Funny story about how the Axe FX won - again!

Purists are annoying.

Regarding tuning vocals. No absolutely not. It's their "art" and they should know about that stuff. Having said that, I have no problem letting someone know I can tune the slightly out of tune parts as long as the performance is there. If you mention this WHILE they are tracking, it's easy to come back and show them that it's not a lack of talent that's the reason for tuning but a preservation of the performance while adding back in the precision they likely could have gotten with 8 (or 80) more takes. The problem with doing a ton of takes is that the vocalist usually loses some of the immediacy of the fresher performances and something is lost. Get the performance first and then make small adjustments if necessary. I find there is zero reason to get "perfection" if the vocalist doesn't have it naturally but can perform well.
 
...so i told him "listen bro the session is dead in the water unless you want to try the Axe FX" He looked at me as if i asked him to eat shi#.

Ironically he has never been closer to heaven...
Melodyne/Auto-tune stuff better stay hidden: The wizard never show his tricks
 
Y'all think that i should inform the client that i have been using Auto-Tune and Melodyne on his vocals for the last 2 years? He has no idea b/c i use it subtly but i would love to see his face scrunch up when he finds out the truth. He is one of those annoying yuppy purists that doesn't use his ears to find tone- if its a tube amp and sounds like shi# he loves it - if its digital and sounds amazeballz he hates it. - Glad i was able to prove that punk wrong! :)
Absolutely not. He paid, he's a customer and you're a professional.
What's important is that the final product is good. The way to get there doesn't matter.
 
Why show so much disrespect to a client? You are making a living off of him after all.
No disrespect to the client. I was kidding about showing the client that he gets his vocals tuned. Almost every vocalist gets slightly tuned. its no big deal. It is only those annoying "purists" that probably couldn't even tell if they were tuned to begin with that seem to care. Its as if the fact alone is the problem, not what they actually sound like.
 
The same Client that this post is about came to the studio again last night to track more guitars. After allowing me to use the Axe FX to track more guitars for the song we are working on, he comments " Jay you know what the thing is about the Axe, it does sound real but it almost sounds too good to be real. Its like Auto-Tune for amps". Loved that comment! Than i proceeded to mic up his Marshall amp and record a track, i then went ahead and dialed up a preset that sounds exactly like his amp and i recorded another take on the guitar. I compared them side by side and he agreed that when discussing the "final product" aka the recorded tone, the actual amp and the axe FX were nearly indistinguishable. Love doing these experiments for people that are not familier with the Axe. They hear modeler and they run for the hills. The only thing i can add is that with real amps in conjunction with really good microphones and top of the line preamps such as Neve or API (my setup) there is something about the warmth and juiciness to the sound that you don't get right out of the box with the Axe. but considering the amount of money i have spent on microphones and preamps, i could have purchased 5 Axe FX's. So for the money the Axe is the best solution out there - period!
 
" Jay you know what the thing is about the Axe, it does sound real but it almost sounds too good to be real. Its like Auto-Tune for amps"

Ok...so interesting comment. I'm actually on the other side. Based on my experience in my 'Too Accurate?' thread, the problem I was having was that the Axe sounded TOO real. The GSP and other modelers are like AT for amps, not the Axe. From my perspective, the Axe sounds so 'bad' it's hard to believe it's not real. (If you followed my thread, you'd understand that I'm not trashing the Axe here... :) )

RR
 
Ok...so interesting comment. I'm actually on the other side. Based on my experience in my 'Too Accurate?' thread, the problem I was having was that the Axe sounded TOO real. The GSP and other modelers are like AT for amps, not the Axe. From my perspective, the Axe sounds so 'bad' it's hard to believe it's not real. (If you followed my thread, you'd understand that I'm not trashing the Axe here... :) )

RR
I actually did follow your thread. I get what you are saying. Yes there is no question that with the newer firmware updates, the Axe is a bit more unforgiving when it comes to flubs on the guitar b/c there is so much transparency in this box. Old school modelers that we used back in the day were far less transparent but the end result was a useable tone that was not very realistic but hey it sounded pretty good. now we get both, realism and sweet tones. #lovingtheaxe
 
I actually did follow your thread. I get what you are saying. Yes there is no question that with the newer firmware updates, the Axe is a bit more unforgiving when it comes to flubs on the guitar b/c there is so much transparency in this box. Old school modelers that we used back in the day were far less transparent but the end result was a useable tone that was not very realistic but hey it sounded pretty good. now we get both, realism and sweet tones. #lovingtheaxe

Agreed....and I'm slowly starting to get used to it and love it! :D

RR
 
I like your stories, I personnaly still have the same stupid smile since May 2015 with the Axefx2xl+ ;)
 
well... it's time to get some dummy amp heads and dummy cabs (repro of the best of the best) with only a little red light on and a pass-through instrument in...
and then... The Axe!!! :p
 
well... it's time to get some dummy amp heads and dummy cabs (repro of the best of the best) with only a little red light on and a pass-through instrument in...
and then... The Axe!!! :p
Put the axe inside the chassis. "why is the inside of this marshall glowing green???..."
 
Than i proceeded to mic up his Marshall amp and record a track, i then went ahead and dialed up a preset that sounds exactly like his amp and i recorded another take on the guitar. I compared them side by side and he agreed that when discussing the "final product" aka the recorded tone, the actual amp and the axe FX were nearly indistinguishable.

This is interesting because purely as a player I've always felt that having 100+ amp models was totally unnecessary as in many cases you can get the exact sounds you need with just a handful of amp models. This comes from using the old Yamaha DG amps (which were way ahead of their time in many ways) which had a mere 8 amp models but covered the full spectrum of tones from clean to mean. But in a studio environment when trying to match a client's amp I can see having all those models on tap is handy.

I like using the Yamaha DG as an example of what happens when you don't specifically name the amps that the models aim to imitate. The models in the DG were just stuff like "Clean 1, Crunch 2, Lead 1" etc. even if they sounded like Fender, Marshall or Soldano. But when people tried it they always said "this sounds good" because they compared it on its own merits rather than immediately saying "this doesn't sound like amp X". I like that Yamaha has continued this with their THR amps, which also sound good even if they don't sound like some specific brand or don't have the same realism the Axe-Fx is known for.
 
I guess the FAS-amps are the equivalent to the Yamaha DG philosophy (naming philosophy only - no quality of sound and feel comparison). My understanding of the FAS-amps is that they are Cliff's tweaked and optimized version of the "cornerstone" amps; Marshall, Fender, Vox and Mesa just to mention the first four that comes to my mind. I use FAS amps as go-to amps and they reside in many of my presets. I select amps based on what I am hearing and feeling and do not really, care of what specific "amp type" I use. As stated numerous places on the Forum; if it sounds good it is good:).

I also have to add that my main go-to amps other than the FAS amps are the Carol Ann's and if I should acquire a tube amp the Triptik is on top of my list. @M has a similar statement in another thread and Cliff has given many positive comments on the Carol Ann amps. I came onboard the "Fractal Boat" at FW 9 (Axe Fx II Mk I and now an Axe Fx II XL) and it has been an incredible voyage. By far my best purchase EVER.
 
Man I hate auto tune and a lot of modern production. When I hear isolated vocal tracks of classic tunes without that crap I can't help but wonder what today's stuff would sound like without it. There are still plenty of great singers out there so it ain't an absolute necessity.

And I would love to lose the horribly over compressed mastering done today. It is remarkable to go back and listen to old Zeppelin, Sabbath, Rush, Trower, Stones, Sinatra, Jeff Beck, Beatles, etc. and hear the amazing dynamics versus today's music where everything is at some universal level.
 
Back
Top Bottom