Axe-Fx II Firmware 19.01 Public Beta (1)

APOGEE123 said:
Its funny some are talking about resolution with cab IR's.:? I don't know about you but I'm always cutting the highs in the cab blocks substantially ....just MHO
Click to expand...
Cutting the highs doesn't change the resolution; lowering the resolution doesn't cut the highs. :)
 
Man! No kidding. Almost too many choices, really.

Still, it beats having a room full of real cabs, not to mention the mics, cables, preamps, and all that.

lqdsnddist said:
So now the big question (for me) is should I go and buy cab pack 13 and 14, and the new OH v4 collection, OR, should I spend a few days with the thousands of IR's I've already bought from Fractal, ML, OH, etc and play with some dephase parameters ? lol

I ask that part if jest, but also part in truth.
Click to expand...
 
FractalAudio said:
Added a new mode to the “Character” controls in the Amp block. A Char Type of “Dynamic” engages an exciting new mode of tone control. This can be used to fatten or scoop the tone as a function of picking strength. For example, set the Type to Dynamic, Char Freq to 450.0, Char Q to 0.7 and Char Amt to 4.0. This will cause the tone to get fatter and thicker as you play hard but without getting honky when playing soft.
Click to expand...

Wow this really helped make the wah so much less honky.
 
Rex said:
The Dynamic Character type is my new favorite. Cliff's suggested settings give a nice midrange push when you spank it. Also try higher frequencies at lower Q with negative Character Amount.
Click to expand...

Likewise. A few years ago at Axe-Fest Cliff talked about implementing things in the AMP block that were beyond the capabilities of physical amplifiers so we could start to push our sounds in to a realm only digital, and only the Axe-Fx II, could cover. The dynamic parameters seem like the inevitable outcome of that talk and I'm really digging them. I use Dynamic Presence and Dynamic (in both the negative and positive response forms) on my patches and love them. This is one more quiver that's incredibly powerful and totally unique to this product.

Thanks Cliff!
 
ML SOUND LAB said:
Okay here's my analysis and opinion on the de-phase parameter:

dephase.png


As the image suggests the green line is an alloy IR without de-phase. The red line is the same IR with de-phase at 5. The blue line is the same IR with de-phase on 10.

So essentially it evens out your IR. If you have a bad IR you can make it more usable by using de-phase. On the other hand if you have a good IR then I personally wouldn't advice you to use de-phase as it also removes the character of your IR. So at 10 it's almost like a Palmer PDI.

From an IR procuder point of view you will not see me using this feature. Don't get me wrong. It's a really useful tool and it can make many IRs sound better. The reason I wouldn't use it is that I spend a lot of time making sure that I have the best resolution for my IRs. When we start talking about evening out the IR graphs then it's similar to lowering the resolution of the IR.

I think this is a great future and many people will find it useful. I would assume in a live situation it's a miracle worker especially with FRFR setups. It "should" result in less ear fatigue. :)
Click to expand...

Well, i think i will (slightly) disagree to some aspects, or at least give another view to some points you metioned:

De-Phase is NOT similiar as lowering the IR resolution, IMO. As long we talking Ultra-Res, we also not discuss having the best resolution in a IR, when producing IR`s. Ultra-Res define a fixed resolution, representing 8192 Samples. This resolution is more than enough to represent superior near-field "Images", compared to the real mic recording. Allright.

From an IR producer point of view the goal may seem to find
1) so called "sweet spots", complementing/correct the overall frequency of an given Audio-path (Guitar - Amp(settings) - ... - IR), they make the overall sound result of the complete path the most pleasant.
2) Represent the charakter of an cabinet the best, while trying to get rid of unwanted influences NOT coming from the intended path (mostly cabinet+Mic). IOW: Get rid of noise, comb filtering coming from bad room, etc.
3) As an User experience it seems, that IRs without (extensive) spikes in a plot and comb filtering issues working most satisfying for the most people, it seems...

As a counterpoint it is also interesting, that "real-phase mixes" (your Alloy paradigm) implement comb filtering again, as a result of phase displacement. So, under certain circumstances, comb filtering seems to be liked again.


So, IMO De-Phase is NOT similiar like lowering resolution (less Samples, like 1024 (Low-Res) or 512 Samples, like Low-Res in the Standard/Ultra f.ex.). De-Phase smooth out the "mountains" and "valleys", but keeps it`s resolution. So, essentially it works more like the "SMOOTH" Paramter in the TMA Block.

Lets have a look:

public.php


GREEN: represent an UR IR resolution (8192 Samples)
YELLOW: represent an 512 Samples Low-Resolution
BLUE: UR with De-Phase at 5
BLACK: UR with De-Phase at 10

A closer / detailed view incl. RED = UR with De-Phase at 3:

public.php


CONCLUSIONS:
Comparing resolutions (Green=High; Yellow=low), we notice a resolution increasement helps disproportionate for accurate Low-End. That`s what Cliff talks from minute one, when introduced UR.

Comparing most accuracy in comparison to the real miced cabinet (Green=High; Black=Lowest), we notice that the resolution of De-Phase keeps the same, but it smooth out the "mountains" and "valleys" (amplitude) the more, the higher the frequency is. Compare Green (UR) & Blue (UR+De-Phase 5) in the first picture!

So, yes: The more action from the De-Phase knob, the less accurate the IR represent the "real deal", the curve smooths out and on ten it starts really looking like any analog CabSimulator. Other picture: The EQ gets less and less belts, like "Hardware EQs", representing a "analog CabSim" have.

In my experiences, i often liked analog Hardware-CabSims like Palmer PDI, Hughes&Kettner RedBox, etc. Not because they sound "super natural" like a real miked cabinet (or good impulse responses), but they were EASY TO USE! You plug em in and it sounds ... good. No bigger frequency issues. You know what i mean ... hopefully. Especially by using an FRFR Monitor, analog Sims often feels faster and easier "good". More "cabinet like".

And this is, were i agree totally to Mikko: If you want the superior reality DON`T USE De-Phase. But if you`re looking for easy and faster "good" results, especially when monitoring through FRFR Monitors, De-Phase could bring you faster in a comfortable ball-park, than not using this feature.


In short:
De-Phase YES = (could be) Less IR search / finetuning / IR mixing / EQing if you do it to fix frequency issues.
De-Phase NO = Harder finding and working on YOUR IR, which represent YOUR (!) sweet spot and sound vision, but if you got it, you are clearly nearlier to "the real miced" result.

And because it`s FAS: It`s no YES or NO, you can smoothly find YOUR in-beetween from 0 to 10 - if you like :)

Last but not least: De-Phase did something you can`t reproduce by changing mic positions, changing mics, changing IR mixes. And this is the reason why i think, it`s not a knob to "fix" something "bad", it`s a knob for further possibilities. Very USER-FRIENDLY POSSIBILITIES!

Well done, Cliff! Thank you :) Perhaps we`ll see two more paramters for the De-Phase paradigma in the future?: A (frequency) Start and End Parameter which defines the bandwidth area De-Phase (i would call it "Smoother") works exclusiveley...
 
Last edited:
yek said:
Disregard the above. The CPU increase was caused by something else.
Click to expand...

Select a Preset (with higher CPU demand). Go to utility -> CPU screen. Wait (idle...) ... within 10 - 20 seconds the CPU jumps ca. 1,5 to 2% higher ... wait for longer ... after a while it decrease again ...
 
Morphosis said:
Select a Preset (with higher CPU demand). Go to utility -> CPU screen. Wait (idle...) ... within 10 - 20 seconds the CPU jumps ca. 1,5 to 2% higher ... wait for longer ... after a while it decrease again ...
Click to expand...

Not doing that here.

The CPU increase I reported, is related to the presence of a Drive block.
With the Drive in the preset, CPU increases when playing, and decreases to its normal value when not playing.
 
as an end user I'm for anything that makes using the axe fx easiser and in my time with it so far dephaser does

I own 3 cab packs, a 4 or 5 ownhammer packs from over the years, 3 redwirez sets , all the free ones .literally thousands or IR's .probabaly 10000

peeps preach about needing to find the right IR for every preset . why is that ? I own 1 "real" guitar cab that I can dial a hundered tones in with my recto . I can put A sm57 on the front of it , cap edge without much messing aorund , and capture those tones pretty closely

why do I need thousands or IR's ?why cant I just have 1 great IR of each of the cabs I want to use and tweak from there? to me the dephase is approaching this way of working . dialing in a IR to a preset rather than digging through 1000's of files trying to find a perfect match
 
mongey said:
why do I need thousands or IR's ?why cant I just have 1 great IR of each of the cabs I want to use and tweak from there? to me the dephase is approaching this way of working . dialing in a IR to a preset rather than digging through 1000's of files trying to find a perfect match
Click to expand...


Have you ever gone into the studio with your one real cab ? The options with mic placement, mic types etc can be pretty staggering. In order to simulate just a couple of mics, in a couple of placements requires a ton of IR's.

There is certainly a point where it gets silly, either with real mics or IR's, but to each his own how much time they want to spend chasing "perfection"

I've worked with guys who would mic up the cab and literally not touch it again for the entire recording session. I've also worked with guys who would change mics, positions etc for each track we laid down. Its basically the same mentality when it comes to IR's and presets

Some guys can pick a favorite IR and that is it. They stick that IR into all their patches and are set. Other guys want to tweak the IR for each and every patch, and these are the guys who probably would spend 3 days in the studio just playing with the mic positions. At least it is way cheaper to do it with IR's now and not on the studio clock lol
 
lqdsnddist said:
Have you ever gone into the studio with your one real cab ? The options with mic placement, mic types etc can be pretty staggering. In order to simulate just a couple of mics, in a couple of placements requires a ton of IR's.

There is certainly a point where it gets silly, either with real mics or IR's, but to each his own how much time they want to spend chasing "perfection"

I've worked with guys who would mic up the cab and literally not touch it again for the entire recording session. I've also worked with guys who would change mics, positions etc for each track we laid down. Its basically the same mentality when it comes to IR's and presets

Some guys can pick a favorite IR and that is it. They stick that IR into all their patches and are set. Other guys want to tweak the IR for each and every patch, and these are the guys who probably would spend 3 days in the studio just playing with the mic positions. At least it is way cheaper to do it with IR's now and not on the studio clock lol
Click to expand...

yeah I've done a little studio stuff . of course you get super deep with options and techniques and super deep with your budegt .

I def fall into the dial in a sound and stick with it category . To be honest cab pack 13 121-57 2 is the only IR i have been using for everything from super clean to high gain chugg .lol

the great thing about the axe fx is there are so many roads to getting what you want .the more ways you can make it suit your workflow,rather than you having to adapt your workflow to it's , the better a peice of technology is
 
Last edited:
I wonder is de-phase might become a Cablab feature where you apply it once and save the IR. You could keep the feature on the AXE for experimentation purposes and when you find what you like you could apply it one and re-save the IR with the processing applied. Just a thought.
 
kroubik said:
I wonder is de-phase might become a Cablab feature where you apply it once and save the IR. You could keep the feature on the AXE for experimentation purposes and when you find what you like you could apply it one and re-save the IR with the processing applied. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Would depend on whether the algorithm is applied to only the IR or to the product of the IR and the input signal to the block. Given there's continuous CPU use when you use the parameter, I'm guessing it's the latter, which would mean it can't be incorporated in to the IR.

But...total guess on my part. :)
 
iaresee said:
Would depend on whether the algorithm is applied to only the IR or to the product of the IR and the input signal to the block. Given there's continuous CPU use when you use the parameter, I'm guessing it's the latter, which would mean it can't be incorporated in to the IR.

But...total guess on my part. :)
Click to expand...

Couldn't you like, produce the Cab you want, and then apply Dephase and Tone Match the result? :O Something like that....... I've never used Tone Mate :lol
 
I second Morphosis' proposition to be able to control the frequency range effected by the de-phase control.
I've been messing around with this over the weekend, and I'm finding that I like how it's affecting the high end, but I wish it wouldn't touch the low end as much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom