Buttons functioning as on amps

Are you interested having accurate visuals buttons in the amp block

  • Sure

    Votes: 4 6.2%

  • No I don’t care, I just want a sound tool factory

    Votes: 61 93.8%
  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
My name is mud

My name is mud

Fractal Fanatic
Vendor
Hi .
this is my main wish that controls in the amp block react with the exact same course that the original one .
We already talked about it sometimes but I still don’t understand why it’s not like that already . questions and feelings :

1/ I am not convinced about the “different” course button between 2 real amps . I don’t think that for example a jcm800 got sometimes eq buttons very reactive and sometimes not . The difference can exist , but it’s not that huge .

2/ so why called it a “Marshall jcm 800” simulation if you don’t give to musicians (who want to sell their amp and go with axe), the only thing they may know if they tried or have one : turning the buttons .

3/ how can we consider all the internal things in the circuit that we will never understand , give us 100 controls by amps but snob in the true control visual of the head . I mean if I want to reproduce a car , I won’t put 6 speed if it has 5, or choose to make it “automatic” because I prefer it .

4/ so if it is not the goal of the axe to be a high fidelity modeler , why just call all the amps fas A , fas B etc better than use real names in disguise?

5/ having real visual buttons don’t mean that we cannot have all the tweaks and options in other parts .

all apologies for the English mistakes , I am not . I am not attacking anyone and surely not cliff that knows a lotttt things that I don’t know . But as he sells it to musicians , not physicians, I just wanted to share my opinion as a ... musician .
 
AxeLive provides realistic visual buttons for the amps. It is still not compatible with Axe-FX III though.
ccc3f08af924ee598603ade3e711e8c8.png

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/axe-edit-notation-to-denote-the-real-amp-controls.127641/
https://www.roxxxtar.com/axelive
 
+ when I talk about visual fidelity of the knob that’s not really about the interface himself. Just that 8 on the treble knob in the axe match the real head in the same knob position.
 
OK. I misunderstood that.

Cliff has mentioned in several occasions that it is difficult to find two amplifiers of the same model with the knobs responding exactly the same, due to component tolerances. That is the reason why they may not exactly match the amplifier that you own

Differences are not huge, though. They just require slight dial turns. And we normally want to do that by ear, not by eye
 
In my experience, the dials in the “authentic” tab are the same as, and work just as they would on the real amp. Not 100% perfect for every amp model, but pretty close. Granted, there’s some differences when the real amp dials don’t go from 0-10, but I think these are definitely the exception and not the rule.
One of the reasons I love the Axe FX is that I can watch a video, or read an article, about dialling in a particular amp and when I use the same settings in the Axe FX I can get pretty much the same tone, obviously taking into account differences in guitars and individual amps.
 
My name is mud said:
+ when I talk about visual fidelity of the knob that’s not really about the interface himself. Just that 8 on the treble knob in the axe match the real head in the same knob position.
Click to expand...
Actually, they already do match the amps that Cliff has in his arsenal. Any difference to a particular amp that you might own, is due to part tolerance.

The only controls that don't match, are presence and master volume. They're designed to offer a more flexible range of settings. Many presence and master volumes on real amps have very poor sweeps where nothing happens, and then everything at once.
 
Last edited:
I think that there are a lot of things to consider, most of which have already been addressed. I do understand what you are asking for, and I certainly see no issue asking for it. However, let's take that JCM 800 amp that you use as reference in your opening post and take a look at the Master control on it. We know that JCM 800s get really nice and meaty sounding with the Master control up quite a ways. This means that it is incredibly loud. Due to the volume being that high, you are getting a coupling relationship from the amp and speaker into to the pickups of the guitar and back. Now in the Axe it works a little different. You can crank the Master control up to the same number as in the real amp, but that doesn't mean the volume itself will be to the same level as a real JCM800, therefore not having the same interaction. This is a big part of what we call feel, and it makes us perceive it a certain way. Also, if you are using studio monitors or FRFR monitors, it just won't interact the same as going through a power amp into a real guitar cab. Now if you ARE using a power amp and real guitar cab, you can still lower the volume so you don't destroy your ears, but in doing so, you are once again losing that relationship that comes from volume. All of this is to say, that it is kind of a complicated thing when we talk about accuracy in the controls, aside from the already addressed parts tolerance because there are so many factors at play.
A real world example is Slash. Adam Day, his tech as mentioned that he will track his parts in the control room away from his amp. But Slash just couldn't get the same feel and feedback as when he is in the live room with his amp. So they took a little combo into the control room to get that interaction I talked about earlier. And he is using a real tube amp for this.
So we see how one knob and it's position is really important and has a huge effect on the overall sound and feel. But if this were to be as authentic as you want it to be in the sense of controlling overall volume, you still wouldn't get the same effect if you are going through anything but a power amp and cab AND it would be so loud that you couldn't use it in many places. As far as the tone controls, that has already been addressed.
Anyhow, I understand where you are coming from and I think your post opens up some interesting questions. I hope that my reply does not come across as antagonistic to your request. I'm just someone who loves the guitar tone adventure and wishes to be musically expressive, and the Axe as it is, allows me to go on that journey and create. It's different for everyone and that's okay, there is enough room for all of us.
 
For those like me who have not owned a lot of real amps, it's not a big deal, but, even if I had owned a JCm800 for example, and know its various settings intimately (or when I research amp settings and find recommendations from those with the real amp that I want to dial into the Axe model), I don't see the big deal about getting to know different tapers on the basic controls when the amp is otherwise accurately modelled. Aside from this, I think Fractal has said that they try to align as close as possible to the real tapers except where the real tapers can be strange (ie 90% of travel = 10% change). It's a small company with limited resources, so there are tradeoffs - I'd take this if they offered it but it would not be high on my priority list.

PS - I did not vote because I don't like the sound of "I just want a sound tool factory" which seems to suggest Fractal is not really trying to model the real amps with exacting precision - I think they definitely are + I never like questionaires that try to "box in" the responder's opinion.
 
Last edited:
My name is mud said:
+ when I talk about visual fidelity of the knob that’s not really about the interface himself. Just that 8 on the treble knob in the axe match the real head in the same knob position.
Click to expand...

It already does... On Cliff's particular amps.

It's been already stated numerous times that the knobs on the models match those on the real amps from Cliff's collection (and those particular amps lent to FAS by the likes of Satriani, Petrucci, etc...). If it doesn't match your particular amp it's not because the modeling algorithms aren't accurate. I'm totally positive that if you compare YOUR JP2C to the one owned by JP using the exact same settings, both amps will sound different, that's just the nature of the beast and folks here already told you that because the tolerance in components phenomenon.

It's rumoured that the new patent that many people are confusing with FAS' take on profiling will be used to actually analize the components on your particular amp and match the controls' to it, so who knows, maybe your wish is in the works as a tool, just like Tone Match, but thinking the modeling isn't accurate because it doesn't match your particular amp is just plain wrong IMO. Hell, maybe there are some guys out there whose amps actually matches the ones in the Axe...
 
I got this question because , for me , when you try to simulate an amp , you start doing his basics controls perfectly first . As I see them doing crazy feature , like changing the wattage (!!!) , super complex options on them , I just ask myself “but how can you go so far skipping the first step”. Then it’s just a guitarist talking . Once again I don’t imagine the craziness doing what he does , it is a really hard and amazing work . As I know the kemper by heart too , a lot of kemper users like this plug and play thing , changing the buttons in the front pannel as the real head and that’s all . Me I like to get in the advanced parameter because I am a sound geek , but most of guitarist just want to have heads simulated , without the original noise , some effects and that’s all . I prefer the sound of the axe 3 , for me it’s better , more define. If one day I can “profile “ my head with the axe , then I have it all . This is another wish 😅
 
My name is mud said:
I got this question because , for me , when you try to simulate an amp , you start doing his basics controls perfectly first .
Click to expand...
When you build the model of the amp (not really a simulation), you must do two things:

1) Have a reference to compare to.
2) Model the actual values of the various components of the amp.

Here's the problem - no two amps are exactly alike. Tolerance for resistors and capacitors in tube amps is likely in the range of 5% (resistors) to 20% (caps). As a result, no two amps sound or behave exactly the same. If you buy three different JCM800s, they will all sound different from each other when set to the same settings. Once a model has been built using one of them as a reference, it can never sound and respond quite like the other two. Heck, the specific tubes and the way they are biased will make a big change in the sound, and change the way the settings respond.

This is really no big deal, because as noted above, we dial them in with our ears, not based on the specific setting.

Why don't amp makers use tighter tolerances in their components? Because pretty much nobody cares, so they would be adding a lot of cost that wouldn't provide any real benefit.
 
FractalAudio said:
The controls are very accurate with exception of the Presence which has been elucidated upon numerous times. If you are not experiencing this accuracy then something is wrong in your evaluation.
Click to expand...
I think I remember another exception that has been mentioned - 5 band Mark graphic sliders.

Being an amp tweaker and builder for going on 35 years, parts tolerances (especially on 'budget' parts) can explain a lot of variations. The knob positions required for the AxeFX3 to mimic, for example, David Gilmour's HIWATT tone are likely sorta close to the photos available of his touring rig, but likely need some small adjustments to shine on....
 
FullThrottle64 said:
Here's the problem - no two amps are exactly alike. Tolerance for resistors and capacitors in tube amps is likely in the range of 5% (resistors) to 20% (caps). As a result, no two amps sound or behave exactly the same. If you buy three different JCM800s, they will all sound different from each other when set to the same settings. Once a model has been built using one of them as a reference, it can never sound and respond quite like the other two. Heck, the specific tubes and the way they are biased will make a big change in the sound, and change the way the settings respond
Click to expand...
I understand this to be true having heard it from many informed players making the valid point that no 2 amps ever sound the same, BUT, the question that remains to my mind is what really is the range of difference? - if I go out and buy 3 new MB MkVs or whatever, I understand each will vary, but by how much? Intuitively, I'd guess that the range of difference will generally not be that dramatic and all 3 amps will sound like the MBMkV "reference tones" we've come to understand (I'm sure someone can throw in an anomaly here but generally speaking). If the range of difference is relatively small then I don't think we can conclude that trying to match modelled controls to actual controls is futile and not worthwhile - anyway, we have it from horses mouth above - they make the effort to do it.
 
Joe Bfstplk said:
I think I remember another exception that has been mentioned - 5 band Mark graphic sliders.

Being an amp tweaker and builder for going on 35 years, parts tolerances (especially on 'budget' parts) can explain a lot of variations. The knob positions required for the AxeFX3 to mimic, for example, David Gilmour's HIWATT tone are likely sorta close to the photos available of his touring rig, but likely need some small adjustments to shine on....
Click to expand...
You're correct. The taper is different on the MK EQ, because it's horrible on the real amps.
 
sprint said:
I understand this to be true having heard it from many informed players making the valid point that no 2 amps ever sound the same, BUT, the question that remains to my mind is what really is the range of difference? - if I go out and buy 3 new MB MkVs or whatever, I understand each will vary, but by how much? Intuitively, I'd guess that the range of difference will not be that dramatic and all 3 amps will sound like the MBMkV "reference tones" we've come to understand. If the range of difference is relatively small then I don't think we can conclude that trying to match modelled controls to actual controls is futile and not worthwhile - anyway, we have it from horses mouth above - they make the effort to do it.
Click to expand...
Do some math.

Let’s say part 1 is off by 8%, part 2 by 6%, part 3 by 5% and part 4 by 3%,

it would yield .92 x 2(.94) x 3(.95) x 4(.97) = 20.79

versus 1x2x3x4 = 24

Seems like a 13% difference across the first four parts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom