Heads-up: SpaceStation keyboard amp is apparently back

[Al Quinn]

Thanks guys. I'm glad you enjoyed it. Yeah, the Shure MV88 clip on mic is a great way to record gigs. And, their IOS app makes it easy to trim out individual tunes afterwards if desired. I usually just listen to each gig, try to learn from what I hear, and delete. But, in this case I was thinking folks on the forum might enjoy hearing the rig so I posted a song.

 

I can't take full credit for the TT08A/SS V3 combo amp idea. A while back I PM'ed Aspen asking for help to install a jack in my SS V3. The envisioned jack would provide the front speaker signal to an external speaker (e.g., TT08A) while disabling the SS V3 front speaker in hopes of getting a great DP acoustic piano sound. Aspen thought there might be away to accomplish this without modifying the SS V3 and he was right! After trying a few different placements of the two amps (while following Aspen's guidance) I found one that met my needs. Many thanks to Aspen for his willingness to collaborate and share his expertise -- he's not just super smart and innovative, but he's also a great guy!

[cphollis]

Great thread, so thanks Al (and Aspen)

 

I think the trick here is to have access to a self-powered PA unit that is head-and-shoulders better, and not a little better -- plus the incentive to lug more gear, of course.

 

I tried this at home with my QSC K12. It was better, but not oodles better. Bass was fuller, the mids were a shade clearer, etc.

 

I then tried it with my FA12ac. It was a LOT better, as it should be.

 

All that being said, guess what I'm taking to my Friday night pub gig?

 

My standalone SSv3. I'm getting lazy in my old age.

 

-- Chuck

[Al Quinn]

Chuck, you're logic makes sense to me, especially as we get older (i.e., I'm 58). If the TT08A weighed as much as the FA12ac (i.e., 46 lbs.) I'd probably leave it at home too. It would likely stay in the closet for most gigs; right next to the chopped Leslie 145 which sounds great but may not see another gig. At 25 lbs. the TT08A schlep factor is a non-issue for me.

 

- Al

[cphollis]

OK, now you've got me thinking. What would be a super-high-end self-powered 8" that you could pair with the SSv3 without the need for the TT08a?

 

Hmmm. ~1000 watts. Maybe a two-way. Great dispersion. Super-accurate.

 

And light. Very light. I'll try my QSC K8, but I'm not expecting much.

[timwat]

Piggybacking on that idea - how about a standalone SS box that ONLY has the side speaker, intended to be used as an "aux" box underneath a small format powered speaker.

 

Essentially, cannibalize the SSv3 and remove only the electronics, the side speaker.

 

Eliminate the main speaker, the tweeter and make the box a 12" cube.

[cphollis]

OK, that TT08a is starting to look better and better

[TimA]

Fulcrum has the fa28ac....still weighs 38 lbs.

[Aspen]

Piggybacking on that idea - how about a standalone SS box that ONLY has the side speaker, intended to be used as an "aux" box underneath a small format powered speaker.

 

Essentially, cannibalize the SSv3 and remove only the electronics, the side speaker.

 

Eliminate the main speaker, the tweeter and make the box a 12" cube.

 

That pretty much describes one of our first Fender released SFX products (licensed under the CPS patent). It was called the SFX Satellite (Fender's TM for our CPS patent was an acronym for Stereo Field eXpansion):

 

http://support.fender.com/manuals/guitar_amplifiers/Satellite_SFX_manual.pdf

 

It was a 'powered side speaker' designed to sit beneath a mono guitar amp, use it's FX loop to send the mono signal to the Satellite amp (1x12" w/ 80 watts), to be processed thru a bunch of stereo FX and then a CPS encoder that sent the Front signal back to the guitar amp via the FX return. The stereo FX and CPS controls were on the front panel of the Satellite.

 

The Satellite was one of 3 'SFX' products Fender made with that first bite at the apple, the other 2 were:

 

The Fender SFX Keyboard 200 amp (http://support.fender.com/manuals/keyboard_amplifiers/Keyboard_200_SFX_manual.pdf), and

 

The Fender Acoustisonic SFX amp, the only one that survived the first cut, and now in it's 3rd generation: http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/AcousticSFX?adpos=1o4&creative=55281333121&device=c&matchtype=&network=g&product_id=AcousticSFX&gclid=CIqm8KK82s8CFYNpfgodR8wOgQ

 

I had little (read; no) input to the design of these Fender SFX amps, other than licensing the CPS technology and guiding their engineers thru that learning curve. But in retrospect...I wish I had. The Keyboard amp and Satellite both flopped for (what I thought were) obvious reasons...which I will not dwell on here.

 

They really wanted the CPS technology for their acoustic amp market, but I wanted them to also make a keyboard amp, and the Satellite amp. Well, the 1st Acoustisonic amp gave them a 42% market share at that time, and was nominated for many awards including the TEC award.

 

But I saw the CPS market as much wider (still do) and felt the most obvious market was keyboard amps...as KBs were already becoming mostly stereo engines (this was 16+ years ago when CPS was still 'patent pending'). So I insisted, and had them agree in our license agreement that they would also make the Satellite and KB amp, which they did. But both those products flopped.

 

Fast forward to today. Obviously the KB market has found the CPS technology to it's liking in our SS3 amp...which I consider my most rewarding product ever in my 45+ years at this...for which I have this forum and you guys to thank (along with my Dealer Partners like Sweetwater, Thomann, and Soundhouse plus my OEM Vendor Partner Eminence Speaker Corp). It certainly was NOT the expensive advertising campaign (read; zero).

 

And, Fender is happy, now having good success with their latest Acoustc SFX amp...a much improved design over the 2 earlier versions.

 

But judging by your interest and your kind suggestions here, I can envision an opportunity for a new CPS Satellite amps. Maybe one sans FX and more straight forward to use for KBs and PA mixers that already have stereo processing. I just have 2 reservations:

 

1) the first Fender Satellite flopped for many reasons, but mostly because it was 'kluggey' to use. Not surprisingly, guitar players never figured out how to use it. IF I made another Satellite amp today, it would be simple. But it would still be an 'accessory' (not a stand alone solution). And also it would be on a shelf by itself; nothing else out there like it, and so no market sector established. That is always a dangerous path, there are a lot of dead pioneers...especially in the audio business.

 

2) And as an 'accessory' product (not a stand alone amp), I wonder if there would be enough business to sustain it? It would be 'large' (like a sub), and 'cost money', like say a mixer or a sub (I have seen resistance for adding either of those thru out this thread). And, if I made it loud enough to mate with your RCF and QSC powered monitors, at least 250 watts and a 12" speaker, then it would be as large and weigh as much as a sub. One frequent positive comment I have read thru out this 'novel' thread (in BOTH senses of that word), is the cool 'schlep factor' of the SS3; you are taking far less gear in the car. Our backs are not getting any younger, and the gigs are not paying any more. So again, would your backs, and wallet, support this product?

 

I enjoy discussing this here, because if you guys think it will fly, then I might have more confidence in actually designing one. After all, I thought this was a great idea 16+ years ago...and I still do. But would it sell? I hate to be so pragmatic, but that is one big Gorilla reality in my world.

 

On a side note, I used to have 'custom shop' in my old Groove Tube days where I made small run products, which by nature were kinda expensive. For an example, I made a custom SFX rig for Ray Manzarek when he did the 21st Century DOORS tour (sadly his last). It had a modified QSC 2x1Kw stereo amp and one of my big K5 cabs loaded with the best available 15" McCaulley coax system for the Front, and 2x12" Celestion KB speakers for the Side. It was LOUD, and sounded amazing. But the raw speakers alone cost ME $1500..and the whole rig when finished sold for $5,000 back then...with basically w/ no profit. I just wanted to make Ray smile, and I did. So it was well worth it to me.

 

BTW, just posted a pix of that system and Ray smiling on our CPS facebook page for 'throw back Thursday': https://www.facebook.com/centerpointstereo/posts/648195582025256

[JPerry]

Interesting question, Aspen. It seems like a natural product for those who want to do some experimenting. It seems to me that it would appeal to those of us who already own some high quality powered speakers, as the buy in might be prohibitive otherwise.

 

I have experimented with using my SSv3 in conjunction with an Eon 10 G2 and a Yamaha DXR12, as outlined in the recent posts. The DXR12 especially seemed to get good results. It's a nice detailed sounding box with good bass response from the 12" woofer that the SSv3 isn't capable of. The SSv3 worked its usual magic in providing the 3D effect that a conventional box can't provide on it's own.

 

My conclusion, however, is that the SSv3 sounds pretty good by itself, and adding extra speakers defeats one of the reasons I bought the SSv3 in the first place - good results from one plug and play box. I'm with CP Hollis on this one - for most situations the simplicity and schlep factor of just needing one box is pretty great. Like a lot of us on this forum, I'm getting older and lazier!

[roygBiv]

Aspen

 

I think it definitely is worth considering - a SMALL, lightweight SS3 without the front speaker could definitely be a viable product.

 

I actually had the Fender Satellite SFX that you noted above - cool concept, but as you note, Fender dropped the ball in its implementation, with a number of glaring defects for guitar player usage:

 

1. The onboard effects, while cool, were could not be switched remotely (kinda rendering it useless for the average guitar player used to the immediate satisfaction of stomp-box gratification)

 

2. It assumed (and essentially required) that one could run it as part of an effects loop - which left a middle age guy like me with his prized collection of 60's and 70's Fender amps out of the loop (so to speak).

 

3. It was unnecessarily heavy and awkward to move (big square box, handle placed in the wrong position).

 

So, I never ended up using it - but it was easy to trade to a music store once they heard it in action!

 

However, since (as you anticipated) a lot of the interest in your CPS technology has been keyboard players (a more refined and discerning bunch, I'm finding), I think you could make this work!

 

Maybe if it was (as timwat suggests above),lightweight, and half the size of the current SS3, achieved by just including the side speaker that does L-R, you could almost sell it as an "effects" box.

 

If the price point was low enough (>$400 maybe?) then it would get closer to an "impulse" buy level.

 

Maybe also have a version with an included small mixer and/or effects to highlight the CPS effect as a 2nd tier option.

 

Anyway, just a thought - I'm sure there are plenty of Keyboard players that are reading all this SS3 excitement who would love to try one, but are already happy with their portable PA speaker. This would give them an easier pathway to try - and they may later end up buying the full enchilada later!

 

Me, I'm so happy with my SS3 (literally the coolest new music item I've seen since my days working in a music store back in the early 80's, when every year it seemed some new gizmo was coming out) that I bought an older SS2 so I can leave it at practice. Had something like the hypothetical product like we are now discussing been available, I would have bought that instead, to go with my 12" Mackie Thump (I know, not the best speaker, but affordable for a hack like me, and got me by until you released your SS3!).

 

Anyway, just my 0.02c - do what you think is best, as a guy who runs a small (very small) research lab, I understand you don't want to over-extend your operation, as that can bring the whole thing down - either way, keep on inventing Aspen! Love your product(s).

[timwat]

Aspen,

 

The KB guy in me says "yay, satellite!" because it would selfishly serve my individual needs.

 

But the business consultant in me would echo all your business reservations and then some. Unless there is a convincing weight of market research out there to the contrary, I don't believe there would be a large, growth-potential, immediate market to support such a product at the outset.

 

You'd basically be selling a relatively costly alternative to:

 

1) Converts who already believe in the technology (in other words, folks who already own a Spacestation of some version, current or previous) AND

2) Are willing to purchase a satellite AND

3) Have a suitable self-powered speaker to pair it with.

 

That's a lot of "ifs" in one sentence. A larger company like Roland, Korg or Fender has the resources to take a risk on a niche product. Until you feel Aspen and Associates can also do that, I wouldn't release it as a shelf product.

 

So then that might hazard the next question - how viable is it to sort of develop this as a complete kit, sans box? It seems to me the sort of user who this appeals to might also be the user who is willing to try to DIY the cabinet and assembly. Lowers your labor cost considerably, although the finished product would vary in quality from user to user.

 

Just thinking out loud here.

 

Tim

[Al Quinn]

The idea of a small, inexpensive side-firing only box is interesting. I'm not sure how much of a market there would be for this product though. For me personally I love the SS as it is because I use it on jazz organ gigs with a Markbass CMP121 bass amp. This amp combo sounds great. Then for gigs where I need a clear and full acoustic piano sound from my DP the TT08A / SS V3 combo sounds great.

 

Aspen, if it were possible to repackage exactly what's in the SS V3 minus the front speaker(s) and front speaker amp(s) perhaps your development cost would be relatively small (i.e., for the most part limited to the associated mechanical and manufacturing engineering costs). And, the product cost seems like it would be pretty low considering it would be an SS V3 minus quite a bit of material cost. I'm making the assumption that your electrical design is modular enough to accommodate this type of approach but obviously I don't know if that's the case. Maybe your manufacturing partner could do some or most of the repackaging effort. But is there a big enough market for this product? I don't know.

[cphollis]

My interest would be along the lines of a SSv3 Turbo.

 

Same form factor, same amplification -- just top shelf speaker components that can deliver that pristine acoustic piano sound we all crave.

 

And maybe a few more watts. Just a few.

 

Here's my reasoning.

 

1 -- one of the strengths of the SSv3 is its all-in-one form factor. I've gotten quite good at placing it for different venues and band situations. Don't want to go back to a two-piece setup.

 

2 -- Aspen did a great job with value-engineering the SSv3. The damn thing sounds better than it has any right to at its price point. But, what could you do to the sound quality if you upped the price point?

 

3 -- Those of us who are looking at auxes and TT008a's on top are looking mostly for one thing -- crystal clear sound reproduction of our acoustic pianos. Not crushing volume, per se, although that wouldn't be a bad thing. I would bet that for the cost of upgraded components, we'd pretty much get what we are looking for.

 

I'm thinking there might be a market in the $1200-$1500 price range. Heck, I paid more than that for my Motion Sound KBD amp years ago.

 

If I was any good at audio and electronic engineering, I'd consider tearing apart one of my SSv3 units and loading it up with upgraded components.

 

If I knew what the hell I was doing, that is.

[timwat]

+1, cphollis.

 

All that resonates with me.

[Doerfler]

I also agree with Chuck and Tim.

[roygBiv]

See, just to be contrary, I would argue to go in the opposite direction - lower cost, lighter, more capable of capturing the "impulse buy" crowd.

 

If you could design it to appeal for both keyboard players AND guitar players, by including an optional internal speaker or amp simulator circuit, it could seriously broaden the market.

 

The "boutique" guitar nerd crowd (who's numbers are legion) think nothing of dropping $200-300 (or more) for some re-hashed version of a Tube Screamer pedal -

 

Thus, I suspect they would have no problem ponying up for a a mini-SS3 after they heard what its 3D sound could do for their "tone".

 

Anyway, just a thought - not sure how much extra engineering that would require. The Fender SFX satellite I owned previously was extremely cool, but the form factor frankly sucked.

 

Part of that may have been because it was designed and released before the cheap digital amplification options that we now have available that enable such lightweight amplified speakers.

 

If it had been half the size, and had an easier interface to use with any amp (no just amps with effects loops), I think it could have been a hit. Especially if it could simply be used to route your effects into - nothing beats an unaffected sound in one amp, and the effects in a second - really cleans things up. Brian May used to do that, and he has a PhD in physics, and really cool hair).

 

It might be the right time now for a re-boot, with a dual purpose guitar and keyboard version - that would seriously broaden the market.

 

OK, my apologies for the ramble, its late and the Lagunitas Hop Stupid is winning.

[Al Quinn]

I also agree with Chuck's suggestion of a high end SSV3. If it sounded as good as the TT08A/SS V3 combo I would buy one.

[cphollis]

Aspen: don't forget the "Turbo" logo if you decide to build a few

 

http://cartype.com/pics/99/small/911_turbos_04.jpg

 

 

[TimA]

I would also.....

[Synthaholic]

I'd love to try to run my Spacestation wirelessly. I like it at least 20 feet away from me, but hate running 25 foot cables. I just searched on MF for Stereo Wireless and found this:

 

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/wi-digital-audiolink-pro-portable-stereo-digital-wireless-instrument-system-with-wireless-usb-audio-interface#productDetail

 

I'm wondering how well it would work. It actually looks like more of a PITA than the cables.

[Bill Spencer]

I had Redco make me a 15' stereo cable with 2 right angle 1/4" TS males on one end (amp end) and 1/4" TS females on the other. It uses Mogami super slim 'zip' type paired audio cable. I combined that with a 15' iec power cord that has a right angle female plug at the amp end.

 

I keep this 'snake' in the bottom of the SS so it's really easy to set up at a distance where possible. I just plug my mixer output cables into the female cable mounted jacks. The right angle connectors at the amp end allow placement close to a wall if necessary.

[Bill Spencer]

+1 on a premium level SS. Many of us would gladly pay more for a super high quality slightly larger one box solution.

[MathOfInsects]

I am going to be an outlier and say that some great portion of the value prop for the SS3 is the price-to-quality ratio. Once the price rises to the level of the quality, it would seem to me the other "deficits" we live with--the low bass response, the need for a mixer to maximize non-distorted gain--would be a major drag on the value proposition.

 

Imagine spending $2000 to slightly improve basically a single, idiosyncratic aspect of this box, and then still having to add a sub. I personally believe this thread would go quite differently if that were the case.

 

FWIW.

[Bill Spencer]

I get your point, but I don't need a sub 90% of the time and would spend $$$ to get a single box with the fidelity of even my QSC K8s.

 

 

[MathOfInsects]

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you would, and clearly others here might as well. But in terms of selling enough units to make it worth all that R&D and manufacturing cost...well, I am personally not sure there is enough of a market for that single use (slightly better AP verses everything else that seems fine now) to make the difference in price pay off. I think this thread would have gone very differently if the box were even $400-$500 more than it is, let alone the price difference I imagine we'd be talking about.

 

But it's all fantasy league until Aspen chimes in.

[cphollis]

But it's all fantasy league until Aspen chimes in.

 

Yup, you're right on that one ...

 

My personal thinking: the only change I'd suggest if Aspen was interested was simply upgrading the speaker components, nothing more. For example, the bass of today's unit is more than adequate for what I do, and I'd surmise that an upgraded 8" coax might put out a bit more bass. I'd be a happy camper.

 

Where I think several of us are coming from is simple: we're willing to pay a bit more to get the pristine sound we're getting from some of our other upmarket amplification gear.

 

We love just about everything else about the box. Al Quinn got me thinking in this direction with his post where he was putting the 8" front flat on the floor (essentially defeating it), and plopping a ~$2K RCF TT08a on top of it.

 

Hmmm. Let's think about that TT08a, and what it brings to the party.

 

Don't need (or want) the separate enclosure and power supply. Don't need (maybe want) more watts as the current unit has more than enough stones for my gigs. Don't need (or want) fancy DSP and all that.

 

Just want the higher-end speaker components. Gotta wonder what something like this would sound like: http://www.parts-express.com/faitalpro-8hx200-8-neodymium-coaxial-driver-8-ohm--294-1190

 

Being no expert whatsoever on any of this, my guess is that we're not talking much in the way of R+D, etc. Maybe Aspen could make them himself as a boutique product. Or someone might be interested in aftermarket upgrades.

 

Certainly not mass-market at a substantially higher price point -- agreed.

 

But then there's the halo effect

 

 

[John Tweed]

I've been using my SS3 with my K10, as per Al Q's setup, and it solves the two shortcomings of the SS3 - it gives me good solid bass for LHB gigs, and/or it gives me raw power for the times when the SS3 by itself is just not loud enough to compete with the rest of the (too loud) band. I've tried various other ways of combining the two units (a separate crossover unit feeding the two, or a graphic equaliser between the sub out and the K10) and this is the most reliable from a setup point of view. As it is I usually carry both speakers in the car and can use either separately or both, depending on the exact situation.

 

The only thing that occurs to me to improve the sound and usefulness would be if there was some way of turning off the front facing speaker in the SS3. So far as I understand, a D-Class amp can be run quite safely without a load, so in theory I could disconnect the front speaker and have just the side-facing speaker and not be restricted to having to place the SS3 face down.

 

While a separate unit with the side-facing speaker only sounds appealing, in reality if Aspen sold that, he'd just end up cannibalising his sales of the SS3 unit. If he came up with a larger, more powerful SS4 (?) unit I'm not sure that I'd buy one when the current solution works so well. Big ups to Al Quinn for the idea.

[timwat]

Thanks to Al Quinn, indeed!

 

Having been inside my SS, would not a simple inline toggle switch (or switches) be able to disable the front speakers manually (the coaxial 8" (LF and MR) and tweeter)?

[cphollis]

At some point, I'm going to get brave and crack open my SSv3. If I'm super-brave, I'm going to get a higher-end coax 8" and plop it in. If I get stupidly brave, I'll A/B them and tell y'all what I found.

 

As I do have two

[Synthaholic]

When I need a little more, and don't feel like lugging my 15" JBL subwoofer, I use my JBL EON510 10" + horn and switch it to bass boost. It's got 280 watts and only weighs 17 lbs. They sound great together. You can find them pretty cheap.