my friend and I used my SoloAmp to do an acoustic duo at the Jersey shore. I used a small mixer and it handled 2 guitars and 2 vocals extremely well. We set up out in the courtyard of my sisters condo community and put on a little show for the tenants. The sidewalk was about 100 feet or so to our left (almost 90 degrees to the left of the way the SoloAmp was facing, and people where stopping on the sidewalk to listen. I only had it turned up to about 10 o'clock, and they told us it sounded great.

I do agree that it is geared for guitar and vocal, but I think it handles multiple guitars and vocals quite well.

[Larry Pattis]

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

...I think folks can get too involved in specifications and sound dispersion characteristics and miss the point that these are compact and easy systems to transport and setup....

<<snip>>

I think it's important to note that (in my opinion) a dismissal of the sound propagation/dispersion issue when comparing Bose & BagAmp to the SoloAmp is a mistake.

This is not about specs, it's about how the units can be best (and most effectively) used in a live-performance setting.

The Bose and BA are designed to be used behind & to-the-side of the performer (as a monitor), and they both do well at this one aspect of their use. The SoloAmp, by it's design, can be (I said "can be") problematic if you attempt to use it in this same fashion. This has been discussed at some length on this thread, and at great length on one of the other "portable-PA" threads.

As has been stated above (post #71 {page 5}, and elsewhere), the SoloAmp is a guitar amp, not a PA...and it has many fine qualities within the context of it's proper use...and many will find the SoloAmp the perfect piece of gear.

Others, like myself, have found that the SA has limitations in it's actual use.

All three pieces of equipment have benefits and drawbacks specific to each design, and there will be satisfied users for ALL of them.

[SpruceTop]

From Fishman's Website comes this about the SoloAmp:

Portable and Powerful

Designed for the singer/songwriter, the SA220 Solo Performance System provides exceptional sound quality and coverage in a wide variety of venues. 220Watts of clean, lightweight power drives a line array of six custom high-excursion speakers and a soft dome tweeter. This unique combination delivers incredibly full sound, ultra-wide dispersion, and deeper sonic penetration than the common speaker cabinet. Better yet, the enhanced bass response of the custom-designed speakers means there’s no need for a subwoofer!

It’s a P.A….and an Amp

With the SA220, the performer and audience hear exactly the same sound, meaning there’s no need for separate wedge monitors or a combo amp backline. And because the SA220 is voiced for the singer/songwriter, acoustic instruments and vocals are projected with superb depth and clarity.

Fishman isn't saying anything about it being a full-range PA but is touting its usage for acoustic instruments and vocals. I would probably add that although Fishman is saying there's no need for a subwoofer, acoustic instruments of the mid-range variety like guitars, banjos, mandolins, etc., would probably fare best through a SoloAmp. I think, as information on various threads has come to light on this and other compact amps, that the SoloAmp probably isn't a really good behind-the-performer monitor/PA type setup, as Larry mentioned.

Regards,

Sprucetop

[Larry Pattis]

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

From Fishman's Website comes this about the SoloAmp:

<<snip sales/marketing rhetoric>>

Fishman isn't saying anything about it being a full-range PA but is touting its usage for acoustic instruments and vocals. I would probably add that although Fishman is saying there's no need for a subwoofer, acoustic instruments of the mid-range variety like guitars, banjos, mandolins, etc., would probably fare best through a SoloAmp. I think, as information on various threads has come to light on this and other compact amps, that the SoloAmp probably isn't a really good behind-the-performer monitor/PA type setup, as Larry mentioned.
Regards,

Sprucetop

I guess I would have no problem calling the SoloAmp a PA (public address system), but one primarily designed (I said "primarily") for a solo performer...and one that could be extended to a duo, if necessary.

...and yes, my real (and only) personal rejection of the SA is based on difficulties I encountered trying to use the SA as a behind-the-performer monitor in performance, for which it is really not designed.

Had I been looking for something that could be placed directly to one side, or better yet, out-front, the SA would likely have been a very good choice for me.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

If you used a cardioid microphone placed very close to the SoloAmp, the proximity effect would have exaggerated the bass response. Also, the size of the room is a factor.

I was probably miking from around a foot away, being careful not to mic too close to the tweeter.

FYI, my hypercardioid Audix OM-7s have very little proximity effect. I can get right on them and not sound muddy. The omni-directional Earthworks condensor mics have no proximity effect either, of course.


Ken,

Glad to hear that the Cole Clark is still serving you well.


Gary

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by bobc

but I think it handles multiple guitars and vocals quite well.

Hey Bob,

Yes of course there's no doubt about. In the end I'm just trying to point out to those who might benefit that the two systems were simply designed and are in fact marketed differently. To complete that thought a conversation about subs, cross-overs and fundamental low end frequencies was needed (at least I felt) to clarify some of the pragmatic design differences.

Because the Fishman was primarily designed for a solo guitarist and perhaps a single vocal doesn't mean it can't excel in a handful of varied situations and obviously does Conversely because the Bose is designed for PA doesn't mean it can be an excellent acoustic guitar amp as it obviously is.

Understanding why all of this happens was my primary motivation.