Axe-Fx II "Quantum" Rev 2.02 Firmware Release

Swan1 said:
Personally, it sounds a little like the tail wagging the dog. If the goal is to get the sound and feel as close to the reference amps (obviously the custom Fractal amps are different) then regardless of anyone's personal preference to a specific sound or feel, I would vote for getting it to sound and feel like that amp and being done with it. If it is Q2.01 or if it is Q2.02 that sounds exactly like the reference amps then thats what the amp sounds like and thats that. Users can go into the almost dizzying array of advanced features and tweak it to sound however they want. Not to mention all the IR's that are out there to add additional customization of the sound and feel. Again, personally, if the Axe sounds and feels like the real reference amp then Fractal's job is done and I'd prefer to to see the inspiration go into new amps, effects, greater efficiency of the algorithms and frankly whatever other cool stuff Fractal can dream up.
Click to expand...

^ This. The benchmark is the real amp, not whatever sounds and feels better to some dude...
 
Swan1 said:
Personally, it sounds a little like the tail wagging the dog. If the goal is to get the sound and feel as close to the reference amps (obviously the custom Fractal amps are different) then regardless of anyone's personal preference to a specific sound or feel, I would vote for getting it to sound and feel like that amp and being done with it. If it is Q2.01 or if it is Q2.02 that sounds exactly like the reference amps then thats what the amp sounds like and thats that. Users can go into the almost dizzying array of advanced features and tweak it to sound however they want. Not to mention all the IR's that are out there to add additional customization of the sound and feel. Again, personally, if the Axe sounds and feels like the real reference amp then Fractal's job is done and I'd prefer to to see the inspiration go into new amps, effects, greater efficiency of the algorithms and frankly whatever other cool stuff Fractal can dream up.
Click to expand...
CrimsonGhostSLO said:
^ This. The benchmark is the real amp, not whatever sounds and feels better to some dude...
Click to expand...
You're both over exaggerating "some dude"'s impact here. There were more than a few complaints. They brought about a critical listening and experimenting session back at Fractal's HQ. And a decision was made based on that. Not on the complaints.

The benchmark is always going to be the real amp. But what's real is terribly hard to nail down. The variables involved in this whole modeling things are numerous and often subject to change and drift with time and operation, which makes reality an ever-shifting thing to capture.
 
Swan1 said:
Personally, it sounds a little like the tail wagging the dog. If the goal is to get the sound and feel as close to the reference amps (obviously the custom Fractal amps are different) then regardless of anyone's personal preference to a specific sound or feel, I would vote for getting it to sound and feel like that amp and being done with it. If it is Q2.01 or if it is Q2.02 that sounds exactly like the reference amps then thats what the amp sounds like and thats that. Users can go into the almost dizzying array of advanced features and tweak it to sound however they want. Not to mention all the IR's that are out there to add additional customization of the sound and feel. Again, personally, if the Axe sounds and feels like the real reference amp then Fractal's job is done and I'd prefer to to see the inspiration go into new amps, effects, greater efficiency of the algorithms and frankly whatever other cool stuff Fractal can dream up.
Click to expand...

+1 exactly! amps should be as close as possible else it should be fas models. more amps & effects & better algoritms indeed.

Cliff/FAS: you can never get every one happy, but you guys are doing super and its well appreciated!
 
iaresee said:
You're both over exaggerating "some dude"'s impact here. There were more than a few complaints. They brought about a critical listening and experimenting session back at Fractal's HQ. And a decision was made based on that. Not on the complaints.

The benchmark is always going to be the real amp. But what's real is terribly hard to nail down. The variables involved in this whole modeling things are numerous and often subject to change and drift with time and operation, which makes reality an ever-shifting thing to capture.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with fixes. But since the latest version (2.02) has come out the are now others who are not happy with the change and want 2.01 back (including, if I am reading Cliff's response correctly, the guy that lobbied Fractal to make the change in the first place). Unless Cliff has already released a 2.03 that I am not aware of to address the new feedback.
 
iaresee said:
You're both over exaggerating "some dude"'s impact here. There were more than a few complaints. They brought about a critical listening and experimenting session back at Fractal's HQ. And a decision was made based on that. Not on the complaints.
Click to expand...

I was not referring to a person in particular, it was just an expression. My apologies if it sounded like finger pointing.
 
Swan1 said:
I have no problem with fixes. But since the latest version (2.02) has come out the are now others who are not happy with the change and want 2.01 back. Unless Cliff has already released a 2.03 that I am not aware of to address the new feedback.
Click to expand...
Cliff makes decisions based on what he thinks is best and most accurate, not what forumites think is most accurate. You'll never have a release that pleases all of the people.
 
iaresee said:
Cliff makes decisions based on what he thinks is best and most accurate, not what forumites think is most accurate. You'll never have a release that pleases all of the people.
Click to expand...
In case you missed Cliff's comment I'll re-post it here for you and let it speak for itself: "You were the first one to complain about 2.01. You were one of the reasons we reverted the preamp modeling because you were complaining so loudly."
 
Swan1 said:
In case you missed Cliff's comment I'll post it here for you and let it speak for itself: "You were the first one to complain about 2.01. You were one of the reasons we reverted the preamp modeling because you were complaining so loudly."
Click to expand...
Toungue-in-cheek. Cliff doesn't do things because one person complains.

Look at it from his perspective: he's trying to make something everyone loves to use, loves the sound of. Someone is overly loud and whiny about something, that something gets changed and they're overly loud and whiny about it again. You don't think you'd get a little frustrated with that kind of juvenile behaviour? Want to throw a little bit of your frustration their way?
 
iaresee said:
Toungue-in-cheek. Cliff doesn't do things because one person complains.

Look at it from his perspective: he's trying to make something everyone loves to use, loves the sound of. Someone is overly loud and whiny about something, that something gets changed and they're overly loud and whiny about it again. You don't think you'd get a little frustrated with that kind of juvenile behaviour? Want to throw a little bit of your frustration their way?
Click to expand...
Absolutely I understand his frustration. You seem to be taking this very personally on behalf of Fractal. I don't blame Cliff for being frustrated which is why based on his comment (that said nothing about being tongue-in-cheek) I was stating my personal (I put that in there twice) response to that comment that the only determining factor should be the actual amp that is being modeled.
 
uhm forumites LoL, but seriously it was only my subjective opinion, i am a fan of this outstanding product.

It's just feedback from a random customer, nothing more.

rock on
Marco
 
Man, it's amazing how some can hear such a profound difference between 2.01 and 2.02. They are very similar to me, with a subtle difference. I feel like if 2.02 sounds "muffled" the we can just increase the treble or something? No?
 
iaresee said:
I've worked with Cliff and company for almost 5 years now. My care and concern for Fractal is more than firmware-deep. :)
Click to expand...
That's great and maybe why you believe that Cliff's comment was tongue-in-cheek (or written out of frustration - not sure exactly what you think it is now really). My only concern, such as it is, is that the Axe sound as close to the real amp and was expressing that personal opinion in response to Cliff's comment.
 
Swan1 said:
Personally, it sounds a little like the tail wagging the dog. If the goal is to get the sound and feel as close to the reference amps (obviously the custom Fractal amps are different) then regardless of anyone's personal preference to a specific sound or feel, I would vote for getting it to sound and feel like that amp and being done with it. If it is Q2.01 or if it is Q2.02 that sounds exactly like the reference amps then thats what the amp sounds like and thats that. Users can go into the almost dizzying array of advanced features and tweak it to sound however they want. Not to mention all the IR's that are out there to add additional customization of the sound and feel. Again, personally, if the Axe sounds and feels like the real reference amp then Fractal's job is done and I'd prefer to to see the inspiration go into new amps, effects, greater efficiency of the algorithms and frankly whatever other cool stuff Fractal can dream up.
Click to expand...


^^^This ^^^
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
Man, it's amazing how some can hear such a profound difference between 2.01 and 2.02. They are very similar to me, with a subtle difference. I feel like if 2.02 sounds "muffled" the we can just increase the treble or something? No?
Click to expand...
This is what I would like to know. Installed 2.02 and played thru a few presets--Vox's, Triptik, etc. Things sounded 'off' and I didn't have time to mess with it, so I went back to 2.01 where everything was sounding great.

I don't mind making some tweaks for 2.02, but is it just the HARMONICS setting or what else?

I did not reselect the amp models. Did I need to do that to possibly fix things?
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
Curious, no other more basic parameter to adjust for that? It's specifically this new parameter? I wonder what it was "set to" before we had access to it?
Click to expand...

Hi Chris,

In my experience the crunch knob sort of behaved in that manner, but used to the extreme it would choke off my sound. That said, I believe Cliff altered it because the lower the value, the more pinch harms seemed to come out.

For me, all of my amps are set to 0 for crunch as it has given me more of that pinch harm thing I like as well as a little more of that starved plate effect like we get out of that 70's plexi amp.

As for the harmonic default, I happened to load some amp blocks of old that I had saved and they seem to default to 460. This is what made me mention that setting. To me, 0 just sounds like what one of our other forum members mentioned....a 400Hz sort or low mid to mid sort of sound that actually makes my pinch harms a little less apparent.

That said, at 0 we sort of get some of the elements of that 70's plexi without being as extreme. So for me, somewhere up the middle on harmonics has been working great.

For anyone experiencing way different sounding presets in 2.02, the first thing I set is harmonics to 460. It takes away any slightly exaggerated mids or what some of you may be referring to as mud.

Also, to tighten things up a little more if need be, (I always forget what this is called as I'm not in my studio) the option in pre-amp to the right of crunch.....I back that down to 10% and it tightens me up a bit. Then I go to sag and set it at 6.0 and all I have to do from there is add a little more gain and I'm done. I turn boost on and drop input gain by -1 from default of 5.0 to 4.0. Turning boost on softens transients and makes the amp a little warmer.

Those are for my live sounds. For studio, repeat process but leave option next to crunch set at default (74% for me) harms at 460 or 500, sag at 5 and input gain down -1.5 with boost turned on.

If this fails and your still not getting the saturation you need, we can milk the studio compressor (first in effects chain unless you are using a wah. If using a wah first, put the comp 2nd) by turning makeup gain on, 4:1 ratio, auto release and set threshold to a number higher than -35 for some insane, but useable and tight, gain. Hope this helps someone. :)
 
I'm sure a lot of people behind the scenes, beta testers and ultimately Cliff himself, that listen, give feedback and decide to make changes on firmware.
There are so many different rigs that people are plugged into, coupled with the fact that tone is so subjective, it would seem to be impossible to please everyone.
 
Last edited:
Swan1 said:
That's great and maybe why you believe that Cliff's comment was tongue-in-cheek (or written out of frustration - not sure exactly what you think it is now really).
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure Cliff would not create a FW revision based on 1 person's statement, no matter how loud or often that 1 person posts.

I think sometimes we lose sight of how many FAS users there are. On the forum, maybe there's 50 or so people that post daily or so, maybe 100 who post weekly? There are WAY more people out there with opinions and wishes of their own, and we just don't know about them usually because they aren't on the forum. I'm pretty sure 1 guy on this forum at any given time does not influence things as a whole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom