Axe-Fx III Firmware 22.00 Public Beta (Beta 6)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joshua_L said:
I have to gig with in ears, i don’t have the choice, I hate that, I do really hate that, I hate those piercing flat highs.
I always have to put more body to the tone to not have the feeling of playing through a 2 inches speaker.
Irs are great but they are still not close as an isolated recorded guitar track.
It still lacks depth, still not as 3D as a single recorded take. It’s close but still flat to my ears.

As I’m new to fractal, I have to say I’m really blown away by the tones, but i still miss something (maybe fullres but I’m on the fm3 so)

And as I’m tweaking the tones for this year tour, I watch and read a lot about how to tweak the fractal.
2 days ago I watched a video of cooper Carter explaining his gig preset. And man when he played his Friedman scene, there was a lot of bass. So I think I depends on each player choice.

I decided to put more body and bass to my presets and let our foh guy do his job.
Click to expand...
What in ear monitors are you using?
What in ear system are you using?
Which board are you using?
Are you getting your own mix?
 
My name is mud said:
In a mix yes, but when you play alone with that tone brrr
Click to expand...
It would depend on how you are used to hear your guitar and how the treble and high mids hits you, though.
I always try to find cutting ir's to match my amps/cabs in front of me. And i like 57's :eek: (depends on position, ofc)
With my AXII i think i used ir #103 mixed with Pete Thorns ir, which gave it more cut. Now i usually use #148 (fac2?) and the GB fullres.

In front of a Full stack = lots of treble in the face
Standing within 1 m of a Half stack = most treble hits your bumpibum. (esp if you have a straight cab)
Standing close to a non-tilted combo = most/all treble hits below your knee
Never played a real amp = the sound of recorded guitar

Nothing conclusive here can be said though, as moving 30 cm in any direction changes the sound, just like for a mic. :)
 
Thenewexhibit said:
For sure! Even doing a little high cut can help to not interfere with cymbals/synths etc sometimes too! It’s just interesting that some have experienced not enough low end, but I’ve noticed the opposite and find there to be plenty, so it’s interesting how we hear things! The Lord blow my mind with how we perceive frequencies!
Click to expand...
It seems like many here may see this from a recording engineers view. Just look from a different perspective:

Some users don't record and just play/practice. Those players do not have the same criteria as for a recording.
They may not care about cut in the mix, as there may never be a bass or a kick drum involved. ;)
 
The term AITR is subjective. What some people are describing is an amp that is too powerful for the room. A Twin Reverb in a very large venue does not sound the same as in your basement. I started performing when FOH was a PA for vocals. Having the right amp was important. That’s why having a Twin and Deluxe was important. Sometimes the Deluxe was too powerful as well, so then came the Princeton, lol. OD pedals came, and we were able to use the same amp for small or large venues. An amp right for the venue is beautiful. But Fractal now provides any amp for any venue. It has multiple Outs. In my use-case, one Out goes to FOH and another goes to a SS amp and guitar cab behind me, mostly just for a bit of stage volume. These new dynacabs are (for me) the missing link. The cab block sounds great. Everything is better. I only need two more things:
1. The final v22 release with a Super Reverb dynacab.
2. The future eureka-moment results from Cliff Chase, giving me something that I didn’t know I needed.
 
Hi guys, stupid question: where is the "Proximity" level knob in DynaCab? just see the "Proximity Freq".
Is the "Proximity" equivalent to "Distance" (DIstance at 0 is Proximity maxed out ?) ?
 
FractalAudio said:
We actually used six mics during the captures, two of each type. I picked one from each type that I thought sounded best. The dynamic is an SM57 (naturally). I actually prefer the SM7 captures we made but given how iconic the 57 is on guitar cabs I went with that instead.
Click to expand...

Dude, I think you should buck tradition here. 🙂 You are not even naming the ribbon and condenser mics you used, so why aquiese to the dynamic you liked less when you originally were not going to name them at all, especially when you preach the wise gospel of ears not eyes? Perhaps you could, if there's room, offer Dynamic 1 (SM57) and Dynamic 2 (SM7)? Probably if you included only the SM7 and didn't say what it was, few would think twice about it!

I've always thought IRs made with SM7s sounded way cooler, even though SM57s are ubiquitous.
 
State of Epicicity said:
Dude, I think you should buck tradition here. 🙂 You are not even naming the ribbon and condenser mics you used, so why aquiese to the dynamic you liked less when you originally were not going to name them at all, especially when you preach the wise gospel of ears not eyes? Perhaps you could, if there's room, offer Dynamic 1 (SM57) and Dynamic 2 (SM7)? Probably if you included only the SM7 and didn't say what it was, few would think twice about it!

I've always thought IRs made with SM7s sounded way cooler, even though SM57s are ubiquitous.
Click to expand...
Because while the SM57 is harsh on its own that extra brightness is useful when blending mics.

Yes, I prefer the SM7 on its own but the SM57 is ubiquitous in studios when blending two or more mics.

This is not an absolute science. It's subjective and for every person who yells they want the SM7 an equal number, or more, would complain that they want an SM57. There is not room for both.

The beta testers haver an alternate version of the Dyna-Cab data with the SM7 instead of the 57. I'm still awaiting more feedback.
 
FractalAudio said:
Because while the SM57 is harsh on its own that extra brightness is useful when blending mics.

Yes, I prefer the SM7 on its own but the SM57 is ubiquitous in studios when blending two or more mics.

This is not an absolute science. It's subjective and for every person who yells they want the SM7 an equal number, or more, would complain that they want an SM57. There is not room for both.

The beta testers haver an alternate version of the Dyna-Cab data with the SM7 instead of the 57. I'm still awaiting more feedback.
Click to expand...
Even for mk2 users ?
 
FractalAudio said:
Because while the SM57 is harsh on its own that extra brightness is useful when blending mics.

Yes, I prefer the SM7 on its own but the SM57 is ubiquitous in studios when blending two or more mics.

This is not an absolute science. It's subjective and for every person who yells they want the SM7 an equal number, or more, would complain that they want an SM57. There is not room for both.

The beta testers haver an alternate version of the Dyna-Cab data with the SM7 instead of the 57. I'm still awaiting more feedback.
Click to expand...
So, basically three mics are what we going to get until there’s an Axe IV if I understand correct (since you’re mentioning there’s no room for both types of dynamic and therefore no other mics i guess)?
 
This may have been answered already, there are a lot of pages, but will Dyna Cab be added to Cab Lab? Also can you export your mixes to a new IR?
 
Steven Persson said:
So, basically three mics are what we going to get until there’s an Axe IV if I understand correct (since you’re mentioning there’s no room for both types of dynamic and therefore no other mics i guess)?
Click to expand...

Pure conjecture, but I'm guessing since Cliff wrote that IR creators can rent his equipment and software to create their own Dyna Cabs, there's got to be space for more cabs to fit, but perhaps just not in the factory cab selection, maybe only in the user cab section, if there's room, unless third party Dyna Cabs will only be an Axe-FX IV feature. Who knows? And if that happens, maybe we'll be able to buy Fractal Dyna Cabs like we can with the Fractal IR packs that are available for purchase. In that case, maybe you can buy the SM7 captures and load them at will in the user cab section. Just conjecture, like I said.
 
State of Epicicity said:
Pure conjecture, but I'm guessing since Cliff wrote that IR creators can rent his equipment and software to create their own Dyna Cabs, there's got to be space for more cabs to fit, but perhaps just not in the factory cab selection, maybe only in the user cab section, if there's room, unless third party Dyna Cabs will only be an Axe-FX IV feature. Who knows? And if that happens, maybe we'll be able to buy Fractal Dyna Cabs like we can with the Fractal IR packs that are available for purchase. In that case, maybe you can buy the SM7 captures and load them at will in the user cab section. Just conjecture, like I said.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. Would be cool though if there could be a regular IR firmware and a Dyna Cab firmware meaning that if you want more mics and cabs in the Dyna Cab format you as a user have to make a choice and remove the regular IR:s to make space for the Dyna Cabs. Also as transitioning method as I guess with Dyna Cabs we’re moving further and further away from regular IR:s as time goes on.
 
FractalAudio said:
Because while the SM57 is harsh on its own that extra brightness is useful when blending mics.

Yes, I prefer the SM7 on its own but the SM57 is ubiquitous in studios when blending two or more mics.

This is not an absolute science. It's subjective and for every person who yells they want the SM7 an equal number, or more, would complain that they want an SM57. There is not room for both.

The beta testers haver an alternate version of the Dyna-Cab data with the SM7 instead of the 57. I'm still awaiting more feedback.
Click to expand...
SM57 is working great for me. Got a bunch of old school tones that are great. Maybe my ears suck 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom