Are the Amps in Axe-Fx modeled after "Real Amps" or "Schematics"?

blackmoreguitar said:
I like your enthusiasm, but if a curve is programmed in, then by definition it is not unpredictable. I agree with @iaresee that you already have the controls at your disposal to do what you want.
Click to expand...

When you program in curves of aging scales for different components simultaneously, and input small amount of mathematical Random Generators you get something close to what happens in an amp over time as far as relationship between the components which is unpredictable since each component goes through its own journey with it's small amount of random shift in time... I think it should be part of living with an instrument, but that's me( and a few more)...

I still prefer my Mini Moog to behave differently everyday to the VST version of it.
 
FractalAudio said:
Let's keep this civil please. Name-calling it's not necessary nor permitted on this forum. All opinions are welcome and respected.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that Cliff. I very much appreciate you chiming in. As you can see your invention totally captures my imagination, and my time.
Amazing achievement the Axe FX!
 
∞Fractals said:
Perhaps Chris has far far more credibility here versus you. ...
You just seem to make a mess of what many here have treasured for over a decade.
Click to expand...

see, that I don't get in this forum: I too think it's a terrible, terrible idea of randomizing or changing parameters over time. (And I'm pretty sure it will never happen)
But how does that warrant personal insults?
 
dumbeat said:
The Bizarre end I'm trying to achieve is the mysterious random elements that make stuff amazing. Like certain guitars and amps that were built identical yet sound so much better than others. This is attributed to the unpredictable - and that curve can be programmed in these days. Its a classic property of the gear we use and there is no reason why not to emulate that, especially if you can choose to use that feature or not use it. Different strokes brother,
You don't have to understand it. Were all wired differently. There is room for all of us.
Click to expand...
I believe you have the tools to achieve what you want already in the box.
 
dumbeat said:
When you program in curves of aging scales for different components simultaneously, and input small amount of mathematical Random Generators you get something close to what happens in an amp over time as far as relationship between the components which is unpredictable since each component goes through its own journey with it's small amount of random shift in time... I think it should be part of living with an instrument, but that's me( and a few more)...
Click to expand...

Some sort of automated tube aging process may be possible, and you could potentially even select the speed at which you wanted the tubes to age, albeit that's not something I have any personal interest in. To each their own, of course.
 
FractalAudio said:
FWIW, when I get an old amp for modeling I have it serviced replacing any components that are out of tolerance, fresh tubes, etc. Old tubes don't sound good.
Click to expand...

I am sure this is the best way in order to present a great starting point for the product, but don't you personally enjoy the permutations that the components and the relationship between them go through? Or at least find it to be a potential for great tones that otherwise would not be achieved?

Is the concept of time based evolving program a thing of interest to you?
 
Last edited:
dumbeat said:
Is the concept of time based evolving program a thing of interest to you?
Click to expand...
The unit doesn't have a concept of time that plays out over the scale you're talking about. When you turn it off, what would happen to any aging? There's not date and time kept in the box that would allow a continuous aging process to continue between restarts.
 
iaresee said:
The unit doesn't have a concept of time that plays out over the scale you're talking about. When you turn it off, what would happen to any aging? There's not date and time kept in the box that would allow a continuous aging process to continue between restarts.
Click to expand...

There are many solutions to that. One is- as soon as you hook it up to your PC it receives a time stamp there. Another one is a battery powered clock. That is the easiest part i believe.
 
dumbeat said:
Even if it was available you wouldn't have HAD to use it, so why be so scared of someone's imagination? Its the only good thing that is free.
Click to expand...
One may not have to use a given set of features but we all pay for it not just in money but in time that could be used for other features,

BTW, opinions can be free too and I get paid for my imagination. ;)
 
dumbeat said:
I still prefer my Mini Moog to behave differently everyday to the VST version of it.
Click to expand...

I suspect real Mini Moog have a "better feel", some drift in real component, that is non emulated.
I like the idea of "out-of-tollerance" or "aged" component, but it should not be a "random" issue. I wish there could be "fortuite" circuit that have The Tone, but I wish to load them as I need them. Many variations of a base model.

I don't think it will happen, because each model is firmware coded (infinite firmware to maintain!) and the result could be not so good sounding. If there will be a way to store the variation outside the firmware, and recall only "best" variation... this will be interesting.

I remeber, for example, some models with wrong parameter was held and added beside corrected version because many player like them.
 
Smilzo said:
I suspect real Mini Moog have a "better feel", some drift in real component, that is non emulated.
I like the idea of "out-of-tollerance" or "aged" component, but it should not be a "random" issue. I wish there could be "fortuite" circuit that have The Tone, but I wish to load them as I need them. Many variations of a base model.

I don't think it will happen, because each model is firmware coded (infinite firmware to maintain!) and the result could be not so good sounding. If there will be a way to store the variation outside the firmware, and recall only "best" variation... this will be interesting.

I remeber, for example, some models with wrong parameter was held and added beside corrected version because many player like them.
Click to expand...

I was basically musing about this topic.

A lot of the tech these days is moving towards "A.I" and Evolving Program and Artificial Organism, its a fascinating thing and where tech is heading.

Combining this with the simple fact that musical instruments and pro audio gear, including guitar amplifiers, have their "own life" so to speak, where components have a life span and changes over time, a by product of which gives very unique and loveable(and less loveable) states in which the gear operates,+ the fact that we interact in a certain way with the shifts the gear presents us with, i thought it was a natural direction for the technology to go, since it is about modeling "Real Gear", As this is a property of "Real gear", It is never static.

Simply put- a "frozen in time" static state amplifier simply can not be a natural and fully acurate representation of the electrical analog device that is being modeled. Fluctuation is a big part of the beast. Even in some of the Digital Synthesizers nowadays (the digital reincarnation of the Prophet line) fluctuation of the oscillators was programmed in.

I faced some backlash and pushback by a few members here, but i am not sure they got the full concept i was talking about, and based on where tech is going at this time im quite confident that in a few years, if not less, this idea i presented will actually take shape in one way or another. Its just the way things are heading.

From trying to make things "perfect" when tech was young, nowadays there is a shift in thought about Tech to become more organic, including the more and less desirable artifacts. Especially that you can reset values and not be doomed to a repairman when shit goes too far south.
 
Last edited:
Ever play the game The Sims? I did, briefly. As soon as I realized it took more time in real life than in the game to get the simulated humans to do mundane tasks (like taking half an hour of real time to get a character to use the bathroom), I deleted it.

Authenticity is not the only measure of usefulness or legitimacy. For example, it's not "authentic" to be able to put 250+ amps in a 3-space rack. Are guitarists requesting that several thousand pounds be added to their modelers to make the weight more realistic? Not that I can see.

"Frozen in time" isn't a bad thing. One specific example -- Slash's magical #34 amp he used for Appetite for Destruction. I would gladly bet you a bazillion dollars that if it were possible, Slash would have had that amp frozen in time back when he made that album so the sound wouldn't ever change from that point. Nobody wants components to fail or for sound to change unpredictably over time; that's all undesirable stuff from the real world.

In real life, component wear & tear over time MIGHT cause the "secret sauce" to happen, but there's zero guarantee of that. On the other hand, it is 100% guaranteed to make the amp sound worse over time because in real life, the amp eventually breaks down. Would you want that modeled too? If we were just hellbent on total authenticity, the answer would have to be yes. But short of technology like in The Matrix, at some point it's practically impossible to achieve completely, and it gets to be ridiculous as well when said goal of total physical accuracy is better achieved by just using the real amp in the first place. (And even the Matrix wasn't built to be 100% real-world authentic. :)

Authenticity in modeling "real gear" is great up until the point that it isn't, at which point it makes the modeling less useful. Being able to tweak specific components of an amp to give it individual character (i.e. the "secret sauce")? Fantastic! We've got that today with the Axe-FX. Having that same amp "randomly" change as time goes on? Not so useful. With modeling you don't have to follow the same path as reality to achieve the goal -- we get to take shortcuts and "play God" with our amps. That's the point. I don't use the Axe-Fx to simulate component wear & tear; I use it to get kickass guitar sounds.
 
Mesa Boogie's whole goal was to isolate the 'magic' they would find in one amp out of a group of the same type that sounded 'special', and distill the 'magic' down to a definable repeatable, so you got the 'magic one-off amp' coming off of an assembly line, all equally magical.

The subtle component drift idea that would at some point get you to tonal bliss, you can get there now with the available circuit adjustment parameters. How? I have no idea. But power tube mismatch blew me away bumping it just off of zero, haven't had much luck with getting the same :eek: with the preamp yet, but I also don't know wtf I'm doing with bias or bias drift or hardness or B+ etc etc.
 
jasonmauer said:
Ever play the game The Sims? I did, briefly. As soon as I realized it took more time in real life than in the game to get the simulated humans to do mundane tasks (like taking half an hour of real time to get a character to use the bathroom), I deleted it.

Authenticity is not the only measure of usefulness or legitimacy. For example, it's not "authentic" to be able to put 250+ amps in a 3-space rack. Are guitarists requesting that several thousand pounds be added to their modelers to make the weight more realistic? Not that I can see.

"Frozen in time" isn't a bad thing. One specific example -- Slash's magical #34 amp he used for Appetite for Destruction. I would gladly bet you a bazillion dollars that if it were possible, Slash would have had that amp frozen in time back when he made that album so the sound wouldn't ever change from that point. Nobody wants components to fail or for sound to change unpredictably over time; that's all undesirable stuff from the real world.

In real life, component wear & tear over time MIGHT cause the "secret sauce" to happen, but there's zero guarantee of that. On the other hand, it is 100% guaranteed to make the amp sound worse over time because in real life, the amp eventually breaks down. Would you want that modeled too? If we were just hellbent on total authenticity, the answer would have to be yes. But short of technology like in The Matrix, at some point it's practically impossible to achieve completely, and it gets to be ridiculous as well when said goal of total physical accuracy is better achieved by just using the real amp in the first place. (And even the Matrix wasn't built to be 100% real-world authentic. :)

Authenticity in modeling "real gear" is great up until the point that it isn't, at which point it makes the modeling less useful. Being able to tweak specific components of an amp to give it individual character (i.e. the "secret sauce")? Fantastic! We've got that today with the Axe-FX. Having that same amp "randomly" change as time goes on? Not so useful. With modeling you don't have to follow the same path as reality to achieve the goal -- we get to take shortcuts and "play God" with our amps. That's the point. I don't use the Axe-Fx to simulate component wear & tear; I use it to get kickass guitar sounds.
Click to expand...


I get your point and appreciate parts of it. However, real time fluctuations for one are a thing we react to and in my opinion create a certain relationship with the instrument and the amp. That, in my opinion IS desirable. The heat and the result of it in real time is a real property of the way we interact with the instrument. That is about short term fluctuation.

As far as long time fluctuation of the parts, i think they are desirable as well in order to reach a "Special sauce", since there are so many variables, you probably wouldn't be able to program it in yourself, just like the example you brought from Sim City.
Where the benefit of the Digital device come is the ability to limit the fluctuation as much as you want or "Lock it" where you want, if you want to. Things you, indeed, can not do in real life.

Its unneeded to say that we also dont want the weight of a real amp. You know there is no benefit in the weight really. There is a benefit in the organic behavior of the components though. If you can have control over the process, yet allow it to behave, you can achieve very interesting and deep interaction with the machine.

The "Frozen in time" in my opinion is a great benchmark but i am pretty sure it is not the last word. Tech is gravitating more and more towards evolving program for a reason. Humans appreciate interaction which is not 100% in their control. Its a human thing, certainly in the Arts,
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom