Do You Hear a Difference

Do You Hear a Difference

  • Total voters
    296
  • Poll closed .
barhrecords said:
Makes sense to me.

For me, if you would have left of the bit about money spent and time wasted tweaking and cutting your loses, giving up on the AxeFx and going back to a conventional amp rig, you could have avoided part of the criticism. Just my take on your OP.
Click to expand...

Yeah you're right. I had a break down... long day at work and long day at the studio and that was the outcome and... you know how it is. :)
 
Clark Kent said:
I feel the need to clarify a few things. I am all for the Axe-Fx and that's what I've been saying over and over again but for some reason I get these accusations with presumptions that I'm not. I can make my Axe-Fx sound awesome. There's no denying that and I bet some of you agree with me.

First I'd like to say something about how you measure stuff in these tests. 1) Ofcourse the scientific way with all the meters etc. but 2) "the feel" is something that can't be explained by graphs or science but you have to experience it and sadly all I have to give is words.

I wasn't being too clear about the test we made mostly because too much text is harder for people to digest but seems like even that amount of text was a bit too much for most people. We did multiple tests. That dynamic picture was just one out of many and I think that one was through a Palmer PDI and same settings on the Triaxis and Axe-Fx model so there was no power amp influencing that signal. (yes we used the right output of the Triaxis)

Cliff's test is different to ours. I'm talking about [real amp + real cab + mic] vs [axe-fx (with an IR of the same mic position)]. Because most of what we were testing was "is an IR good enough?" how could we compare that if both clips came through an IR? That's the "questioning" part and I was hoping for conversation. Is there a cool compressor setting that could maybe slow down the attack of the IR to make it maybe a bit smoother etc? The IR thing definitely falls into the "feel category". Also because the power amp affects the IR so much, is there a power amp that is really perfect for shooting IR's because in my experience tube power amps end up too scooped and SS power amps sound closer but maybe too much middle? I almost feel like maybe mixing the same IR with a tube and SS power amp would be the most realistic outcome. This is all just guessing though.

But this requires a bit of brain work. How many of you have been in a studio with a separate isolated amp room and a mic'ed up cab, shot and IR with a good SS power amp (we also tried a tube amp), used the same mic position for a comparison between all inside Axe-Fx vs all real tube gear and A/B'd them under a microscope for a day? That is what I'm talking about. And the difference was small but there was a difference that I couldn't explain in that situation where I tried everything to make it disappear. Simply put: the Axe-Fx was clearer and lacked a certain depth that the real life counterpart had which could be match EQ'd in post but not with the amp sim knobs.

So yes I might be a bearer of bad news and we all know what happens to those guys. Personal remarks might be "very funny" but the need for some people to go there shows that they would rather not see evolution in the Axe-Fx. I guess I'm not the cool kid in the guitar geek club then. :lol
Click to expand...

Cliff's test takes out a lot of the variables out. And based on the wave form and the sound clips, the triaxis preamp and the Axe's triaxis model is virtually identical. So I think we can conclude that the preamp is not the issue, no? How did the two things sound to you when you did your test? If it's close then there are most likely some variables fudging things up.
 
If you were more confident about the sound of your Axe and had convinced your friend with the Triaxis the Axe was superior, would he have went thru all this? Also did he acknowledge Cliff's work on ir development because he thought they could be improved?
Dynamics from a preamp(s) are hard to hear compared to what power amp dynamics do. Feeling this is nice when playing (power amp) but when going to FOH or even getting away from the amp a bit it loses the impact and doesn't matter, even when recording too.
I've heard many recordings with the Axe that are hands down better sounding than a similar real world tube rig. I hope I can match some of their writing/recording skills someday, I'm not worried about someone's tube rig.
 
Clark Kent said:
"the feel" is something that can't be explained by graphs or science but you have to experience it and sadly all I have to give is words.

I'm talking about [real amp + real cab + mic] vs [axe-fx (with an IR of the same mic position)]. Because most of what we were testing was "is an IR good enough?" how could we compare that if both clips came through an IR? That's the "questioning" part and I was hoping for conversation. Is there a cool compressor setting that could maybe slow down the attack of the IR to make it maybe a bit smoother etc? The IR thing definitely falls into the "feel category". Also because the power amp affects the IR so much, is there a power amp that is really perfect for shooting IR's because in my experience tube power amps end up too scooped and SS power amps sound closer but maybe too much middle? I almost feel like maybe mixing the same IR with a tube and SS power amp would be the most realistic outcome. This is all just guessing though.
Click to expand...

You're sort of encapsulating what I have been asking here recently, since we all became IR crazed. But that is, simply, that an IR appears to be "an EQ curve". And a speaker and cabinet, seem to be reactive and alive. The speakers push out a little bit with a little volume, and push out a lot with a lot of volume. The cabinet resonates a little bit or a lot - depending on the frequencies. The assembly pushes back and resists the power amp, and that is changing over volume and frequency. The impedance is changing.

I think the cabinet block should be "alive" like the amp block already is. If I turn my guitar volume down, the amp cleans up. But then, that goes into a stagnant cab IR Eq curve. In the real world, my resonance would change and the whole thing would sound different "pushes back at the power amp" differently. IR's are very cool, but I think we need a VRL - virtual reactive load algorithm that pushes against the power amp, similar to how the real life cabinet would for that size and model 1x12, 2x12, 4x12, and changes according to how hard it's being driven....

The thing is...I haven't the foggiest clue how to put that into code. Perhaps that is already happening inside the Cab block, and I just don't know that.
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
You're sort of encapsulating what I have been asking here recently, since we all became IR crazed. But that is, simply, that an IR appears to be "an EQ curve". And a speaker and cabinet, seem to be reactive and alive. The speakers push out a little bit with a little volume, and push out a lot with a lot of volume. The cabinet resonates a little bit or a lot - depending on the frequencies. The assembly pushes back and resists the power amp, and that is changing over volume and frequency. The impedance is changing.

I think the cabinet block should be "alive" like the amp block already is. If I turn my guitar volume down, the amp cleans up. But then, that goes into a stagnant cab IR Eq curve. In the real world, my resonance would change and the whole thing would sound different "pushes back at the power amp" differently. IR's are very cool, but I think we need a VRL - virtual reactive load algorithm that pushes against the power amp, similar to how the real life cabinet would for that size and model 1x12, 2x12, 4x12, and changes according to how hard it's being driven....

The thing is...I haven't the foggiest clue how to put that into code. Perhaps that is already happening inside the Cab block, and I just don't know that.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the electrical interaction between the amp and the cab is modeled in the amp section, with the caveat being that, since the Axe cannot possibly know the characteristics of the cab used to make the IR, the user must take his/her best guess and manually set these parameters in the amp section. Use what sounds best.
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
You're sort of encapsulating what I have been asking here recently, since we all became IR crazed. But that is, simply, that an IR appears to be "an EQ curve". And a speaker and cabinet, seem to be reactive and alive. The speakers push out a little bit with a little volume, and push out a lot with a lot of volume. The cabinet resonates a little bit or a lot - depending on the frequencies. The assembly pushes back and resists the power amp, and that is changing over volume and frequency. The impedance is changing.

I think the cabinet block should be "alive" like the amp block already is. If I turn my guitar volume down, the amp cleans up. But then, that goes into a stagnant cab IR Eq curve. In the real world, my resonance would change and the whole thing would sound different "pushes back at the power amp" differently. IR's are very cool, but I think we need a VRL - virtual reactive load algorithm that pushes against the power amp, similar to how the real life cabinet would for that size and model 1x12, 2x12, 4x12, and changes according to how hard it's being driven....

The thing is...I haven't the foggiest clue how to put that into code. Perhaps that is already happening inside the Cab block, and I just don't know that.
Click to expand...

I believe the SPKR page of the current Amp block are the parameters intended to accomplish what you are saying... at least some of it.
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
You're sort of encapsulating what I have been asking here recently, since we all became IR crazed. But that is, simply, that an IR appears to be "an EQ curve". And a speaker and cabinet, seem to be reactive and alive. The speakers push out a little bit with a little volume, and push out a lot with a lot of volume. The cabinet resonates a little bit or a lot - depending on the frequencies. The assembly pushes back and resists the power amp, and that is changing over volume and frequency. The impedance is changing.

I think the cabinet block should be "alive" like the amp block already is. If I turn my guitar volume down, the amp cleans up. But then, that goes into a stagnant cab IR Eq curve. In the real world, my resonance would change and the whole thing would sound different "pushes back at the power amp" differently. IR's are very cool, but I think we need a VRL - virtual reactive load algorithm that pushes against the power amp, similar to how the real life cabinet would for that size and model 1x12, 2x12, 4x12, and changes according to how hard it's being driven....

The thing is...I haven't the foggiest clue how to put that into code. Perhaps that is already happening inside the Cab block, and I just don't know that.
Click to expand...

There's a reason tubes are called "valves", I'm not sure a solid state power amp can open up (or simulate) a valve opening up and whacking a speaker like a valve opening up does. But see my above post as I think this is only about feel.
 
Just saw this. With my monitors it's not hard to hear the difference. There's more lows in the axe-fx, but I like both. Putting both machines in the same signal chain/listening context is critical, unlike all the cab vs frfr in-a-room bs that typically goes on.
 
I definitely hear a difference. The first half of the clip has more weight and pronounced low mids and thickness as well as what seems like more saturation or gain then the second half of the clip. To my ears it could be simply a matter of more gain. Think this translates into what feels like a more forward/slightly louder sound in the first clip. IMHO.

FractalAudio said:
In the "Questioning" thread I posted the waveform of the Axe-Fx followed by the real amp. I then posted the clip for that waveform. Do you hear a difference?

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/triaxis_comp.mp3

Here's the same clip but with the parts reversed:

www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/triaxis_comp_reversed.mp3
Click to expand...
 
Clark Kent said:
Cliff's test is different to ours. I'm talking about [real amp + real cab + mic] vs [axe-fx (with an IR of the same mic position)]. Because most of what we were testing was "is an IR good enough?" how could we compare that if both clips came through an IR?
Click to expand...

Maybe the room has an influence on your result? Since the IR is basically all attack and very little room interaction, whereas the real amp is filling the room with sound, shaking the floor, etc, I could see that making a big difference in the result depending on the room, sound levels, mic and amp positions, and guitar tone.
 
sam said:
Maybe the room has an influence on your result? Since the IR is basically all attack and very little room interaction, whereas the real amp is filling the room with sound, shaking the floor, etc, I could see that making a big difference in the result depending on the room, sound levels, mic and amp positions, and guitar tone.
Click to expand...

Good point. Also, was the mic in suspension?
 
Could not hear a difference. Not sure anyone would hear a difference on their car radio either, or their mp3 player, PC audio out card, tv for that matter ...
 
rodzimguitar68 said:
You're sort of encapsulating what I have been asking here recently, since we all became IR crazed. But that is, simply, that an IR appears to be "an EQ curve". And a speaker and cabinet, seem to be reactive and alive. The speakers push out a little bit with a little volume, and push out a lot with a lot of volume. The cabinet resonates a little bit or a lot - depending on the frequencies. The assembly pushes back and resists the power amp, and that is changing over volume and frequency. The impedance is changing.

I think the cabinet block should be "alive" like the amp block already is. If I turn my guitar volume down, the amp cleans up. But then, that goes into a stagnant cab IR Eq curve. In the real world, my resonance would change and the whole thing would sound different "pushes back at the power amp" differently. IR's are very cool, but I think we need a VRL - virtual reactive load algorithm that pushes against the power amp, similar to how the real life cabinet would for that size and model 1x12, 2x12, 4x12, and changes according to how hard it's being driven....

The thing is...I haven't the foggiest clue how to put that into code. Perhaps that is already happening inside the Cab block, and I just don't know that.
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention this, as I asked for something similar around a month ago and got very little response. Lol

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/showthread.php?t=81751 Amp/Cab Block Interaction

I really think this is the "next step."
 
I listened to both clips, so I'll only reference clip 1. Riff 2 seemed to have more life and cut in the upper lows and mids. Riff 1 seemed a little smoother and darker in the upper lows and mids. I think riff 2 will cut through the mix better than riff 1. I prefer 2.
 
Yeah, well when I talked about how IRs are not like "the real thing" I got basically bitch slapped with a bunch of techno mumbo jumbo that amounted to basically nothing. IRs sound different because of the way we capture them. Until a new system is devised on how to handle them, we'll only get "really great sounding" IRs, not "more cab-like" IRs.
 
RichHowe said:
It seems like an auditory illusion to me. When I listen to them consecutively the first clip sounds better to me; more clarity, more open, and less compressed then the second clip. However, if I jump back and forth to the same spot in each clip they sound the same to me. I believe it may be because the clips seem to end on higher frequencies than they start, so the beginning of the second clip appears to sound a little duller and more compressed when compared to the end of the first clip. But, when I jump back and forth to when they should be playing the same frequencies they sound the same to me.
Click to expand...

I swear I can hear a slight difference when I listen to them back to back, but when I cut a section out and listen to it in Audacity (just those sections looped) I can't hear any difference. Maybe it's the effects or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom