Axe-Fx II "Quantum" Rev 4.00 Firmware Release

ML SOUND LAB said:
Quantum 4 clippage with Mark IV + Cab Pack 13 + ML USA Bass Cab Pack:

Click to expand...



Holy Crap! I had my volume adjusted for "Clyde Wah and Analog Flanger" with X-Mann playing Blue Planet and this nearly ripped my head off! That's an impressively powerful clean mix (as usual for Mikko). I even liked the tune, and that's not my style of music.
 
Brownmatthall said:
While i agree with this for most drive blocks, fuzz boxes are different bc they work almost like an extension of the guitars electronics. Bc of the way the axe's input works it acts like a buffer between your instrument and the fuzz and kills a part of the feel of them. Does that mean they're bad and unusable? Nah, but for the time being there's still something a teeny bit special about running your guitar into a fuzz before the axe and I can understand fully where op is coming from
Click to expand...


You can always change the input impedance setting in the Axe which does produce some changes in tone/feel.

Likewise, the sound of say a nice Ge fuzz (I personally don't find Si fuzz to respond the same to the vol pot) does indeed change tone/feel when you roll back a bit, and no, an Axe fuzz, at a given set of parameter values doesn't respond the same, BUT, you can dial in the sound of a fuzz pedal with the volume rolled backed and get the same cleaner/edge of breakup fuzz tones.

You just will need to set things up differently, such as use an X/Y setting on the drive block, so instead of just rolling the volume pot back, you roll the volume pot back, and ALSO hit the X/Y for the block. Its a less organic experience than just using the vol pot to shape the tone, but pretty much any specific tone you can get out of the fuzz you can get out of the Axe.

I dialed it in with my EQD Dream Crusher, the London Fuzz AVS Ge, a Red mini Dunlop FF, all great fuzz, especially the London, with its amazing clean-up, and I ended up selling them all because after enough tweaks I could get it where I couldn't tell them apart. The Axe is really that good, but it takes work sometimes

I totally get the advantages of plug and play with a pedal, not to mention the cool/fun factor of having pedals, buying pedals etc, and the my traditional playing experience they can provide, so I'm not saying the Axe replaces all that, or is "better", but I am saying that as far as the end tone goes, the Axe can match nearly any fuzz out there (sort of maybe some of the crazy stuff)
 
dgzieg said:
Holy Crap! I had my volume adjusted for "Clyde Wah and Analog Flanger" with X-Mann playing Blue Planet and this nearly ripped my head off! That's an impressively powerful clean mix (as usual for Mikko). I even liked the tune, and that's not my style of music.
Click to expand...
Oh wow thank you so much buddy! :)
 
lqdsnddist said:
You can always change the input impedance setting in the Axe which does produce some changes in tone/feel.

Likewise, the sound of say a nice Ge fuzz (I personally don't find Si fuzz to respond the same to the vol pot) does indeed change tone/feel when you roll back a bit, and no, an Axe fuzz, at a given set of parameter values doesn't respond the same, BUT, you can dial in the sound of a fuzz pedal with the volume rolled backed and get the same cleaner/edge of breakup fuzz tones.

You just will need to set things up differently, such as use an X/Y setting on the drive block, so instead of just rolling the volume pot back, you roll the volume pot back, and ALSO hit the X/Y for the block. Its a less organic experience than just using the vol pot to shape the tone, but pretty much any specific tone you can get out of the fuzz you can get out of the Axe.

I dialed it in with my EQD Dream Crusher, the London Fuzz AVS Ge, a Red mini Dunlop FF, all great fuzz, especially the London, with its amazing clean-up, and I ended up selling them all because after enough tweaks I could get it where I couldn't tell them apart. The Axe is really that good, but it takes work sometimes

I totally get the advantages of plug and play with a pedal, not to mention the cool/fun factor of having pedals, buying pedals etc, and the my traditional playing experience they can provide, so I'm not saying the Axe replaces all that, or is "better", but I am saying that as far as the end tone goes, the Axe can match nearly any fuzz out there (sort of maybe some of the crazy stuff)
Click to expand...
Any tips for dialing in that EQD fuzz? I've been lusting after it for a bit now...
 
Is there a diagram somewhere that makes it easy to understand the nature of why the fuzz and the electric guitar act as a unit? I mean, I guess its a simple statement, but WHY? WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY?
 
SoProg said:
If you wish to build a fuzz pedal from scratch, you must first create the universe...
Click to expand...
I knew the Axe FX II with such enhanced fuzz pedal modeling would effectively model the entire universe!

Maybe some cat like Cliff with figure all this out one day, by traveling to the center of the universe.

Oh, one did?! (see 02:50)



I have a tale to be told won't you listen tonight
Follow me into the core of the fountain of light
Try to imagine that hope (with all its necessary accompanying fuzzy/furry/purry cat logic) is our ship for the soul
 
Last edited:
I'm a bit late to the party having just updated last night. Thanks FA for another great firmware.

I have one question, though. The release notes say: "Note that existing presets will NOT be affected. Any existing preset will have its local Modeling Version (under the Adv tab of the Amp block) adjusted to its previous value." I take this to mean 3.xx and that every existing preset has to be "switched" manually to the latest modelling version.

In my case, I've gone through all of my "existing" presets, and the Modelling Version was set to "Latest", by default. Which is what I would personally expect. If I download a new firmware, I want to turn the unit on and experience it right away, rather than having to go through and switch every single preset individually.

Have I missed something?

BTW, I've got an AFX II Mk2; and is there an "Advanced Tab" in Axe Edit?
 
Chuck100 said:
I'm a bit late to the party having just updated last night. Thanks FA for another great firmware.

I have one question, though. The release notes say: "Note that existing presets will NOT be affected. Any existing preset will have its local Modeling Version (under the Adv tab of the Amp block) adjusted to its previous value." I take this to mean 3.xx and that every existing preset has to be "switched" manually to the latest modelling version.

In my case, I've gone through all of my "existing" presets, and the Modelling Version was set to "Latest", by default. Which is what I would personally expect. If I download a new firmware, I want to turn the unit on and experience it right away, rather than having to go through and switch every single preset individually.

Have I missed something?

BTW, I've got an AFX II Mk2; and is there an "Advanced Tab" in Axe Edit?
Click to expand...

This has been asked and answered a few times in this thread.

IIRC, Presets created before 3.x stay "Latest". Presets created after 3.x stay at the version they were created on.

I ended up with a mix of "Latest" and some versioned when I upgraded from 3.03 to 4.0.
 
jesussaddle said:
Is there a diagram somewhere that makes it easy to understand the nature of why the fuzz and the electric guitar act as a unit? I mean, I guess its a simple statement, but WHY? WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY?
Click to expand...

I can try. Here's the schematic:

fuzzfacepnpschematic.gif


The guitar input is on the left. The capacitor labelled 2.2uF (the capacitor symbol looks like "|(" ), is a filter that stops any DC current from flowing between the guitar and the pedal, but it doesn't do anything else. So you can consider the guitar to be directly connected to the base of transistor Q1, and the collector of Q2 (through a resistor). There's no isolation.

Compare this to a typical tube screamer circuit:

tsxtech.gif

This diagram has nice dotted lines around the sections of the circuit. Look at the section on the left labelled "Input Buffer". To the left of transistor Q1, you have the DC filter and a couple of resistors to provide input bias. Q1 is the buffer. Essentially, it isolates the rest of the circuit from the guitar (and visa versa). That transistor, Q1, allows current to flow from the battery (from the +9V at the top) into the rest of the circuit through through the line going to the section labelled "Clipping Amp". It works like an electronic volume knob, opening and closing as the current from the guitar pickup goes up and down. But none of the current from the guitar actually passes through Q1, it just controls how the current will flow through the other two pins of Q1.

So in the Tube Screamer, the guitar is exposed to the battery (through a resistor) and the gate of the input buffer transistor, both of which would have some impact on the guitar pickup, but that's it. The biggest impact of that is probably the input impedance of the buffer.

In the Fuzz Face, there is no buffer and guitar freely interacts with the battery and the amplified signal. There's a lot of feedback, and no doubt that the FF itself affects how the pickups behave. When you roll back the volume on the guitar, not only do you lessen the output from the guitar, but you also decrease the impact of the FF circuit on the pickup. The result is that the tone goes from being that blown out "phhhhtttt" sound to something that sounds kind of gritty, with some fuzz coming through when you dig in with the pick.

I don't know if that explains it clearly enough. At least I tried.
 
StickMan said:
I can try. Here's the schematic:

I don't know if that explains it clearly enough. At least I tried.
Click to expand...

Brilliant, I see what you mean. I suppose it could be emulated in a block, but not truly modeled, lacking the actual signals needed - If it can be done, it will still be a valuable emulation though; if it can have some of these dynamic behaviours simulated in some way, and I hope it can be done at some point. If I understand you it isn't only the changes via guitar volume pot that are desirable and elusive to emulate but the reaction to the behavior of pickups in real time, which can themselves be feeding back into the monitors/speakers.
 
Last edited:
Wondering, why would it not be possible in the Axe-FX to add a digital representation of the guitar volume pot to the FF circuit, which then can be adjusted in the preset. If that pot is controlled by an IA, you have that interaction with the volume pot even dynamic...
Just curious.
 
pitta said:
Wondering, why would it not be possible in the Axe-FX to add a digital representation of the guitar volume pot to the FF circuit, which then can be adjusted in the preset. If that pot is controlled by an IA, you even have that interaction with the volume pot dynamically...
Just curious.
Click to expand...
 
pitta said:
Wondering, why would it not be possible in the Axe-FX to add a digital representation of the guitar volume pot to the FF circuit, which then can be adjusted in the preset. If that pot is controlled by an IA, you have that interaction with the volume pot even dynamic...
Just curious.
Click to expand...

There's no reason that the effect of rolling back the volume pot on the guitar can't be analyzed, modeled and then mapped to a drive control in the AFX. But rolling back the volume on the guitar itself isn't going to ever work with a model.

I actually think it would be a really cool feature for the AFX.
 
pitta said:
Wondering, why would it not be possible in the Axe-FX to add a digital representation of the guitar volume pot to the FF circuit, which then can be adjusted in the preset. If that pot is controlled by an IA, you have that interaction with the volume pot even dynamic...
Just curious.
Click to expand...
The circuit in aggregate is loading the pickup, it is not just the volume pot. You still have a buffer sitting between them, the axe cannot feedback what is happening in the virtual FF back through the buffer to affect the pup behavior.
 
zenaxe said:
The circuit in aggregate is loading the pickup, it is not just the volume pot. You still have a buffer sitting between them, the axe cannot feedback what is happening in the virtual FF back through the buffer to affect the pup behavior.
Click to expand...

Let's say the drive block is first in the chain - there is no interaction with the pickup because the pickup was isolated from the drive block (pickup is buffered and converted to digital).
But... is there a way to model a pickup inside the drive block itself? If so then maybe what pitta envisions is possible.
 
zenaxe said:
The circuit in aggregate is loading the pickup, it is not just the volume pot. You still have a buffer sitting between them, the axe cannot feedback what is happening in the virtual FF back through the buffer to affect the pup behavior.
Click to expand...
Which is why I suggest emulating a pickup's behavior using software. I imagine a pickup's behavior depends on load to its various coils, and that even if not in any way authentic, it might be emulated usefully to some degree (understanding that there are a zillion configurations, but that the organic response of a limited number of pseudo pickups might be cool to have within a fuzz drive block unit - I know Cliff, this is probably ridiculous, but I'm clueless [and Grammar-less] about all this, and a boy or girl could have dreams can't they not?). As far as emulating the feedback between monitor and pickup, that's a whole different story, and that would be a fun thing to play around with as a sort of novice programmer - looking into some level of detection of the phenomena in some way, and creative ways to utilize the detected phenomena. The problem is; I think this feedback realm may also be where some really great stuff happens, and I imagine it is pretty intense stuff requiring a lot of firepower to emulate.

 
Last edited:
Hi Folks - I'm a struggling brand new Axe-FX II XL+ user, attempting to download latest firmware for the first time. I've connected the Axe FX via usb to Mac, backed it up successfully using Fractal Bot. However, when I try to download latest quantum 4.00 firmware I get a download error message displayed via fractal bot. That's all it says - any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom