one problem is people want things that are familiar to them, and don't take into consideration anyone else's experience.
i've seen the same person "complain" that a certain amp's controls don't act exactly like the real thing, and they have years of experience with the amp. later they tried an amp they didn't know and "complained" that the Mid knob didn't do anything. he was told that's how the real amp works. he then "complained" that it makes no sense to model an amp to match a Mid knob that doesn't do much, but instead they should make the Mid knob more useful with a bigger range.
so i mean which is it? make some of the amps exact, but not others?
i say this just to show that in discussion, it's easy to think your experience and knowledge is correct, and possibly "only" your knowledge is correct. that seeps into preferences and requests, because your knowledge is superior. that "ego" is in all of us, but some really push it out front, and others realize that there are other experiences and opinions to consider.
when i approach amp models, i know going in that Drive, Bass, Mid, and Treble are going to act differently on different amps. i have to experiment with these and see what they do per amp model. but i enjoy that other things like Master Volume are sort of similar between models, so it's one less thing i have to learn per all amp models. there are other parameters on both sides, but just mentioning those for now. actually, the Jazz120 model comes up often due to how the MV works in the model. people think it's broken, but it was modeled as is. i can't imagine that for all 280+ models.
i would guess that most people who have owned tube amps in their life have had maybe 1 - 3 of the amps modeled in the Axe. of course some may have had more. but with knowledge of only 3 amps, if every single control was exactly like the real amp, it'd be much more difficult to create tones because you'd have to learn even more of every single amp you want to try.
i'm not sure it's worth trading the user experience of adjusting the amps more easily for the absolute authenticity of every single amp model. having one amp at a MV of 1 and it's screaming vs another model that has to be at 10 to get a similar response might confuse people even more than they say they are now.
i think FAS has struck a nice balance of authenticity and ease of use as it is. sure, the small amount of people who have used Amp X and know the Master is up more than it is on the real thing might not like that, but the larger amount of people who've never used that amp might appreciate that the MV behavior is more predictable. those people who don't like the Master on that one model will probably try another model they've never used, and unknowingly appreciate the predictable nature of the MV and other parameters on that new amp.
customer service and product design is always a balancing act. some wishes never get granted because they are very specific and the addition of that option can just confuse the majority of users. i see people say the Axe is confusing because of all the Setup options and other things, but many of those options exist solely because of customer requests over the years. i think if a designer didn't care about their customers, there would be very few options, it'd be super straight-forward, and due to that, actually "easier to use" because of the lack of options.
i appreciate all the options we have now, as it's so flexible to fit in everyone's rigs. it's easy to forget just how different everyone's use-cases are. we've seen so many unique setups shared on the forum, and it's those options that allow those sorts of things.
but this gear is for many people to use, not just one set situation. keeping some of the ease-of-use qualities in the Amp block would be a good idea to me. i don't think the Axe ever set out to model every single aspect of every amp as is - honestly some amp designs are pretty bad, especially some of the classics we love.
i think the goal of the Axe is to sound good, offering a range of options and making some amps more friendly to dial in. it's a balancing act of accuracy and ease of use. i'm sure there are tons of studio tricks that need to be used to make certain amps sound like they do on the record, and that they don't sound that way live in the room without modification or post-processing. i personally wouldn't want those "flaws" in the modeling of the amp if a small tweak can make it respond in a more friendly and usable manner.
it's Cliff's design and product. if Cygnus has accurate MVs, then i'll appreciate the work done and learn how to use them. it's not the end of the world either way. but i feel Cliff has always maintained the integrity of the Amp being modeled, even if there are slight adjustments. the model always reminds me of the specifics of that real amp, and that's just something i don't get from other platforms.
