Are the compressors in this thing 'modelled" or what?

guittarzzan

guittarzzan

Inspired
I was just wondering if the compressors in this are modelled after any particular gear or just Cliff's spin on it.
I don't know how much dsp it'd use, but I was thinking it'd be sweet to have models of, for example, an La2a and/or 1176 etc for compression.
As great as the amp sims sound now, I would think the same quality modelling could be done on some sweet classic comps.
Am I high maintenance? :cool:
 
Correct me if I have this wrong, but I believe Fractal Audio's goal is not to model every piece of musical equipment ever invented.

The Axe-Fx puts a huge amount of control over options into the hands of the user. Users can pursue their own ideal sounds faster and easier with the Axe-Fx than with traditional methods.
 
xrist04 said:
Correct me if I have this wrong, but I believe Fractal Audio's goal is not to model every piece of musical equipment ever invented.

The Axe-Fx puts a huge amount of control over options into the hands of the user. Users can pursue their own ideal sounds faster and easier with the Axe-Fx than with traditional methods.
Click to expand...

You are correct.
 
xrist04 said:
Correct me if I have this wrong, but I believe Fractal Audio's goal is not to model every piece of musical equipment ever invented.

The Axe-Fx puts a huge amount of control over options into the hands of the user. Users can pursue their own ideal sounds faster and easier with the Axe-Fx than with traditional methods.
Click to expand...
...and I actually prefer having a transparent compressor ;)
 
VegaBaby said:
...and I actually prefer having a transparent compressor ;)
Click to expand...

... and I actually prefer to have both kinds at my disposal so I can use whatever the situation calls for. :cool:

Cheers,

Mats N
 
Mats N said:
VegaBaby said:
...and I actually prefer having a transparent compressor ;)
Click to expand...

... and I actually prefer to have both kinds at my disposal so I can use whatever the situation calls for. :cool:

Cheers,

Mats N
Click to expand...

And that's what the axe-fx offers by allowing you to choose between studio and pedal.
Also with parameters like knee, sc chain select, makeup, mix (ala barber tone press), and filter.
 
I'm not saying he SHOULD do models of classic studio comps. I was just asking if the ones in there were modelled AND thinking out loud about how cool it'd be to have models of the studio standards. He's pushed the envelope with the amp modelling etc and it's really not out of the realm of possibilites if you think about it.
Some of you guys get pretty defensive when someone says, "wouldn't it be cool if..." and act like the person is saying that the Axefx is lacking. We all have our own dream wish list. I might think some of yours are ridiculous or over the top.
It's just gear...relax. :cool:
 
guittarzzan said:
I'm not saying he SHOULD do models of classic studio comps. I was just asking if the ones in there were modelled AND thinking out loud about how cool it'd be to have models of the studio standards. He's pushed the envelope with the amp modelling etc and it's really not out of the realm of possibilites if you think about it.
Some of you guys get pretty defensive when someone says, "wouldn't it be cool if..." and act like the person is saying that the Axefx is lacking. We all have our own dream wish list. I might think some of yours are ridiculous or over the top.
It's just gear...relax. :cool:
Click to expand...

No not out of the relm of possibilites. Line 6 has taken that paradigm. I am saying I prefer Cliffs approach. Also, of course we are going to get a bit defensive about some feature request. None of it comes w/o a cost. Each thing that is added may keep another feature from being added or increase the processing cost for the particular effect. We have already seen it happen. Some patches that used to work now use too much processing power to function. All these features come at a cost.

You probably DO think many ideas are over the top. You have every right express and voice that opinion. Nobody seems uptight here to me. You made a post in a public forum, you are going to get differing opinions most likely.
 
I one were to model a transparent compressor (and one that actually works well), the FMR Audio R.N.C. is the only one I know of, and have used. Does not change the character of the sound one iota.
 
The RNC is two compressors in series - at least Super Nice Mode.
The most transparent compressor I know and use is a CraneSong STC-8.
It's fabulous for what it does, but kind of hard to dial in what I want to hear in a guitar compressor, I mostly don't want those to be too transparent.
 
Not to nit pick but to nit pick...

The RMC in SuperNice mode is THREE (3) compressors in series. So if you thought two was nice three are more nice! :D

http://www.fmraudio.com/supernicepage.htm

There a pretty picture at the link.

For those that want maybe they can make a request to Cliff to add another available compressor to the "inventory" and you could re-create the RMC SuperNice mode.
 
javajunkie said:
guittarzzan said:
I'm not saying he SHOULD do models of classic studio comps. I was just asking if the ones in there were modelled AND thinking out loud about how cool it'd be to have models of the studio standards. He's pushed the envelope with the amp modelling etc and it's really not out of the realm of possibilites if you think about it.
Some of you guys get pretty defensive when someone says, "wouldn't it be cool if..." and act like the person is saying that the Axefx is lacking. We all have our own dream wish list. I might think some of yours are ridiculous or over the top.
It's just gear...relax. :cool:
Click to expand...

No not out of the relm of possibilites. Line 6 has taken that paradigm. I am saying I prefer Cliffs approach. Also, of course we are going to get a bit defensive about some feature request. None of it comes w/o a cost. Each thing that is added may keep another feature from being added or increase the processing cost for the particular effect. We have already seen it happen. Some patches that used to work now use too much processing power to function. All these features come at a cost.

You probably DO think many ideas are over the top. You have every right express and voice that opinion. Nobody seems uptight here to me. You made a post in a public forum, you are going to get differing opinions most likely.
Click to expand...

So are you saying you don't support the idea
of adding new and useful features that will
benefit the Axe because some people may lose
their presets? Forgive me for saying this but we'd
still be operating on a older version if that was the case.
In which anyone not happy with that could always remain
on that version if they wish. There is going to be someone
always maxing out their CPU no matter what. I don't know
anybody else's opinion but I think the Axe is revolutionary.
Cliff's raised the standard to meet the needs of the customer.
Especially the guitarist. Not everybody's needs are the same,
that doesn't mean its a bad idea. I would be shocked
to see, if Fractal decided to be creative in this way, lack
of any support. You'd probably have a lot of customers thanking
him for yet another unworthy update.
 
lilbman said:
javajunkie said:
guittarzzan said:
I'm not saying he SHOULD do models of classic studio comps. I was just asking if the ones in there were modelled AND thinking out loud about how cool it'd be to have models of the studio standards. He's pushed the envelope with the amp modelling etc and it's really not out of the realm of possibilites if you think about it.
Some of you guys get pretty defensive when someone says, "wouldn't it be cool if..." and act like the person is saying that the Axefx is lacking. We all have our own dream wish list. I might think some of yours are ridiculous or over the top.
It's just gear...relax. :cool:
Click to expand...

No not out of the relm of possibilites. Line 6 has taken that paradigm. I am saying I prefer Cliffs approach. Also, of course we are going to get a bit defensive about some feature request. None of it comes w/o a cost. Each thing that is added may keep another feature from being added or increase the processing cost for the particular effect. We have already seen it happen. Some patches that used to work now use too much processing power to function. All these features come at a cost. Other have and will disagree with features I would like to see, that's the way it goes. In the end Cliff decides. We provided our thoughts and feedback pro and con.

You probably DO think many ideas are over the top. You have every right express and voice that opinion. Nobody seems uptight here to me. You made a post in a public forum, you are going to get differing opinions most likely.
Click to expand...

So are you saying you don't support the idea
of adding new and useful features that will
benefit the Axe because some people may lose
their presets? Forgive me for saying this but we'd
still be operating on a older version if that was the case.
In which anyone not happy with that could always remain
on that version if they wish. There is going to be someone
always maxing out their CPU no matter what. I don't know
anybody else's opinion but I think the Axe is revolutionary.
Cliff's raised the standard to meet the needs of the customer.
Especially the guitarist. Not everybody's needs are the same,
that doesn't mean its a bad idea. I would be shocked
to see, if Fractal decided to be creative in this way, lack
of any support. You'd probably have a lot of customers thanking
him for yet another unworthy update.
Click to expand...

No, people didn't lose their preset before because there was plenty of processing power to spare. Yes, I think it is a serious concern that needs to be weighed. You are mistaken we would not still be operating on older firmware because it wasn't until recently that this started to become an issue. I am not saying I don't support new features. I am saying I don't support this idea, if the processing cost is significant. Other have and will disagree with features I would like to see, that's the way it goes. In the end Cliff decides. We provided our thoughts and feedback pro and con.

In which anyone not happy with that could always remain
on that version if they wish.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I intend to voice my opinion on what I feel should/should not go into the axe-fx because I DON'T want to have to make the decision not to upgrade because my patches will no longer work w/o serious restructuring.

You'd probably have a lot of customers thanking
him for yet another unworthy update.
Click to expand...

and you would probably have a lot of others asking why their presets are broken because of stuff the don't use. :D


There is going to be someone
always maxing out their CPU no matter what.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about those people. Some of the stock presets have started to exhibit this behavior.

Not everybody's needs are the same,
that doesn't mean its a bad idea.
Click to expand...

Doesn't mean it is good or bad. However, it does make it worthy of discussion. Sometimes in discourse their is disagreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom