Do Pro Users Record the Axe-Fx through a mic pre?

[barhrecords]

i wouldn't run the output of the axe into a mic pre, because the axe runs at line level and a mic pre does not. wrong tool for the job. there's a reason that mic pre's exist and that's to take the output of a microphone and turn it into a line level signal. use the line inputs on your audio interface from the analog outs, or go via usb or spdif. i can't hear a significant difference between analog and digital in this scenario, so i choose to go analog and then i'm not forced to use 48k in my projects.

The OP was about running: guitar -> preamp -> Fractal

To me this can be good if you have a favorite DI or HI-Z preamp that you track with. No different than using a real amp to me.

 

[AlienSexGod]

How long ago was that?

So Long ago you can be certain no modeller was anywhere near it!
1987
But the principals would still work the same .... if you enhanced your tone before you enter the Axe....
The tone on that album was insane as was his playing!
The bottomline line truth is a modeller is a convenient fantastic package ... the ultimate pro recording scenario rarely involves modellers. You can never beat real tubes....

 

[vangrieg]

You can never beat real tubes....

Especially in pro recording business. There MUST be something unavailable to your client if you make money on a service. Having a special room, stacks of amps, mics, vintage compressors and of course a console with five hundred faders is way more impressive than an Axe FX and a laptop. You'd inevitably ask the question about why the hell you need to pay a lot of money for just a guy and a laptop. After all, all those faders are there for a reason. And if they are, they do something to your sound a laptop can't, right? Right?

I'm a management consultant, that's my day job. There are lots of jokes about how consultants show meaningless charts, fly meaningless flights and have meaningless conference calls. They are funny and true, to a certain extent. The other part of the truth, however, is that it is clients that require all that stuff. I would love to just come to a client, listen to the one REAL issue he has, spend a week to analyze it, and come back with a solution written on three pages. Heck, it would be a better business even. But no. Clients almost never agree to that. It makes them feel cheated. And stupid. Like I'm smarter than they are. No. There has to be some special process, some secret methodology, something they don't have, right? Right? So we end up having a contract for a million dollars, spend months producing hundreds of slides, waste time in conference calls and workshops, and all of this generates 95% of the cost with little additional value. And that answer to the real question is buried somewhere in that junk. If we manage not to forget about it, that is. I mean, we do it like real professionals!

 

[smallstonefan]

I use SPDIF because my UAD Apollo Quad lets me monitor in real-time, and can even do sample rate conversion on the fly if I wanted to use a rate other than 48k (but I don't). USB introduced too much latency for me.

FWIW, I use an old Valvulator with an AT7 tube (less distortion than the stock AX7) between the guitar and the Axe. I always did this with amps because I ran a pretty complex pedal chain and wanted a buffer - but one that behaved like a tube amp. The Valvulator ensures that a high voltage tube is always the first thing the guitar sees. I tried the Axe with and without it, and though the difference was minor I preferred the Valvulator in the chain.

YMMV

 

[gitfruit]

Why is there no mention of the AES output? Probably because many interfaces do not have AES ins ? I recorded from AES into my RME Fireface as well as from analog outs and could not hear a difference. I didn´t care much for the reamping options USB supplies, you can alternatively split your signal before the axe if you feel the need. I don´t care for reamping either. I believe you have to find the tone that fits the song and record that. I may be old fashioned anyway. Old for sure. And I don´t see a problem with CPU overload. I prefer to record my guitar without effects and add them in the DAW.
Note that all this doesn´t come from a "pro", it´s just my experience after producing, recording and partly mixing and mastering three albums for my band. Oh, and I wouldn´t use a mic-preamp when recording guitar with the AxeFX, simply because the sound is already stellar.

 

[LiamH]

The OP was about running: guitar -> preamp -> Fractal

To me this can be good if you have a favorite DI or HI-Z preamp that you track with. No different than using a real amp to me.

There are quite few possibilities available within the Axe-FX for adjustment of input impedance. Until you have exhausted all of these there is very little point in considering putting another buffer in between the two, which is effectively what you would be doing with a good "flat" mic preamp.

I have never been a full time pro recording guitar player, but when I did record regularly I used quite a few devices as buffers and preamps. Particularly liked the WEM Copicat buffer, and used them without a tape loaded both live and in the studio. One of the great things about the Klon Centaur is it has a great sounding buffer rather than being true bypass. I can't think I'll ever want either in front of my Axe-FX, but I guess I'll have to see what it sounds like one day.

Liam

 

[vangrieg]

Why is there no mention of the AES output? Probably because many interfaces do not have AES ins ?

I guess so. AES is definitely superior to S/PDIF as it should have less jitter, if I remember correctly, but I personally can't hear any difference.

 

[AlGrenadine]

Especially in pro recording business. There MUST be something unavailable to your client if you make money on a service. Having a special room, stacks of amps, mics, vintage compressors and of course a console with five hundred faders is way more impressive than an Axe FX and a laptop. You'd inevitably ask the question about why the hell you need to pay a lot of money for just a guy and a laptop. After all, all those faders are there for a reason. And if they are, they do something to your sound a laptop can't, right? Right?

I'm a management consultant, that's my day job. There are lots of jokes about how consultants show meaningless charts, fly meaningless flights and have meaningless conference calls. They are funny and true, to a certain extent. The other part of the truth, however, is that it is clients that require all that stuff. I would love to just come to a client, listen to the one REAL issue he has, spend a week to analyze it, and come back with a solution written on three pages. Heck, it would be a better business even. But no. Clients almost never agree to that. It makes them feel cheated. And stupid. Like I'm smarter than they are. No. There has to be some special process, some secret methodology, something they don't have, right? Right? So we end up having a contract for a million dollars, spend months producing hundreds of slides, waste time in conference calls and workshops, and all of this generates 95% of the cost with little additional value. And that answer to the real question is buried somewhere in that junk. If we manage not to forget about it, that is. I mean, we do it like real professionals!

Ahah yes you're right customers judge sound with their eyes, so there's definitely a market for fake vintage compressors, fake consoles etc so you can use a laptop and an axefx alone

 

[vangrieg]

Ahah yes you're right customers judge sound with their eyes, so there's definitely a market for fake vintage compressors, fake consoles etc so you can use a laptop and an axefx alone

Not necessarily fake, but there's certainly law of diminishing returns here.

 

[Pwrmac7600]

I say do whatever gets you the sound you are after. if that happens to involve mic pres then I say go for it, and when you post clips and all the nay sayers are telling you how amazing your tone is and asking for a preset, tell em they can have the preset, but not the secret cause that got the sound.

 

[prog_head]

This is a great question. I have been recording off and on for 25 years. EVERY piece of equipment puts stamp on the sound. Every cable, every amplifier, every guitar, every pickup, every speaker, every cabinet…. EVERYTHING.

My years of searching for the perfect guitar sound took many turns and cost me a ton of money. I have over a dozen amplifiers, and 1x12, 2x12, 4x10, 4x12 cabinets loaded with all sorts of speakers. I have microphones from 57s to AKG 414 to Royer R121. Every single one produces a different sound. Some better for this, some better for that. Some even plain sucked (a reverend 4x10 cab comes to mind… the flattest, most unappealing cabinet I could ever imagine). I NEVER found the perfect sound… and I spent at least $100,000 looking for it. My conclusion is that there is no perfect guitar sound and my desires for what it should be change daily…

I also spent a ton on recording gear. I've had cheap converters and nice converters and great converters. Again, they make a HUGE difference. Currently I have Lynx and Mytek converters and I record at 192kHz and 24bit. Is it worth it? Hell yes. My raw sounds have never sounded more realistic… ever… and I am a convert to HighRes recording and I want a 96k Axe-Fx. It would be a game changer… to me at least.

So what? Big deal people might say… what difference does this make? None if you can't afford it all. Now… finally to answering the question.

When I got my AxeFx II (I had an Ultra before and loved it) I took some time testing it out. My favorite sounds came through my Atomic Reactors. It sounded full and deep. When I would record this direct, in any way, through my converters, I felt it lost some of this. Some of what? Air? Tubes? Speakers? Doesn't matter, it was missing something to my ears. So I started to experiment. I put it through all of my preamps. I had just gone through upgrading all of my 'stock' preamps to Audient and

• Neve Portico - sounded scooped… definitely did not like it… and I LOVE this preamp, but not for this
• Audient - pretty good but not exciting
• Etc, etc
• DBX 386 that has a tube… this was my favorite. Not perfect, but it imparted a certain roundness that I liked. It came closest to what I was hearing from the Atomics into my DAW.

Then I started the same stupid and expensive process that I always do… I went on a quest to find the perfect preamp for my Axe. I tried numerous… UA 2-610… great sound (I love it for direct bass) but… not for the axe… a bit scooped again. I called Mercenary Sound to get some advice. "What you are looking for is a big transformer, not tubes or anything else" I was told. I kept trying and buying preamps, looking for the one that my ears said "YES!" to. I finally landed on Chandlers. Big solid state transformers and they just work for me. Both the Chandler TG2 and the Chandler Germanium do it for me. They impart the sound that makes me happy. To my ears they work great and I am happy.

Moral of the story? To each his own. Try out different combinations, if that is they type of person you are. Otherwise, do what you do and just be happy. For me and my money, the preamp put the Axe over the top. In this regard, even though I had to buy a $2k preamp to make my Axe record the way I wanted it to, the Axe has still saved me tens of thousands of dollars on continuing my quest for the perfect guitar sound. And it is never perfect, just like my wall of amps and cabinets and my chest of microphones, and my racks of preamps and other crap. But at least I am not buying a new amp every other month. Find your sound and go with it.

Good luck and happy hunting and playing! I love the Axe (but I still want a 96k Axe... that would be unreal!)

 

[AlienSexGod]

Especially in pro recording business. There MUST be something unavailable to your client if you make money on a service. Having a special room, stacks of amps, mics, vintage compressors and of course a console with five hundred faders is way more impressive than an Axe FX and a laptop. You'd inevitably ask the question about why the hell you need to pay a lot of money for just a guy and a laptop. After all, all those faders are there for a reason. And if they are, they do something to your sound a laptop can't, right? Right?

And that answer to the real question is buried somewhere in that junk. If we manage not to forget about it, that is. I mean, we do it like real professionals!

Hi Vangrieg,
There is no argument that modellers have their place however I thought this was not the argument. The management consultant comparison is incomparable unless you are a relatively weak facsimile of a professional with a different title delivering superior results, albeit at greater cost benefit ratio?

The question surely is what would a professional working in an environment with an almost unlimited budget to achieve the best result would do and use?

The test for me is to listen to an amp without effects and tweaks. Sure I can make the modeller sound better but you can do that with a real amp recorded with a good ribbon or large diaphragm condenser mic not this SM57 rubbish. If I have the time and budget I would prefer to start with the best and tweak from there.

I only recently came to Fractal land after owing one of the first Helix's in the world and when I listened to just the amps there was only ONE amp that was good and that was the Marshall. The AC30 was useable but not great the rest was basically rubbish. So I flipped it fast. Are there guys that are pulling good sounds from them? Sure and in the mix they can sit well and sound very good however even the choruses when you solo them sound cheap and fake close up. With the Axe things like the chorus sound very good solo'd. As good as my TC 1210? Nope. But close enough to be very usable and super convenient. I have a relatively poor budget so the TC got flipped as they are worth 3 times the price I paid.

In the Amp department the Axe has many very good useable amps. Probably a hundred times more than the Helix but some like the Dumble ODS solo'd are so weak compared to the original that I wonder if it's worth the time to tweak? As a reference I have solo'd all the Q 2.04 amps and I am running through Q3 Beta 2 now. Sure I have heard some Axe Dumbles in the mix sound good but if I recorded a real Dumble with a Royer 121 then tweaked it with real valve preamp and EQ and added effects I would have a seriously mind blowing recording. This can also be done with a quality Dumble clone.

In the high end however most engineers will record the dry signal.

I believe it's a fact that many pros use the 4CM (four cable method) with Axe FXII. Why? Because at the high end you just can't beat real tubes.

 

[Lionheart]

not this SM57 rubbish

You're kidding, right?

 

[AlienSexGod]

You're kidding, right?

Well for the money they are good but if you actually compare say a Royer 121 Vs SM57 then yes the sound form a 57 is rubbish.
I used one of the first Helix's and my default ALL of their amps have a model of a SM57 on them. The only amp that is good in a Helix is a Marshall and even that didn't sound good until you change the mic to a ribbon mic then good to go. I appreciate that most guitar players think that a 57 is good but it's not.....

 

[Pwrmac7600]

Well for the money they are good but if you actually compare say a Royer 121 Vs SM57 then yes the sound form a 57 is rubbish.
I used one of the first Helix's and my default ALL of their amps have a model of a SM57 on them. The only amp that is good in a Helix is a Marshall and even that didn't sound good until you change the mic to a ribbon mic then good to go. I appreciate that most guitar players think that a 57 is good but it's not.....

You know that the SM57 is hands down the most widely used mic to record a guitar amp with right?
Without a doubt the most commonly heard microphone ever for guitar recordings.... Not saying it is a be all end all, but to say it is rubbish would contradict the opinion of most of the worlds top producers and engineers. To each his own.

 

[LiamH]

You know that the SM57 is hands down the most widely used mic to record a guitar amp with right?
Without a doubt the most commonly heard microphone ever for guitar recordings.... Not saying it is a be all end all, but to say it is rubbish would contradict the opinion of most of the worlds top producers and engineers. To each his own.

Tends to be my first pass at getting a sound. Second pass is generally 2 x SM57, one angled at 45 degrees and a little further off axis. If I'm still not feeling it by then I start experimenting. It's kind of hard to say the SM57 is rubbish on the basis of it not sounding good in a Helix model. They are definitely better when they haven't been hit by a drumstick too often - I really ought to mark one of mine with tape and only ever use that one on the snare drum.

Liam

 

[Rexxyboy]

I have an RME UCX as my primary audio interface, and I choose SPDIF. I do't see any point in going through an external pre-amp.

I record every day in a DAW for a living. I have a neve MIC pre which i use for bass guitar and vocals, percussion, acoustic guitar. LOVE the RME drivers, they are rock solid and is has a great monitor mixer with FX. I can control this monitor mix with an iPad, very handy when vocalists come in. Based on this workflow, the AXE FX usb audio is of no use to me.

I do however have AXE Edit up for editing sounds on the fly, i treat it like a plugin!

 

[swass]

Lets not forget the pre's in the cab block and the mic pre's that are used to capture many of the factory and 3rd party IR's alike. To use another mic pre on top of what is available in the Axe and what is baked into most IR's already... seems a little redundant to me.
But hey... whatever blows your hair back... which is very important.

 

[AlienSexGod]

You know that the SM57 is hands down the most widely used mic to record a guitar amp with right?
Without a doubt the most commonly heard microphone ever for guitar recordings.... Not saying it is a be all end all, but to say it is rubbish would contradict the opinion of most of the worlds top producers and engineers. To each his own.

Nope. It may be the most widely used mic LIVE because they are cheap robust and OK but certainly NOT in Pro recording. Back in the 60s & 70s they may have been used on some budget recordings that became hits but these tunes we hits for reason other than the most uber guitar tone.

It's kind of hard to say the SM57 is rubbish on the basis of it not sounding good in a Helix model. Liam

I didn't actually say that. They are rubbish in real life compared to a Royer 121! A mic that can be had for USD $700 every semi-pro let alone Pro studio can afford one. Or get a Royer 122 that has a similar sound but higher output and sensitivity and more useable for applications other than guit amps. (Check the above linked youtube demo) Sure I used the Helix model as an example of the type of EQ a 57 does to your tone. I am sure they use spectral analysis on a 57 to get it close. It also was a good example of the massive delusion that the 57 is a good mic for your amp that Line 6, or is that Line 57?, would put a SM-57 on all their amps by default and make them sound even worse than they already were! Unfucking believable. Go get a Helix, solo an amp, change the mic from the 57 to ribbon mic and you will see what I mean ... even non muso people go whoah that's a massive improvement!

If your interested I think it's a good move that Amps in the Axe have NO mic on them by default and in most cases if you are adding a mic the Neumann U67 model, I find, is arguably the best. I used to own a 1960's U67 a superb mic!

 

[Lionheart]

It may be the most widely used mic LIVE because they are cheap robust and OK but certainly NOT in Pro recording.

You are flat out wrong. Your sweeping generalizations are inaccurate, as well.