Rethink, Rework, Reboot. Building a preset - JCM800 - Major Twist for ANY Preset

yek said:
Of course you now need to disclose how you do that. ;)
Click to expand...

I used one of my expression pedals, assigned to External 1. For each PEQ block, I put a modifier on the BYP MODE, user External 1 as the source, and played around with the curves. When you assign an expression controller to a bypass, the trigger point is at 50%, so you just tweak the curves (for each successive PEQ block) so that they un-bypass at different ranges of the expression pedal's travel, i.e. 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. Tweak to taste.

However, like I indicated in my previous post, I need to refine it all. Currently, as a push my expression pedal from heel to toe, I get cumulative PEQ blocks (as opposed to one at a time), so it's a little over the top. But it's dead simple to edit the blocks and give them lower gain levels. The overall effect with still be cumulative gain levels from no PEQ, to 1, to 2, to 3 and at toe-down to all 4.

(EDIT: I could also muck with the curves so that the previous PEQ block goes to bypass when the next one is activated, but the curves in the Axe are a pain in the butt to work with...)
 
yek said:
Don't think so again.
Gain in the PEQ block affects only the shelved frequencies (3 of the 5 bands).
Gain/Level in a Mixer bock would adjust the entire level.
Click to expand...
Right, you'd need to mix in the PEQ signal with the dry signal. Otherwise it's just a volume block.

Edit: To clarify, as an example, heel down would be: dry @ 100% and PEQ @ 0%, toe down would be the other way around: dry @ 0% and PEQ @ 100%.

Edit 2: You might still need 2 PEQ blocks though, to get rid of any cross-fade phasing. Come to think of it, since the output level of PEQ blocks can be assigned to an expression pedal, the mixer block might be redundant.
 
Last edited:
Dpoirier said:
I used one of my expression pedals, assigned to External 1. For each PEQ block, I put a modifier on the BYP MODE, user External 1 as the source, and played around with the curves. When you assign an expression controller to a bypass, the trigger point is at 50%, so you just tweak the curves (for each successive PEQ block) so that they un-bypass at different ranges of the expression pedal's travel, i.e. 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. Tweak to taste.

However, like I indicated in my previous post, I need to refine it all. Currently, as a push my expression pedal from heel to toe, I get cumulative PEQ blocks (as opposed to one at a time), so it's a little over the top. But it's dead simple to edit the blocks and give them lower gain levels. The overall effect with still be cumulative gain levels from no PEQ, to 1, to 2, to 3 and at toe-down to all 4.

(EDIT: I could also muck with the curves so that the previous PEQ block goes to bypass when the next one is activated, but the curves in the Axe are a pain in the butt to work with...)
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 
Since both the outside bands in the PEQ are blocking, the entire level should only include the boosted frequencies. Or at least the blocked frequencies would be so much lower they would be negligible. Therefore, raising the entire level would be somewhat approximate to raising the three inside bands. Wouldn't it?

Beddybye time here in NL, so I'm slightly foggy. I wish my kids would sleep 'till after 6:30 AM sometimes... I don't know how, but I feel they are up earlier in the weekends than on workdays.
 
Ah. I see. The inside bands do not span the entire range between the outside blocking bands. But this could be approximated with a blocking PEQ for the outside bands and a second EQ for the inside bands in parallel and blocking the signal outside those three bends.

So you'd set one PEQ blocking as the boost PEQs are set now at 70 and about 10K, but leaving the tone control bands at 0 gain and you add one PEQ parallel to the first using the tone control bands and gain settings and blocking bands 1 and 5 at about 200 and 2K. Then attach the expression to the output level of the second PEQ?

Run with it guys, I'm off to bed.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the new recipe!

Hi Scott!
tgunn said:
I finally got a chance to try this out yesterday. "you HEAR the cab" is absolutely right. ... I also tried out a few different amps with the same principals ... and it's working great. ... just wanted to say that I really appreciate you sharing this with us Scott! :)
Click to expand...
What he said! I performed the new recipe with all my BigBox cabs and use them in my presets now. Tiny little step towards perfection ... I thought. But my bandmates where really floored yesterday. I didn't tell them that I had changed something. They asked me what was different. And I should make sure that these sounds are carefully backed up and reproducable forever, they are so rocking good! :twisted
I'm amazed and stoked! And I don't understand how this thing can still improve. Maybe it's my ears what improves. But the AXE-FX keeps up.

Thanks to Scott and all the sharing crowd. Not to forget Cliff, creator of all joy ... :D
THANKS!! You rock!
 
Thank you Scott for sharing this. It really rocks.

Has anyone a tipp how to tame the boomyness that I get of playing a palm muteded D power chord in the 5th fret without loosing too much of the sound?
 
Thanks Scott,

I will give it a go and see how it works on my ears at home... I'll try and dail in some the other ampmodels.
I been tracking this forum since I own the Axe fx (2009) and learned a lot. Your effort means a lot to my knowledge of the tweaking / Axe (and a lot of other people, I suppose).

Cheers!
Rembrandt
 
I was finally able to give this a shot last night.

First off, thanks Scott for your work on this; part of what makes this community great!

I've always complained (whined?) about the stock CAB models. I could really only find a few that worked well (for me...) Scott has pointed the direction to how this is solved for me. The difference in this cab mix is phenomenal in my ears. The clip he posted alludes to this, but once you play it through your FRFR solution, it's even better. I tried the cab with a few other amp models, and had similar successful results.

Kudos Scott. This shows the way using the Redwirez and mixing.

FWIW, I really took ONLY the cab mixing technique and some of the amp settings. My Standard couldn't hang with all those blocks, so I got to the meat of the matter and shunted off most of the *stuff* around just the AMP/CAB blocks.

Ron
 
Thanks for the nice words guys. I am so glad you are going to the trouble to really check out some of this stuff, I know it's a bit of work to try some of these things. I think it is worth the effort; it just really makes me feel like I'm doing something worthwhile to share and have guys actually try it and then actually like some of it.

Have fun and make music!
 
Scott Peterson said:
Cool idea. The +1db, +2db, +3db, +4db works for my pea brain... so I'm stayin' with it though. :D
Click to expand...

Was playing with this a little last night and it is so very cool indeed. You're right, as the boost level goes up it doesn't color the sound. Even having all of them on..... major oomph and no coloration.

I think I have an idea though....

Add 1 more switch that turns them all on at the same time (1+2+3+4 = 10 + 1 = Eleven) ;-)
 
Scott - great post. I notice you are not using the tape drive after the amp in this patch. Is that out altogether with the new patches?
 
KG MD said:
Scott - great post. I notice you are not using the tape drive after the amp in this patch. Is that out altogether with the new patches?
Click to expand...

No, I'm not using that at all now.

Like I note, I rethought and reappraised everything starting from scratch. This is the result of that journey for me. Note that this is my way, not the only way or even the right way for anyone else but me. But hopefully, folks can take a look and a listen and maybe find something they can use in their world too.
 
Hi Scott - thank's for sharing your creative ideas with us.

I have one question: Are you using the same "template" for acoustic guitars or is it completely different?

setzinger
 
setzinger said:
Hi Scott - thank's for sharing your creative ideas with us.

I have one question: Are you using the same "template" for acoustic guitars or is it completely different?

setzinger
Click to expand...

Exactly the same, though I remove the amp block (or use the Tube Pre model); cab block and replace the PEQ with very different curves that are 'tuned' to my guitar and setup. I'm not sure it would be a good thing to share as it is highly individualized and you'd have to change everything in that preset that you'd have to in order to make the existing preset template work with your acoustic anyway.

But the effects and basic template is the same.
 
wknight2 said:
So you're not using an acoustic IR? Did you find your acoustic guitar responded better that way?
Click to expand...

I have a Taylor K-16ce with the Taylor expression system. It sounds fine without any acoustic IR's loaded in the Axe-FX and if I feel an acoustic IR is needed I have my Fishman Aura pedal at the ready (Guitar -> Aura Pedal -> Axe-FX). I haven't felt the need to use the pedal or IR's in about a year.
 
Thanks sharing the luv, that is, the results of your rethinking/reworking, here for everyone's benefit! There's a working player in my town that has always gone to great lengths to cover up or otherwise hide his gear so no one will find out the "secrets" to his special sound. I just roll my eyes.:roll

I've added the PEQ setup to several of my presets and they all sound better, except for my George Benson type jazz sound which still needs a little tweaking. Which got me wondering how you even thought it was a good idea (and why it works so well)--boosting the very frequency (and it's octaves) that the tone stack was designed to heavily cut...

Do amps wish that guitar PUs were more mid-rangy? The result speaks for itself, but the logic is baffling to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom