Thanks for a great series. I recently bought a 28 watt Matamp from the early 2000’s. It sound phenomenal but is “somebody call the police” loud when above 3 on the master volume, so this series has been really helpful in helping me choose an attenuator/load box. Thanks for your hard work.
Very nice work with these comparision videos! It would have been nice if there was a TAD Silencer included in the comparision. Isn't that a German attenuator?
I’ve had an UAD Ox Box for the last few years. My amps tube life is greatly shortened….. not driving the amps that hard but amps really don’t like them. My Friedman Butterslax and Runt hate the ox . Sound is great but be prepared to have to take your amp to get repaired at least once a year. People don’t talk about this enough.
This video and the loadbox series are excellent... thank you! Can you briefly expand on the PS-2 presence and depth settings in your experiment when used with the flat flat settings? That curve most closely resembles the non-attenuated signal, however, at the end of the video you mentioned the presence and depth controls can help create a Fletcher Munson curve.
@@RockGuitarVibesthank you for that info. Do you remember what the depth and presence settings were during your tests in this video with the flat flat settings?
Very interesting comparison and information. Of the 4 units you compared, the only actual attenuator (in the strictest sense) is the Tone King Ironman 2. The others are doing more than simply attenuating the original amp signal. The Freyette, for example, is re-amping the original signal coming from the amp using its own tube amp. All that aside, I'm trying to decide between the Ironman 2 and the Rivera Rock Crusher. I like the concept of the Ironman using dual transformers to attenuate and compensate for the Fletcher-Munson Curve, but it could then be said that the Rock Crusher is more accurate to the original amp signal due to this feature. I find it strange that the Ironman does not have a bypass switch or even an on/off switch as it requires AC power to operate resulting in it always being "on". Also, Tone King themselves are hesitant to recommend the Ironman 2 for heavy attenuation usage with a "big amp" such as a 1972 Marshall Super Lead. The Rock Crusher on the other hand was supposedly designed around using a Super Lead. Any thoughts?
Pretty good amp, now I'm a little jealous. Anyway, even if I understand your concerns - active attenuators sound better, trust your ears. BTW: It's not simple reamping, technically it's the line out signal of a reactive loadbox which is amplified.
@@RockGuitarVibes Thanks! My '72 Super Lead is really something else and I feel lucky to have it. It does have a PPIMV mod, but even with that you still have to turn it up to quite a high level to get the power tubes cooking in order to sound right. I want to use an attenuator to drop the dB level from about 112-114 to around 102. I wouldn't really call that "heavy" attenuation. But apparently Tone King does. The Rock Crusher would just ask for more...supposedly. Even using a line out signal of a reactive load box going through an entirely different amp, still brings another tube amp into the equation. How high do you need to have that amp turned up for its power tubes to start cooking? I'm referring here to the Freyette, not the TAE which is SS because that brings a whole other new variable into the equation. That variable being a solid-state amp.
@@markn4526 The PS poweramp is pretty transparent and this is how it should be - the original tone should stay unchanged. However, what's really important is the interaction between the power tubes and the loudspeaker - I think thats the real secret why the PS attenuator works that great. In case you need more headroom possibly the PS100 is the better choice.
Hello! Great Video series! I have one question: If I want to reamp (different amp) a guitar track, using a pre recorded clean DI, but cannot reamp using a cab (I live in a flat!), what attenuator/power soak/load box is best for a punchy realistic sound? Which one has the closest result to a real amp, full volume with a real cabinet? Thanks in advance and Cheers from Portugal!
I would recommend the X-Load from Fractal Audio - you can find a detailed test here -> th-cam.com/video/AR_q297ll5U/w-d-xo.html However, keep in mind the sound also depends on the used IR's...
I'm not sure, if the amp will see the speaker impedance of the speaker. With fryette the amp see the reactive load of the fryette power station and the poweramp of fryette see the speaker impedance. Same for the rest imo.
That's right - with the Flat/Flat option you can avoid having two reactive loads (emulation and a real speaker) in the chain. This concept works pretty well.
Well done. Yet another confirmation of Freyette's "best in class" status.
im gonna buy it ... its just such a pity that the Freyette has no headphone out
@@wurzlgaming I agree 100%
@@wurzlgamingyou could use something like Nux nss4.
Thanks for a great series. I recently bought a 28 watt Matamp from the early 2000’s. It sound phenomenal but is “somebody call the police” loud when above 3 on the master volume, so this series has been really helpful in helping me choose an attenuator/load box. Thanks for your hard work.
Thanks a lot mate 🙏 glad I could help 😎🎸
Interesting. Thx for doing this.
Glad I could help 😎🎸
Amazing research, very nice explanation. Thank you so much for this!
Excellent Video Thanks So Much
Very nice work with these comparision videos! It would have been nice if there was a TAD Silencer included in the comparision. Isn't that a German attenuator?
Yes, TAD is a German company - unfortunately I don't own the Silencer...
Thank you for all your work. Your videos gave me confidence in deciding to buy the Suhr reactive load IR when I was shopping it
Glad I could help 😎🎸
No attenuator vol 6 - 2:00
No atteuator vol 1 - 2:24
Fryette PS2 edge/deep - 3:31
Fryette PS2 flat/flat -3:55
BOSS TAE - 6:24
OX Loadbox - 7:11
ToneKing IM2 - 7:55
I’ve had an UAD Ox Box for the last few years. My amps tube life is greatly shortened….. not driving the amps that hard but amps really don’t like them. My Friedman Butterslax and Runt hate the ox . Sound is great but be prepared to have to take your amp to get repaired at least once a year. People don’t talk about this enough.
I've seen some chats regarding the OX and the risk of damaging the amp. But no explanation why or how.
This video and the loadbox series are excellent... thank you! Can you briefly expand on the PS-2 presence and depth settings in your experiment when used with the flat flat settings? That curve most closely resembles the non-attenuated signal, however, at the end of the video you mentioned the presence and depth controls can help create a Fletcher Munson curve.
Yes, these controls work for the attenuator only - but keep in mind, the line out is not affected.
@@RockGuitarVibesthank you for that info. Do you remember what the depth and presence settings were during your tests in this video with the flat flat settings?
@@andrewamicarelli Sorry, it's been too long to remeber.
Very interesting comparison and information. Of the 4 units you compared, the only actual attenuator (in the strictest sense) is the Tone King Ironman 2. The others are doing more than simply attenuating the original amp signal. The Freyette, for example, is re-amping the original signal coming from the amp using its own tube amp.
All that aside, I'm trying to decide between the Ironman 2 and the Rivera Rock Crusher. I like the concept of the Ironman using dual transformers to attenuate and compensate for the Fletcher-Munson Curve, but it could then be said that the Rock Crusher is more accurate to the original amp signal due to this feature. I find it strange that the Ironman does not have a bypass switch or even an on/off switch as it requires AC power to operate resulting in it always being "on". Also, Tone King themselves are hesitant to recommend the Ironman 2 for heavy attenuation usage with a "big amp" such as a 1972 Marshall Super Lead. The Rock Crusher on the other hand was supposedly designed around using a Super Lead. Any thoughts?
Pretty good amp, now I'm a little jealous. Anyway, even if I understand your concerns - active attenuators sound better, trust your ears. BTW: It's not simple reamping, technically it's the line out signal of a reactive loadbox which is amplified.
@@RockGuitarVibes Thanks! My '72 Super Lead is really something else and I feel lucky to have it. It does have a PPIMV mod, but even with that you still have to turn it up to quite a high level to get the power tubes cooking in order to sound right. I want to use an attenuator to drop the dB level from about 112-114 to around 102. I wouldn't really call that "heavy" attenuation. But apparently Tone King does. The Rock Crusher would just ask for more...supposedly.
Even using a line out signal of a reactive load box going through an entirely different amp, still brings another tube amp into the equation. How high do you need to have that amp turned up for its power tubes to start cooking? I'm referring here to the Freyette, not the TAE which is SS because that brings a whole other new variable into the equation. That variable being a solid-state amp.
@@markn4526 The PS poweramp is pretty transparent and this is how it should be - the original tone should stay unchanged. However, what's really important is the interaction between the power tubes and the loudspeaker - I think thats the real secret why the PS attenuator works that great. In case you need more headroom possibly the PS100 is the better choice.
I've tried both the PS-100 and IM2, and kept the IM2. I've tried it through 4 boutique amps and 3 cabs. It sounds and feels great.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
Just saw a channel featuring the Driftwood reactive load up against the Shur. Interesting. Would you consider doing a test on one of these?
not quite sure if I want to test it, what I've heard so far is that the RedSeven sounds better - which also means that the Suhr sounds better...
Thanks ! :)
Hello! Great Video series! I have one question: If I want to reamp (different amp) a guitar track, using a pre recorded clean DI, but cannot reamp using a cab (I live in a flat!), what attenuator/power soak/load box is best for a punchy realistic sound? Which one has the closest result to a real amp, full volume with a real cabinet? Thanks in advance and Cheers from Portugal!
I would recommend the X-Load from Fractal Audio - you can find a detailed test here -> th-cam.com/video/AR_q297ll5U/w-d-xo.html
However, keep in mind the sound also depends on the used IR's...
I'm not sure, if the amp will see the speaker impedance of the speaker. With fryette the amp see the reactive load of the fryette power station and the poweramp of fryette see the speaker impedance. Same for the rest imo.
That's right - with the Flat/Flat option you can avoid having two reactive loads (emulation and a real speaker) in the chain. This concept works pretty well.
Save your money, Two Notes Captor and CaptorX work just as good.
CaptorX significantly worsening the tone, according to tests.