Axe-Fx III Firmware Release Version 12.10

What about a 7 or more stringed guitar....
:p
So an AxeFX 21 + all crammed into a 1 rack space and no fan, but big screen that I can shut off when my eyes hurt.
Then I'd like the option to do the 4 cable method for all that, just in case but xlr and all other I/O still fit into one rack space ...
Axe Edit 21, how many blocks, I want it all work on an iPad 2?
This post is sent in humor and not meant to upset anyone.
no, your needs are totally unimportant. it’s much more important that i want to daisy chain 12 axefx 21+ together with bluetooth and zero latency because my windows 17 computer can’t have multiple audio interfaces

😜
 
I realise it's your forum and your rules, but do you really have to respond to people in that manner? There are a number of ways of saying things far more constructively. All it does is really make me want to walk away from a company like that, regardless of how good a product is
Stop being such a crybaby, crybaby! 😁😉

If you've ever read one of Cliffs rants, then you'd know it's all in good fun.
 
I second that motion

It i not sy-fy. This breakout cable would do.

The only thing we need is convince Cliff to allow 6 mono AMP block instances inside the Axe-FX III :cool:

https://www.separate-strings.co.uk/breakout cables and more.html
wpa0ce33e5_01_06.jpg

The problem with this approach is that you are starting at an uphill battle. The fundamental tone of 13-pin equipped guitars is canned ass. It's either the crappy GK pickup or a piezo signal. The CycFi stuff is much better, you are starting with a fundamentally good tone.

Another thing about hex guitar stuff, if you are trying to get a somehow more refined classic guitar tone you are going to be disappointed. As soon as you separate things, you're changing how everything reacts. If you're just pitch-shifting or adding a little gain/eq and then merging the strings for normal processing then maybe it's not too different. But if you have separate drive/amp/cab blocks for each string, the result is going to be more like an organ or analog synthesizer. For me, this stuff is about getting new sounds out of the guitar.[/QUOTE]
 
Stop being such a crybaby, crybaby! 😁😉

If you've ever read one of Cliffs rants, then you'd know it's all in good fun.
I was trying to find a polite way to say something along those lines, but that nails it.

Cliff is an ordinary guy with the mind of a creative genius in both music and technology. Don't expect him to sugarcoat things when someone is asking his vision to sound "less like a real amp". Nobody is perfect and I'd rather have a creative genius with a sense of humor interacting on the forum than some stuffy CEO that is trying to suck up to everyone with buzzwords they don't even know the meaning of.
 
Well you have two options:
  • Live with it.
  • Use a different product.

If you think I'm going to change the modeling that is considered the world's best for one person you're nuts.
Well Cliff, I almost couldn't tell if you are joking or being serious... Thank you for acknowledging the issue though :)

Maybe this excessive distortion is a common problem for amp modeling that is hard to get right...?

I don't think this is merely about being more like real amps, Axe III have so many features one can NOT do on real amps. If such distortion is not desirable musically, perhaps provides an option/knob to minimize it could be another example that modeling shows its advantage than the real tube amp ;-)
 
perhaps provides an option/knob to minimize it

I get the sentiment, but this doesn't make sense generally given the design philosophy of the Axe. The unique sound and response of particular amps is largely due to nonlinear 'artifacts' due to specific circuit topologies and dynamic internal interactions. Modeling these is complex and you can't just turn down one artifact w/o affecting a lot of other things. The amp would stop being that amp model and/or would approach a more generic sound or different model.

There are 250+ amp models, including idealized FAS ones (as suggested by @flying_walrus).
 
I realise it's your forum and your rules, but do you really have to respond to people in that manner? There are a number of ways of saying things far more constructively. All it does is really make me want to walk away from a company like that, regardless of how good a product is
Wow! No time for the long response this begs for. Maybe if you hang out here long enough,
you'd get it!
 
I tested this with 12.09 and I hear the same heavy crossover distortion... Weirdly, it only happens when playing low E open string and high E string at 3rd fret together... Playing high E string by itself or with any other (string, fret) sounds fine...

I have no idea why I didn't notice this before, here is a short recording of it, please tell me you guys hear what I am hearing. The following recording uses the scene 2 of the preset above with Plexi 50 Jump:


Were you using the bridge or neck pickup? Here's your preset (scene 2) with the bridge pickup of my LP:



You must've been using a custom cab, because the cab slot is empty.
 
Were you using the bridge or neck pickup? Here's your preset (scene 2) with the bridge pickup of my LP:



You must've been using a custom cab, because the cab slot is empty.

Thank you @Jason Scott for trying it out, really appreciate it!

I used my tele neck pickup in the previous recording, and yes I used my own IR, but I tried with one of the factory IR, I hear the same thing.

However, interestingly, it seems the dissonant distortion in your recording is a bit less prominent, likely due to your high end frequency dominated the low end...
 
If such distortion is not desirable musically, perhaps provides an option/knob to minimize it could be another example that modeling shows its advantage than the real tube amp ;-)

Not how it works. Models are virtual representations of real amps. The virtual components act just their "real" counterparts. Everything interacts. There's no such thing as a simple "provide an option/knob" ...
 
interestingly, it seems the dissonant distortion in your recording is a bit less prominent, likely due to your high end frequency dominated the low end...

I recorded another sample with a low pass filter set to 625 Hz and it doesn't seem much more prominent to my ears. Certainly not close to what I'm hearing in your recording.

 
Not how it works. Models are virtual representations of real amps. The virtual components act just their "real" counterparts. Everything interacts. There's no such thing as a simple "provide an option/knob" ...
The models also have many advanced parameters available that could potentially reduce or eliminate this behavior. Maybe a better response would have been info about which parameter(s) could be adjusted to accomplish this rather than pick another amp or use another product.
 
I recorded another sample with a low pass filter set to 625 Hz and it doesn't seem much more prominent to my ears. Certainly not close to what I'm hearing in your recording.


Yeah, Interesting, thank you! After filtering out the low end, it becomes less prominent :)
 
The models also have many advanced parameters available that could potentially reduce or eliminate this behavior. Maybe a better response would have been info about which parameter(s) could be adjusted to accomplish this rather than pick another amp or use another product.
I certainly tried tuning/sweeping every knob in the amp block, however no luck so far...
 
Anyone else thinks Cliff deserves a huge pat on the back and high five for this one? I mean, the modeling is now so much like a real amp people are complaining about the artifacts of the imperfections of the analog circuitry and tubes that he models. That says a LOT about his work!

I think we all need to raise a glass of our favorite adult beverage in triubute to the man. (Mine is water since I can drink as much as I want and still act like an adult if I choose to do so, which is a choice I don't often make.)
 
Yeah, Interesting, thank you! After filtering out the low end, it becomes less prominent :)

The filter in the last sample I posted was a high cut filter; it filters out the high end. If excessive high frequency content were the culprit, the effect you're referring to should've been much more prominent in that sample, in my opinion, because I basically removed all of the high end. However, despite having removed all of the high end, the effect still sounded less prominent than what I'm hearing in your sample.
 

I noticed when I switched from 12.08 to 12.09 my preset's tone changed, particularly in the 660hz+/- range. I have my input EQ bumped around this range and really loved the tone and feel. When I upgraded to 12.09 & 12.10 I had to adjust the EQ bump to around 772hz because the tone was muddy. Adjusting the eq 'bump' cleaned it up and does get good articulation, but there was some mojo happening with my settings on v. 12.08.

I caught this post and swapped from EL34 to 6CA7 and tried the eq input back at 660ish and it's cleaner, possibly behaving closer to what I was experiencing in 12.08. I only had about 10 minutes to play but was wondering if maybe I'm on to something. Of course my ears guide but man, the feel I had going on was so inspiring. I really hope I've found the grail again. I'll know once I get some time to test it. Just wondering if there is a known tonal difference between the two.
 
Back
Top Bottom