Fractal Audio and amp profiling

My name is mud said:
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 )
Click to expand...
your data is way off
 
My name is mud said:
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 )
Click to expand...
Your opinion is a legitimate one, if you think the immense amount of time it would require to change Fractal's focus from modeling to profiling would be the best use of its limited resources.
But remember that a company like Kemper must spend nearly all of its R&D time to develop and improve its profiling product.
IMO, I would prefer that Fractal use its limited resources on usability improvements to its current architecture. Its that simple.
 
To be fair, I'm not "against" profiling. There have been several times I've wanted to replicate a tone from another guitarist and used the tone match to do so. Some with great results, some with mediocre results. The mediocre results were largely the result of poor source audio. Really though, a "Profile", as is it with the KPA, is not much more than a tone match on the Kemper's distorted amp. Terminology is different and there is likely some differences in the build of the algorithms, but a profile is essentially a tone match. I don't know why you wouldn't be able to do that with a live amp now...though, admittedly, I've never tried.

smoker0081 said:
A clean chanel of Ecstasy would be great..
Click to expand...
Yes indeed it would. I had always wondered what the deal was with the Ecstasy and why everyone seemed to oooh and aaaah over them...then I played one. Holy smoke! Don't get me wrong, I love my Trainwreck and my Marshall, but that Bogner was nothing short of amazing.
 
This was the thread where the mention of a Fractal take on "profiling" popped up:
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/is-arrived-the-time-for-axe-fx-iii-to-profile-an-amp.161004/

FractalAudio said:
I have something even better. Waiting for my patent approval.
Click to expand...

This is likely to be the patent application mentioned:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200279546A1/en?inventor=clifford+chase

The biggest reason to own an FM3 or an Axe3 is that it's the most high quality, sonically detailed digital guitar amplification system on the market, and it keeps getting improvements heaped onto it generously.

There is a Tone Match capability already present, and considering the time it takes for patents to get approval, I wouldn't look for this new process to be launched anytime soon.

Whatever you're looking for, Fractal likely already offers it. Once you feel it under your fingers you realize that.
 
ModelGuitarist said:
This was the thread where the mention of a Fractal take on "profiling" popped up:
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/is-arrived-the-time-for-axe-fx-iii-to-profile-an-amp.161004/



This is likely to be the patent application mentioned:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200279546A1/en?inventor=clifford+chase

The biggest reason to own an FM3 or an Axe3 is that it's the most high quality, sonically detailed digital guitar amplification system on the market, and it keeps getting improvements heaped onto it generously.

There is a Tone Match capability already present, and considering the time it takes for patents to get approval, I wouldn't look for this new process to be launched anytime soon.

Whatever you're looking for, Fractal likely already offers it. Once you feel it under your fingers you realize that.
Click to expand...

I can kind of understand the sentiment of not needing profiling now that I have been playing with the axe fx although I would certainly welcome it if it was added. I cant imagine not being able to get just about any amp tone imaginable with the models that are there and the level of tweak ability to really mod any of the models. But there are definitely some use cases where it might just speed up getting to the tone you want (ie capturing your own rig).

Development time would probably be better spent on effects that are not yet implemented which would have a much more significant impact on the output sound and your sound design abilities.
 
Before purchasing the Axe FX I did a lot of reading on what modelers vs profilers are, and bought the Fractal based on that research. If i wanted a profiler, I would have just bought a Kemper. I much prefer the modeling approach and the near infinite configuration possibilities and depth I will never fully understand. Still in awe of what this thing can do every time I turn it on, and the poor ol Mesa just collects dust. I also don't really see the point of capturing the sound of your own rig when you already have.. the sound of your own rig.
 
As I said on Facebook:

Profiling is a patented technology and any unit implementing it is infringing on that patent. We personally believe that patent infringement is a serious offense. We also believe that modeling is superior to profiling. Others may disagree with one or both those points.
 
Looking at this from a slightly different perspective: profiling…to what end? What tone can you not achieve with the existing, in the box technology? I’m not asking what amps do or don’t exist, to be clear. I’m asking what tone is the existing Axe incapable of achieving that you feel demands profiling? I’m just not seeing it. Sorry.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
That's what Fractal does with their "FAS" models. Look at the FAS model descriptions in the Wiki; They're all hybrids and several have grafted sections from multiple amps. Currently we, as users, can't mix and match, but it'd be possible if we were given an interface. We can change where the tone-stack sits and the tubes and rectifier types, capacitor values, etc which isn't possible in a profiler unless you're willing to have the original amp's circuitry modified.
Click to expand...
I don't care about replicating an amp, my point is "profiling" could be a new creative musical tool.
I already can change tone-stack, and tube amps. But I have to choose between existing option. If I want something between them? How I can achieve the sound of a non-existing tetrode and a half, or exhode (the element number is e)?
Given a dinamic transfer function, we could mod it in a creative an musical way not bound to any existing phisical device.
The first step could be "fuse" two or more "profile", given birth to a new transfer function.
Than split the function in bands, mix different "splitted" profile. In a intuitive way.
No need to know how a device work or the math behind... only some parameters (band, gain, level). The concept is the same as mixing IR, the only difference is the we should mix "dynamic transfer function".
 
Both worlds would be fantastic. Axe FX3 with profiling and modeling! That would be unbeatable. The profiling result for the Cortex must be very, very good. I would find it very exhilarating if I could profile my own amp myself on my Ax fx3. fast and easy. I would not be bound by the choice of fractal.
 
Smilzo said:
I don't care about replicating an amp, my point is "profiling" could be a new creative musical tool.
I already can change tone-stack, and tube amps. But I have to choose between existing option. If I want something between them? How I can achieve the sound of a non-existing tetrode and a half, or exhode (the element number is e)?
Given a dinamic transfer function, we could mod it in a creative an musical way not bound to any existing phisical device.
The first step could be "fuse" two or more "profile", given birth to a new transfer function.
Than split the function in bands, mix different "splitted" profile. In a intuitive way.
No need to know how a device work or the math behind... only some parameters (band, gain, level). The concept is the same as mixing IR, the only difference is the we should mix "dynamic transfer function".
Click to expand...

Better yet, use two amp blocks and blend them in an interesting way.
 
Budda said:
Better yet, use two amp blocks and blend them in an interesting way.
Click to expand...
You use the term "block"... it's difficult to blend two block... you can mix the output signal. Ie... it you take two clip with a 25.5 guitar scale lenght and a 24.... mixing sound will be different from a single 25 guitar scale clip!
What I wish is not a mix of two amp, but a new amp. The component approach is the best way to reproduce faithfully a tube amp. But merging the component is not possibile.... how can you merge topology, number of stages, different components? So a transfer function could be useful... a linear combination of two transfer function is still a transfer function (at least given some properties). (also dinamic properties should be combined).
I think that blending blocks will be hard to do. Better approach is one block than can run two "profile" and merge them.
An external app could merge more than 2 block, that should be loaded into the profile block. There could be more istance of a "profile" block (to mix the output but not blend them).
 
My name is mud said:
If you don’t want to bring your 4000 dollars head in a bar and having different amp sound in a small box ... why did you use a fractal then ? Lol ...
Click to expand...
I use fractal so I can have a sim of the entire amp. Not to have a minuscule sliver of the amp. It’s a nice concept in theory to profile but I think realistic simulations of the entire amp are far more beneficial.
 
Budda said:
@Smilzo why make it unnecessarily more complicated? Blending two amps does provide a "new" tone. Thats why people have been doing it for decades.

Blending two blocks is very easy.
Click to expand...
Tube amps have been used for decades. No needs for digital crap... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom