Fractal Audio and amp profiling

I had a Bogner Ecstasy 101b. I made an IR of the cabinet. Set the amp up like I wanted it. Profiled it on the Kemper and dialed in the Euro model on the AxeFX III using the IR I shot of the cab the 101b was plugged into. IMO profiling is irrelevant on the AFIII thanks to the tireless work Cliff and has put in getting it right. I could make the AF3 spot on match the 101b. Profiling is necessary with the Kemper because of it's design. In a blind test, it's unlikely you'd be able to tell which was which. Frankly, the Euro model sounding identical to the Bogner is the reason I don't own the Bogner.
 
MGW said:
I had a Bogner Ecstasy 101b. I made an IR of the cabinet. Set the amp up like I wanted it. Profiled it on the Kemper and dialed in the Euro model on the AxeFX III using the IR I shot of the cab the 101b was plugged into. IMO profiling is irrelevant on the AFIII thanks to the tireless work Cliff and has put in getting it right. I could make the AF3 spot on match the 101b. Profiling is necessary with the Kemper because of it's design. In a blind test, it's unlikely you'd be able to tell which was which. Frankly, the Euro model sounding identical to the Bogner is the reason I don't own the Bogner.
Click to expand...
A clean chanel of Ecstasy would be great..
 
Harm said:
I am not really interested in profiling. I would love to have an option where the axe “profiles”(. Or mimics or whatever you want to call it) an effect. I sometimes hear a guitar sound with an effect and would love to be able to have the axe do that for me. I am not really skilled enough to do that myself.
Click to expand...
It's highly unlikely a modeler or profiler can take the guitar sound with even a single effect and be able to deconstruct it into the effect type and model. Perhaps someday AI will be able to but that's a ways out and would take a huge amount of training. Remember, guitars are processed multiple ways in a recording, due to compression, EQ, plus you've got the effects of string-height and composition along with pickup types and distance from the strings, effects like distortion, delay, chorus, flanging... all affecting the sound you're hearing.

Running a known and specific input signal into an effect, then watching the resulting output and then subtracting the original signal would result in the difference, and THAT could be applied to another input signal, but only for those specific dial settings on the effect. It gets harder to take it apart once there's any sort of randomness added to the effect or guitar's output.
 
yek said:
That's not the case. Only for Master, Presence/Depth and the GEQ sliders.
Click to expand...
+1

FractalAudio said:
Most of the controls in the Axe-Fx match their physical counterparts. The exceptions are Presence and Master Volume. Most amps simply have the wrong taper for their Presence controls. For example a 5150 Presence control does absolutely nothing from 0 to 7. All the action happens in the upper 1/4 of the control's range which is just dumb. The Axe-Fx uses a proper taper which gives a nice, even response over the full range of the control.

Likewise the Master Volume on many amps is too abrupt. By 2-3 on the knob the power amp is saturating. Again we use a more rational taper so that you have finer control over power amp distortion.

The downside of this approach is that if you put the Presence and Master Volume controls in the same position as the amp it won't sound the same. People do this then post videos and proclaim "See? Modeling isn't accurate!!! Toobz rule brah."
Click to expand...

source
 
My issues with profiling are:

1. I don't own enough amps to profile on my own.
2. While there may be tons of user made profiles, quality will be very inconsistent from person to person. I don't want to wade through a long list of profiles to find the one that works for me and I don't want to pay for 3rd party ones.
3. I find it easier to use select an amp type I want in a modeler and change the settings as I see fit.

Profiles may work for some but I see them as a hassle. YMMV.
 
guitaryates said:
2. While there may be tons of user made profiles, quality will be very inconsistent from person to person. I don't want to wade through a long list of profiles to find the one that works for me and I don't want to pay for 3rd party ones.
3. I find it easier to use select an amp type I want in a modeler and change the settings as I see fit.
Click to expand...
Besides differences in room acoustics and miking technique, most amp manufacturers are unable to create amps that are exact clones of each other. Pots, resistors and capacitors are "within tolerance" but that leaves wiggle room where the sound can vary, and if one pot or resistor or cap is on the low side of its tolerance and an "identical" one is on the high side, they can affect the signal. Toss in variations in tubes and speakers due to manufacturing or age, different densities in wood... and the amp profiles will be different.

Modeling attempts to do away with the variability, but even so, when Cliff models an amp he's trying to work with a specific one that exemplifies the best characteristics of that particular brand and model, and not everyone else will get that particular sound from their own purchased version of that amp. But, at least in modeling he's given us the depth and flexibility to tweak and push the sound to match our own particular idea of the sound we want.

Think about a Dumble amp. Even within a specific model, they were all tweaked for the original purchaser's style and desired sound, perhaps Robben Ford, yet we get an "ODS" or "SS".

He and Yek talk about it all in the Wiki and/or the tech notes and the amp model document.
 
Everyone will have their own opinion. Keep in mind that each amp will have differences and some amps do not have models (yet?). The ability to take an amp model and set it to your "base" amp and then "Frapture" the amp to get your identical sound is appealing. Having it in a block that is sharable with everyone is also appealing. You have modeling and "Frapturing" covered, so one device can do all of that. It just needs to be able to do it well and efficiently with a single block. If not it may be more tedious than many desire and not be used to its fullest. I have thousands of profiles I've personally made since 2012 and no longer use them. I had gone back through them a few times editing the clarity and definition, but they tend to vary from the actual amp and the mid compression bump was never fully done away with. I used the output Eq to drop some mids and it was usable. Until the III came out the KPA was the main stay for me.

I've tried the tone match and it really didn't work as smoothly as I was hoping. Before going back down the rabbit hole of getting amps and "Frapturing" them I will definitely try one first and see if it is noticeable enough.

I would not say that the profiling process is useless, but it needs to work as well as the modeling and be less complex in the signal path area.
 
GlennO said:
Other than vague hints from Cliff, no, there is no information about this. So, I wouldn't base your purchase decision on the assumption that Fractal Audio will offer profiling. Unless you have an amp that you want to profile because it isn't modeled, IMHO profiling isn't very useful.
Click to expand...
There's actually a patent on it you can find. Who knows if FAS will offer it anytime soon, but it's pretty cool, seems like it could be a best of both worlds solution to me.
 
smoker0081 said:
A clean chanel of Ecstasy would be great..
Click to expand...
There are a few threads out there on other forums claiming that the Green circuit on the Ecstasy is basically a Super Reverb. That's the model I would start with on the Axe, and I'm guessing is why Cliff didn't model it since other amp models do the same thing (and probably better given they have a power section designed around that tone, whereas the Ecstasy's power section is more designed around the gain sounds in my experience and thus becomes a bit of a compromise).
 
The reasons I'd like to see some kind of profiling in the Axe are:

1) Cliff will never be able to model everything, and there are some amps I own (like my Bogner Goldfinger and Landry LS100) that I would love to see in the Axe for simplicity's sake
2) Cliff will probably create a profiling method that is light years ahead of everyone else given his deep knowledge of electronics, how components affect the output sound, and how various parts of a tube amp interact not just on an audio level, but also on a feel level
 
Variable said:
There are a few threads out there on other forums claiming that the Green circuit on the Ecstasy is basically a Super Reverb. That's the model I would start with on the Axe, and I'm guessing is why Cliff didn't model it since other amp models do the same thing (and probably better given they have a power section designed around that tone, whereas the Ecstasy's power section is more designed around the gain sounds in my experience and thus becomes a bit of a compromise).
Click to expand...
Thanks, i will try the Super reverb model👍
 
For the cheap seats: Fractal has something like profiling - Tone Match. Maybe FAS should consider changing the name of the block.
 
yeky83 said:
There's actually a patent on it you can find. Who knows if FAS will offer it anytime soon, but it's pretty cool, seems like it could be a best of both worlds solution to me.
Click to expand...
I read that a while back.

I'm not sure we can conclude that the patent applies to something akin to profiling or not... Just my opinion.
 
JoKeR III said:
For the cheap seats: Fractal has something like profiling - Tone Match. Maybe FAS should consider changing the name of the block.
Click to expand...
Tone Matching is just that. It's a matching EQ. That's a common feature. Even a $200 Mooer has that. Profiling is something different. It is a capture of all parts of the signal chain, most importantly the amp, which has non-linear behavior that cannot be captured with a tone match.
 
I don’t know why so many people are « against » a profiling option . As you can see , most famous bands use kemper live , cause they just want their amp copy on stage . So if fractal got the option , maybe their will be more than 5 famous bands using it .... just saying . I prefer the axe 3 and still don’t know why they all play with kemper on stage, but adding a perfect profiling option , and not this buzzy kemper result , can be very good for their business . (And for us to have everything in the box )
 
MGW said:
I had a Bogner Ecstasy 101b. I made an IR of the cabinet. Set the amp up like I wanted it. Profiled it on the Kemper and dialed in the Euro model on the AxeFX III using the IR I shot of the cab the 101b was plugged into. IMO profiling is irrelevant on the AFIII thanks to the tireless work Cliff and has put in getting it right. I could make the AF3 spot on match the 101b. Profiling is necessary with the Kemper because of it's design. In a blind test, it's unlikely you'd be able to tell which was which. Frankly, the Euro model sounding identical to the Bogner is the reason I don't own the Bogner.
Click to expand...
I am tremendously glad to hear this, having gone through the process of profiling my 101b...and now no longer having the Kemper.

This is my target use for the Axe-FX - hoping to pull the trigger once I get back my tax refund....

ka-ching.jpg


That said, I would use a profile/capture/fractal sound-stealing method if it existed in the Axe-FX, if for no other reason than to grab the sounds from a couple of my other amps which are not modelled (MP-1, Marshall 3203).
 
smoker0081 said:
A clean channel of Ecstasy would be great..
Click to expand...

Variable said:
There are a few threads out there on other forums claiming that the Green circuit on the Ecstasy is basically a Super Reverb. That's the model I would start with on the Axe, and I'm guessing is why Cliff didn't model it since other amp models do the same thing (and probably better given they have a power section designed around that tone, whereas the Ecstasy's power section is more designed around the gain sounds in my experience and thus becomes a bit of a compromise).
Click to expand...
This^. I can't speak to how close the circuits are between Green and SR, but I can say that I can get very, very close to the SR sound with the Bogner. The two amps I've used over the years that just really "did it" for me are the SR and the XTC - they just plain sound great.

In fact, my plan for replacing the Bogner with the AFX for live duty would be to have 4 basic amp channels - JC-120, Super Reverb, Euro Blue, and Euro Red. That combo covers a LOT of territory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom