9.02 Amp Model Poll

[mworkman]

I know people are going to disagree, but does the Amp block really need more parameters?

If anybody has a problem with this I would think it would be the people that feel compelled to tweak a parameter just because its there.

I haven't ventured into the advanced parameters at all. I read about them and try to understand them but they are beyond me and I would absolutely hang myself if I went in there. Fortunately it hasn't been a problem because I've been happy with what I've been able to get out of the "basic" parameters.

So I don't worry too much about more parameters because I am not compelled to tweak them. There have been what I think is a relative few that "short circuit" because of all the parameters but it is pretty nice to have these options. If you understand the parameters its like having the ability to mod your own amps.

 

[marvinx]

You both said it better , +1.

 

[kev]

I've had my Standard since v3.00. IMO, a lot of good stuff has happened since then, particularly with respect to Cliff exposing parameters in the drive, amp and cab blocks. In my case, the ability to have all the tone shaping options that became available through exposed parameters in the latest firmware versions was critically important in creating the tones I was seeking. Personally, I never thought that a digital device would allow me to get the "tones I hear in my head," but Cliff's programming has made this possible. IMHO, with 9.02, the Axefx is about as "plug and play" as it has ever been with the current default settings. IMO, at this point, one does not necessarily have to fiddle with all the various parameters to get great tones. However, I hope he continues to give as us as much access to these exposed virtual parameters as he can without compromising the security of his code. IMO, it simply enables unlimited possibilities. - Tim

Exactly. Most people are perfectly happy with the amp off the show room floor. Some take it home and tweak components until it sounds exactly like what they hear in their head. I've done that with tube amps and love having the ability to do it with the Axe. The fact is that he's giving the Axe more value and a choice whether to tweak or not.

 

[zentman]

Good lord, one more parameter isn't gonna kill you. Do it, do it nao I say.

 

[VegaBaby]

It varies from model to model but it was set too low in nearly all of them. This new parameter indirectly exposes that parameter and allows you to decrease it back to 9.00 levels if desired.

When you're saying that it varied from model to model, does that mean that all of them were increased in an absolute way or relative ? I guess what I'm trying to say is, do some models have the value set too high at the moment because you incresed it all over the board to one value ? Just trying to get my head around it a bit more

I think he means they were all relatively low, but varied according to each model. I THINK the 9.02 adjustment was a proportional increase across the board?
EDIT. Since cliff said it was strictly to offer the 9.0 sound to those who desired it, then that must mean that as of now all amp model settings are correct.
~mx~

Ok, to clarify myself. Halion, Steinbergs software sampler, has an absolute and relative function. If you have a group of samples selected, choosing 'absolute' and setting the volume of one sample to let's say 5, ALL other samples go to 5 as well, no matter where they were before. Choosing 'relative' would adjust all samples only by the amount you used on that one sample. So if you increase one sample by 5, all others would be adjuted plus 5, still taking into account where they were originally.


And about this possible new parameter...As long as it doesn't make Cliff's life even more difficult to further improve on things, where's the problem ?

 

[marvinx]

I think what he did was individually increase this voice coil parameter on most of the amp models till they were accurate , except for the few that were accurate from the get-go (because he said it was low in ALMOST all of the models). I believe the new parameter will allow you to vary this on an individual patch by patch basis, but default to his new more accurate settings.

 

[vAmp]

My wife hates me currently.

I guess she could do with some tweaking of her own

I'm not sure what playing ability has to do with it, and IMO that arbitrarily applied blanket statement of "the more you give the more you'll be asked for" could be a sign of questionable I.Q..

How so? It is a provable truth, just watch things in the future.
What I mean is that there are some very vocal ppl all over the forums here and elsewhere, which tend to get some serious influence just for this habit alone, strangely enough. I've checked out some of these ppl and I was flabbergasted how badly some of them played, so I don't think these people should influence Cliff or anyone above someone like say Dweezil Zappa. If they had more IQ they would spend more time practising than visiting forums as well. [BTW I have a particular guy in mind who is not on this forum, so Scott or others shouldn't feel targetted ]

I'm also confident Cliff would not set a step back.
This time, this solution seems the best one, since...
- Cliff seemed to have made some mistakes, so the all-pleasing solution is only reasonable to offer, as long as it is not compromising too much. It seems easy enough this time and I'm glad for it.
- Jay already indicated there might be even more benefits to it, if done right.

 

[Soultrash]

- Cliff seemed to have made some mistakes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hlMK7tCks

:mrgreen:

 

[GM Arts]

Way to go Cliff!

As much as I really like Scott's suggestion for a flux capacitor control, people will forget the joke after a few more versions.

Surely the right name for the control is Chime ?

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I know people are going to disagree, but does the Amp block really need more parameters?

"Need" is a relatively extreme characterization. If a parameter defaults to an appropriate value for the amp sim, and Cliff decides to make it adjustable, one option you have is to not adjust it.

How many reviews or forum posts have we seen where people were put off because they couldn't traverse the learning curve?

In case you hadn't noticed, the last few firmware revs have moved significantly closer to the sound/feel of the modeled amps with advanced parameters left at the default settings. If you want plug 'n' play, the Axe-Fx is getting closer with every new firmware.

Not too long ago I got bent about a fairly high profile review calling the Axe’s advanced editing parameters esoteric, but to be honest the more I thought about it the more I realized some of it really is.

And that does not matter in the slightest. There are lots of users who never change the advanced parameters in the amp block, because they don't need to.

I'd be pretty confident in saying that anyone who doesn't like the Axe just hasn't turned the right knobs yet, and I think many (here especially) would agree. Adding more variables is not going to help that. Making the unit sound better overall with no magic parameter knowledge needed will.

Actually, it's possible to do both, and Cliff has done just that: expose more parameters for user adjustment, but make the default settings more in line with the expectations of folks who want clones of specific amp sounds.

At the time of writing this 87% of users think the "more accurate" modeling sounds better.

Nope. 87% of the responders to this poll prefer the amp sounds of 9.02 to those of 9.0. Given the number of amp sims in the Axe-Fx and the short time since 9.02 has come out, it would seem entirely premature to speculate about the desires of most users.

Why add a setting to undo that?

Uhh, lessee, to provide an option that many users - including myself - want? One that will have no effect on the folks who don't want to fool with it? Sure seems like a no-brainer to me....

 

[shredi knight]

For the next firmware release I've added a control that lets you vary the "voice coil influence" parameter. I haven't decided what to call it yet. The default value is 5.0 and that gives you the 9.02 sound. Reducing the value will sound darker and at certain settings, that vary with the amp model, will equal the sound of 9.00. For most high-gain amp models setting it 2.5 will give you back the 9.00 sound. You can also increase the value to make it really bright.

Thanks Cliff!!!!

I just got done playing my re-tweaked Mark IV patch and it's sounding pretty damn good. It will be interesting to compare it with my old one back to back with the upcoming firmware to see which one really sounds better without relying on my memory of what it sounded like with 9.00.

One question if it's not a problem: Could you tell me the exact setting(s) the USA Lead sims were set at with 9.00 so I don't go through days of "option anxiety", trying to decide what setting sounds "right"? :lol:

 

[riffy]

Man,
All this grumpiness about something that sounds great,
and is being made even better by a new knob that does whatever it does so your old high-gain patches still sound the same...

What is there to gripe about? Shut up and play yer guitar.

 

[vAmp]

- Cliff seemed to have made some mistakes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hlMK7tCks

:mrgreen:

That would be too much! Those are plain brutalz!

 

[DNW]

I haven't even updated from v9.00 yet and all this has happened!

 

[soularflair]

Man,
All this grumpiness about something that sounds great,
and is being made even better by a new knob that does whatever it does so your old high-gain patches still sound the same...

What is there to gripe about? Shut up and play yer guitar.

How very apt.
Wonder if Dweezil is reading this thread...

 

[wezx]

For the next firmware release I've added a control that lets you vary the "voice coil influence" parameter. I haven't decided what to call it yet. The default value is 5.0 and that gives you the 9.02 sound. Reducing the value will sound darker and at certain settings, that vary with the amp model, will equal the sound of 9.00. For most high-gain amp models setting it 2.5 will give you back the 9.00 sound. You can also increase the value to make it really bright.

I think that's a great idea Cliff, and much appreciated! Even though I'll probably just leave my presets at 9.02, it's nice to have the option. I really can't understand why some here think having more available options is a bad thing???

If you like your patch's tone with 9.02 don't adjust the "Flux Capacitor", if you don't, then adjust it back to 9.0 settings...pretty simple...what's not to like???

Thanks Cliff!

 

[psst]

Cool.
Some time ago I wrote about an instant comparison I made (Axe-tweed twin): viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6982
Extremely similar tones (to the point of not being able to say which one is which when pressing the footswitch to switch between them) except for the top end. I more or less fixed it adding an EQ boosting slightly some high frequencies, seems like I won't need the EQ any more.

 

[Reiep]

One question if it's not a problem: Could you tell me the exact setting(s) the USA Lead sims were set at with 9.00 so I don't go through days of "option anxiety", trying to decide what setting sounds "right"? :lol:

Yes, that would be good to have a list of "flux capacitor" values for each amp actually But with 2.5 it'll be a good start !

 

[xpenno]

This new setting sounds cool, thanks Cliff. Seems to be a lot of complaining about an extra control being added, if you don't need/want to use it then don't, there are plenty of current controls in advanced that I never touch but one day they might come in very handy.

Thanks again Cliff for v9.02 it's fantastic!

 

[wezx]

I think it's pretty funny we're all calling it the "flux capacitor" now... :lol: