Fishman Loudbox Artist Vs Performer

You have better controls over the mic channel and a few other options not available on the mini. I have it narrowed down to the fishman loudbox mini or the artist.

Fishman Loudbox Artist PROLBX600 120Watt Acoustic

Fishman loudbox artist, the cheaper option, tends to get more favorable reviews than fender acoustic 100.

Fishman loudbox artist vs performer. It think the fishman loudbox mini is a wonderful choice for several reasons. The artist is a more sophisticated amp overall than the fender and, more specifically, has a proper dome tweeter instead of the fender's whizzer cone: May not matter at all to you, but good to be aware of just in case.

Despite the praises received from users, the mini has problems that many have encountered, as well. It is clean, light and gave me the full volume i need in most of my small settings. It is very compact and portable, measuring just 12 x 13.7 x 9.7 and weighing by only 19.7 lbs.

While i agree that the vinyl covering is way too delicate, that is my only complaint. The extra wattage gives it a bit more headroom. The performer edged out the artist because of the 5 mid speaker and the headroom.

I went a step up to the loudbox artist, and am much happier than i was when i tested out the mini. Plus, both of the bigger amps had quite a few more features than the mini. I really like it with the eastman.

So i have been perusing craigslist for the last 3 weeks for either a phil ones ag100 or fishman loudbox artist or performer and nothing. Since doubling your power gives you an extra 3 db of power, a 50% power increase will give you 1.5 more db. Go to awesomeness ranking go to consumer score ranking.

The loudbox artist replaces the older loudbox 100, bringing slightly more power, some subtle changes in features, and a redesigned appearance. I've not played an acoustasonic, but have gigged quite a few times with my loudbox performer. So i went out and got the fishman artist new.

It's my go to for smaller gigs and i still use my bose l1 compact for larger gigs. One minor issue is that the phantom power is only 24v not 48v. However, the artist, besides the extra power, had the xlrs for both channels rather than just one and was the same price as the loudbox 100 [actually about $50 cheaper than where i got mine].

Took the fishman loudbox artist, which is a very small fishman amp, and put the upright through one channel, and the harps through a mic into the other channel. A compact, yet powerful acoustic amp, the fishman loudbox mini is a fantastic amp for practice and small venue performances. To my ear, its reproduction of what is coming out of my guitar is what clinched the deal for me.

They have stronger mids than the mini and that seemed to compliment the steel string acoustics better. I take my performer a lot in coffee shop type venues over my aer because of the better bottom end it provides. Both are great acoustic amps with the main difference being that the artist has more power and more features.

But i agree the performer has more oomph and in your case is probably the better choice. Fishmans latest in its loudbox line of amplifiers stands just over a foot tall and weighs in at just 25 pounds, but it delivers plenty of clean sound and volume and has a compelling array of features. Each of the two models packs considerable power.

If you're looking between the. In our awesomeness score fishman loudbox artist ranks #9 out of 149 and fender acoustic 100 ranks #39 out of 149. I have also used it (via my tech 21 rk5) with an electric and it sounded great.

Well, i did a comparison of the two (aer + fishman) about 18 months ago and to my ear the aer was and is a clear winner. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the fishman loudbox amps. In small to medium venues, the performer gives you that bit of extra coverage and imho the tone is much smoother and more natural.

It also has two identical Eq'd completely differently of course. The loudbox artist would not cut it in that context i think.

I have the loudbox 100, the predecessor to the artist. I think for small venues the artist would do perfectly well. Power wise, an extra 50% isn't very noticeable.

I checked with fishman before doing this and they said i wouldn't hurt the amp, but it wasn't really designed for bass response. The fishman is hands down the better amp in my opinion. This gives the artist more clarity, wider dispersion and greater ability to cut through ambient sounds and noise.

The loudbox is the only acoustic amp i would consider at this point. Its pretty loud, yet it can be easily lugged around and tuck away. At this very amateur stage in my playing, i'm sure the mini will fit my needs well.

It's better to have more than you need, than less. We found it to be incredibly versatile, on account of the bluetooth connectivity and additional 1/8 jack input, while it could feasibly support you at any sized gig thanks to the xlr di output for connecting up to pa systems. Its sound quality is superb.

I don't use an acoustic amp that much so i'm not thinking of replacing my fender, but perhaps just for size alone (under my desk) i might replace it. +1.and i do play outside but i have the tak ct4bii preamp and have back issues and the 6 lbs or so makes a difference (25/31) so i went with the artist and have a stand; The roland cube street ex is not as good tonally as a fishman loudbox artist (see below), but for the price and portability you really cant go wrong.

I'm currently in the market for an acoustic amp to go with my 2013 314ce. I own a fender acoustasonic 30 and i've a/b's both the acoustasonic dsp and the fishman loudbox artist. No issue with a dynamic mic (like a shure sm58) but there are a number of condenser mics that are not going to work going direct into the loudbox.

Also, the power distribution is different: It's tiny, but puts out a big sound.

FENDER 2313700000 Acoustic 15 Acoustic Guitar Amplifier in