Axe-Fx III 16.00 Beta 5 "Cygnus" Firmware - Public Beta #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joe Bfstplk said:
Thanks! Exciting is not the exact word I'd use, as it is a move into a 55+ community, but with the WFH thing, being close-ish to the office stopped having value, and the market prices are shooting up at the old place, so it looked like a good time to do a 'Kenny Rogers', and walk away - with a pile of the casino's money....
Click to expand...
I've lived in a 55+ community for 14 years (don't even try to guess my age) and I kinda like it. Grandkids come over for a visit, but they don't live here. The neighborhood looks beautiful, and nobody parks their cars or trucks on the lawn, only in a garage or driveway. "Hey you, GET OFFA MY LAWN!!" Haha
 
Mark Al said:
In this non-scientific comparison, I have both master volume set around 4 on the dial, but I will try to dial it down on Axe III later and see.

Don't get me wrong, the distortion character of the beta sounds much closer to the Mark V now, e.g. it's chunkier, larger-grained, for lack of better words, and start to have some singing quality in it.

On the other hand, regarding dynamics, that is likely not the target/goal of this beta...? I do feel Mark V reacts more dynamically (again via cab clone), increasing Input Dynamic control on Axe from 0 to 2 helps but not quite the same, e.g. the resulting increased dynamic in Axe seems to reacts a bit slower....
Click to expand...
just for purpose of experiment
change the power tubes to EL84
and play a bit with the tranformer match to simulate a smaller power section like a 40 watt
 
Dimi84 said:
When trying to emulate commercial kemper profiles with axe fx, as well as emulating my amps, all units at hand, getting the amp sim master right was one of the most important factors.

What I found out quickly (well, can't be 100 percent certain obviously) was how low the master vol was on the amps people were profiling, much of the time. Emulating a few VH4 profiles, for example, meant setting amp sim master vol down to darn 1.5/10 or so.

And having some similar amps right there I made detailed tests, trying to factor in some taper differences. Part of what made me (and makes) use fractal most of the time is the master section.

It's very powerful. Extremely so. Can't be understated imo. It's part of what allows me to save time when dialing in tones compared to many other units, but also ultimately behaves considerably closer to what I've learned to expect from my amps.
Click to expand...

Another thing to consider is that many of those amps had two volumes on their output sections. A channel volume and a global/master/output volume. If the amp had both at 5 (attenuating x% of the signal each), then the combined result is attenuating x^2% of the signal before the power amp. So they may well have had both knobs on 3, but you need 1.5 to match them. This all depends how the deleted pot is set inside of your amp sim in question.

Mark Al said:
In this non-scientific comparison, I have both master volume set around 4 on the dial, but I will try to dial it down on Axe III later and see.

Don't get me wrong, the distortion character of the beta sounds much closer to the Mark V now, e.g. it's chunkier, larger-grained, for lack of better words, and start to have some singing quality in it.

On the other hand, regarding dynamics, that is likely not the target/goal of this beta...? I do feel Mark V reacts more dynamically (again via cab clone), increasing Input Dynamic control on Axe from 0 to 2 helps but not quite the same, e.g. the resulting increased dynamic in Axe seems to reacts a bit slower....
Click to expand...

The Mark V 35 has both a channel master and an output control. The axe doesn't have one of them, so the effect both setting both to 4 might not match. Both knobs attentuating the signal some might equate to you needing the knob much lower on the Axe even with the authentic taper, depending if the deleted pot is being treated like it's at 1, 5, 10, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom