• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Anyone not a fan of Quantum 6?

hochha

Inspired
The thing about the "real amps" is the high degree of variance among production units, especially old ones, they don't all sound alike. However the extensive modeling capabilities of the AxeFx should allow the sound you want with sufficient tweaking. Stay at it.
 

Ed DeGenaro

Veteran
The thing about the "real amps" is the high degree of variance among production units, especially old ones, they don't all sound alike. However the extensive modeling capabilities of the AxeFx should allow the sound you want with sufficient tweaking. Stay at it.
Very true... That said seeing that were comparing amps into miked cabs... The amount of filters/eqs in firm if mic(s), pres, etc... Act as an equalizing device...
 

Deadpan

Inspired
When we discuss tight vs loose ... are we talking dynamic range or response (sag?) of the feel? For me, Q6 responds better to the tone and volume knobs in a way that wasn't there on Q5.
For me it's a sag/feel thing. Sounds amazing but feels like the time between picking and bloom is a bit much. Q 5 was about spot on, Q 1 and 2 we're a bit too immediate, 3 and 4 were improvements. I'm using 5150 and vh4 amps. I've owned a 5150 but not a Vh4 so I do have experience. Only real amp I have left is a triple rectifier which is naturally loose but still doesn't feel like Q6.
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
For me it's a sag/feel thing. Sounds amazing but feels like the time between picking and bloom is a bit much. Q 5 was about spot on, Q 1 and 2 we're a bit too immediate, 3 and 4 were improvements. I'm using 5150 and vh4 amps. I've owned a 5150 but not a Vh4 so I do have experience. Only real amp I have left is a triple rectifier which is naturally loose but still doesn't feel like Q6.
If you own an XL or XL+ you can simply choose Version 5.00 modeling as your default modeling version. Ironically those amps you mention get their distortion from the preamp and the preamp modeling is unchanged from 5.00 to 6.00 (aside from the default preamp tube type but you can choose the JJ tube to get it the same as 5.00). But what do I know?
 

Deadpan

Inspired
If you own an XL or XL+ you can simply choose Version 5.00 modeling as your default modeling version. Ironically those amps you mention get their distortion from the preamp and the preamp modeling is unchanged from 5.00 to 6.00 (aside from the default preamp tube type but you can choose the JJ tube to get it the same as 5.00). But what do I know?
I do wish! Unfortunately it is an Ax8. I will give the preamp tube a try
 

jyflorida

Veteran
My playing time has increased exponentially with 6. Everything just sounds more "alive". Used the 5F8 Keith Urban model over the weekend & was just blown away at the tone and the dynamics.
 

Shask

Inspired
For me it's a sag/feel thing. Sounds amazing but feels like the time between picking and bloom is a bit much. Q 5 was about spot on, Q 1 and 2 we're a bit too immediate, 3 and 4 were improvements. I'm using 5150 and vh4 amps. I've owned a 5150 but not a Vh4 so I do have experience. Only real amp I have left is a triple rectifier which is naturally loose but still doesn't feel like Q6.
I am surprised. I still have a 2-channel Triple Recto also, and I feel like Q6 is probably the best the Axe II has felt. It doesn't feel as stiff, and is getting more bounce and chug to the tone. At least through my matrix poweramp and 212 cab. I always felt like getting clinically tight, clear tones has always been easy, but getting more natural thicker, chunkier sounds was WAY harder, but feel like these sounds are coming more naturally/easily on Q5 and Q6.
 

REDD

Forum Addict
When we discuss tight vs loose ... are we talking dynamic range or response (sag?) of the feel? For me, Q6 responds better to the tone and volume knobs in a way that wasn't there on Q5.
To me the low end or bass isn't tight and punchy, it's almost like there is a fuzz pedal in the background of my low end. it's like there is more gain on the lows than there is on the mids and highs. everything is awesome and perfect to me except this. I played for three hours tonight pretty darn loud and had a blast so it's not something terrible I can't deal with, could be my room or my CLR's or me, who knows.
 

Gilly

Regular
Definitely enjoying Q6, especially the ability to go between versions and comparing.

Just a quick confirmation, when we are suggested to reset the amp block am I right to assume that means just change the amp block to something else and then change back again? Or do I need to do something else to reset?
 

kisslorand

Veteran
I have an AxeII MK1, I use only Recto2 and I was disappointed by the sound of Q6. I was surprised how everybody was praising it, especially for the Rectos.
The low end was just all over and couldn't be dialed out without loosing balls from my guitar tone. It just hit me, maybe this time the poweramp is driven too hot and that was it!
I always used my MV at 3, it was my sweet spot since FW5 (not Q5). This time just lowering it to 2.5 brought back the clarity of my tone. I had to do a few more adjustment to be back to the preferred tone EQ wise. I raised the MID from 2 to 3, raised PRESENCE from 4 to 5 and get rid of the comb filtering I used in cab block. I use a stereo CAB block (both sides centered, so it's mono), used with a delay of 0.04ms on one of the speakers. This gave me a natural roll-of of the abrasive highs. This comb filtering is not needed anymore so the delay went back to 0.
I hope these infos will make someone to fall in love again with their Axe on Q6.

P.S.: I still prefer the tightness of Q5, maybe it's just me but I cannot replicate it on Q6.
 

GuttaLaser

Forum Addict
Q6 is a beast! Period!
Every tweak done on previous fw probably was in the direction of what now is Q6!
So an old tweaked preset now sounds worse in some way on Q6.
I love dig in a nu fw reworking my preset 'coz for me it's a new learning process.
And what i found is that Q6 needs LESS tweak to sound perfect to me!

PS: i can't understand some "mind settings" about nu fw. It's kinda like someone tell you "do you want this new amp for free?" and you answer "Nope tnx! I have my old rig! I don't want tweak a new amp to get new good tones!"
One can spends hours and hours tweaking and modding the guitars (settings, puppyes, strings, cables, etc) but don't want easily turn some virtual knobs on the Axe Edit UI.
 
Last edited:

xykhron

New here
Here's another no-fan of Q6. The high-gain amps sound boxy to my ears. I tried all my live presets and also tried new from scratch, amplified through Matrix GT1000FX and custom cabinets (cab sims off) as well as through studio monitors (cab sims on). Tried changing values of distortion blocks, amps blocks, and nothing, even reseting amps. I reinstalled Q.6 firmware and sounded the same way....So now, back to Q2.00
 
Last edited:

Tremonti

Fractal Fanatic
I like Q6 a lot. Wahs are so much better and amps need less tweaking. RESET YOU AMP BLOCKS THOUGH!!!!!!!
 

Deadpan

Inspired
To me the low end or bass isn't tight and punchy, it's almost like there is a fuzz pedal in the background of my low end. it's like there is more gain on the lows than there is on the mids and highs. everything is awesome and perfect to me except this. I played for three hours tonight pretty darn loud and had a blast so it's not something terrible I can't deal with, could be my room or my CLR's or me, who knows.
This is another way to word my experience as well.

Red, have you tried the preamp tube type and lower the master volume? I will give it a go today myself.
 

Deadpan

Inspired
If you own an XL or XL+ you can simply choose Version 5.00 modeling as your default modeling version. Ironically those amps you mention get their distortion from the preamp and the preamp modeling is unchanged from 5.00 to 6.00 (aside from the default preamp tube type but you can choose the JJ tube to get it the same as 5.00). But what do I know?
Thanks, changing the preamp tube to JJ really helped. This is most if not all of the difference I was feeling.
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
Thanks, changing the preamp tube to JJ really helped. This is most if not all of the difference I was feeling.
I figured that was it. Like I said the preamp modeling in 6.00 is the same as 5.xx except the parameters for the default tube type (12AX7A SYL) are different. The Sylvania 12AX7A is more nonlinear than other 12AX7As which results in more dynamics but will also result in more "background" distortion because the waveform is being distorted even when it isn't being clipped. The JJ version is more linear which will result in a tighter tone and less background distortion but less dynamics.

For 6.01 I've also added back the old 12AX7B type which is the most linear of the types and clips hard. People who play with lots of gain tend to like this as it results in tighter tone and more aggressive harmonic content.

There are two primary parameters associated with our preamp tube models. "Preamp Hardness" determines how abrupt the tube clips when it enters the saturation region. There is another parameter that determines how nonlinear the tube is between cutoff and saturation. This is currently not exposed to the user but I've been contemplating adding it.

I've also changed the default type for British amps to the ECC83 model as these amps typically were equipped with ECC83s (duh). The ECC83 was the European equivalent of the 12AX7A and tended to be a bit more linear and clip a little harder.
 

AtomicBlaze

Inspired
I figured that was it. Like I said the preamp modeling in 6.00 is the same as 5.xx except the parameters for the default tube type (12AX7A SYL) are different. The Sylvania 12AX7A is more nonlinear than other 12AX7As which results in more dynamics but will also result in more "background" distortion because the waveform is being distorted even when it isn't being clipped. The JJ version is more linear which will result in a tighter tone and less background distortion but less dynamics.

For 6.01 I've also added back the old 12AX7B type which is the most linear of the types and clips hard. People who play with lots of gain tend to like this as it results in tighter tone and more aggressive harmonic content.

There are two primary parameters associated with our preamp tube models. "Preamp Hardness" determines how abrupt the tube clips when it enters the saturation region. There is another parameter that determines how nonlinear the tube is between cutoff and saturation. This is currently not exposed to the user but I've been contemplating adding it.

I've also changed the default type for British amps to the ECC83 model as these amps typically were equipped with ECC83s (duh). The ECC83 was the European equivalent of the 12AX7A and tended to be a bit more linear and clip a little harder.
When we upgrade to 6.01 will the tube types in the patches automatically change to the default or will we need to reset the amp block? Would it be a good idea to make note of our currently selected tube for each patch before upgrading?
 
Top Bottom