Axe-Fx III Firmware Release Version 16.01 Beta 1 Public Beta

I just installed firmware 16.01 beta tonight direct from 15.01. I also installed Axe Edit 1.08.13. I had just been playing through 15.01 so the sound was fresh in my mind. After installing 16.01 beta I tried my first 40 presets, mainly presets based on Marshalls, Friedmans, Fenders, Vox, and Matchless. I was shocked. Literally nothing sounded good or even useable. I tried resetting the amps on a few patches and rebuilding them, but gave up and went back to 15.01 for now. 16.01 beta sounds like I put my hands over my ears and cranked up the bass on every preset.

Do I need to go back to Axe Edit 1.08.11 for it to work right with firmware 15.01. or will the newest version of Axe Edit still work fine on 15.01?
Maybe try this if you have backed-up your 15.01 presets : https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/tutorial-move-your-presets-from-15-01-to-16-01.172863/
 
Due to the changes in the gain range. You'll need to adjust and resave.
Ok. I gave it another try and now it seems the problem is different then exspected.

After installing the update all my eqs were ok, the linked ones and the unlinked ones. Even though the new max value is higher now, 20 bd instead 12 db my old values were there.

But I turned up the neg FB to my old values in all my presets, one by one, and with every time I saved a preset, the global linked peqs got lowered by factor 0.6, and after storing 70 presets the values reached 0.0, so that's why I thought they got loaded empty after the update. That's not right, they get lower each time you save a preset.
 
Regarding the linked PEQs: check my post above.

  • Re-save all your presets (don't bother adjusting the PEQ). You can use FracTool to do this for you in one go.
  • Then adjust the global PEQ block in one of the presets and the other presets with the global PEQ will adhere.
 
Regarding the linked PEQs: check my post above.

  • Re-save all your presets (don't bother adjusting the PEQ). You can use FracTool to do this for you in one go.
  • Then adjust the global PEQ block in one of the presets and the other presets with the global PEQ will adhere.

Every time you call up a preset made with an earlier FW it multiplies each eq gain by 0.6.

Can I update all presets to the new firmware number by using fractool?
Them all in one go, so the system will not recalculate the eqs then?
 
To make it clear how my problem works:
1. When calling up a preset made in a FW before 16.01 it recalculates it's peq gains to keep the old gain.
2. When saving such a preset it gets the new FW version and the peqs get saved with the recalculated gain values and that's correct, because the next time you call up that same preset they will not get recalculated again because now the preset already is based on 16.01.
3. Problem: When there were globally linked blocks in that preset, the new values get reflected in all other presets with the same linkage, among them presets with an earlier FW version. There the already recalculated values get recalculated one more time upon recall of the preset.
4. The workaournd is to get all presets to the new FW version, only after that it makes sense to reapply the peq gains.
 
I've been confused about something, and I think there may be others who are too. When updating FW, what actions are required to get the benefit of the FW on current presets? Some mentions of "updates upon preset recall" or "resetting amp block" are two different things, resetting requiring the user to re-dial in amp settings/start from scratch.

I'm on the new beta, and did an amp block reset on my main preset, and I think I'm getting the benefit of the new beta, but honestly, I'm not sure if a reset was even required.

As others have said, resetting the amp block just puts all the advanced parameters back to their default settings, and sometimes it's recommended when a firmware has made a lot of changes to the defaults. Or it can be recommended if a firmware drastically changes how the amp modelling works, and if you're likely to be doing a lot of dialing to get a sound back it can be easier to start from default instead of start from wherever you last left the amp.

For example, maybe you increased or decreased negative feedback or some other advanced parameter to accommodate for something you didn't like before that the firmware has now fixed. How that it's fixed, that adjustment might be pushing too far the other way and resetting it will get you back to square one.

It's nice to make it manual in case you wanted to keep some of these advanced changes, as just force re-setting all advanced params might be disruptive and confusing to someone who dove deep.

But in this case, where the negative feedback defaults have all been changed, the presets instead automatically load their new default values the first time you open them. So you don't need to worry about it, that one value will get set to the new default. But if you manually adjusted it (common on the friedman models to simulate the 8-ohm tap) you might need to do so again.

Cliff seems to use his best judgement for which will be less disruptive for users, because it'll always be annoying for someone no matter what. If it auto-resets you lose you advanced changes, if it doesn't you might find it sounds weird because you applied advanced changes you might not need anymore.
 
Holy Moly!
Would you like to share the preset?
Which IR did you use?
Thanks
Sash
Hi Sash. The IR is just a single 57 test shot from a cab I’m working on at the moment.

Here are the amp settings for the “matched” model:
Model - Solo 100 Lead
Input Drive - 4.5
Bass - 5.12
Middle - 5.42
Treble - 4.72
Presence - 4.11
Depth - 4.81
Master Volume - 3.52
Input Trim - 2.2 (you might not need to go that high, but it helped to match the palm muting feel of my amp. Ears, not eyes, right?)

I made the clip using a Les Paul with Suhr Thornbucker+ pickups, so the moderate output lets you push the gain a little harder while still retaining clarity.
 
Newbie question here, can someone explain to me why the drive in the preamp section sounds so different to using a drive block before the amp. The 808 in particular sound completely different to me.
 
Drive the in the preamp section of the amp block is EQ and optional level boost only. Drive pedals often distort too, probably with EQ before and/or after.
 
FAS:

"The amp boosts are just the frequency shaping part of the drive. The clipping stuff is removed. It's analogous to turning the Drive knob all the way down and using the pedal as a clean boost."
I understand that the waveform is being clipped when the drive knob is turned up but even when I turn the drive knob to zero in the drive block it still sounds different. Are there specific frequencies being cut in the preamp section vs all the the frequencies are available unless you mess with the high and low cut in the drive block?
 
Hi Sash. The IR is just a single 57 test shot from a cab I’m working on at the moment.

Here are the amp settings for the “matched” model:
Model - Solo 100 Lead
Input Drive - 4.5
Bass - 5.12
Middle - 5.42
Treble - 4.72
Presence - 4.11
Depth - 4.81
Master Volume - 3.52
Input Trim - 2.2 (you might not need to go that high, but it helped to match the palm muting feel of my amp. Ears, not eyes, right?)

I made the clip using a Les Paul with Suhr Thornbucker+ pickups, so the moderate output lets you push the gain a little harder while still retaining clarity.
You know that we all now want to hear more about the new IR ;-)
 
I understand that the waveform is being clipped when the drive knob is turned up but even when I turn the drive knob to zero in the drive block it still sounds different. Are there specific frequencies being cut in the preamp section vs all the the frequencies are available unless you mess with the high and low cut in the drive block?
I think the difference might still be caused by the clipping section. The gain control on most pedals is basically just a volume control before the clipping stages, so even if it's at 0 the signal might still be slightly clipped, especially with high output pickups and/or hard strumming.
 
Here's a little clip comparison that hopefully illustrates my tip. The higher Input Trim gives palm mutes a little more hair and thickness behind them while the default Input Trim keeps them a little tidier and controlled.

1. Real amp
2. Model with Input Trim at 1.00
3. Input Trim raised
4. Real amp
5. Switches between models with raised Input Trim and default Input Trim.



This is really interesting. I have an old 5150 block letter that I love. With the "normal gain" input, it's completely saturated by 2 on the gain knob and is completely bonkers beyond that.

With the Fractal, I had the gain up around 4 to have the same saturation. It sounds "good enough" but it does not have the same thump or sense of being out of control like the real amp.

So in the Fractal, I turned the input gain to 2 and started cranking the input trim until it had enough saturation (I think it was like 5?). It definitely was more wild and hairy than having the input gain at 4 and input trim at 1. Will have to tinker more with it, but it seems promising.
 
This is really interesting. I have an old 5150 block letter that I love. With the "normal gain" input, it's completely saturated by 2 on the gain knob and is completely bonkers beyond that.

With the Fractal, I had the gain up around 4 to have the same saturation. It sounds "good enough" but it does not have the same thump or sense of being out of control like the real amp.

So in the Fractal, I turned the input gain to 2 and started cranking the input trim until it had enough saturation (I think it was like 5?). It definitely was more wild and hairy than having the input gain at 4 and input trim at 1. Will have to tinker more with it, but it seems promising.
Then does that mean perhaps that the preamp gain tapers are different than the real amps likely ?
 
I am wondering if its a Lynchback
or Creamback M65
it would be a guess but i am thinking the Lynch
It’s neither of those. ;)


This is really interesting. I have an old 5150 block letter that I love. With the "normal gain" input, it's completely saturated by 2 on the gain knob and is completely bonkers beyond that.

With the Fractal, I had the gain up around 4 to have the same saturation. It sounds "good enough" but it does not have the same thump or sense of being out of control like the real amp.

So in the Fractal, I turned the input gain to 2 and started cranking the input trim until it had enough saturation (I think it was like 5?). It definitely was more wild and hairy than having the input gain at 4 and input trim at 1. Will have to tinker more with it, but it seems promising.
I LOVE the normal gain input on that amp! On mine, it sounds awesome with the gain at 5 (massive and open sounding) and it’s bonkers if you go past that. I wouldn’t be surprised if our gain tapers are a little different than Cliff’s head. Can’t those things have a +/- 20% difference or something? If you’re matching your real head, try lowering your guitar volume and listen to the gain of the 5150, then match the gain level with the model. That can help you dial in the Input Trim level.
 
Back
Top Bottom