Axe-Fx II "Quantum" Rev 8.00 Public Beta

Status
Not open for further replies.
First time ever I'm rolling back to a prior firmware from this Beta. I like what is happening on some amps, like the Ford ODS; less congested sounding, and the presence and treble controls interact really nicely.

But I have one preset I use a lot based on the Tweed Deluxe. Where before it sounded killer on Eagles tunes, now it sounds like there is a piece of paper on the speaker cone, or a torn cone. Buzz over the top of everything that fades pretty quickly, leaving the tone that I was after.

I like where you're going with this, but I think there are some bugs to iron out before I'm ready.

I rolled back yesterday after initially not liking it, but after putting in some work on my patches they sound pretty amazing with this update. I think this update more than most might require an amp block reset.
 
The micro-delay in the cab block is not intended to be used as a delay effect but to change the voice of the mix of two IRs.
When you sum two identical signals one of which is delayed by a tiny amount you get comb-filtering and the delay time determines in which points of the frequency spectrum peaks and notches will be. Having a finer resolution for this is surely a useful thing because those peaks and notches change even with a small change in the delay time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comb_filter
I wanted to reply but couldn't communicate it as technically precise as this! Thanks DLC86!
 
Sometimes it feels like Cliff's key to customer loyalty besides rapid update releases is just making amps a bit bassy on one update an then making them a bit more trebly on the next, so people will keep on marveling at the changes from the previous update, perhaps made manifest by whatever tweaks they have to make to their presets. "Oh this one brightens up the mud, oh, this one sounds so much fuller and not tinny". Or "Cliff made a parameter I never thought about more accurate, he's so on it, it's so much better". Heresy, you say? It might be.

Wow! Good weed out there!!! Who's your pusher?! Snoopy Dogg???
 
Just spent my whole weekend trying to update all of my Axe-Fx and AX8 presets for 7.02. (The changes to the Comp block did the most damage to my stuff)............. and Beta Q8 drops....:eek: The AX8 never even got to see an official Q7.02....:p
I wish I could update my 500+ Axe-Fx presets and almost 500 AX8 presets in just a week-end :p I need several weeks ! :D Fortunately I was already in 7.02 and Q8 doesn't seems to affect them

ODS-100 Clean sounds fine here. In fact it sounds amazing. Maybe the best clean model IMO. You have to really crank the MV though (just like the real amp).
Agree, definitely one of my favorite amps for cleans !
 
Thats what jakbar stated in the thread I posted...

"I think it was decided that setting the level so the meter goes to 6db for Brit speakers and 3db for USA speakers.".

Personally, I have no idea how to dial motor drive and the other parameters. Somehow I totally missed any discussion about it. I'm totally lost. I don't even know what it does, why we need it and why it's in the Axe!

Have a look at this thread.
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/my-first-steps-and-obstacles-with-motor-drive.126403/
I posted my take on the motor drive parameter. Mind you, this is for AX8 but might still help you some.
 
I understand what you are saying from the end result, but the release notes are usually pretty good at explaining the "why" for a given update. You don't even really need to understand electronics or physics to get the overarching objective that drives most of these changes. It's not "I added some bass or treble to the system". That might be a symptom of the change, but what changed is almost always the manner in which the characteristics of a component is measured and then translated into code. The degree of accuracy to which this is done is what makes the AxeFX unique.

You just have to remember that what makes a guitar amplifier magic is the manner in which it completely screws up the signal coming out of the guitar. They are not good "amplifiers" from a strict definition of the word. If they were it would just be an exact copy of your raw guitar signal at a much louder level. Capturing the manner in which the signal is changed (distorted) from the original is not just a matter of taking the input and comparing it to the output. If it were you could write some kind of code to simulate that, but that would be a static representation (i.e. no consideration for variation in frequency, level, etc). The accuracy of the modeling is based on how realistically/exacting you can simulate every single component individually taking into account how they impact each other within a circuit. None of these components are static or linear; they break down as they heat up, they attenuate some frequencies, they add some resonant frequencies, they clip, etc.

It's the defining of the properties and characteristics of a resistor, a capacitor, a transformer, a piece of wire, etc to simulate the operation of the entire circuit that makes the difference here. The degree of accuracy of how each component's characteristic is defined is based on the manner in which the measurements are made. The degree of accuracy of each is what determines the quality (level of exactness) of the end result.

So basically you could just look at the end result as what was done, but that's not what was specifically done. The majority of release notes indicate changes in the way that a component was measured. If this data was readily available to FAS from the beginning then I'm sure that it would have been used in the initial release and we would have far less updates, but these are physical/analog components that have non-linear properties and he's basically creating new ways to capture those in a variety of scenarios on a continuous basis. I can imagine that some company out there has done a lot of this in some big lab with a lot of engineers and scientists already for some purpose, but I imagine that it would be for internal use only and be guarded.

I'm not trying to be defensive or anything like that. I understand your point. I'm just sharing my perspective and if it's of no use then that is fine. It's not our job as the customers to really care about the process; it's to use the product to do what we need....some of us just like getting a little peek behind the curtain and appreciate the process and amount of work that goes into getting to that final result so some of us probably get a bit defensive about it. Not many companies are as transparent about what it is doing in terms of development nor are they as enthusiastic about sharing incremental changes/discoveries with it's customers as FAS is. As a matter of fact I don't know any other company that is like this. It's one of the things that I enjoy about being a FAS customer....that doesn't mean that everyone else feels the same way as I do. Some people just like to use the thing for what it's intended. ;)

You know, the end goal for all of us is to have a product that can recreate all of those amps and stuff as realistically and accurately as possible. I see every update as a step closer to achieving that.

This precisely ⬆︎⬆︎⬆︎
 
My main gigging tones are ODS Clean 100-based now. I'm updating tonight. Appreciate the early heads up and I'll let you know how it goes for me.

Edit: no problem tweaking post-update on the ODS Clean 100. I ended up dropping back input drive and bumping up master volume. Some very slight tweaks to BMT and the presence and everything was sounding right again.

Yeah, in some cases a bit of tweaking may be required, just basic controls.

Re-selecting amps blocks does not seem to be necessary, provided that this has already been done after updating to 7.xx.
 
Yeah, in some cases a bit of tweaking may be required, just basic controls.

Re-selecting amps blocks does not seem to be necessary, provided that this has already been done after updating to 7.xx.
Do you still have issues with those amps @yek or not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom