Axe-Fx III Firmware 25.00 Public Beta (Cygnus X-3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Somehow I always found it a bit more difficult to dial in Bogner Uber and Euro amps with Axe FX, compared to the real amps. Don't get me wrong I Iove my Axe FX, but Bogner models were never really easy on me. Are there some major changes with Bogner amps in this firmware?
 
TGM said:
Somehow I always found it a bit more difficult to dial in Bogner Uber and Euro amps with Axe FX, compared to the real amps. Don't get me wrong I Iove my Axe FX, but Bogner models were never really easy on me. Are there some major changes with Bogner amps in this firmware?
Click to expand...
I somewhat agree with the Uber, but not really with the Euro. The Euro models are a breeze to get great tones from (the trick is to crank the treble).

Afaik, there are major changes with every model because of thr new algorithm(s) but the Bogners haven’t had anything changed on top of that.
 
Saarang Narayan said:
I somewhat agree with the Uber, but not really with the Euro. The Euro models are a breeze to get great tones from (the trick is to crank the treble).

Afaik, there are major changes with every model because of thr new algorithm(s) but the Bogners haven’t had anything changed on top of that.
Click to expand...

Man, I'm with you on the Ecstasy models; I think they sound incredible, but I disagree about the Uberschall; that one is sooo easy to dial in for me. I think it's not an indication of accuracy though; it's just how the amps and your choice of IRs interact with your guitar and style. To me if you have the right IR and speaker impedance curve, you're 90% there.

And the right IR might be completely unintuitive too. My favorite for high gain right now is a 57 and a 1973 misaligned in front of the Blues Jr cab. If I set those mics misaligned just right with the right levels, the amp settings are just different flavors of awesomeness.
 
To be clear, my only measure of accuracy is the testimonials I've read countless times from owners of the real amps. I think Cliff's point about the age of components and proper servicing is one of the most important things. I would wonder about this in every modeler I ever played through when it sounded weird or responded weirdly. I would always think, it sounds like an amp that has got to be looked at by a tech. One notable exception was the Kazrog stuff, which always had a great feel to me. But Fractal gear was the only thing I'd ever find where so many owners had done A/B comparisons with the real thing, and on top of that, actually sold their gear because the models were that good.

Because in the end, even if an amp is something I can't dial in because it fights my guitar, that of course has nothing to do with accuracy. I love that I can trust that the models are measured, that every idiosyncratic aspect, like fizz and ghost notes, are reproduced accurately, and that you know you may as well have the real amp in front of your face. With that knowledge, I find it easy just to let go and tweak with my ears.

That said, I always take seriously when someone who knows a real amp posts that something is off in a model. Cliff has found errors before, from typos in under the hood values to incorrect assumptions (like the John Petrucci shred button), but they always get fixed in the end.
 
TGM said:
Somehow I always found it a bit more difficult to dial in Bogner Uber and Euro amps with Axe FX, compared to the real amps. Don't get me wrong I Iove my Axe FX, but Bogner models were never really easy on me. Are there some major changes with Bogner amps in this firmware?
Click to expand...
I know there was recent discussion on this one
The Bogner XTC in the box is a 20th anniversary so if you own the 101b that’s a very different voicing and usually the XTC people think of
The second part is Reinhold Bogner uses different tapers on the treble and pres pots so you really have to crank those up or the amp models just like the real amps will come off as dark

I am hoping one day there may be a model of the good old 90s XTC as it is a different flavor.
 
State of Epicicity said:
Man, I'm with you on the Ecstasy models; I think they sound incredible, but I disagree about the Uberschall; that one is sooo easy to dial in for me. I think it's not an indication of accuracy though; it's just how the amps and your choice of IRs interact with your guitar and style. To me if you have the right IR and speaker impedance curve, you're 90% there.

And the right IR might be completely unintuitive too. My favorite for high gain right now is a 57 and a 1973 misaligned in front of the Blues Jr cab. If I set those mics misaligned just right with the right levels, the amp settings are just different flavors of awesomeness.
Click to expand...
For sure! I didn’t mean to imply that the accuracy is off. It’s just a harder beast to tame is all. My go-to IRs (V30/Greenbacks/Blackbacks/DV77) don’t quite do it for me with the Uber. I’ll give more unconventional options a go; thanks for the tip!
 
Saarang Narayan said:
For sure! I didn’t mean to imply that the accuracy is off. It’s just a harder beast to tame is all. My go-to IRs (V30/Greenbacks/Blackbacks/DV77) don’t quite do it for me with the Uber. I’ll give more unconventional options a go; thanks for the tip!
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't take it that way. I guess in this case I meant that the real amp would probably be the exact same pain in the ass to get a good tone out of, just that the amp itself probably doesn't play well with your guitar and you're style.

And with cabs it's of course the biggest son of a bitch in the real world, because you have limited options, and plugging an Uberschall into a Blues Jr cab would result in bad things haha. Using weird ass combinations is a workaround for me in a recording sense, because, by using midrangey cabs I end up not needing low cuts on the mics and by misaligning mics I end up not needing high cuts.
 
FractalAudio said:
My experience does not match yours. We actually measure the amps and compare them to the models. The gain of an amp is an easily measured quantity and the models match the gains of our reference amps.

Now, our reference amps are always serviced before matching. Any resistors that are out of tolerance are replaced. Capacitors are replaced as needed and new tubes installed.

Old amps almost invariably have less gain than a freshly serviced amp. Tubes lose gain as they age. Resistors tend to increase in value as they age but this doesn't change the gain as much as the reduction in tube gain.

But if you feel differently please provide quantitative data to back up your assertions.
Click to expand...
This makes perfect sense. All my vintage amps are broken in and have a different tone and breakup than the ones I get serviced and new tubes. I find myself not servicing them unless they really need it, because I like the broken in sound. The old vintage speakers make a difference as well.
 
Re: the Bogners, I have had an easy time dialing in the Uber and Shiva models to sound very close to my amps.

As far as the XTC goes I have a 20th 101A (6L6) and a 101B. I’ve had a few 101B’s over the years and played some of my buddies B’s as well in different rooms and they’ve been elusive for me in the Axe regardless of power tube type settings etc…, I could never quite get them as ‘chewy’ as what I was used to.

I did spend a lot of time experimenting with cabs and advanced settings but could never quite get there…then I got distracted by the mountain of killer amp models in this box and moved on.

Now I am not a pro player or master preset builder so YMMV but having bought my Axe FX3 right before Cygnus 1, every major software revision seems to narrow the ‘gap’ between the XTC model and my amps and experience with them through the years.

When I tried this beta, the first thing that jumped out was more chewiness so I fired up a Euro model and built a preset with a basic V30 4x12 and it’s the closest it’s ever been…for me. I’ve always been able to dial in fantastic tones with that model but they were never ‘chewy’ enough till Cygnus X-3.
 
HiGainYan said:
Re: the Bogners, I have had an easy time dialing in the Uber and Shiva models to sound very close to my amps.

As far as the XTC goes I have a 20th 101A (6L6) and a 101B. I’ve had a few 101B’s over the years and played some of my buddies B’s as well in different rooms and they’ve been elusive for me in the Axe regardless of power tube type settings etc…, I could never quite get them as ‘chewy’ as what I was used to.

I did spend a lot of time experimenting with cabs and advanced settings but could never quite get there…then I got distracted by the mountain of killer amp models in this box and moved on.

Now I am not a pro player or master preset builder so YMMV but having bought my Axe FX3 right before Cygnus 1, every major software revision seems to narrow the ‘gap’ between the XTC model and my amps and experience with them through the years.

When I tried this beta, the first thing that jumped out was more chewiness so I fired up a Euro model and built a preset with a basic V30 4x12 and it’s the closest it’s ever been…for me. I’ve always been able to dial in fantastic tones with that model but they were never ‘chewy’ enough till Cygnus X-3.
Click to expand...

Don't the Ecstasy's have a bunch of switches for different settings? I haven't paid attention to which switch settings you'd need to equal the real amp, and I think that's a huge factor. I think the Excursion, e.g., is a huge one, and, rather than the model replicating that exactly in the form of three set settings, you have to turn the Depth knob until it sounds right to you. I could be wrong on this, but I think this might be why it feels different to the real thing, aside of course from normal pot variance.
 
MirrorProfiles said:
Fractal Uberschall is amazing and very accurate to the real thing. Can be a weird amp to dial in if you aren’t used to it though, mid is more like treble, treble is like presence and presence is like midrange.
Click to expand...
from the Bogner website:
1712073918511.png

1712073937378.png

My question about the Fractal would be, are the controls emulated the same way as depicted above?
 
State of Epicicity said:
Don't the Ecstasy's have a bunch of switches for different settings? I haven't paid attention to which switch settings you'd need to equal the real amp, and I think that's a huge factor. I think the Excursion, e.g., is a huge one, and, rather than the model replicating that exactly in the form of three set settings, you have to turn the Depth knob until it sounds right to you. I could be wrong on this, but I think this might be why it feels different to the real thing, aside of course from normal pot variance.
Click to expand...
exactly, the depth knob mimics the 3 position excursion switch. In the past, no amount of tweaking got me ‘there’ whereas now even at default settings it feels much closer to what I expect. Everything feels chewier to me!
 
HiGainYan said:
Re: the Bogners, I have had an easy time dialing in the Uber and Shiva models to sound very close to my amps.

As far as the XTC goes I have a 20th 101A (6L6) and a 101B. I’ve had a few 101B’s over the years and played some of my buddies B’s as well in different rooms and they’ve been elusive for me in the Axe regardless of power tube type settings etc…, I could never quite get them as ‘chewy’ as what I was used to.

I did spend a lot of time experimenting with cabs and advanced settings but could never quite get there…then I got distracted by the mountain of killer amp models in this box and moved on.

Now I am not a pro player or master preset builder so YMMV but having bought my Axe FX3 right before Cygnus 1, every major software revision seems to narrow the ‘gap’ between the XTC model and my amps and experience with them through the years.

When I tried this beta, the first thing that jumped out was more chewiness so I fired up a Euro model and built a preset with a basic V30 4x12 and it’s the closest it’s ever been…for me. I’ve always been able to dial in fantastic tones with that model but they were never ‘chewy’ enough till Cygnus X-3.
Click to expand...
That’s really cool to Hear
In the real world the XTC 101b Red channel with a boost is probably my favourite rock / modern rock sounds and lead sounds I have played , for the reason you mention , the feel
It’s addictive and it has almost a bounce on the low strings it’s not overly tight but with a boost it’s easily tight enough and the mids sound huge plus the string seperation and clarity , it’s just a great sounding amp
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom