boltrecords
Fractal Fanatic
Any way to thicken up the guitar in a live/mono setting by using these techniques? Or is it all pretty much done with a stereo setup?
Personally, I love the Enhanacer block (classic) but, before I got an AxeFX….A lot of us record and have used the technique of recording two guitar parts ~exactly panned L / R, anyone come close to that sound on their AxeFxII?
I've tried just about all these techniques simply to give myself a beefier tone when playing solo and practicing. I'd never use them if actually tracking. Nothing beats or substitutes for real multi-tracking.
Yeah, I double or quad like everybody else. There's no point in trying to emulate a double tracked guitar track. If you copy a guitar track into another channel strip, you get phase cancellation and it sounds identical to the original track. The only way to get a huge sound from having a double tracked guitar tone is to do precisely that. Also, don't pan your guitars hard left and right, it makes them sound thin in the mix.
I dont have a link for you but I belive its in Bank A in the stock presets wich you can download from Fractal website.hi can anyone link me to the preset - cheers
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be possible to automate the delay between L/R amps using an LFO somehow to give it a more human feel? Maybe could be done with a filter block in front? I thought I remembered reading a thread a while back that touched on this idea. Maybe I'm crazy.
Try it and see. You'd use either the envelope follower or the ADSR as the modifier. I'm guessing it'll sound like slapping your whammy bar (insert joke here): a quick frequency shift at the attack. You never know until you try, though.I would like to hear what it would sound like if a "pick attack" detector could be used to trigger the random delay/pitch/volume modifications. If you consider two guys playing a single note line, one player hits a note and the other guy plays it slightly out of time, pitch, and volume from the first guy... the delay and pitch variation are going to be pretty constant until the next note. Algorithms that use random delays will sound like a chorus, but one correlated to pick strike and keeping the difference constant in between might sound closer. I'd love to try it in the Axe, but I can't think of a way to use modifiers to do it. If this type of algorithm is successful, I think it'd be best as it's own effect block.
I know what you mean, and I did try playing with both those types of modifiers but I couldn't figure it out (I'm certainly no modifier wizard). In effect I was trying to slice the input signal into chunks that each last until the next pick strike, and each chunk is delayed, pitch shifted and volume modulated by a small, random, constant amount. A good implementation would also handle the transients (maybe a windowing technique?). I suspect that this type of special logic would have to be coded and tested to give it a fair shot. For example, I'm not sure if an amplitude envelope by itself is a suitable "pick attack" detector. Thomas Edison was correct when he said that realizing such things are 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. I'm a little short in the perspiration department .Try it and see. You'd use either the envelope follower or the ADSR as the modifier. I'm guessing it'll sound like slapping your whammy bar (insert joke here): a quick frequency shift at the attack. You never know until you try, though.
I know what you mean, and I did try playing with both those types of modifiers but I couldn't figure it out (I'm certainly no modifier wizard). In effect I was trying to slice the input signal into chunks that each last until the next pick strike, and each chunk is delayed, pitch shifted and volume modulated by a small, random, constant amount. A good implementation would also handle the transients (maybe a windowing technique?). I suspect that this type of special logic would have to be coded and tested to give it a fair shot. For example, I'm not sure if an amplitude envelope by itself is a suitable "pick attack" detector. Thomas Edison was correct when he said that realizing such things are 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. I'm a little short in the perspiration department .
It's hard to emulate double tracking but here's something I've tried with fair results:
- First you'll need 2 amp blocks. They could just be a copy of each other or EQed differently for better results.
- Put a null filter in front of one of the amps.
- Assign a modifier to the level control - select a RANDOM LFO with some damping.
- Adjust the min-max settings to fine tune it, i.e. you most likely don't want a -20dB to 20dB random swing - keep it to a couple of 2dB's or less.
- The null filter block now is simulating input amplitude differences.
- Put a micro delay before one of the amps as well (the same path were you put the null filter) - I like to use the flanger block for such a purpose
- Set the type to mono, feedback to 0% and mix to 100% - now the flanger block is pretty much a micro-delay block.
- Set the LFO type to random
- Adjust the LFO Hi-cut to smooth out the LFO (less abrupt changes in delay time).
- Turn auto-depth off.
- Fine tune by adjusting time, rate and depth
- This block is now simulating time differences
Thanks for sharing that info...any chance we could hear a clip demonstrating it, and without it?
The first part is just the double amp block base sound.
Second is the double track sim (Don't expect miracles still sounds like you are running an effect)
Third part is actually double tracking for comparison