FAS: A couple clarifications needed on 5.0, please.

Patzag

Patzag

Fractal Fanatic
To Cliff:

I'd like to get a couple of clarifications to make the most out of my upgrade to V5.0. Having thoroughly enjoyed 4.01 and sculpted presets which worked wonderfully and sat well in live mixing environments, I was a bit stomped when I upgraded to 5.0 and my presets no longer worked the same way. One preset, my most go-to in my live set, took 25 minutes to tweak back to a playable form.

This is really mainly due to ignorance on my part. I'm not an engineer (by far) and I know next to nothing about tube amps topology, so the release notes actually just result in a blank look on my face and in my mind :shock.

So there are two things which would, for me, make the transition easier and more productive:

1. A set of "null" values for the new settings, if the exist. Meaning a set of values which bring the model back to, or as close to, the earlier version. This may not be the "optimal" values (which I would assume are the default values), but although it would be "like version 4.0", it would allow me to move towards optimal with a certain degree of understanding and causality.
2. A "for dummies" version of the release note or some sort of explanation of what the new parameters do.

It's not like I feel entitled to these, BTW. It's just that as a working musician with gigs almost every day, I need to be very efficient in moving from one FW version to the next. And I certainly don't want to be left behind in the evolutionary process. So is this was possible. It would be great.

I also want to mention here that the valuable notes posted by the more expert than I on the use of V5.0 are read and appreciated.
 
I've respectfully and unrespectfully asked for this simple template since 4.0 came out. Either no one here knows this information or for some reason they don't want to post it. Best you can hope for, exceptmfor Scott's helpful starting points, is the helpful reply "don't like the new firmware, don't upgrade."
 
I think the request falls into the unfortunate category wherein he's spending his time making new stuff, not replicating the old. I think if he shifted focus it wouldn't be in anybody's best interest as a whole. On the other hand, if someone spent the time that cared (you? lol) they could post it on the wiki! =)
 
You know I think that with all the people that we have here on this forum that can get around this sucker pretty efficiently that this would probably be a great group project to undertake. I mean I appreciate all the stuff that Cliff does for us, but really this is something that I'd hate have him burn brain cells on if you know what I mean....it's just going to be tedious crap that isn't going to require a lot of mental horsepower. Let him keep working on new firmware and models and stuff (or even crazier...perhaps take a day or two off to recharge or maybe even play the AxeFXII).

My only concern is that I'm not real familiar with the original presets and how they sounded (just got it like a week ago and just started making my own presets from the get go) so dialing them back in to how they were is probably out of the question. But I could go in there and reset the amps and give the new parameters a quick twist just to get them working and then check the levels and for anything ridiculous or funky. I'd prefer to do like one bank and have two other people take on the other two if that's cool. I mean I'm all about helping out, but I'm still inherently lazy.

I'd need wait for the AxeEDIT to be released which is in a day or two, but I'm up for it. I can't promise it'll all be great though. ;)
 
shasha said:
You know I think that with all the people that we have here on this forum that can get around this sucker pretty efficiently that this would probably be a great group project to undertake.
Click to expand...

+1.
@ OP: Just wait some time (probably a week, at most) until all the savvy, tweakheads, beta testers and experts have put a major firmware change through its paces and this forum will be filled with everything you asked for; if you don't have the time/nerves to read endless threads, chances are that the nuggets are condensed into the wiki.
I perfectly understand you and your situation and think, this forum is the best way of handling this task.
 
The Axe-Fx is unique: it provides users a plethora of mod kit tools noone else offers.
Because of the availablity of these parameters, users expect or in some cases demand Fractal Audio to provide a modding handbook too.
While understandable, this is not "fair". You can mod real amps too, but no manufacturer explains in detail how a tube amp works and how changing components will influence the tone.
Fractal does provide some explanation of new parameters and no doubt the next manual upgrade will include these.

Even if Fractal were to provide more detailed info, would it help? Take a look here: http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-discussion/46615-b-time-constant.html#post608766
How many users actually understand what's written here, and what this does to the tone? Sure, one can try to bring it back to basics: Hey, it's compression (or not). In fact probably all adv. parameters can be deduced to: it impacts gain, feel, tone, compression, etc. But that wouldn't do them justice I think. Before you know it, metalheads (j/k) would go around the forum claiming that this parameter is the key to ultimate palm muting, and that to more gain etc. And a week later people would start complaining that it isn't and that Fractal should change stuff, and so on and so on and so on.

I say: commit and delve into the subject (Nikki mentions a number of good books in an earlier post) OR just don't use the advanced parameters. Hell, I don't use them because I don't understand most of them.
For me it's about cons and pros. I'm happy with my tones using the basic controls. I MIGHT be able to improve my tones after learning the workings of the advanced parameters, but I've decided the cons (time, rabbithole) outweigh the pros.

So when new firmware arrives (if it includes major amp changes), I reset the amp blocks, I set the tone and volume/drive controls back to default and I dial the amp tones in again. Nothing too different from using a real amp. I even consider it fun, but I'm weird like that. It works, read this for an example: http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-discussion/46599-firmware-5-high-freq-res.html. It seems to me that most early complaints after new firmware has been released originate from not adapting presets to the new firmware. One can argue: the user shouldn't have to adjust his presets after new firmware has been installed. Well again, continuous improvement seems to be part of the business model. Changes are not always evolutionary, but can be revolutionary. Guaranteeing "preset tone" would have a definitive (negative) impact on progress I think. So, late buyers have an advantage, but who knows, the next firmware may change it all again. ;)

Regarding "null" values: every new firmware version represents improvement. You may think otherwise, but it does in the eyes of Fractal otherwise it wouldn't be published. It's their business model as I see it, like it or not. IMHO there's no benefit in that view to ask Fractal to provide values/parameters which would take the device a level back. Also I think that there are far too many variables in play to provide a set of values which would guarantee that the user can maintain his "previous-firmware-tone". Even if provided, discussion would emerge immediately whether the provided values are accurate enough.
 
Last edited:
I agree with yek. Well said. After reading a large number of posts from users having issues with this or that, I am again reminded of a Louis C.K. comedy bit called... Everything is Amazing and No One is Happy. I'm sorry, but some people (just speaking GENERALLY here) really need to get some perspective.

I've not had one patch that wasn't immediately 'fixed' within a new FW update by using BASIC amp style knob twiddling... gain/bass/mid/treb/pres/master...
 
Totally agree with this stuff Yek- I think many players (myself included) are not used to having the means available to really sculpt their sound as provided by the Axe. So there's a lot of growing pains here for many involved. I think some of this frustration that is being posted is to be expected in light of this fact. If you're the type to really tweak your tone, then all these rapid improvements (what I call firmware updates in Fractal land) are a lot to keep up with and learn. But it's the best part of the ride for me. I don't know how many amps I've owned over the years that sounded good at one point and then just lost the magic or were a fight to keep sounding consistent.

Hopefully Cliff and crew can let it ride and keep doing what they're doing without taking it too personally or feeling unappreciated when it comes to the frustration of some users. I don't think it will ever end.

BTW, I see it posted all the time but thanks for your efforts with the wiki and posting, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yek
Well I got intrigued and went to read that B+ post. That was both enlightening (because I understand the parameter better) and most revealing of my lack of knowledge of tube amps. Wow. Just a wee bit over my head.
I promised myself to learn something about it.
And what I most got out of it, is the understanding that there is something to actually understand about it. I am not joking here or trying to be witty.
It's not all a mystery. It's just a subject that can be learned. So I'll probably go check out Tube Amps for Dummies or some equivalent so I can follow these threads intelligently and get more out of my Axe.

Anyhow, how I got through with the current firmware os pretty much what Yek says above. I reset the parameters of the amp and started from scratch. The sound I'm going for is deeply seated in my head and the tools in front of me allow me to get as close to it as possible. I tried to do it with tube amplifiers and though pleased with the result, always not quite there. The Axe allows me to get closer to what I "hear".

A bit OT, I still have a very slight comb filtering effect coming from the cabinet. It's more pronounced with some cabs than others and I believe this comes from imperfect IRs, but it is so slight as to disappear from the equation after 2 minutes of playing. Overall, couldn't be much happier with the machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yek
I usually wait until Scott Peterson posts his "Idiots guide to new firmware" (obviously joke title, he titles it much nicer) and then I'll upgrade the FW and use his tips as the basis for my tweaking. So far, it's worked great for me and has made my transitions the easiest, so thanks Scott for that.
 
Yek, I couldn't have put it better than you. Folks wait for Cliff to teach them electronics/circuit design, so that they can mod the amps. It's not his problem if one doesn't have the knowledge to do so; one has to buy some books and try to learn about the subject, there's really no easy way - you have to burn some neurons in the process. Summing it up: Advanced parameters=Amp Modding. And Cliff can't waste his time looking to the past, how could he push forward trying to make newer firmwares sound like old ones? Sounds absurd to me, sorry guys.
 
iggypop said:
Yek, I couldn't have put it better than you. Folks wait for Cliff to teach them electronics/circuit design, so that they can mod the amps. It's not his problem if one doesn't have the knowledge to do so; one has to buy some books and try to learn about the subject, there's really no easy way - you have to burn some neurons in the process. Summing it up: Advanced parameters=Amp Modding. And Cliff can't waste his time looking to the past, how could he push forward trying to make newer firmwares sound like old ones? Sounds absurd to me, sorry guys.
Click to expand...

I understand your point totally. And I fully subscribe to the Advance Parameter=Amp Modding paradigm. Makes total sense.
As to making new FW sound like old one, that's not my point. Asking for the null values of parameters just would allow me or anyone to "defeat" the new and improved added feature so that one can compare and move forward in a more educated and causative way, not retrogress toward an earlier sound. I'd love to be able to hear at the flick of a switch how the new model algorithms affect the sound and be able to tweak from there.

Slightly OT: I'd also like to point out that asking for clarification about something does not equal criticism. I don't know anyone else but Cliff or Matt who can say what the null values would be if they existed. So who should I ask? Just because one or two persons bitched about something in FW 5 does not mean that there's a bunch of disgruntled users who are complete a88holes, you know?

In early school, many students shut up and don't ask questions because they're afraid of being ridiculed by bullies who call the guys who want to know more sissies or punks. The only result from that is the status quo and degraded SAT scores and people who come out of high school unable to read. So I ask questions when I feel I need to understand something. /rant

As I mentioned above, I'm definitely going to delve a bit more in the amp design technology so I can use my Axe more effectively. If anything, that's the lesson learned on that one for me.
And so far, the Axe has been quite a lesson plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
Patzag said:
A bit OT, I still have a very slight comb filtering effect coming from the cabinet.
Click to expand...

By definition that's what you will get from a physical speaker cabinet. Comb filtering effect is due to signal time arrivals from different parts of the speaker at different times. If you didn't have any comb filtering effect it wouldn't sound like a cab!
 
Patzag said:
As to making new FW sound like old one, that's not my point. Asking for the null values of parameters just would allow me or anyone to "defeat" the new and improved added feature so that one can compare and move forward in a more educated and causative way, not retrogress toward an earlier sound. I'd love to be able to hear at the flick of a switch how the new model algorithms affect the sound and be able to tweak from there.
Click to expand...
Sorry if I came across like I were pointing the finger at you, actually it was directed at those who bitch and moan repeatedly about not having their previous "tone" from the new firmware. Your question sounds totally legit to me, and I figure Cliff answered them in a (very) succint way, as to prevent those flamers from twisting his words.
I figure it would be hard for M@ or Cliff to point some null settings, because of the modeling algorithms improvement. There must some complex sh!t going on in there which would make your request a bit hard to accomplish, I think. Of course the only one who can confirm this is Cliff.

Slightly OT: I'd also like to point out that asking for clarification about something does not equal criticism. I don't know anyone else but Cliff or Matt who can say what the null values would be if they existed. So who should I ask? Just because one or two persons bitched about something in FW 5 does not mean that there's a bunch of disgruntled users who are complete a88holes, you know?
In early school, many students shut up and don't ask questions because they're afraid of being ridiculed by bullies who call the guys who want to know more sissies or punks. The only result from that is the status quo and degraded SAT scores and people who come out of high school unable to read. So I ask questions when I feel I need to understand something. /rant

As I mentioned above, I'm definitely going to delve a bit more in the amp design technology so I can use my Axe more effectively. If anything, that's the lesson learned on that one for me.
And so far, the Axe has been quite a lesson plan.
Click to expand...
No harm in asking questions, I agree with you. We all want to hear from the horse's mouth the effect each new parameter has on tone. The problem are those guys who have a huge sense of ENTITLEMENT, as if Cliff was obligated to give some physics lesson on each new parameter, or justify its inclusion... leading to a flame war every time. :)
 
AlbertA said:
By definition that's what you will get from a physical speaker cabinet. Comb filtering effect is due to signal time arrivals from different parts of the speaker at different times. If you didn't have any comb filtering effect it wouldn't sound like a cab!
Click to expand...

Hmm, that's interesting. I hear that very much when I play through a 2x12 MONO. In stereo, not so much, because the signals are distinct. I don't really hear that through a 1x12 closed back.
OK: Opening myself to flame, but to illustrate: When playing the older Variax-type guitars, or the VG 88, you can hear very definite artifacts. They are loud and obnoxious and make the instrument pretty much unusable. I have not heard the latest offerings so I don't know if these are any better. These artifacts, to me, sound very much like comb filtering. I may be wrong in how I interpret this, but this is what I hear.
Cabinet, to a much, much, smaller degree, but still existing, have similar artifacts. Some worse than others. None gross, but still unusable IMO. Some others, indiscernible through my monitors.
Totally willing to be educated further on this.
 
iggypop said:
Sorry if I came across like I were pointing the finger at you, actually it was directed at those who bitch and moan repeatedly about not having their previous "tone" from the new firmware. Your question sounds totally legit to me, and I figure Cliff answered them in a (very) succint way, as to prevent those flamers from twisting his words.
I figure it would be hard for M@ or Cliff to point some null settings, because of the modeling algorithms improvement. There must some complex sh!t going on in there which would make your request a bit hard to accomplish, I think. Of course the only one who can confirm this is Cliff.


No harm in asking questions, I agree with you. We all want to hear from the horse's mouth the effect each new parameter has on tone. The problem are those guys who have a huge sense of ENTITLEMENT, as if Cliff was obligated to give some physics lesson on each new parameter, or justify its inclusion... leading to a flame war every time. :)
Click to expand...

All good!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom