Blind Test #1: Axe-Fx III vs. Real Amp

Jozsef Kiss said:
Everybody tried to "push" his ears!
Everyone tried to wash their ears!
But!
If only it had been written! - That's what Ax-Fx III says.
Everyone is happy - the Ax-FX III is so good at it.
Everything can be! to look for an error!
But the point is!
Very Super Ax-Fx III.
I am happy to start finding SOUND at the age of 70!
Sorry for english! Google is my interpreter!
Click to expand...

Dont worry about language
Music is universal
Your avatar makes up for it too
 
I’m a little late to the party here but I just read through the thread and feel the need to chime in with my .02¢. The dynamics argument is a losing argument. Cliff has added in the ability to make any of the amps modeled even more dynamic in multiple ways; drastically, subtly & in nuanced ways, (Dynamic Presence & Depth) than their real life counterparts. Once you learn how to properly dial in whatever amp you’re working with they are all incredibly dynamic to begin with & *if* that’s not enough for you there’s still further options in the Dynamics page: Input Dynamics can be adjusted & you can further adjust Dynamics by switching the Output Compression type to Feedback & raising the Out Compression. Or you can make it LESS dynamic as well.
Fractal is every bit and argueably more dynamic than the amps modeled, period.
 
In after the reveal. ;)

I thought the first two had a touch more gain. If the answer had been that they were all Axe or all amp, I wouldn't have been even slightly bothered.
 
dumbeat said:
Its not a good test i can i tell you. It has none of the qualities an amp can be judged by, the stuff that makes an amp stand out do not exist in your examples. Again- Dynamic playing and dynamic presentation. Its just not there. Dont blame me for that. Make some examples of dynamic playing on clean tones, in breakup tones, let the player play dynamically and dont have it so compressed. Thats when you can judge the quality of the amp. Im sorry, but this is not on me.
Click to expand...
Come on man, lighten up. A lot of people are here as part of a hobby or for personal enjoyment. You get so damn intense. Chill. Smoke some oil. Throw a couple back. Whatever. But for the love of god, could you ease up?
 
skunc said:
1&2 are different than 3,4&5

To hear the difference between a guitar amp and an AXE3...

1) live band @ arena-impossible
2) in song track- impossible or nearly impossible (depending upon the genre, maybe)
3) track isolated- maybe possible

The number of musicians and fans that can hear the difference in any scenario- less than 1%?
Click to expand...
This is right along the lines of what I was thinking. For the professional using Axe-FX, I think we are at a place now where the Axe is so close that production on a track might very well obfuscate if a modeled or real amp was used. In other words in the real world for studio use... it is “good enough” (not that it can’t get better).

Live use is where a discerning listener could tell the difference. But... is the drunk chick in the club going to suddenly stop partying and exclaim “hey that guy is using a modeler not a real amp!”? Is the stoned kid in row 10 going to go “Dude, I can’t listen to this he is not using a tube amp”?

No. The number of people who can a) tell the difference and b) want to make an issue of it is exceedingly small.

The difference mostly impacts audiophiles and bedroom warriors IMO.

In my experience people create posts like this one because they are truly excited about the direction of a product. The innovations that are coming in are significant enough that they feel the needle move and that excites people. It is a good thing.

This could be a fun thread if we take it for what it is: a statement on how far this product has come. BTW, luckily we have an audiophile developing this product.
 
Last edited:
Capt Nasty said:
Is the drunk chick in the club going to suddenly stop partying and exclaim “hey that guy is using a modeler not a real amp!”? Is the stoned kid in row 10 going to go “Dude, I can’t listen to this he is not using a tube amp”?

No. The number of people who can a) tell the difference and b) want to make an issue of it is exceedingly small.

The difference mostly impacts audiophiles and bedroom warriors IMO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd venture that 99% of music fans go to see a show and/or hear songs that emotionally affect them, hang out with friends, distract them from life, or help get them laid. They don't give a shit about the gear much less care about the type of gear (tube vs SS vs modeler, etc.), and they don't even know that the wall of 4x12s is mostly a facade. Then, the maybe 1% gear-aware folks/dudes in the audience might want know how the guitarist gets that tone. Then 1% of those might be gear snobs and/or have more discerning ears. (And another 1% of them who can hear fine details that no one else can hear...etc...)

To @Capt Nasty's point, I'd guess that "discernment + care" about some detail/skill in life within a population probably follows something like a Power Law (e.g. fractals, wealth distribution, Pareto distribution, acoustic attenuation...). The masses are happy with low bit-rate mp3's over BT earbuds or bass-heavy beats headphones. Thus someone with any expertise/discernment in any area will easily surpass novices -- but also there is almost guaranteed someone who is more discerning than them.
 
in my experience, almost the entire audience will only judge if things sound "good" or "bad" and that's it. they typically don't discern that the bass guitar is too loud, or the singer is too quiet, or that there's too much distortion on the guitar. they just say "that sounds bad."

if you want to spend the time needed to impress the handful of musicians that may or may not be in the room, that's for you to decide if it's worth it. but most people respond to the energy and overall feel of the performance, judging if it's appropriate for the current venue/gig.

if you have a guy kicking and jumping all over the place the entire gig... in a restaurant gig, then it doesn't work, even if he sounds good. if you have a guy sitting on a chair and emoting love songs the entire gig... at a rock show, then it doesn't work, even if he sounds good.

so you can sound objectively great, but not performing correctly for the moment. compare this to a band that may not sound the best objectively, but their performance matches the energy expected at the gig. people will love that. the few musicians will be judgey judgers, but does that really matter?
 
Capt Nasty said:
...Live use is where a discerning listener could tell the difference...
Click to expand...

I bought my first Axe-Fx II after seeing a local band play live. One guitarist (the main guy) was playing a tube amp into a 4x12 cab, the other guitarist was playing an Axe-Fx through a SS power amp and 4x12 cab. Both cabs were on opposite sides of the stage pointed at the band. All the guitar that I was hearing was coming from FOH, being mixed by a good sound engineer. (Local guy who tours with Alice Cooper running FOH.) The Fractal rig sounded much better in all respects than the tube rig. So yeah, I could definitely hear the difference. At that point, I was sold on Fractal.
 
TG3K said:
I bought my first Axe-Fx II after seeing a local band play live. One guitarist (the main guy) was playing a tube amp into a 4x12 cab, the other guitarist was playing an Axe-Fx through a SS power amp and 4x12 cab. Both cabs were on opposite sides of the stage pointed at the band. All the guitar that I was hearing was coming from FOH, being mixed by a good sound engineer. (Local guy who tours with Alice Cooper running FOH.) The Fractal rig sounded much better in all respects than the tube rig. So yeah, I could definitely hear the difference. At that point, I was sold on Fractal.
Click to expand...
You are one of the rare people in an audience who has a discerning ear and cares enough to note what is going on.
 
Jason Scott said:
You'll either take the test the way everyone else takes them in general, using high quality MP3 samples, or you're basically admitting you can't tell the difference. Frankly, I kind of figured you'd find every excuse in the world not to answer because you honestly don't know. Like most people who can't admit they don't know, they can't just admit they don't know. They have to blame it on sample quality, signal chain or whatever.
Click to expand...

Jason, I can't tell. Just ignore dumbeat. He's taking this all way too seriously. Most wouldn't be able to tell the difference even if they were there with you. I know because I've done this before with older firmware and even though I knew the answer because I was there, I'm pretty sure I couldn't tell the difference in a blind test:

 
Capt Nasty said:
You are one of the rare people in an audience who has a discerning ear and cares enough to note what is going on.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're right. In the case of that night, I could hear everything the guy with the Fractal was playing. The guy with the real amp, I couldn't. Of course a lot of that has to do with who's at the controls, but at that moment I realized how good the Axe-Fx was. I had only heard of the Axe-Fx from another local guy whose posts I'd seen on Facebook, but I'd never heard his rig. At the time, I was using a POD XT Live direct to FOH, and couldn't see justifying the cost of stepping up into the Fractal world. Once I actually heard one, the justification came quickly.
 
Capt Nasty said:
This is right along the lines of what I was thinking. For the professional using Axe-FX, I think we are at a place now where the Axe is so close that production on a track might very well obfuscate if a modeled or real amp was used. In other words in the real world for studio use... it is “good enough” (not that it can’t get better).
Click to expand...

Given the current state of modeling, it can be extremely difficult to distinguish a modeler from a real amp when comparing two samples against each other. The level of difficulty goes up exponentially higher when judging a single track on its own, either in a mix or in isolation, without any comparative context.

That said, the primary reason modelers sound as convincing as they do today is because developers have invested massive amounts of time coding algorithms that simulate the characteristics of the genuine article, and it's for that reason I'm a strong advocate for the continued pursuit of authenticity and realism. Currently, tube amps are undoubtedly considered the gold standard, which is why most amp models are based on them. Thus, generally speaking, the more realistic / authentic the model, the better it sounds and the easier it is to dial in. How much more realistic / authentic can it get? I don't know, but I'm undoubtedly curious to find out.
 
Last edited:
Differences are so marginal, it is impossible to tell what's real and what's simulated...that's how these Axe's have evolved. All I can say, is thank God for tube amps..otherwise we'd have nothing to model...lol.

I think Fractal has forever changed the face of guitar amplification / effects as we know it, and that tube amps will eventually disappear...as there is nothing more they can offer and nowhere further for them to go.

That I can buy an Axe for a bit over 2k, with every meaningful amp / cab and effect pedal built in - and basically have a million dollars worth of equipment built into one sleek audio computer, is a feat all in its own. That it can actually do more than its analogue counterparts is an added bonus.

Thanks for that cool test; it really proves everything I heard and knew about the Axe!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom