What do people mean when they say modelers "lack the amp feel"?

FractalAudio said:
It means they haven't played Fractal. :cool:

Seriously though, earlier generation modelers didn't capture the complex dynamics.

Another issue though, is people tend to listen to modelers at far lower volumes than tube amps. This gives the illusion that things are not as "dynamic" due to Fletcher-Munson, the lack of tactile sensation and the lack of acoustic feedback into the guitar.
Click to expand...

Amen.

I've tried other modelers for years (decades?) like the Line6 POD when that came out...it's not the same ballpark, it's not the same league, it's not even the same sport

My Axe FX 3 can sound just like my old Dual Rectifier with a 4x12...difference is, now I can actually integrate effects too besides a TS9 in front of the thing!

Trying to run effects through that Recto FX loop..... 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
markwayne said:
I think "feel" gets talked about so much these days because, IMHO, it's the final frontier for digital devices. When it comes to tone, I have played a number of devices that sound great and, once the part is recorded, it can be tough for me to distinguish what I used. It's only when I plug in and play that the problems show up. I can play through those other devices and get the job done, but it's not nearly as inspiring or, for lack of a better word, fun. And that is due to feel more than tone.

It reminds me of when I experimented with guitar synthesis back in the day. The sounds worked and I used them in spite of the latency but I never found myself playing them for hours. They just weren't fun.
Click to expand...

See I think "feel" gets talked about in this way because it's simply a nonsense word that holds zero actually measurable values, so it's just easier to justify one's preconceived idea that modeling is simply "worse than tubes, because of, uh, the feel, man."

I think the elusive 'fun factor" you're talking about with tube amps has very little to do with sound, but instead is simply the inspiring thought that you're playing through a very loud, very powerful machine of wood, tolex, metal, and glass, that's filled with components that get hot and glow and and burn dust and have a smell to them and look cool as hell and are simply inspiring to play for those reasons.

Tube amps are great but personally I think the best things about them are more about what they are than what they sound like.

Basically, I don't think many double blind tests are going to reveal some major difference in "feel" because it's mostly in the player's head. And I say this as somebody who owns 10+ tube amps. I love tube amps for what they are and what they sound like, and I also love Fractal stuff for what it is and what it sounds like.
 
Last edited:
DBraz said:
My opinion as a long time tube amp player, and for the last 12 years a Fractal user, is that for recording NOTHING currently beats the AXE FX iii. As far as playing "live" is concerned it's not quite the same but its close. Increasingly close with each big update in firmware.

I'm a big Bogner Ecstasy fan and the AXE doesnt quite hit it for me, even with an LXii, but for every album I've recorded on I've used the Fractal.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting point.

I have a Bogner 101B and the Fractal doesn't do that sound at all... because it models an Ecstasy 20th Anniversary head, which sounds very different than the 101B. I own a 101B and I've A/B'd it extensively with a 20th Anniversary head I had in my studio for a while, routed both preamps through both poweramps, etc.

The 101B's Blue channel is one of the best medium-gain rock channels ever made. Unfortunately for the XTC 20th, its Blue channel just isn't in the same league. It's nowhere close to the 101B's Blue channel. Actually it's just not a very good channel period. It's much harsher and more brash overall. And it has a lot less gain than the 101B Blue, and the character of its gain in nowhere near as smooth.

On the other hand, the XTC 20th's Red channel is absolutely on fire, and better than the 101B's Red channel. The XTC 20th's Red channel is a white hot modern high gain lead machine that sounds massive, full, crunchy, detailed, and expressive. The 101B's Red channel is also good but isn't quite as crispy and modern high gain sounding as the XTC 20th's Red channel.

Basically, all the changes Reinhold made going from the 101B to the XTC 20th were great for the Red channel, but detrimental to the Blue channel.

On that note (and this isn't a post asking for anything), it would be very cool to see the Ecstasy 101B modeled in the Axe-Fx one day.
 
Last edited:
In electric guitar land there are basically two types of ‘feel’.

One is the famous AITR (which has been discussed a billion times). Yes… a tube amp will have more punch (feel) than a FRFR.

The other is ‘feel’ of the string response on the fingers. I ‘feel’ this is where the Fractal holds up pretty damn good.

I’ve been using FAS since 2008, and I have all three generations (Ultra, Axe II XL+, and the Axe III MK II.

I’ve been using my SS power amp thru guitar speakers when gigging for years. That’s where I use the Axe II. For home practice and recording, the III with Atomic CLR’s, or direct recording thru my DAW.

Little true story…
For 7 years I’ve gigged in a successful tribute band using my gig rig, while the other guitarist would go thru a 1975 Marshall super lead stack. Over kill IMO, while I was using two 1/12 Mesa cabs (only playing thru one).

Guess what… In EVERY gig situation, I sounded better, and get this… cut thru the mix better! Every recording (cell phone or otherwise) confirmed this. Plus the sound man would sound check me within seconds, and always compliment my tone.

A good FRFR will give you what the FAS is designed to excel at. While the guitar power amp and cabinet will give what all the tube amp guys rave about.

In the end… live thru a PA, or recording… FAS is the leader… and the tone options aren’t even comparable. Your audience hears the PA (FRFR) live… and a recorded album gives you a RECORDED guitar tone. NOT AITR or ‘feel’ of the strings under the players fingers
 
Last edited:
I was late to the party and got my AxeFXIII in 2020 I believe. The main thing I was worried about was "feel", to me that means response to my playing such as dynamics but also time response. I was pleasantly surprised and I almost feel that my Fractal has more direct response and dynamics than my Mesas do.
 
At some point in their development, a guitarist develops a “oneness” with his/her instruments. This oneness is what is called “feel”. Why, because it often manifests itself as an emotional “feeling” or internal thrill on gets when playing and all one’s senses are aligned. When this happens the sound of the instrument that is reaching one’s ears, the actual caressing of the strings by one’s hands, and the emotions being experienced are all aligned and the guitarist is one with the instrument. It is this bodily contact with the instrument through the strings and the vibrations of the instrument body, the sounds (tones) being received by the ears and emotions the combination of all those sensory inputs are eliciting that inspires the performer to give a stellar performance.

In the past, tube amps were able to provide better sensory inputs (especially the harmonic vibrations reaching the performer’s body, than solid state amps…largely because solid state amps did not produce the same harmonic content of the tones being heard and felt. They also did not produce the same “thump” feeling that tube amps produced even at the same loudness. Early modelers sufferend from the same issues.

Today, modelers are able to produce tones very similar in tonal quality of a tube amp, so that part of the “feel” equation can be achieved. The tonal experience with the FX3 is very similar to a tube amp. Therefore, as long as the tones produced are able to reach one’s ears that magic “Feel” can be achieved pretty well. The only missing piece is the physical sound waves hitting the body of the instrument and the performer and the “thump” of the real tube amp. However, I find that when a good set of in ear monitors is used the “feel” I get from using the FX3 is very close to a tube amp. Many users use a real cabinet on stage to give them a more realistic overall “feel”.

When you witness a guitarist truly experiencing the “feel” and performing like a virtuoso…that Is a great indication that his/her rig is giving him/her the tube amp “feel”.

My two cents worth.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, if you want that amp in the room feel and sound use the AF3 (or FM3/FM9) but get a tube power amp and real guitar cabinet. These solid state power amps and ‘FRFR’ cabinets simply don’t reproduce this, they will always sound different. I’ve experimented extensively and my Matrix power amp and XiTone cabs collect dust now. Nothing against either of those companies, they amplify nicely but it doesn't sound or feel even close to the same thing. This is what I've determined based on my personal experience, whatever works for you though of course....

ps. For playing low volume and on your own, just use good studio monitors - nothing beats it! :)
 
Playing at live volume with a band there is no f*****ng difference at all and you get your kicks at the condition, IMHO.,that you use a backline for getting a nice sweet and natural feedback whether you use IEM or not. If you play bars you might prefer to have a backline with a real guitar speaker. Personally I don't mind.
 
Budda said:
Sag.
Click to expand...

I know what sag is. I know it sounds different.

Honest question, though. How does that change how the guitar feels?

Imagine a deaf person playing a real, loud, whatever you prefer amp...no compromises, no modeling, no volume constraints.

How would the amp sag affect how the guitar feels under the deaf person's fingers?
 
As has been pointed out, so many use it to just deny that modellers are where they are at now. Others because they play a modeller at low volume, and it isn't the same as a loud tube amp, and all the interactions that go with it. Many others, it's just some specious, nebulous 'feeling'.

But one legitimate complaint I've heard is that modellers can't quite capture the total package of accurate response and tone for an amp set to edge of breakup. As has been said, they haven't played a Fractal.

Modellers have had this as an achilles heel for a bit. But, even the less than high end are getting pretty close today.
 
I have never associated "feel" in the context of playing guitar through an amp as a tactile experience. It's more of a sense of connection with the sounds produced as notes and chords are played on a guitar. It's an emotional connection with the music, not something measurable but experienced in the soul.
 
JoKeR III said:
I have never associated "feel" in the context of playing guitar through an amp as a tactile experience.
Click to expand...
There's totally a tactile element to it for me. And that's really what "feel" is for me.

Different amps respond differently...

When you play a note or chord, it might be very immediate or it might sag. It might compress, or bloom, etc.

All of these things are more about "how" you hear it then "what" you hear.

Based on those things I will play differently because of the feel/response of amp.

It's hard to talk about in a way that makes sense.
 
marsonic said:
I know what sag is. I know it sounds different.

Honest question, though. How does that change how the guitar feels?

Imagine a deaf person playing a real, loud, whatever you prefer amp...no compromises, no modeling, no volume constraints.

How would the amp sag affect how the guitar feels under the deaf person's fingers?
Click to expand...
How quickly the amplified version of the note comes back their body and the guitar’s body (creating that super fun loop of liveliness).
 
my take is that the note dynamics you get from a tube amp due to supply sag, preamp sag and other parts that I’m not totally knowledgeable about. (Fractal models these anyway)

those note blooms specifically

Plus the acoustic reinforcement you get from a loud tube amp resonating with the guitar, adding more dynamics to the note in a positive feedback loop.

(You can get this from digital aswell but most people who play digital tend to be on the quieter side, thus little to no acoustic reinfocement)

My 2c

Tube amps have their own feel.

No two same-model amps will have the same feel with the same knob settings anyway due to variances in parts tolerance/manufacturing.

Digital Amps have their own feel based on an analog model.

Even if the digital model (it doesn’t have to be fractal) has a stiffer or looser feeling than the compared to a real amp.

(again no two same-model amps feel/sound the exact same at the same knob settings anyway)

Why dismiss that digital model as unaccurate and instead calling it having it’s own “feel”.

If you can connect to the sound coming out of them….

That’s all that matters.
 
Last edited:
I'm late to this thread.

The Axe 'feels' better to me than any tube head I've ever had, when recording. Meaning, when I'm listening through my studio speakers.

When pumping through my guitar cabs (2 4x12s) I find it IMPERITIVE to have a beastly amp. A 100w Marshall is NOT equivalent to a 100w class D 2 pound power amp. I think you need 500 SS watts or more to replicate the WALLOP you get from a big tube amp head.

If I'm not mistaken, tube amps are rated using the old 1% THD formula.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom