Closed True Multichannel Capability: One Amp sim per input channel

Status
Not open for further replies.
With so much processing power compared to previous models, Fractal could capture the entire hexaphonic guitar market by simply adding more Amp sim blocks - enough for one for each string.

Even if the additional Amp blocks were of lower quality, AxeFX II or Ultra amps sims, that would still be fantastic for us multi-channel players.
 
With so much processing power compared to previous models, Fractal could capture the entire hexaphonic guitar market by simply adding more Amp sim blocks - enough for one for each string.
There's already discussion of 3-Amps-At-Once being available, in another thread. The notion produced a fair bit of excitement and enthusiasm.

I grant that three is not the same as six. But depending on what you're trying to achieve (tonally), it might be enough.

Were the 3-Amps-At-Once to appear in an upcoming Firmware update, I would try running...
- Strings 1 & 4 into Amp 1,
- Strings 2 & 5 into Amp 2,
- Strings 3 & 6 into Amp 3,
...and testing out the interactions.

By doing so, I think you'd get an effect not-very-different from One-Amp-Per-String.

After all, it isn't an ultra-clean amp that gives you a big difference between One-Amp-Per-String and All-Strings-Into-One-Amp.

On the contrary, it's the distortion and intermodulation that makes the difference. When 2 notes play through the same distortion circuit, their overtones clash. The more distortion there is, the more that the notes themselves become harder to distinguish. And the effect is worse, the closer-in-pitch those two notes are. (Excluding unisons, of course.)

But if your 3rd and 6th strings share an amp, I don't think the overtone clash would be particularly bad. The notes are certain to fall in different octaves; often they'll have more than an octave between them.

Certainly, with such an arrangement, any chord played on 3 adjacent strings would sound similar to the Boston-esque "guitar harmonies."

Is that what you were hoping to achieve?
 
There's already discussion of 3-Amps-At-Once being available, in another thread. The notion produced a fair bit of excitement and enthusiasm.

I grant that three is not the same as six. But depending on what you're trying to achieve (tonally), it might be enough.

Were the 3-Amps-At-Once to appear in an upcoming Firmware update, I would try running...
- Strings 1 & 4 into Amp 1,
- Strings 2 & 5 into Amp 2,
- Strings 3 & 6 into Amp 3,
...and testing out the interactions.

By doing so, I think you'd get an effect not-very-different from One-Amp-Per-String.

After all, it isn't an ultra-clean amp that gives you a big difference between One-Amp-Per-String and All-Strings-Into-One-Amp.

On the contrary, it's the distortion and intermodulation that makes the difference. When 2 notes play through the same distortion circuit, their overtones clash. The more distortion there is, the more that the notes themselves become harder to distinguish. And the effect is worse, the closer-in-pitch those two notes are. (Excluding unisons, of course.)

But if your 3rd and 6th strings share an amp, I don't think the overtone clash would be particularly bad. The notes are certain to fall in different octaves; often they'll have more than an octave between them.

Certainly, with such an arrangement, any chord played on 3 adjacent strings would sound similar to the Boston-esque "guitar harmonies."

Is that what you were hoping to achieve?
The Boston-esque guitar harmonies are a huge part of the appeal for me, and I completely agree with your suggested strategy for anyone limited to three channels of amp simulation.

For me an equal priority is being able to adjust and optimize the tone of each string independently. So I need a separate channel for each string.
 
For me an equal priority is being able to adjust and optimize the tone of each string independently. So I need a separate channel for each string.
To me this just sounds over the top. Is there any recording where this was done and it demonstrates the benefit? I’ve never heard it.

Would it not be simple to add the Ultra amp sims back in as a relatively "lo rez" option?
I personally wouldn’t want a low-anything in Fractal gear. And even so, why would it be simple?
 
Hmmm, we currently have 2 amp blocks, why not just buy 2 more axefx3's? That'll get you there! See @yek the solution is quite simple ;-)
 
To me this just sounds over the top. Is there any recording where this was done and it demonstrates the benefit? I’ve never heard it.

Roland VG8, VG9, VG99, VB-99, GR-55, SY300, GR-D, GR-5 Boss GP-10... There are many recordings, although it is not easy to find one that covers all the cool features without spending too much time on the COSM amp modeling (it cannot be compared to the Axe-FX).

There are also manufacturers of guitars, like Fender or Godin, that already include a hex divided pickup in some of their models.

Only for the alternate tunings or for the acoustic/nylon/bass/synth guitar models, the hex pickup system is already worth.



A few years ago I recorded some experimental samples using the VG8 connected to the Axe-FX standard:
https://www.soundclick.com/bands3/default.cfm?bandid=661197

I’d guess the total hexaphonic market is pretty small overall though.....?
Have you been around vguitarforums.com? :)
 
Last edited:
I know what a VG does in general. I was asking for an example of each string with its own amp. Any of those links above show that specifically?
 
I know what a VG does in general. I was asking for an example of each string with its own amp. Any of those links above show that specifically?

OK. I missed that point. The VG has hexaphonic distortion. The advantage of over-driving each string separately is more clarity when playing chords. But I've never used that feature, because string separation is not an issue with some drives and amp models of the Axe-FX.

I neither see the advantage of one amp per string. It would be more interesting to have separate IR Players, synths, panned delays and pitch-shifters per each string, rather than AMP blocks.
 
Separate overdrive on each string is a unique thing. You only get harmonic distortion — no intermodulation distortion. It definitely adds clarity to high-gain chords. But that intermod is part of the edgy, nasty attitude that is distorted guitar. Taking it away would be helpful or not, depending on what you're trying to achieve.

SRV's bent double-stops would lose their balls without intermod. But complex chords could really shine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
Here are some samples of Poly-Distortion

...

At 1:16 in that last video is an excellent example of the clarity that you can get on complex chords with polyphonic distortion. With the intermodulation distortion stripped away, you can get away with high gain on "jazz" chords. That just wouldn't work with the traditional Six Strings, One Amp paradigm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom