A few sounds I'm wondering if anyone has modeled?

Hey Hey,

Maybe you should contact Cliff, explain the situation, exchange addresses, arrange insurance, and send it to him for a few weeks... Thanks!
Pauly
bxlgotham said:
I just picked up a near mint Marshall 100JH full stack. It's the Hendrix signature stack they put out as collector edition. Normally I'm not a signature anything kinda guy, but this is a work of art, sounds immense (100W), and has nonsensical beautiful cleans and if James Bond played guitar, the film would be called Volume Galore. I think it probably may not sound substantially different from Super Lead/Plexi sounds that its trying to be based on, curious if anyone knows if it's worth modeling.

Secondly, the Solodallas Schaffer pedal/tower reissue circuitry that literally claims to bring back the missing link to Angus' sound. So close that Angus is using it now, since the original equipment that nailed it is illegal due to its emittance of FCC bandwidth reserved spectrum (which in its day, was not exclusive). I have some doubt about trying to model a boutique product since that is their source of income, if that's even right to do, but putting that aside, if I owned one, modeling it for convenience wouldn't violate my sense of duty there. Ask me sometime about reselling magic tricks, it's sort of verboten in the magician world, and I'm not a fan of reselling video games either, as one who makes them for a living. But in any event, welcome thoughts.
Click to expand...
 
If using two comp blocks in this manner (both before the amp block) produces an audible effect, that would mean that the corresponding +/- settings are not exact inverses of each other. Incorrect? What am I missing?
 
bxlgotham said:
I was but I already own AFX3 and I wasn’t referring to people buying it to model it I was referring to people who already own it and I really wouldn’t be judging anyone else for this I was really just questioning whether or not it was a cool thing to do myself. I decided it’s really not a big deal especially given how simple the whole set up is.
Click to expand...
I was just responding to the notion that modeling the Schaffer pedal would impact SoloDallas's income in any meaningful way. I don't see an issue with modeling a boutique piece of gear like that pedal because if you don't own it, you're not going to spend 9 times the amount of the unit to buy a model of it(ie. Axe-Fx III), nor do I see those who already own an Axe-Fx III comprising a large enough percentage of SoloDallas's customer base that it would put a dent in their income.
 
Last edited:
steadystate said:
If using two comp blocks in this manner (both before the amp block) produces an audible effect, that would mean that the corresponding +/- settings are not exact inverses of each other. Incorrect? What am I missing?
Click to expand...
it’s not volume -3dB +3dB =0dB equation.
Compression changes the transient/attack etc...means your tone also, and how you play/feel etc etc. So even though i have never tried these settings mentioned above with 2 compressors in series...i am sure it does what it should.
 
What does it matter what Angus or Hendrix used? I’m much more interested in what Cliff could come up with then something else someone did. Cliff is a genius. His FAS models are stellar and I look forward to to his work in this area. My grandma and grandpa are buried right next to Hendrix in Renton. I remember visiting their graves and looking at Hendrix’s gravestone and the grass around it. People trying to dig him up. That’s why Paul Allen made a shrine, to stop this behavior. My unclyknew Hendrixes father personally. The guy was a deadbeat. Hendrix had to go live with his grandma, that’s a great dad for you.
 
unFILTERed said:
it’s not volume -3dB +3dB =0dB equation.
Compression changes the transient/attack etc...means your tone also, and how you play/feel etc etc. So even though i have never tried these settings mentioned above with 2 compressors in series...i am sure it does what it should.
Click to expand...
It was my understanding that companding is typically a compressor followed by an expander that performs the exact inverse of the compressor. If performed by digital algorithms, I see no reason why the inverse operation shouldn't be exact and yield and inaudible result. But this obviously isn't the case based on what I'm reading.
 
steadystate said:
It was my understanding that companding is typically a compressor followed by an expander that performs the exact inverse of the compressor. If performed by digital algorithms, I see no reason why the inverse operation shouldn't be exact and yield and inaudible result. But this obviously isn't the case based on what I'm reading.
Click to expand...
Digital algorithms that are simulating analog devices...
 
steadystate said:
Didn't think this was the case here. Must be.
Click to expand...
Even if it wasn't, a process such as compression can definitely be destructive/not lossless in the digital realm.

Probably a weird analogy but think of this like: you have 6 apples. You cut them all in half and eat half of each. Technically you have 3 apples, but you won't have an equivalent 6 apples if you just add 3 new apples back to your bunch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom