Axe-Fx III Firmware Version 4.00 Beta

Status
Not open for further replies.
Question: Why are such models, like "USA Lead" and "USA Lead Brt" separated?
Why doesn't the Bright switch on the amp block work in this case, that it needs a whole new Amp model?
Your answer is here: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...-usa-iic-and-iic-mesa-boogie-mark-iic.115442/

TL;DR the pull bright on the amp's lead control is not a bright cap across the input potentiometer and therefore is not covered by what the bright switch in the Axe-Fx model does.

Anyway, Ideally, as much as having 260+ amp models is a selling point, a smaller list would be easier to navigate and understand, i believe. Most of items in the list are slight variations , or different channels of an amp. The list would shorten a lot if all these original switches were placed in the models themselves, and the channels and variations would be a submenu.

Each model in the Axe-Fx is a specific circuit in an amp, not an amp. You'd never have fewer than what we have now, even if you nested navigation into a tree of choices instead of a flat list. The list would not be shorter, just displayed differently.
 
Last edited:
Each model in the Axe-Fx is a specific circuit in an amp, not an amp. You'd never have fewer than what we have now, even if you nested navigation into a tree of choices instead of a flat list. The list would not be shorter, just displayed differently.

I totally get that. Though, comparing it to a real amp experience: The channels are all enclosed into a single chasis, and the channels are switched with a physical switch.
And, before doing any mods, you first have to take the original, see if you like it the way it is, and if you found it lacking, then get it modded.
That just makes sense to me.
 
Question: Why are such models, like "USA Lead" and "USA Lead Brt" separated?
Why doesn't the Bright switch on the amp block work in this case, that it needs a whole new Amp model?

Anyway, Ideally, as much as having 260+ amp models is a selling point, a smaller list would be easier to navigate and understand, i believe. Most of items in the list are slight variations , or different channels of an amp. The list would shorten a lot if all these original switches were placed in the models themselves, and the channels and variations would be a submenu.


At what point is it “too many”, or how many models need to be removed before it’s easier to understand ? How do you draw an arbitrary line and say “not going to add another amp, it’s become too many”?

More so, do you start to remove some models ? How will that affect those who use a given model ?

I only use a handful myself, as many do, but we all use different handfuls.

I don’t think there is a single amp model that the whole of the user base all doesn’t use, as such, removing anything would affect someone.
 
At what point is it “too many”, or how many models need to be removed before it’s easier to understand ? How do you draw an arbitrary line and say “not going to add another amp, it’s become too many”?

More so, do you start to remove some models ? How will that affect those who use a given model ?

I only use a handful myself, as many do, but we all use different handfuls.

I don’t think there is a single amp model that the whole of the user base all doesn’t use, as such, removing anything would affect someone.

At no point did I say that amp models should be removed.
I was just just thinking on how they could be organized, grouped, to avoid such things:
upload_2019-3-6_2-42-22.png
 
Question: Why are such models, like "USA Lead" and "USA Lead Brt" separated?
Why doesn't the Bright switch on the amp block work in this case, that it needs a whole new Amp model?

Anyway, Ideally, as much as having 260+ amp models is a selling point, a smaller list would be easier to navigate and understand, i believe. Most of items in the list are slight variations , or different channels of an amp. The list would shorten a lot if all these original switches were placed in the models themselves, and the channels and variations would be a submenu.
Here I thought we might be getting to a place where people are finally happy, but no, now there's too many "redundant" amps.

Each amp has its own unique characteristic and each channel has its own circuit 'tweaks'. Since Fractal models at the component level, anything less than separate models for each channel would be a compromise. My presumption on amp models like the Friedmans is the access to the actual physical amps. Ease of access allows more versions, each of which sound and feel different.


Allow me to use an amp as an example that's not in the list but one I have experience with, the Mesa Roadster. It's a four channel amp in which each channel is unique. Using your logic, there would be one 'Roadster' model and parameters to adjust or switch on/off within the model to emulate each channel. Which channel do you use as the base? Only channels 3 and 4 are remotely similar but still quite different in how they respond and feel.

Another example of one that I have is the Splawn Quickrod. Having the individual OD models available sounds much more authentic than simply increasing the gain or adding a Boost to the lowest gain model. I think having a model for each channel is brilliant, especially with the Axe-Fx III's Channels feature. Now we can have the "complete" amp in a preset. Each authentic channel of the amp, not one model that needs to be tweaked in order to emulate the individual channels.

I for one am stoked that FAS has modelled amps the way they have. They seem to have gone above and beyond to provide as much authenticity as is possible. Compromises and shortcuts can go take a hike!
 
It would be pretty handy to have one amp to load up, and on the front panel have the drop down of what channel / mode / mod you want it to be on.

Channels right now can change out the whole amp block model without much fuss. It would only streamline tone searching, and help edjumacate people like me who don't know one amp from another, to see clearly that these (7 different names) are circuit variations on one box of parts.
 
It would be pretty handy to have one amp to load up, and on the front panel have the drop down of what channel / mode / mod you want it to be on.

Channels right now can change out the whole amp block model without much fuss. It would only streamline tone searching, and help edjumacate people like me who don't know one amp from another, to see clearly that these (7 different names) are circuit variations on one box of parts.
Axe Fx Wiki is your friend :cool:
 
I totally get that. Though, comparing it to a real amp experience: The channels are all enclosed into a single chasis, and the channels are switched with a physical switch.
And, before doing any mods, you first have to take the original, see if you like it the way it is, and if you found it lacking, then get it modded.
That just makes sense to me.
I don't understand this desire to constrain our UIX to the physical world. The physical world is not ideal. Did we not learn our lesson with that horrible bought of skeuomorphic designs on phones and tablets that plagued us in the mid-2000s? :D

But I do agree that a flat list of models is maybe reaching the useful limit given how long it is now.
 
hey it's like filling your taxes... When you've got 250+ amps... you say "no I don't, I only have 115 amps. Those others are channels / modes / mods on the 115, listed separately."
 
Question: Why are such models, like "USA Lead" and "USA Lead Brt" separated?
Why doesn't the Bright switch on the amp block work in this case, that it needs a whole new Amp model?

Anyway, Ideally, as much as having 260+ amp models is a selling point, a smaller list would be easier to navigate and understand, i believe. Most of items in the list are slight variations , or different channels of an amp. The list would shorten a lot if all these original switches were placed in the models themselves, and the channels and variations would be a submenu.
Maybe “bright” on the Mark IV does more than what the bright switch normally does? Probably alters Gain.

I think multiple “types” is a smart way to do it, so the controls among amp types is the same. I can’t imagine people needing to learn all the intricacies of all the amps on top of everything else already. Cliff did that part for us when creating the types.

I think this “authentic” thing can go too far.
 
Here I thought we might be getting to a place where people are finally happy, but no, now there's too many "redundant" amps.

Each amp has its own unique characteristic and each channel has its own circuit 'tweaks'. Since Fractal models at the component level, anything less than separate models for each channel would be a compromise. My presumption on amp models like the Friedmans is the access to the actual physical amps. Ease of access allows more versions, each of which sound and feel different.


Allow me to use an amp as an example that's not in the list but one I have experience with, the Mesa Roadster. It's a four channel amp in which each channel is unique. Using your logic, there would be one 'Roadster' model and parameters to adjust or switch on/off within the model to emulate each channel. Which channel do you use as the base? Only channels 3 and 4 are remotely similar but still quite different in how they respond and feel.

Another example of one that I have is the Splawn Quickrod. Having the individual OD models available sounds much more authentic than simply increasing the gain or adding a Boost to the lowest gain model. I think having a model for each channel is brilliant, especially with the Axe-Fx III's Channels feature. Now we can have the "complete" amp in a preset. Each authentic channel of the amp, not one model that needs to be tweaked in order to emulate the individual channels.

I for one am stoked that FAS has modelled amps the way they have. They seem to have gone above and beyond to provide as much authenticity as is possible. Compromises and shortcuts can go take a hike!


Agreed completely. In fact I own a Splawn QuickRod and the way Cliff has added all of the possible permutations of it is an elegant solution.
 
At no point did I say that amp models should be removed.
I was just just thinking on how they could be organized, grouped, to avoid such things:
View attachment 53066
There is a way to highlight amps in AXE Edit that you use using a certain color. You can also filter based on the color so that you only see the amp models that you highlighted. Yes this is only for AXE Edit.
 
Last edited:
Another nice feature is saving the amps you want , with the drop down menu in Axe Edit.
This way , you can rename the amp - the ACTUAL amp name if you wish , and can also reduce the number of amps available, to just ones that you would normally use - ( if that’s your desire ) Sounded like that was what was wanted earlier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom