Jason Scott
Fractal Fanatic
If one is happy, why rush to change?
I'm happy with my Gibson Les Paul, but if Gibson offered to make it sound better for free, why not?
Last edited:
If one is happy, why rush to change?
Adjust Preamp Bias.
So every update is instantly guaranteed to be better with no effort/time spent, now? That is a weird implicit assumption coming from a guy who vehemently argued in favor of maintaining a built-in rollback option.I'm happy with my Gibson Les Paul, but if Gibson offered to make it sound better for free, why not?
Thanks, this was really helpful. I adjusted it and the notes are singing like they were in 5.0.
Edit:
OMG I can't believe the tones I am getting now. Thanks so much for the last update.
That there is one nice and concise tech note. What more do we need to know?I should do a Tech Note on Preamp Bias. It's one of the main tools that amp designers use in voicing Marshall-style amps. For these amps you'll notice the amp gets tighter as you set Preamp Bias negative and chunkier for positive values. Too negative and things get thin and sputtery. Too positive and the lows get farty.
Excellent info! Can't wait to try it tonight. Thanks.I should do a Tech Note on Preamp Bias. It's one of the main tools that amp designers use in voicing Marshall-style amps. For these amps you'll notice the amp gets tighter as you set Preamp Bias negative and chunkier for positive values. Too negative and things get thin and sputtery. Too positive and the lows get farty.
Obviously you guys don't respect Fractalbot to be doing its Fractalbot job and reporting to Cliff that he skipped Firmware 5.01. Good job Fractalbot. Skynet has a place for you!
Cliff, that would be very welcome! I had no idea the Preamp Bias had such an impact on the tightness, chunkiness !I should do a Tech Note on Preamp Bias. It's one of the main tools that amp designers use in voicing Marshall-style amps. For these amps you'll notice the amp gets tighter as you set Preamp Bias negative and chunkier for positive values. Too negative and things get thin and sputtery. Too positive and the lows get farty.
So every update is instantly guaranteed to be better with no effort/time spent, now? That is a weird implicit assumption coming from a guy who vehemently argued in favor of maintaining a built-in rollback option.
Not to mention, backing up, redialing, the introduction of minor bugs, etc. Heck, the last update may have BRICKED two people's Axes yesterday. If I hadn't have had time last night I certainly would have skipped or waited (and have in the past skipped multiple minor versions) until I've been convinced we were on a rev with some legs.
Where's the contradiction? And yes, If Cliff claims that the modeling has improved, I take him at his word. Further, the developers are the ones expending time and effort to improve it, not me. My assertion was that some people want to maintain the sound of their older presets because newer firmware often augments it. That's independent of whether I think newer firmware improves the modeling, which I do.
I often pass up installing beta firmware myself, however that wasn't the logic behind the forum member I originally replied to. He clarified the context with which he used the word 'stable' in his post.
That there is one nice and concise tech note. What more do we need to know?
That said, I like tech notes.