Dialing in recording tones

I currently use my AxeFx into an DCM150 and a 4x12 cab. I've gotten some decent tones with this setup but am finding that when I plug my AxeFx into my computer, no cab/mic combination sounds anything close to the sound coming from my 4x12. I realize I have to change my thinking and need to be listening for what my cab would sound like mic'd up, but my tone still has a very "direct" sound about it. It also seems to have lost the amp-like feel I had using the real power amp and cab.

My chain was simply an amp, delay, and cab block. I have tried placing a Parametric EQ, both before and after the cab block, and have shelved off the lows around 75Hz and the highs around 5kHz. This helped a little but is still nowhere near what I have heard others achieve in terms of more authentic distorted tones.

The recording method I used was XLR out of the Axe into a TonePort UX2, with all the preamps/effects off, into GarageBand. I also tried the unblanced 1/4" out of the Axe into the line input of the UX2 with the same results.

I haven't messed with any IR's so I am curious about those but wondering where else I need to be tweaking. Any insight is appreciated.
 
Have you ever tried miking a real cab and hearing how it sounds? Getting your head around a recorded sound and the sound and feel of a real cab in the room with you is hard to do unless you've recorded a lot of guitar. I would say just go with it. Record a tune, mix it, maximize and listen to it. See if you like the way it sounds mixed.
You might try playing through your cab while having a direct line out for recording to give you more feel while recording.
A little room verb on the recorded guitar will go a long way also.
 
kev said:
Have you ever tried miking a real cab and hearing how it sounds? Getting your head around a recorded sound and the sound and feel of a real cab in the room with you is hard to do unless you've recorded a lot of guitar. I would say just go with it. Record a tune, mix it, maximize and listen to it. See if you like the way it sounds mixed.
You might try playing through your cab while having a direct line out for recording to give you more feel while recording.
A little room verb on the recorded guitar will go a long way also.
I have tried miking a real cab, yes. While I won't argue it has it's own challenges, I have heard several unaccompanied clips from Axe users recorded direct that have a much more natural, less-direct sound about them than what I'm getting. I'm wondering what they had to do to achieve that.
 
I'l start by saying i have a UX2 and i was using the line in just the way you were to record my axe ultra and i'll tell you it was destroying the tone I wish i had a clip to show you how bad the UX2 effected the signal compared to my M-Audio profire digital in that i use now. I'd say for your own sanity ditch the UX2 and get something with a digital audio in because when you use the digital there are no conversions you get pure axe out and in unaltered. I spent 2 weeks trying to dial in my axe through the UX2 and couldn't understand why what i heard through a monitor wasn't sounding the same as a recording.
 
rsf1977 said:
I'l start by saying i have a UX2 and i was using the line in just the way you were to record my axe ultra and i'll tell you it was destroying the tone I wish i had a clip to show you how bad the UX2 effected the signal compared to my M-Audio profire digital in that i use now. I'd say for your own sanity ditch the UX2 and get something with a digital audio in because when you use the digital there are no conversions you get pure axe out and in unaltered. I spent 2 weeks trying to dial in my axe through the UX2 and couldn't understand why what i heard through a monitor wasn't sounding the same as a recording.
Hmmm...okay I might give that a try. However, I even ran the AxeFx straight into the audio input of my Mac without the UX2 and it sounded the same. Problem then was I couldn't monitor my sound without latency so I had to use the interface. Do you happen to have any clips comparing your old UX2 to the M-Audio? I could have sworn I've heard clips where guys used the analog outs on the AxeFx (Ed DeGenaro and John Czajkowski, to name a few) and the tones were much more "real" and not direct sounding better than the results I was getting.
 
Tone Jones said:
rsf1977 said:
I'l start by saying i have a UX2 and i was using the line in just the way you were to record my axe ultra and i'll tell you it was destroying the tone I wish i had a clip to show you how bad the UX2 effected the signal compared to my M-Audio profire digital in that i use now. I'd say for your own sanity ditch the UX2 and get something with a digital audio in because when you use the digital there are no conversions you get pure axe out and in unaltered. I spent 2 weeks trying to dial in my axe through the UX2 and couldn't understand why what i heard through a monitor wasn't sounding the same as a recording.
Hmmm...okay I might give that a try. However, I even ran the AxeFx straight into the audio input of my Mac without the UX2 and it sounded the same. Problem then was I couldn't monitor my sound without latency so I had to use the interface. Do you happen to have any clips comparing your old UX2 to the M-Audio? I could have sworn I've heard clips where guys used the analog outs on the AxeFx (Ed DeGenaro and John Czajkowski, to name a few) and the tones were much more "real" and not direct sounding better than the results I was getting.

I don't have any clips actually, but my guess is it isn't the digital or analogue out on the axe that's really at the heart of the issue it's the quality on the line-in on the UX2. As for the axe if the analogue out is better then the digital out I'd like to here a comparison if anyone else has clips of that to share.

I'll also say any patch i designed for a FFFR monitor was useless when i tried to go through a SS poweramp into a 4x12 even with cabs turned off. I had to rebuild a patch from scratch.
 
Have you checked that your cab block is active i.e has some 'sag' ....... or that in the global parameters the power amp and cab blocks are active ....?
It's just that if you're used to using the axe fx with a power amp and speaker you may have neglected to re-instate this part of the chain .........!?
 
rick0chet said:
Have you checked that your cab block is active i.e has some 'sag'
There is no "sag" in the cab block. That is an amp block parameter.

There is no problem at all with using the analog output of the Axe-Fx. Getting good direct sounds with the Axe-Fx is a relatively simple matter, but it is critically important to avoid clipping the input of the next device in the chain after it. It is possible for there to be audible clipping with no indication of that in any metering.
 
[quote="Jay Mitchell]
There is no problem at all with using the analog output of the Axe-Fx. Getting good direct sounds with the Axe-Fx is a relatively simple matter, but it is critically important to avoid clipping the input of the next device in the chain after it. It is possible for there to be audible clipping with no indication of that in any metering.[/quote]

This is something that I've wondered about since building my first patch. How to properly gain stage when there is no input meter to each block. Sure I can use my ears to detect digital clipping but I'd like leave enough headroom while adding blocks. I've been starting by automatically taking 2 to 3 db off the amp and cab blocks to begin with. When putting together a chain of analog processors, there is almost always some sort of input metering to properly gain stage.
 
The Axe-FX uses floating point, so you will *NOT* get internal/digital clipping. What Jay was warning you about was the probability that the Axe-FX output clips the inputs of your audio interface.

Daniel
 
Dpoirier said:
The Axe-FX uses floating point, so you will *NOT* get internal/digital clipping. What Jay was warning you about was the probability that the Axe-FX output clips the inputs of your audio interface.

Daniel

Ahh, I see that now.

My DAW is floating point but I always leave headroom in all my tracks so they sum at a reasonable level and I can tell by the metering on each track where I might be pushing it. It would be nice to have some level indication on the ins and outs of each block. Oh well, another topic I guess.
 
rsf1977 said:
I'll also say any patch i designed for a FFFR monitor was useless when i tried to go through a SS poweramp into a 4x12 even with cabs turned off. I had to rebuild a patch from scratch.
Yeah, I've been rebuilding from scratch as well.
 
rick0chet said:
Have you checked that your cab block is active i.e has some 'sag' ....... or that in the global parameters the power amp and cab blocks are active ....?
It's just that if you're used to using the axe fx with a power amp and speaker you may have neglected to re-instate this part of the chain .........!?
Both the cab and power amp are and have been active in the global parameters. Since I've been using a SS power amp, the power amp simulation in the global settings has always been active though I have tried to make tweaks when going direct. The cab I have been activating/deactivating globally when going back and forth.

Thanks.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
There is no problem at all with using the analog output of the Axe-Fx. Getting good direct sounds with the Axe-Fx is a relatively simple matter, but it is critically important to avoid clipping the input of the next device in the chain after it. It is possible for there to be audible clipping with no indication of that in any metering.
I have tried a variety of signal levels so far without much success. However accurate or inaccurate the level meters on the UX2 are, I have tried a hot signal as well as ones that moved the needle halfway and barely at all. Same result.

When going from a SS power amp/guitar cabinet to direct, are there some constants in terms of paramters and their values, that you always change to give the tone a more natural, non-direct sound? Also, could the UX2 be adversely affecting the signal though I have all of it's tone shaping capabilities off and am basically only using it as a means to interface with my computer? As I mentioned earlier, I tried going straight into the audio input of the computer with the same sounding results and the inability to monitor my sound without latency. I will say the sound seems to suffer the most on high gain patches where again, it's just nowhere near the more organic tones I've heard from other's clips. I may try to record some and post a link soon to help describe what I'm hearing.
 
Ok...so I made a clip of the characteristics I'm talking about: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=961612

The chain is AMP -> DELAY -> CABINET. The left analog out is feeding the line in on a UX2 -> USB out to Garage Band.

Amp:
Solo 100
Drive: 9
Bass: 7
Mid: 5
Treble: 5 (Bright On)
Pres: 1.5
Deep: 2
Damp: 4
Sag: 2
Master: 5
Level: 0
Warmth: 3.5
Thump: 2.5
Low Cut: 100Hz
High Cut: 5kHz

Cabinet
Using Jay's 4x12 V30 SM57 IR with drive on 0

Input is set to analog front and power amp/cabinet sims set to ON globally. Input knob on AxeFx is at about 1pm with strong guitar input signal. Output knob is set very low (about 8 O'clock) and input meter on UX2 is very comfortably in the middle and nowhere close to spiking. Track inputs on GarageBand the same - erring on the low side. I have been careful to make sure nothing downstream from the AxeFx has the possibility of clipping.

This clip sounds very "modeled" to me lacking the feel and realism I've heard others achieve. Not sure what else I need to be doing but would love some pointers. It seems there are several threads going on about having the same challenges so I know I'm not alone but again, I've heard others get much nicer results so wondering what I need to be doing. I appreciate the help.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
[quote="Tone Jones":2an45j9u]Cabinet
Using Jay's 4x12 V30 SM57 IR with drive on 0
Who told you that one is mine? It isn't.[/quote:2an45j9u]
I thought the file name had your name in it, sorry. I've downloaded a ton of IRs and don't remember the source. What would be a better IR to try?
 
Tone Jones said:
I haven't messed with any IR's so I am curious about those but wondering where else I need to be tweaking. Any insight is appreciated.

Oh, man! That could solve your ENTIRE problem right there. I find that using different IR's changes my tone (recorded or direct live) more dramatically than MOST amp settings do. Try all of the fractal versions and then try downloading and using some custom ones. Go to the Impulse Response page here and poke around. Ask questions.

I guarantee that if you start trying other people's impulse responses, you'll IMMEDIATELY see how much different it can all sound. With any luck, you'll find one similar to what you're used to hearing with your personal cabinet recorded in real life.
 
browlett said:
Tone Jones said:
I haven't messed with any IR's so I am curious about those but wondering where else I need to be tweaking. Any insight is appreciated.

Oh, man! That could solve your ENTIRE problem right there. I find that using different IR's changes my tone (recorded or direct live) more dramatically than MOST amp settings do. Try all of the fractal versions and then try downloading and using some custom ones. Go to the Impulse Response page here and poke around. Ask questions.

I guarantee that if you start trying other people's impulse responses, you'll IMMEDIATELY see how much different it can all sound. With any luck, you'll find one similar to what you're used to hearing with your personal cabinet recorded in real life.
I tried all the factory ones and so far no luck. I did upload one IR that supposedly was a V30 loaded 4x12, which is what I currently have, and that's the one in the recording - nowhere close.

I guess I'll keep trying different IRs but if anyone has other suggestions and/or was in a similar situation and the light bulb went off one day for them, please don't hesitate to share.
 
Hi There,

A couple of things that work for me in dialing direct recording tones...

Turn off all of your delays, reverbs, stereo enhancers, etc and start with a dry MONO tone.

Once you get in the ballpark of where you want to go with a patch, put on a well produced/recorded CD of a band with a similar guitar tone that you are trying to dial and re-tweak. Dialing your sound with a reference point makes all the difference in the world. When you start to sound like you are "in the mix" you are getting close.

At this point, your tone may sound a bit flat and two dimensional, depending on what you are looking for. Now add in a touch of reverb with the thought in mind that you want this to not sound like an effect per say, but to merely give you the impression that your sound is coming from a mic'd source in a room. Try to dial in a reverb that mimics what your idea of a good sounding recording studio would sound like where you would mic your cabs. Take time with this reverb, as it will serve you for many of your patches. Now, dial in just a tiny bit of this until your tone begins to sound three dimensional and have some air around it. If you can hear the reverb trail you've probably gone too far. It is something that you shouldn't notice until you bypass it and then find that you miss it. There is some good starting parameters for this in the Wiki that you might want to try, although I would dial the wet mix back quite a bit... maybe 9-10%.

If you are planning on double or quad tracking, you may want to leave your patches as mono and adjusting panning in your DAW. If you prefer to use stereo patches, then start to tweak your panning at this point. I approach this the way I would with a real set of mics and cabs... For instance, an SM57 and a MD421 or R121 are a good combination for rock tones. Let the 57 be the main part of your tone and dial up the Senny or the Royer until your sound gains some girth and some dimension and loses some of that harsh midrange from just the 57. Do this in mono at first. This can be on a duplicate cab (real world would often be same cab and often same speaker) or you can do this on a complimentary cab. If you plan on going stereo, don't just pan everything hard left and right, but instead listen as you pan and see what sounds best. Also, keep in mind that if you are panning two sources of unequal level (the 57 is probably set louder than the other mic for example) that you'll want to pan unevenly to keep the tone sounding "centered" without changing the ratio between mics.

If your sound is starting to happen, but is sounding a bit too muddy, don't be afraid to tame the bass, and do some surgery with the parametric EQ. Try using a high pass and cut out the portion that is going to fight with the bass player (below 70-120Hz). Try some surgical cuts at the frequencies that seem to cause you the most mud, such as 250Hz. Maybe add a little boost at 2K for some clarity and maybe boost a high shelf at around 10-12k for some added air.

If you are getting some harsh or artificial sounding highs, try doing some EQing in similar fashion... Sweep the parametric with a large boost and try to accentuate the offending freqs, and then turn that boost into a cut. Adjust the Q to as narrow as possible to cut out the ugly without interfering with the good. Rule of thumb is wide Q for more natural boosting and narrow Q for less obtrusive cutting. Also, try dialing in a touch of the warmth parameter here. I also personally feel a touch of cab drive helps here, but some might debate that.

Remember, do all of this back and forth with a good reference mix. Makes a world of difference. ;)

Now, you might be feeling like your tone is a bit dry sounding and needs some reverb. Before reaching for the reverb, try using a delay instead. Roll off some of the highs in the repeats and limit the repeats to 1-3. You can add a sense of space without muddying up your tone or your mix. Reverb can be just the ticket for certain tones, but it can take a lot of sonic real estate and also make your sound more distant.

Once you think that you're really getting there, try recording some tracks the way you would with a real world amp, cab, and mic set-up... i.e. double/quad tracking, post processing, etc. This is part of the elusive secret sauce of pro sounding recordings.

Go back and listen to your test tracks with fresh ears and record variations of your tones in the same mix to reference later and on separate systems. If you prefer, then just dial in separate patches with subtle variations so you can spin the patch wheel and hear the differences in real-time. You'll start to narrow in on what you like. I think I had like 13 or 14 different Recto crunch presets before I finally got to where I am now. Same with lead patches, cleans, etc (who said OCD???!!! :eek: )

Remember, when in doubt, err on the side of:

Bright rather than dark
Dry rather than wet
Less gain rather than more
Less wide rather than more wide (panning)
More mids rather than less



Hope this helps!
-Matt
 
Back
Top Bottom