G3 modeling thread

Sixstring;1142064The whole point might be moot anyway after the new firmware is updated :? I guess we just have to wait and see.[/QUOTE said:
Perzactly. And when have we ever been let down? Never, in my recall.
Click to expand...
 
I have never seen so many ways to EQ and voice audio compared to what the Fractal offers. Shirley (PI) one of the plethora of settings, filters, eq's, voices, etc. will be sufficient? G3 or not. Almost every block offers some kind of tone shaping.
 
barhrecords said:
I have never seen so many ways to EQ and voice audio compared to what the Fractal offers. Shirley (PI) one of the plethora of settings, filters, eq's, voices, etc. will be sufficient? G3 or not. Almost every block offers some kind of tone shaping.
Click to expand...

You're right, of course, but there's more to a sound than "tone shaping". I like to think of it as "character", which is much more ephemeral. Probably the same thing when you get right down to it, but boomy bass or wicked highs are one thing, while articulation and variable frequency cutoff points will be something else. If it were anything else, reproducing amps would be child's play and it would have been done long ago. As it is, nothing can touch the Fractal unit other than the hardware-based one-trick ponies it has a large stable of internalized.
 
FractalAudio said:
Wow, lots of speculation. This is the state of things so far:

G3 is all-new amp modeling. There are no other changes to the firmware so the effects, routing, etc. stay the same. But the amp modeling is a complete "reboot" based on this analysis thingy I wrote that learns an amp and extracts the pertinent data.

At this point I have only ported several dozen models to G3. It's a LOT of work because it involves opening each amp and doing all the measurements and then doing the analysis matches, etc. It will be several more weeks to port the remaining models.

Does it sound drastically different? No, but it does sound better. Some amps are noticeably better especially the Plexis, Rectos, 5150s and the Trainwreck. The Rectos are very good now. They're smooth yet aggressive at the same time if that makes any sense.

Many parameters have been removed as they are not compatible. Among them: PA Lowcut, PA Hicut, Character Type, Character Freq, Character Amt, Character Q, Voicing, et. al. The modeling doesn't need them.

So stop banging on your F5 key and get back to talking about deflated footballs.
Click to expand...

Hey Cliffs, will the 5153 and 6505+ be noticably improved sounding too in the new modeling? Would be awesome to hear from you!
 
Well I'm super pumped and figured it would take a while to re-model the amps if you aren't just making enhancements but actually working with new MODELS.

I'm a little confused where the improvement could come from or where it could be as the consensus is that in a 1:1 when you compare your reference amp to the model in a controlled environment, it sounded/felt exactly the same to you and all others?
 
tonaholic said:
I'm a little confused where the improvement could come from or where it could be as the consensus is that in a 1:1 when you compare your reference amp to the model in a controlled environment, it sounded/felt exactly the same to you and all others?
Click to expand...

My brother keeps asking me the same question. "I thought it was perfect! What are they doing to it?"

I just tell him to STFU :lol

Seriously, though, most of the improvements/enhancements/bug fixes are simply repairs that affect some amps/cabs/sfx, but not others. Some stuff was fine to begin with. There's such a thing as successive approximation, which doesn't really apply here directly, but still exists. You'll eventually hit the number, but you have to keep adjusting your aim.
 
I for one think this new tech sounds great. Its currently great too of course, but frankly, I don't understand how to use probably 75% of the amp parameters and often don't notice a difference even. Its cool to have those options I guess, but if we can have basically perfect emulations or digital clones or whatever you want to call them of a ton of famous amps that require no real tweaks, then that sounds even better.
 
tonaholic said:
Well I'm super pumped and figured it would take a while to re-model the amps if you aren't just making enhancements but actually working with new MODELS.

I'm a little confused where the improvement could come from or where it could be as the consensus is that in a 1:1 when you compare your reference amp to the model in a controlled environment, it sounded/felt exactly the same to you and all others?
Click to expand...

90% of people are fooled if the frequency response and the volume are the same. That's the secret to a certain other product. Over time your ears start to hear subtleties especially in the character of the distortion, note attack, decay, bloom and dynamics. The average person probably can't identify the particular characteristics but eventually realizes something is different. G3 is all about those subtleties.

Here's a comparison of our reference 50W Plexi and the G3 model, not necessarily in that order.

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/g3.mp3
 
I find it difficult to believe the sound out of this box we all love could get much better. What would be cool if we could reduce some overhead in the firmware (if any) so that we can stuff a few more blocks in each patch...BTW, I thought the second clip did sound better...not sure if this is the G3 version.
 
FractalAudio said:
90% of people are fooled if the frequency response and the volume are the same. That's the secret to a certain other product. Over time your ears start to hear subtleties especially in the character of the distortion, note attack, decay, bloom and dynamics. The average person probably can't identify the particular characteristics but eventually realizes something is different. G3 is all about those subtleties.

Here's a comparison of our reference 50W Plexi and the G3 model, not necessarily in that order.

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/g3.mp3
Click to expand...

I am always bad at this.
They both sound great and to my ears identical.
 
FractalAudio said:
90% of people are fooled if the frequency response and the volume are the same. That's the secret to a certain other product. Over time your ears start to hear subtleties especially in the character of the distortion, note attack, decay, bloom and dynamics. The average person probably can't identify the particular characteristics but eventually realizes something is different. G3 is all about those subtleties.

Here's a comparison of our reference 50W Plexi and the G3 model, not necessarily in that order.

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/g3.mp3
Click to expand...

I totally agree on the premise of frequency response & volume being able to fool most. I'd say that the Axe has taught my ears quite a bit over time, probably as much as working in a guitar store for many years where I played a good deal of the amps modeled. Love the axe for it's character of distortion, note attack etc already so I'm pumped on improvements.

That clip though, there's quite a difference in the treble/brightness between the clips? It seems more "round" in clip 1 and much more bright in clip 2. I'm not good enough to know if either there's more treble in clip 2 that makes it more "open" or if clip 2 is missing frequencies that make clip 1 "full" but I'm hearing a difference?
 
First one had a little more sizzle and a little more distortion to it to my ears, but part of that could just be Cliff's dynamics (unless he was reamping the same lick).

I actually preferred the sound of the second overall. Whichever it was.
 
FractalAudio said:
Here's a comparison of our reference 50W Plexi and the G3 model, not necessarily in that order.

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/g3.mp3
Click to expand...

The first take sounds more natural to me. There's more body and the notes are blooming. The second take sounds more two-dimensional.
I'd really be interested to learn which is which. Why? Because I believe in FAS' approach and would really like to help make the AFX better than it already is. If the first take is the AFX than strike my comment since I couldn't contribute anything of value anymore.
 
The higher double stops sound nicer on the 2nd clip to me but the lower notes seem fuller on the first version. Hmmm.

To clarify - are we comparing the real amp to the G3 here or G2 to G3?
 
Last edited:
FractalAudio said:
90% of people are fooled if the frequency response and the volume are the same. That's the secret to a certain other product. Over time your ears start to hear subtleties especially in the character of the distortion, note attack, decay, bloom and dynamics. The average person probably can't identify the particular characteristics but eventually realizes something is different. G3 is all about those subtleties.

Here's a comparison of our reference 50W Plexi and the G3 model, not necessarily in that order.

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/g3.mp3
Click to expand...

The first one sounded a bit better to me....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom