5150 Presence Knob

Do You Want the 5150 Presence Control to be Authentic?

  • Yes

    Votes: 160 36.6%

  • No

    Votes: 277 63.4%
  • Total voters
    437
Zedhed said:
Decision has been made with release of 23.05

Axe-Fx III Firmware Release Notes​


23.05

Changed Presence control taper on all 6160 and 5153 amp models to replicate the actual amp. It is advised to audition any presets that use these models and adjust accordingly.
Click to expand...
Thank you! I choose Fractal over other options due to realism and authenticity.
laxu said:
If I were to buy a real 5150, knowing about the presence control I'd probably want to mod it with a better pot taper to make it more useful...

I feel vindicated defending the ideal option as the posts above show that it wasn't some deliberate design choice to make it sound a particular way but "we had these parts and Eddie didn't complain".
Click to expand...
This makes no sense. It won’t make the pot more useful per se. To me, you twist the knob until you find your sweet spot and will probably never touch it once dialed in. You don’t need a massive range of presence. You’re most likely to keep it within a few clicks up or down from the sweet spot.
 
Interestingly, democracy doesn’t produce quality or efficiency in software / product development. It’s been a popular conversation in my circles recently, especially with engineers and developers.
 
RevDrucifer said:
I also have it in my head that I heard James Brown or Howard Kaplan bring up a story about a single pot being different from the rest in a pre-production amp they sent Ed, but Ed preferred it so it stayed. I just skimmed both the ToneTalks with them on it but couldn’t find the story. But at the very least, if that turns out to be true, I’d keep it ‘wrong’ for that alone.
Click to expand...


FullThrottle said:
So, not that I really want to step into all of this controversy--and the decision has been made already--but out of curiosity, I searched and found an explanation directly from James Brown, lead designer, on another site (link included for verification purposes):

"Back to the discussion on how the Presence works on an EVH 100W.... the choice of using an Audio taper pot on the Presence of the 5150's goes back to my first one......it wasn't anything to do with 'tolerance' or price, just that we already had a 10KA in house and once I put it in the first prototype, I couldn't change it....even though it doesn't really do anything until you get to about 1:00. Ed liked the amp like it was, so I never changed it on any of the Peavey's, and EVH brand kept it that way on the 100W amps.
Click to expand...

iu
 
AlGrenadine said:
Probably not but i find it curious to ask opinions and not respecting them... Well, maybe not curious, as it's the general way these days...
Click to expand...

I think Cliff was looking for the most persuasive arguments and an idea in general of how the Fractal user base considers this. I don't at all think it was about which option was most popular.
 
GuitarGuy316 said:
This makes no sense. It won’t make the pot more useful per se. To me, you twist the knob until you find your sweet spot and will probably never touch it once dialed in. You don’t need a massive range of presence. You’re most likely to keep it within a few clicks up or down from the sweet spot.
Click to expand...
It does generally make it more usable/useful in practice because:
  1. Hearing an actual change over every part of a dial gives immediate useful feedback, whether on an amp or model
  2. If the effective control range is really narrow (say between 8-10), bumping the knob accidentally makes a bigger difference than if it was more evenly spread out.
  3. If the sound doesn't change for the majority of a dial's range, some users assume it does nothing (or is broken) and then never change it
  4. Some users are less likely to spin dials over the full range for whatever reasons, e.g. " '5' / 12-o'clock is probably a medium amount of whatever so I'll leave it there"
This doesn't apply to knob-spinners and amp aficionados who know certain amp control quirks etc.

[Disclaimer: I initially voted ideal then switched to authentic for the folks who really care.]
 
Last edited:
I voted authentic as an old timer who rocked block letters back in the day. There's some trick settings with that amp that look wrong af but just work (like scooping the mids... you really ain't scooping shit). The presence is part of that equation.

For those who went with ideal, I can understand the frustration of not getting your way, but at the end of the day we're all spinning dials until we're happy right?
 
I think all of us who voted "Yes" should change votes so it turns to 100% "No", just to troll Cliff for all his "soon" and "chucklehead" comments.

Hmmmm....

But then he'd probably troll us back by actually changing it...

🤔
 
Every now and then, one has to step back. There exists a level of irony, regarding an authentic versus ideal debate about component parameters, when the subject concerns an amplifier modeler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom