Freedom Writers...
I have posted an example of 4 presets from Bank A available to everyone from 2.00b and 3.00 with a source available to everyone. It captures my reaction to firmware 2.00b being different than 3.00. Bank A presets were already re-worked by Fractal and released for 3.00 so one would hope they would show off the 3.00 improvement but they do not (to my ears). Others including Scott have commented as much with "IMHO. Grape's Group A crush Group B. No contest." Now what I didn't do (and I acknowledged this) is adjust the 3.00 presets to make it "better" and that's what Scott went on to say. I agree with this. I agree with this and that is what this thread is about. Updating presets originally for 2.00 for 3.00.
Cliff and Scott have already bowed out but they have already helped me. Cliff in the form of providing the AxeFX II and firmware's in the first place along with release notes, and Scott with his comments about 3.0 preset creation (mostly in another thread). You fixating on me providing a preset is going to go nowhere as I've already stated how I fixed it (mostly hi settings in the Amp Speaker page). If you don't have anything to add to this thread concerning my initial questions, please stop posting.
First of all, I come from
America, where (the last time I checked) there's such a thing as
"Freedom Of Speech." Therefore,
NO I WON'T STOP POSTING ON THIS THREAD (or any other) unless I damn well feel like it!
Once again, I admit that you've posted four-clips on
Soundcloud....That much is undeniable.
However, how does anyone REALLY know what parameters where applied to the
Axe-FX II hardware/unit to create the aforementioned clips? No one (except you) truly knows exactly which combination of parameters created those clips? When you say that you used the
first four Axe-FX II presets (yes, I recognized the names of the patches as you commented on the clips at the starting-point of each clip)
does that mean that you used FW-3.xx-loaded presets with the 3.xx Firmware AND the FW-2.xx loaded presets with the 2.xx-Firmware? Or did you use the FW-3.xx-loaded presets with BOTH versions of Firmware? OR did you use FW-2.xx-loaded presets with BOTH versions of Firmware for those clips? If you could answer that question directly, then ANYONE else could then do a similar re-amped A/B-Test with
their Axe-FX II unit, just to see if it sounds identical to your clips...If you would clarify that (you could do so WITHOUT divulging your "top-secret" presets/patches!)
Just out of curiousity, do you favor
Fender clean and Fender-slight-overdrive type models in your particular default style? I only ask that question, because frankly
I don't think you could've picked 4 worse (or I should say "out-of-stylistic-context") presets/patches than those first for Fender-based models. That said, even though I doubt Scott Peterson (who I believe did the source guitar-playing on the Angus-clip you used) had those clean-to-edgy type Fender sounds in mind (or in his monitor-system!) while he was playing those dropped-tuned riffs....(He probably used something like that
"Bogner-Red patch" he posted his version of this re-amped track with!) but that's a moot-point for an A/B comparison
...Too bad you could'nt have found a "Stevie Ray Vaughan-ish" re-amp dry-track to have used instead of the Scott Peterson-played Angus re-amp track/performance. An "SRV-ish" (or "Clapton-eque," or anything that is typically "Fender-ish" would've been a "more-in-context" track to use for those particular-presets. That said, the
Scott Peterson-played/Angus-track should NOT sound BAD if
re-amped through FW-2.xx (w/2.xx presets) OR if re-amped thorugh FW-3.xx (w/3.xx presets) Anything OTHER than these last two scenarios I mentioned (Firmware and preset-versions MATCHED!) is NOT a valid-test. I'm sorry, but I think that's what
Scott Peterson was alluding to when he asserted that:
"Without a preset to see/hear/test/analyze; there is no way to discuss this or help out at all. Listening tests can be skewed any number of ways, so I don't play that game really. I could make a Standard running 3.00 sound better than a II running 3.0 if that was the goal for instance."
I understand that you're NOT gonna post YOUR presets, and frankly, that's your perogative. I also think it's admirable that you've taken the time to learn your new firmware (albeit publicly - LOL!) From what you've indicated, you seem to have (painstakingly) made progress. Good for you...However, if you're puzzled as to why some people may've seemed a bit "testy/short/agitated," (myself included, but forget me...I'm referring to the genuine experts who reached out to you, and instead of saving precious time from their schedules/lives by posting your presets/patches like: Scott Peterson, yek, and a few others) could've pinpointed the sources of your tonal-frustrations within minutes I'm sure! (Those guys REALLY know their stuff!) Instead, you forced them to play the "guessing-game" (as to what your parameters looked like) thus wasting their time, and indirectly disrespecting their outreach. Again, that was all your perogative, and I hope it all works out for you (and your headphones - LOL!)
Best of luck with your tonal-pursuits!
Bill
