5150 Presence Knob

[sprint]

They don’t really care as long as it sounds good,

Not true in my case as a user who has not owned the real amps represented in Axfx (I don't think I'm that a-typical to others here who have not experienced the real amps). I think it's a matter of how one defines "accuracy" - I want the models to be 100% accurate in that they can replicate the real reference amp instance's tone using the standard controls. Just because the tapers vary from the reference does not make the model less accurate in terms of its ability to produce a given sound true to reference. It's just about the direction the knobs point visually when the model replicates that tone. Users who are not experienced using the real amp directly can be just as descerning about tonal accuracy while at the same time getting along with ideal tapers since, tho they don't know the tapers on the real amp, they may know quite well what sounds the model should be able to produce.

Agreed tho - nice to know which way it is and where.

 

[DJD100]

The proposed presence knob positioning has no effect on the sound aside from where the knob pointer is pointing (with regards to this presence control's pot taper), and the ease of obtaining a preferred setting over 100% of the pot's travel vs only 25% (which reduces the control's granularity).

Ultimately it's a trivial matter within the big picture, and the calls for Fractal to do a bunch of work to provide both concepts for all amp models are ridiculous to say the least. The only benefit of the non-idealized pot taper is for people who don't use their ears, who instead use their eyes and prefer to copy settings, or own the real amps, but to each their own.

What's funny is that the vast majority of these various modeled tube amps are way more similar that they are different, and things like the cab(s)/speaker(s), mic(s)/mic locations/recording and playing environments/mic-pre(s), picks/fingers, pups, scale lengths, string types, tunings, and drives used have as much effect, or more often vastly more effect on the final results than the various tube amp's themselves (which makes pot tapers an even smaller point of contention in our view).

We Toobians are now officially withdrawing our vote for idealized (even though this is impossible via the poll's GUI?), and we'll merely vote present going forward seeing we're now officially neutral on the matter.

 

[sprint]

The proposed presence knob positioning has no effect on the sound aside from where the knob pointer is pointing (with regards to this presence control's pot taper), and the ease of obtaining a preferred setting over 100% of the pot's travel vs only 25% (which reduces the control's granularity).

Ultimately, it's a trivial matter within the big picture, and the calls for Fractal to do a bunch of work to provide both concepts for all amp models are ridiculous to say the least. The only benefit of the non-idealized pot taper is for people who don't use their ears, who instead use their eyes and prefer to copy settings, or own the real amps, but to each their own.

What's funny is that the vast majority of these various modeled tube amps are way more similar that they are different, and things like the cab(s)/speaker(s), mic(s)/mic locations/recording environments/mic-pre(s), picks/fingers, pups, scale lengths, string types, tunings, and drives used have as much effect or often vastly more effect on the final results than the various tube amp's themselves (which makes pot tapers an even smaller point of contention in our view).

We Toobians are now officially withdrawing our vote for idealized (even though this is impossible via the poll's GUI?), and we'll merely vote present going forward seeing we're now officially neutral on the matter.

Those things look creepy scary intimidating unnerving curious - reminds me of ...

 

[DJD100]

Those things look creepy - reminds me of ...

We'd suggest using a more flattering adjective if hoping to avoid an interstellar incident!

 

[Greg Ferguson]

The proposed presence knob positioning has no effect on the sound aside from where the knob pointer is pointing (with regards to this presence control's pot taper), and the ease of obtaining a preferred setting over 100% of the pot's travel vs only 25% (which reduces the control's granularity).

Ultimately, it's a trivial matter within the big picture, and the calls for Fractal to do a bunch of work to provide both concepts for all amp models are ridiculous to say the least. The only benefit of the non-idealized pot taper is for people who don't use their ears, who instead use their eyes and prefer to copy settings, or own the real amps, but to each their own.

So much YES!

 

[SwirlyMaple]

We keep using FAS because it SOUNDS better, "authentic", not because of the slick design of the "plugin UI".

First, just want to say I appreciate your thoughts in your reply. On this point, though, one of the big appeals for me in buying Fractal was that it does behave like the real amps, including the knob positions. I read a lot about these real amps, artists’ preferred settings, photos of their rigs, etc., and I enjoy being able to at least get in the ballpark by copying what I read in the Fractalverse.

One of the things I did not care for about older Helix models is that many of them seemed to need significantly different knob settings than the real amps to sound the same. You could get there—but not really with prior knowledge of the amp.

Once you've found a sweet spot, you'll just leave it there. At this moment it would probably stop matter to both owners and people not familiar.

I’m not a set-and-forget guy. I like to really sweep the range of an amp’s settings and find all the tones that may be in there.

Having all the knobs acting in the same predictable manner makes fine-tuning so so easy. Unification is a wonderful thing for this kind of work.

This will never be a realistic goal, though, because tonestacks behave quite differently from one kind of amp to the next. And even with idealized tapers, you still have to understand the interaction between them to dial in an amp. The only truly unified approach would be something like Boss’s models or a Kemper profile, where the knobs work more like a traditional EQ, but it’s not at all authentic to the real behavior.

Having the amp models match the real gear will always be an easily-defendable position. And it’s one that will reinforce the perception of how accurate Fractal’s models are. Arbitrarily changing things here and there on certain models will mean those models no longer behave the same as their real-world counterparts, and unless you know the reason why, one might assume the models just aren’t that accurate.

 

[LeBigMac]

I would be interested in a poll for modelling the stealth red channel with the gain on full in the blue channel. Either way, the stealth sounds awesome.

 

[eloygperez]

The only benefit of the non-idealized pot taper is for people who don't use their ears, who instead use their eyes and prefer to copy settings, or own the real amps, but to each their own.

I find it very bold to claim that those who prefer authentic behavior do not use their ears...we definitely use our ears but we also have a visual image of certain amplifiers that we know. It is also very lazy to use a model and not bother looking for information about how it works in the real world...

 

[Stratoblaster]

I just wish all this arcane knowledge about specific amps was somehow accessible to those of us who've never used a real amp.....

I frequently check out the wiki to get the unique details a specific amp may have and for any unusual quirks. There are lots of amps in the AFX that I've never tried. As long as any unique modes of operation/things specific to only that amp get reflected in the wiki I'm good to go....

But I always start with tweaking the amp controls fully through their travel to get a sense of any possible control interactions (particularly in the tonestack) and to find it's sweet spot (the Master Volume is particularly important here). I do this regardless of if I know how the real amp works or not.

I also find it personally advantageous that I'm never concerned with the settings of any control, nor if it matches the real thing...I wrench an amp, or drive, etc. until I find something I like and move on.

Considering I find many real amps lacking in some ways which require, and/or benefit from, mods to correct and/or add utility, authentically matching a real amp isn't paramount for me for that reason. I've configured a few mods on both my JCM800's (Canadian versions) with about $10 worth of resistors/caps that take those amps to another level, and consider the modded 800 "better then the authentic amp."

 

[DJD100]

I find it very bold to claim that those who prefer authentic behavior do not use their ears...we definitely use our ears but we also have a visual image of certain amplifiers that we know. It is also very lazy to use a model and not bother looking for information about how it works in the real world...

AFAIK, the OEM even changed the taper on later 50W models, and would've on the later 100W'ers except people were already used to the incorrect taper, so they stuck with it to avoid customer complaints. Just because Eddie liked it or so it is rumored, that doesn't mean it was the best engineering choice.

It's not a bold statement seeing the same sounds are created with the only difference being the knob pointer's "visual" location (plus I excepted the real amp's owners LOL!).

 

[eloygperez]

It's not a bold statement seeing the same sounds are created with the only difference being the knob pointers "visual" location (plus I excepted the real amp's owners LOL!).

That is another very different statement. I only responded to what was said above.
Again, I don't see it as an incorrect taper but I think this has been talked about before...

 

[MirrorProfiles]

it’s not even about copying/eyeballing settings, and it’s familiarity and expectation. I don’t really see the benefit in a knob doing something that is different to what you expect.

@SwirlyMaple nailed it when he said that if you aren’t aware of what’s been changed, you could mess with LOTS of other parameter first or have doubts about other aspects of the modelling that are fine. it’s so easy to dive deep with parameters when things don’t sound or respond as you’d expect.

Changing it creates more problems than it solves, even with the “dumb” taper you have plenty of control over how it sounds, with the added confidence that it sounds and behaves just like you’d dial in the real thing. Less second guessing, less doubt, can work faster.

 

[alcyppa]

It's been interesting reading this thread. It feels like people who love this amp and actually use this model want the authentic taper, and the people who might want to try it in their spare time like the idea of an "ideal" taper.

Those who know the real amp will care about the finer details. I've done obnoxiously critical real 5150 shootouts with friends getting nerdy comparing block vs. signature models, original tubes vs new tubes, etc. The little things are the difference between an amp used to track a record and one that gets sold on Reverb (I can say the same for a Mesa Dual Rec, but that's a different conversation and way more heads were used in that comparison).

All that to say, true amp connoisseurs go nuts over the little details. Fractal is the only modeling company so far that can fool amp connoisseurs in an analog/digital comparison nailing the finer details in both sound and feel (from personal experience with lots of artists comparing Fractal models with their own amps), so keeping everything as true to the actual amp experience as possible keeps Fractal's reputation as being the most accurate modeler intact.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Thenewexhibit]

For what it’s worth, someone had mentioned that the non idealized version is for those who don’t want to use their ears. I don’t think that the poster is insinuating that those people don’t use their ears, but, I would say that the reason authentic in my humble opinion is better would be because of the fact that if you know the real amp in the real world, you could adjust it’s settings to what you know, and most likely get 95+% there because it’s familiar. We do it in real life with the minor pot tolerances, but it takes the guess work out to get to a familiar starting point. As someone who currently owns and has toured with these amps for many years, I know that when I went into the fractal land, I had to search and understand why the presence control was supplying frequencies I was not used to hearing at all coming out of the amp when I set it to where I normally do. Once I found out, I then adjusted accordingly from zero to dial it into what sounded familiar. However, I initially thought “this doesn’t sound right”. If the idea is accuracy, it’s my humble opinion and desire that that is reflected with the real world counter parts.
It’s similar to the new fender modeler; I saw somebody shoot out a bunch of 800’s; the fender, after changing the knobs to drastic and most likely not real world settings EVER got kinda close to the fractal, helix, and quad cortex which all had similar settings. So, to me, having a 5150 be accurate except for one knob can be confusing to people who know the amp intimately. Either way, we adjust and use our ears, and I’m thankful that Fractal puts so much effort into their products and opens the floor for friendly discussions like these.

 

[levipeto]

If it goes idealized it would be nice to have on a symbol for those knobs “informaiton” or “idealized” and with a quick explanation how it changed so we can use it accordingly. If I look up Edward’s setting on the web and set it in axe edit but I see a flag that beware this knob might act differently, then it could work.

Or as someone said already, rename it to ideal presence on advanced view and use the new taper there only. Having a different name would cause less confusion for the value difference.

 

[ApocalypticKatana]

Maybe have a tab like some other parameters of having be ideal or authentic

Or going off the rails here, a future AXE FX feature of changing pot tapers (though IIRC know the wah has something like that already)

(It’ll probably clunk up the UI for AXE EDIT though)

 

[AngusV]

The problem is we can’t have the models being arbitrarily adjusted to something other than the real amp WITHOUT being told it’s been adjusted. I think the discussion is bigger than the 5150 models. If FAS is changing the way the models vs. real amps react, then we need to at least know which amps are not truly 1:1 digital replicas.

But it’s still important to know when the model has been adjusted from its real-life counterpart.

Yes. Agree. Ideal / Authentic toggle switch fixes this.

 

[levipeto]

"The only benefit of the non-idealized pot taper is for people who don't use their ears, who instead use their eyes and prefer to copy settings, or own the real amps, but to each their own.".

Because you can use Axe-Fx different ways!
You can use it to express yourself: using your ears; and you can use it as a learning tool. If I can copy the settings from an article or a rig down, it's not because I want to copy his tone, but I want to learn from if. I want to feel, what he feels even if it doesn't make sense!
Edward used a bunch of broken stuff, including his pickup, that instead of throwing it out, used it as inspiration. Eric Clapton's amp was designed to get his sound at 7 - 7 - 7 settings. Makes no sense, but that's his thing. If I want to feel what he feels at 777 I want to able to set it 777 and feel it and not read the manual that explains it to me that to get that sound I need 5-9-3, because that's logical.

This is very important. When people talk about some people can play like Edward better than others. You can't just copy his technic and amp settings. If you don't know what he felt, the ocean, the parties, the bohemian lifestyle, where all the playness came from, then you won't understand the core of it. When they talk about how Edward had an unmatched swing, it does not come from practicing, it comes from the back yard parties in Orange County when they had fun! It comes from fun and not logic!
If I want to understand a players background and want to feel on the amp what he felt, to learn more about the person I need authenticity, not using my ears! I don't care if a mesa boogie takes me closer to that sound if he used Marshall. In that case I could just use a Line6 and use my ears. I could create amazing tones in 1997 with my POD 2 using my ears. That is not the reason I have an Axe-Fx.

 

[jaycal6]

ok so authentic it is

 

[austinbuddy]

I voted for the existing taper just because I am already used to it, but I can go either way and make it sound good regardless!