Dialing OUT the digital Axe-Fx midrange

Status
Not open for further replies.
I might have agreed with OP before the impedance curves were added, but I haven't experienced honky mids ever since. It's not really honk, it's just that older amp sim plugin midrange, which was because of the lack of impedance curve calculation.

I just sold my kemper a few weeks ago funny enough, after testing it when it had sat for a few years. Updated firmware, tested old favorite profiles. Out the door.

Also people mentioned keeping the master lower on high gain amps, this seems like the most obvious thing in the world, If you stand next to a 120w monster over 1 on the master :D

Just cos you can't don't mean you should!
 
Mongillo19 said:
Sorry one last question, dynacabs or IR? I think I've mentioned before how I think Dynacabs scoop out some mids and just sound brighter to me
Click to expand...
I've found this to be "sorta" true with the Dyna-Cabs. I've found that the positioning controls are very powerful for bringing out the mid range speaker response. Try this mix. I've found it works on all the Dyna Cabs I've tried. Mic=Dyn 1, Position=6.00, Distance=12.25 + Mic=Ribbon Position=4 Distance 12.00-14.00. Speaker High and Low cuts to taste and Preamp tab High/Low cuts wide open, 6db.
I also like the Condenser by itself with similar settings.
IMO, using the position controls, the mids can become much more present and the low and highs are attenuated somewhat, but in more natural way than say eq or cuts.
 
Frodebro said:
Yeah, typically when you see the word ‘digital’ in that context it is a red flag. Sounds digital. Has this digital thing going on. Etc.
Click to expand...

I disagree. For example, I couldn't deal with the Line 6 HX Stomp because of what I can only describe as a very digital tone that I could not EQ out. It is a very common complaint for the Stomp/Helix. How is that a red flag?
 
RifferMcDuck said:
I disagree. For example, I couldn't deal with the Line 6 HX Stomp because of what I can only describe as a very digital tone that I could not EQ out. It is a very common complaint for the Stomp/Helix. How is that a red flag?
Click to expand...

Aliasing.

Very real and very noticeable if you know what to listen for.

Quad Cortex has it bad.

FAS has it inaudible.
 
steadystate said:
Aliasing, quantization noise, ect., are digital artifacts. Bad eq is not. "Digital midrange" is meaningless, and amusing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your response. I'm asking what exactly about me criticizing the HX Stomp as sounding too "digital" in nature is a red flag. Is it because I am not referring to it as "aliasing" or "quantization noise"?
 
Saarang Narayan said:
Here's a 5150 with three different Master Volume settings.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clip, very helpful to hear them back to back. I hear the boomy mids at 5 and it being a bit tighter at 1.

In defense of the OP:

It has taken me awhile to really learn how what a high gain tone should sound like. Tutorials on YT often advise putting way more blocks in than you might need. They often don’t talk enough about what motivates them. And I think it’s easy to believe that the modeling changes make it trivial to get one but there definitely are definitely some subtleties, such as how to set BMT on certain high gain amps (not saying OP has that problem).

I had a real epiphany moment looking at the Jake Periphery GoT preset and the monstrous tone it cops with only a few blocks. It’s all about the IR. I’m still trying to figure what I lR I like for modern prog metal, esp with a 7 string.
 
RifferMcDuck said:
I'm not sure I understand your response. I'm asking what exactly about me criticizing the HX Stomp as sounding too "digital" in nature is a red flag. Is it because I am not referring to it as "aliasing" or "quantization noise"?
Click to expand...

For years now, “I tried it but it sounded too digital” has been the Luddite/tube snob “mic drop” complaint about modeling. In that context, it’s an empty statement based more on an emotional bias against the technology than any clearly identifiable shortcoming. But it sounds impressive.

For people who have been into digital gear for a long time, hearing statements like that for the 10,000th time means basically nothing because it’s been beaten to death.
 
Frodebro said:
For years now, “I tried it but it sounded too digital” has been the Luddite/tube snob “mic drop” complaint about modeling. In that context, it’s an empty statement based more on an emotional bias against the technology than any clearly identifiable shortcoming. But it sounds impressive.

For people who have been into digital gear for a long time, hearing statements like that for the 10,000th time means basically nothing because it’s been beaten to death.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean for sure in the broader context of modelers. But let's take my example about the HX Stomp above (no offense to Line 6, I think they do great work still). I do perceive a digital tone on that modeler, but that doesn't reflect my opinion on all modelers otherwise I wouldn't be here. Without knowing the exact terminology to describe what I perceive, how would I describe that to someone then without causing digital gear experts to dismiss my opinion, find it "amusing" or see "red flags"?
 
"Digital" doesn't have a sound. Bad digital design can sound bad, bit so can bad analog design.

No one ever left a movie theater complaining about the crappy digital sound. ;)
 
Rex said:
"Digital" doesn't have a sound. Bad digital design can sound bad, bit so can bad analog design.

No one ever left a movie theater complaining about the crappy digital sound. ;)
Click to expand...

I've always used "digital" to describe something being inorganic, mechanical, synthetic, etc. I presume many others use it the same way. There isn't really an official definition, as far as I'm aware.
 
aziz said:
Thats exactly whats wrong with it, labeling a bad sound ”digital” instead of describing whats wrong with it. Digital is not a proper adjective for describing perceived faults in audio.
Click to expand...

Yeah I get your point. But my question above still stands if you'd like to take a swing at it.
 
RifferMcDuck said:
I disagree. For example, I couldn't deal with the Line 6 HX Stomp because of what I can only describe as a very digital tone that I could not EQ out. It is a very common complaint for the Stomp/Helix. How is that a red flag?
Click to expand...
You weren't using stock ir.s by chance were you? Much harder to dial in decent presets on the Helix, but nothing sounds "digital" to me at all. In fact it's the only thing keeping me from selling mine since I've bought the Axefx3. It was hard work making 70 or so presets that sound damn good, I'm not selling that hard work away lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom