Post by John on Jan 19, 2007 12:59:23 GMT -7
I've had a Weber Mass for several months. I just received my Airbrake about a week ago. Here are my subjective observations.
They were compared with two rigs:
Rig 1: Route 66 w/ closed back 1x12 greenback and Les Paul
Rig 2: Maz Jr 2x12 (g12h) and Telecaster
The majority of these observations were done at mostly medium to large attenuated levels. (for now) The Mass is the older tabletop style, not the 1/2 rack model
First off, I have to say the Weber replaced a Marshall Powerbrake that I used for a decade. I could just kick myself for using that Marshall for all that time. It scoops out the mids and compresses WAY too much.
But back to the Airbrake/Mass. First off, the Mass has a problem upon insertion. It knocks off 6db even when set at it's loudest. This is a BIG issue in my opinion. This sucks for live gigs where you may only want to knock off a little bit. 6db is a lot. The Airbrake's first several settings are 1.8db each. (if I have that right)
For those that don't have an airbrake, the first 4 settings are 1.8db drops (non adjustable), then the final setting is 'bedroom', which would be like a setting 5, but with the additional feature of a variable knob to raise/lower the sound level. This variable knob only works for the 'bedroom' and not the first 4 settings. In my opinion, the first 4 settings don't need a variable adjustment, because they are only 1.8 db adjustments. That means small reductions per setting.
It was obvious the Airbrake allowed more high end through when using large amounts of attenuation. It was especially noticeable with the Route 66 and Les Paul. This was a Big issue to me. (but I still had to lower the cut on the Maz) With the Weber, I noticed a large reduction in highs when playing very attenuated in the basement, but at rehearsal, (higher volume) the highs would come back. With the Airbrake, the highs are at the lower volume. Yes, I know the Mass has a treble boost switch, but it sounds brittle. It should be adjustable, not a set amount.
It could be my imagination, but the Airbrake seems a bit more percussive. This could be due to the highs coming through. The Weber was a bit more smooth. Not compressed, but smooth. Sorry, hard to explain.
I really like the concept of the Mass with it's reactive speaker motor in it. I really don't care for the concept of a dummy, or non-reactive load. But hey, if it works, it works.
Summary, while they are both nice units, the Airbrake seems more transparent and versitile. That initial 6db upon insertion is a deal breaker.
I also have to add that the Mass has a DI jack and eq for that DI. Something I'll never use, but it could be good in the studio for some.
I hope this helps.
They were compared with two rigs:
Rig 1: Route 66 w/ closed back 1x12 greenback and Les Paul
Rig 2: Maz Jr 2x12 (g12h) and Telecaster
The majority of these observations were done at mostly medium to large attenuated levels. (for now) The Mass is the older tabletop style, not the 1/2 rack model
First off, I have to say the Weber replaced a Marshall Powerbrake that I used for a decade. I could just kick myself for using that Marshall for all that time. It scoops out the mids and compresses WAY too much.
But back to the Airbrake/Mass. First off, the Mass has a problem upon insertion. It knocks off 6db even when set at it's loudest. This is a BIG issue in my opinion. This sucks for live gigs where you may only want to knock off a little bit. 6db is a lot. The Airbrake's first several settings are 1.8db each. (if I have that right)
For those that don't have an airbrake, the first 4 settings are 1.8db drops (non adjustable), then the final setting is 'bedroom', which would be like a setting 5, but with the additional feature of a variable knob to raise/lower the sound level. This variable knob only works for the 'bedroom' and not the first 4 settings. In my opinion, the first 4 settings don't need a variable adjustment, because they are only 1.8 db adjustments. That means small reductions per setting.
It was obvious the Airbrake allowed more high end through when using large amounts of attenuation. It was especially noticeable with the Route 66 and Les Paul. This was a Big issue to me. (but I still had to lower the cut on the Maz) With the Weber, I noticed a large reduction in highs when playing very attenuated in the basement, but at rehearsal, (higher volume) the highs would come back. With the Airbrake, the highs are at the lower volume. Yes, I know the Mass has a treble boost switch, but it sounds brittle. It should be adjustable, not a set amount.
It could be my imagination, but the Airbrake seems a bit more percussive. This could be due to the highs coming through. The Weber was a bit more smooth. Not compressed, but smooth. Sorry, hard to explain.
I really like the concept of the Mass with it's reactive speaker motor in it. I really don't care for the concept of a dummy, or non-reactive load. But hey, if it works, it works.
Summary, while they are both nice units, the Airbrake seems more transparent and versitile. That initial 6db upon insertion is a deal breaker.
I also have to add that the Mass has a DI jack and eq for that DI. Something I'll never use, but it could be good in the studio for some.
I hope this helps.