FW11 IIC+ vs Mark V-IIC+ - Not getting good results (Solved)

FractalAudio said:
The model was based on a early non-SimulClass version. I updated the model to be consistent with the later SimulClass version which most people prefer. The mode in the Mark V is based on the later SimulClass version.
Click to expand...

Cliff, will the IIC+ in 11.01 have a switch to activate SimulClass giving us a choice? My old IIC+ was pre-SimulClass, while our other guitarist's had that option. I always thought mine was the bee's knees. Thanks for all you do for us.

Lee
 
FractalAudio said:
The model was based on a early non-SimulClass version. I updated the model to be consistent with the later SimulClass version which most people prefer. The mode in the Mark V is based on the later SimulClass version.
Click to expand...

Does anyone know if we now lost or gained the model Steve Lukather used (a.o. in the CLASSIC Starlicks video), or if it's still another model...?

I'm talking about the shorter head he used for crunch/lead (the 2 longer ones he used for the power amps only).

Steve Lukather sound from the 85-90's (Isolation-Fahrenheit) (forum.grailtone.com)

upd.: I realise how Luke used it w. a resistor load may sound different anyway, but just curious...
It was probably modded too.
 
Last edited:
Sean Ashe said:
The Mark V covers up a ton of stuff lol, that's why I stopped using it. As far as work for tone, yes you have to tweak it right, but to work for notes doesn't take much effort, even with conservative gain. Imo.
Click to expand...

I have to flat out disagree. When I said 'work for the tone' I meant with your fingers, not dialing the knobs. I've been a Mark series owner for 20 years so that's the easy part.
 
I once owned a Mark III red stripe, and the one thing that drove me crazy was how sensitive the knob controls were. Slight movement past a number on the knob = HUGE tone change. Drove me crazy when transporting the amp.
 
Scary said:
I have to flat out disagree. When I said 'work for the tone' I meant with your fingers, not dialing the knobs. I've been a Mark series owner for 20 years so that's the easy part.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree then, because the Mark series amps have always felt easy to play to me.
 
jeppekristoffer said:
Does anyone know this?
Is the new/old IIc+ model, triode/pentode wired.
Is it possible to simulate the different wiring methods (triode/pentode of the output tubes) in the Axe with the parameters available today?
Triode hardness?
Click to expand...

Not sure about the current model, but if I am understanding you correctly, the option to select Pentode/Triode is already under Amp-->Advanced-->Power Tube Type
 
ocaptainjr2 said:
Not sure about the current model, but if I am understanding you correctly, the option to select Pentode/Triode is already under Amp-->Advanced-->Power Tube Type
Click to expand...

Thanks but no, that is not the same thing. In the advanced tab we can chose between Tetrode(Not Triode)/Pentode. Those are different tube types!

The thing I'm talking about is a wiring type of the output tubes. That is, the same tube can be wired in different configurations Triode(Not Tetrode this time)/Pentode.
I dont know the theory behind these wiring differences I have only experienced the difference with the Mark V where there is a switch for triode/pentode.

It seems though that the output tubes in all the IIc+ models were wired in triode whereas the Mark IV offered a choice between the two versions in the same way as the Mark V triode/pentode switch does.
 
jeppekristoffer said:
Thanks but no, that is not the same thing. In the advanced tab we can chose between Tetrode(Not Triode)/Pentode. Those are different tube types!

The thing I'm talking about is a wiring type of the output tubes. That is, the same tube can be wired in different configurations Triode(Not Tetrode this time)/Pentode.
I dont know the theory behind these wiring differences I have only experienced the difference with the Mark V where there is a switch for triode/pentode.

It seems though that the output tubes in all the IIc+ models were wired in triode whereas the Mark IV offered a choice between the two versions in the same way as the Mark V triode/pentode switch does.
Click to expand...

The clip I did was of the mark v in triode setting.
 
I think the main difference when doing these comparisons is the eq/settings. I dialled my Axe Fx II in with my ears, not my eyes. I got the sounds almost exactly the same as my live rig (5150ii through a mesa recto 4x12) - then with the added eq/dynamic controls I was able to dial in an amazing tone. I took this tone to my band and compared the 2, one after the other a few times and asked them which was which. I used the same cab, and had both units at as close to the same volume as I could.

Results:
The whole band thought the Axefx was the Tube amp and my 5150 (set the way it has always been) was the Digital modeller.

In a band setting, live, or recording the differences are negligible if any. Actually my live Axe fx rig sounds better than my live tube rig because I can dial in my tones at a fraction of the volume. No squealing feedback, no awkward hums, no compensating tone. FW11 just made everything better for me.

Keep up the great work Fractal!
 
Sean Ashe said:
Agree to disagree then, because the Mark series amps have always felt easy to play to me.
Click to expand...

I disagree, the V is an extremely dynamic amp, and responds to pick attack very well. The Mark IIC+ mode in the Mark V is a NON EQ model, the Axe FX II model is an EQ model, they are not going to sound the same due to a coupling capacitor at the end of the EQ circuit.
 
tomc3084 said:
I disagree, the V is an extremely dynamic amp, and responds to pick attack very well. The Mark IIC+ mode in the Mark V is a NON EQ model, the Axe FX II model is an EQ model, they are not going to sound the same due to a coupling capacitor at the end of the EQ circuit.
Click to expand...

Check a page back man as Cliff sent me a new version of the fw and i matched it without even having to use the tone match block

And it's fine to disagree, music is subjective. By me saying it's an easy amp for me to play ( i did say in my opinion btw), doesn't say that's going to be everyone's experience with it. Doesn't matter how hard or easy it is to play anything, as long as it sounds good and you're sincere in what you play it will all be good in the end :)
 
Sean Ashe said:
Check a page back man as Cliff sent me a new version of the fw and i matched it without even having to use the tone match block

And it's fine to disagree, music is subjective. By me saying it's an easy amp for me to play ( i did say in my opinion btw), doesn't say that's going to be everyone's experience with it. Doesn't matter how hard or easy it is to play anything, as long as it sounds good and you're sincere in what you play it will all be good in the end :)
Click to expand...
It was pretty darn close for sure!
 
Just a question and maybe it's a moot point now, but why not put the amp in 4cm and match that way w the pa turned off in the sim of the axe? This way you know the cab and pa used are EXACTLY the same and you're only dealing w matching the preamp. After that, shoot an ir of your cab so that difference is eliminated later and any remaining differences can then be attributed to different power amps which you can then dial in on the axe after turning it back on in the sim...
Just my 2c

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner
 
tguitar said:
Just a question and maybe it's a moot point now, but why not put the amp in 4cm and match that way w the pa turned off in the sim of the axe? This way you know the cab and pa used are EXACTLY the same and you're only dealing w matching the preamp. After that, shoot an ir of your cab so that difference is eliminated later and any remaining differences can then be attributed to different power amps which you can then dial in on the axe after turning it back on in the sim...
Just my 2c

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner
Click to expand...

All is well now, but the point was that i dont need an IR of the cab as i was going slave out. The updated IIC+ is scarily close
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom