What about my impression of the "lost notes"? That's more about clarity in the gain structure. The frequency response differences are not that much bothering me, because that can be corrected relatively easy...
I disagree. I didn't do any tone match or advanced tweaks and my comparison (first two clips on the previous page) did not exhibit the same high end loss as the video. I used the exact same signal chain: amp-> LB-2 -> Axe-Fx III as IR player.I thought the comparison was done correctly. Tone match / advanced settings is quite a deep level of tweaking. I think the majority wants to see this kind of a direct head to head comparison. The good news for this community is that the Axe-Fx was definitely the closest modeler.
When we're talking about "brighter and darker" I think we first need to get the facts straight. This is a match EQ of the real Recto vs Axe-Fx III:I disagree. I didn't do any tone match or advanced tweaks and my comparison (first two clips on the previous page) did not exhibit the same high end loss as the video. I used the exact same signal chain: amp-> LB-2 -> Axe-Fx III as IR player.
When we're talking about "brighter and darker" I think we first need to get the facts straight. This is a match EQ of the real Recto vs Axe-Fx III:
... as in, this is how you would have to EQ the Axe-Fx III to match Jon's Recto. This would be the tone match curve. So the real amp is brighter at 10khz by about 2dB but the Axe-Fx is actually the one that has less low end since it would need a 5,6dB boost at 70hz and 1.5dB in the low mids. Depending on what you're using for listening you might not hear that low end especially since it's been high passed quite a bit. On the later comparisons it seemed as if the Axe-Fx had less highs but I think there were volume differences in favor of the Dual Recto at times.
The way I would solve this would be to change the speaker page settings quite drastically and that's a real difference of this comparison. Loadbox vs the speaker simulation settings on the speaker page. This is usually where I need to make changes when comparing to my real amps as well. And I'm not only talking about loadbox comparisons. DI between amp and cab, same thing. Slave out of a Mesa plugged into a cab, same thing happens.
Here's my real Mark V compared to the Axe-Fx III with a lot of fine tuning on the speaker page of the amp sim:
It's not perfect especially in the low end but it's really close.
If someone is interested in making deeper adjustments, here's a free software that, among a lot of other stuff, allows to measure the impedance curve of a speaker just by using an audio interface and a resistor.
http://www.roomeqwizard.com
Its help section explains clearly how to do it.
Never tried it so I don't know how accurate this method is, certainly worth a try.
Regarding @Guitarjon comparisons, I wish the end section of the solo recordings played the entire chord riff through each modeler because the chords you play through the real amp are bigger chords with higher notes and the regular power chords and sus2 chord are played through the modelers. It gives a false perception that the real amp is clearer but it's really because you're playing almost 3 octaves.
The LB-2 is roughly equivalent to a LF Res. Frequency of 100 Hz, Q of 1.6 and LF Resonance of 4.0.
"Drastic settings" are not required. What is required is an understanding of the controls on that page and what they do. The LB-2 is roughly equivalent to a LF Res. Frequency of 100 Hz, Q of 1.6 and LF Resonance of 4.0. With the voicing switch in the US position the frequency changes to about 70 and the resonance increases to about 5. Due to tolerances the frequency can vary +/- 10%.
So based on the above I'd say the LF resonant frequency is too high. The LB-2 was probably in the US voicing. A typical Recto cabinet has a resonant frequency a little over 100 Hz and therefore that is the default on the model.
So it should be already in the ballpark.I have it set on UK always.
So it should be already in the ballpark.
Was speaker comp turned up in your preset perhaps? I think that can change the frequency response too, while a loadbox shouldn't have any compression.. maybe