mini game : JP2C VS axe fx 3

which one is the real amp ?


  • Total voters
    77
  • Poll closed .
Honestly, they are so incredibly close I'm merely guessing. There seems to be a bit of noise between notes/chords (on number 2) that I can only assume is maybe the physical amp
 
sounds like the 1st one has more harmonics going on when you let the chords ring. but could be also just my perception cause the 2nd one is litle darker. As if the IR has a lower hicut. This might be the reason also why i think the first one sounds as if it has better string separation.

In any case i don't like either cause i am not a fan of JP's playing, tone or his amp....just not my cup of tea.

And i also don't care which one is the amp and which one is the Axe...i did a lot of comparisons some years ago with my handwired ac15 and axe fx 3 through the same cabinet. Axe sounded better cause i could carve out anything i did not like, which came in the way....which i could not do with the ac15. And it had be turned super loud to get a tone out of it.
 
Last edited:
It's not as easy as with some other cases. With kemper, I always look for the wonky mids. With axe fx, there's been changes in firmwares, among other things. Harder. But these are absolutely different certainly, even if it's hard to spot axe fx. I'm going with 1st being the axe fx due to the more "ts" mids, but may be wrong.
 
Concerning the chain , the real amp is through a torpedo as load box into the input of the axe fx , cab block with 2 Irs . The axe is just a amp block in the same cab block .
i have done a minor tweak in the presence of the real head to « match » , the rest is the same .
this is very very close , with even more tweaks I can match them even more I think . But yes there is a light difference between both here
 
Concerning the chain , the real amp is through a torpedo as load box into the input of the axe fx , cab block with 2 Irs . The axe is just a amp block in the same cab block .
i have done a minor tweak in the presence of the real head to « match » , the rest is the same .
this is very very close , with even more tweaks I can match them even more I think . But yes there is a light difference between both here
How about "feel" differences?
 
You got an extra low end with the real thing and more nuances while playing , it’s less compressed when you play . It is hard to explain . Yes maybe “compressed” is the word .
But they are really details . When I play with the head, I play it with a cab, in a normal way, and then it’s a complete another story . You don’t have it with a miced sound . But for recording seriously … you add all the instruments it’s very hard to hear the difference
 
1 is probably the Axe Fx III and 2 is the real amp head in to the Axe fx.

Considering the setup you described above: From my experience, using a similar setup with an actual amp head, into a load box, into the Axe Fx III, the sound is a little duller due to the AD/DA conversions. 2 sounds a little duller to me which leads me to believe that 2 is the real amp.
 
Last edited:
This is the first time I try to play with the head through a loadbo in the axe . It’s funny but seriously … I won’t continue doing that .
as someone said before , you can tweak your sound a lot more with the axe only, no need to put a head on it …
I won’t sold it cause it’s nice to play with the amp in the room when you don’t record . But for gigs and rec, the axe only is more than ok
 
Last edited:
I'm guessing 1 is the real amp mainly because I find that 2 is clearer sounding. The Captor X isn't exactly top tier as a loadbox so it will tend to flatten out the sound a bit and that's what I think I am hearing in 1. Interested to see how right or wrong I am.
 
I'm guessing 1 is the real amp mainly because I find that 2 is clearer sounding. The Captor X isn't exactly top tier as a loadbox so it will tend to flatten out the sound a bit and that's what I think I am hearing in 1. Interested to see how right or wrong I am.
That‘s exactly what I thought.
 
Back
Top Bottom