They All Sound the Same, It's About Workflow

For me, the difference is really noticeable on all 4 samples.

the first is the best, the last is also good. I think the first one is AF3 and the last is the amp.
the second and third have some kind of noticeable distortion on mids.

Listened through AF3->Adam A8X
 
I pulled them into my DAW, aligned the samples on different tracks and loudness matched them.

Sample 2 has a crunchy high end that I don't like
Sample 3 is very wolly and just feels weird in the low mids

Sample 1 and 4 are very close. I think sample 1 has a forward push that makes me slightly prefer it.
 
I do a lot of instrumentation.
The music environment is very important.
Almost every instrument alone sounds great!
But when it comes to mixing!
Then it turns out which instrument is playing!
A lot of beauty disappears in music!
A good dirty guitar sound, it can be very beautiful!
How much of the four now is it worth? - determined by the music environment!
1-4 is clear.
The 2-3 is dirty!
Which will be dominant in the music?
Dirty 2-3 will stop talking.
Guitars 1-4 need to be given a cleaner environment.
 
Surely this thread just proves there’s a big difference between listening to a recorded track (where a Rockman etc can sound great) and the experience of playing an amp?
 
To my ears, the first one has more "ring" to it... but in the end, the 4 sounded al the same that would make me think is 4 times the same clip.
 
Well they absolutely all sound more or less different to me.

Not really giving a shit about accuracy, but the bottom line for me is the sound/feel aspect (the latter not able to judge here).

For me the ranking would be 4, 1, 3 and 2 whereby 4 and 1 sound the closest matched to me.
 
Wow, why am I busting my ass making things so accurate when people can't hear how obviously different the first two are?
I can hear the difference. But recordings are just that. Your stuff really translates when you are there in person. IMO. Oh.....and can't stop won't stop!!
 
I'm listening to these through Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro 250 ohm headphones with frequency correction from Sonarworks Reference ID.
  • The first clip is brighter and tighter compared to the others.
  • Clips 2 and 3 have a more fuzzy bass/low mids.
  • Clip 3 is the darkest sounding.
  • Clip 4 is again brighter and tighter, closer to clip 1.
I could not say which ones are a modeler, real amp, are they different manufacturers' modelers or if these are just different firmwares/generations of the Axe-Fx. They sound different, but firmly in the "I don't care, I would be fine playing with any of these tones" category.

I've had a bunch of manufacturers' modelers in the past few years and gotten tones/feel I enjoyed out of all of them. FM3 has stayed because it has been the best compromise for my uses rather than for any tonal superiority reasons. In X years from now it might be replaced with something else, whether it's another Fractal or something different.

That kind of puts me in the camp that can't get excited about amp modeling improvements anymore. I appreciate Cliff's efforts in that but for me, as the end user it's only so much "more real" this stuff can get until we are talking about diminishing returns. It's kind of like "yay, the new iPhone has a better camera, but the previous one was already really damn good" with smartphones. And that's where Fractal has been since Axe-Fx 2 already: really damn good amp modeling.

That's why when Fractal releases other improvements to their platform I get a lot more excited. The things I have really enjoyed on FW5 of the FM3 the most have been the new shortcut keys and the new fx types for flanger, delay etc.
 
Last edited:
You have expressed this same sentiment often and If I understand you correctly you appear to associate these comments toward what you hear. A good example is this thread, we are all listening to 4 samples and I think that we can all agree that they are very similar. I think we can also agree that what we hear coming from the Fractal hardware and software at this point in time is so good that "improvements" to such could be considered minuscule or as you say: "diminishing returns". However I would point out that the last several years the advancements have been toward feel which we can't hear. The amps, effects and cabinet models all feel better which is extremely important and maybe more so as we advance and move forward. We can't feel those 4 samples in the first post so the agreement that they sound similar is one point but not the most important one.

But, maybe I misunderstood your post as well as past ones where you stated the same.
That's fair, but I have been just as happy with the feel department on various modelers and yes I do have real amps to compare to. If a digital modeler reacts nicely to picking softer and harder, turning the guitar volume knob etc then I'm going to be content.

How an amp or modeler feels is very personal as someone might want it to be very immediate for their hard rockin' riffs, someone else wants it to have give from sag for their blues leads and one person's "touch sensitive" is a very compressed sound whereas for me it means it's got a wide dynamic range that cleans up based on how soft I pick.
 
Difficult...I listened this morning on my ipad and could noit hear much of a difference, just listened on my HS7 monitors an now I do.
1 and 4 sound very similar to me, I don't like 2 (too harsh/sterile) and don't like 3 (to much low end). Now let's wait for the the results ;-)
 
1 and 4 sound the better to me, 2 and 3 have a weird, almost farty low end, specially at the end of the clip. From 1 and 4 I prefer 1, 4 sounds a bit too tight, almost cut, at the end of the notes. In a Mix I could not tell the difference between them I guess, once are EQd.
 
That kind of puts me in the camp that can't get excited about amp modeling improvements anymore. I appreciate Cliff's efforts in that but for me, as the end user it's only so much "more real" this stuff can get until we are talking about diminishing returns. It's kind of like "yay, the new iPhone has a better camera, but the previous one was already really damn good" with smartphones. And that's where Fractal has been since Axe-Fx 2 already: really damn good amp modeling.

But the diminished returns of the new iPhone are not offered free of charge
 
Haven't read the thread, because I don't want to know the answers (yet?). There is a noticeable difference between them, with 2 of them sounding very similar, and the other 2 being outliers.
 
1 and 4 sound the best, with 4 sound just a little more open. 2 sounds compressed, muffled, 3 sounds better than 2, but the bottom end is bomy compared to 1 and 4.
What do I know, my ears are shot from work and loud music. Listened through Senn's 595s.
 
While I find number 2 to be harsher compared to the others, I would love to hear a .wav before guessing in case some of the low end bloom got lost in the compression.
 
Back
Top Bottom