Got a request that will make the tube die-hards think....can you do a demo video?

So far the only thing I haven’t been able to replicate (which I don’t use a lot) is feedback. Otherwise, from a studio standpoint- which is really all I care about - modeling has officially gotten close enough as to be indistinguishable in a recording. Does it feel the same? Not sure, but half the time in the studio my cabinet is in the next room anyway, so I’m not standing in front of a roaring anything.

I kept a couple of my amps. My main one because it’s super rare and I’d never be able to replace it. But I’m having a lot more fun just plugging into an fm9 and going
 
biggator6 said:
So far the only thing I haven’t been able to replicate (which I don’t use a lot) is feedback.
Click to expand...
How are you trying to replicate feedback?

so I’m not standing in front of a roaring anything
Click to expand...
Maybe that’s what you need? 😄

If I crank my HS7 studio monitors I get nice feedback easy, however the feedback is a little more familiar when using AxeFx -> power amp -> guitar cab.
 
Red Sound work really well for musical feedback akin to a cranked 4x12. Because they don't project in the same way as a 4x12, you need to be a little closer. I have my MF.10s on tilt back amp stands, which helps with this. And yes, it needs to be loud, but in terms of what you are hitting the audience with, nothing like as destructive of eardrums as the "treble beam" of a 4x12.

Liam
 
biggator6 said:
So far the only thing I haven’t been able to replicate (which I don’t use a lot) is feedback.
Click to expand...

I think the EHX FreqOut does a great job of this. It can be a little unnatural, and you can get away with that by putting it in momentary mode, being really picky about where you set the knobs, and learning how to time turning it on/off (with the momentary switch) with your playing.

I've bought & sold it a couple times, and at this point, it's staying in the collection despite the fact that I don't use it very often. IMHO, the downside is that it's buffer makes just enough of a change that I don't really want it on my board without a loop switcher, and that's actually just over the limit of big/complicated for what I want to play right now.

At some point, I'll probably build a supplemental mini-board that I can run in front of my main one with it and maybe a couple other little things (in a switcher). But, I'm not in a hurry to actually build it.
 
woodbutcher65 said:
I keep hearing this over and over and over again from the die-hard tube lovers: "No modeller can match the insane roar of a cranked Marshall stack!"

We know that's not true. Yes, it CAN. If set up right, sure it can. So let's prove it.

So I want someone to prove it. Someone who can play well, that's not me, and can do a demo video of a Fractal driving a 100 watt (or more) power amp and at least one, preferrably two, 4x12s, turned up to something in the 123 dB range, comparing it side by side with a good Marshall stack. To demonstrate that power is power,
tone is tone, digital or tube doesn't matter when it's done right. A Fractal running a Plexi or JCM800 model, in that setup, will rattle your pant legs every bit as effectively as the "real deal" and I'd like to see someone make the demo video that proves it.
Click to expand...

But, it’s not the same. I did my damndest to get my AFIII to sound like my amps, all of which were modeled in the soft. I even went so far so to get the Dayton woofer tester and a db meter to be as fair as possible. The texture of the distortion is different and the midrange of the AFIII doesn't breathe/pump the same. The best description I’ve heard is that all modelers have a “static midrange”. I LOVE the AFIII, it’s the most powerful guitar processor ever conceived and for practical, gig minded musicians, it’s gotta be a blessing. I am neither practical, gig minded, nor much of a musician.
 
lastcaress83 said:
But, it’s not the same. I did my damndest to get me AFIII to sound like my amps, all of which were modeled in the soft. I even went so far so to get the Dayton woofer tester and a db meter to be as fair as possible. The texture of the distortion is different and the midrange of the AFX doesn't breathe/pump the same. The best description I’ve heard is that all modelers have a “static midrange”. I LOVE the AFX and for practical, gig minded musicians, it’s gotta be a blessing. I am neither practical, gig minded, nor much of a musician.
Click to expand...
What firmware did you test on? How many power amps did you try? Theres variables.
 
lastcaress83 said:
I keep it updated and used the Matrix GT1000fx as well as the power amp in my boss tube amp expander.
Click to expand...
Have you tried on 24.05? Fair to say you dove into speaker thump parameters to match the real amp/cab setups too?

Imo if it isnt totally exhaustive its only worth so much. But if you’ve found something across many tests (10+?) then worth nailing down 100% what this frequency is. Then see if the required change can be done.

You’re not the first to mention the mids thing and Im not refuting it since again I havent done any testing. Would just be nice for someone to explicitly say what “it” is and have repeatable results.
 
Budda said:
Have you tried on 24.05? Fair to say you dove into speaker thump parameters to match the real amp/cab setups too?

Imo if it isnt totally exhaustive its only worth so much. But if you’ve found something across many tests (10+?) then worth nailing down 100% what this frequency is. Then see if the required change can be done.

You’re not the first to mention the mids thing and Im not refuting it since again I havent done any testing. Would just be nice for someone to explicitly say what “it” is and have repeatable results.
Click to expand...

I agree and I always meant to do this but full time job+wife+babies have kept me from spending the amount of time it’d take.

Somewhere in this forum is a post from Cliff, maybe from the axe II days, where he posted sound samples asking people if they could hear a difference in the midrange between two clips. I think he’d encountered someone who could reliably pick out the real amp from a side by side. That clip is a great example.

I think it’s most likely that power and components in models are functionally “perfect” whereas in the real world there are constant fluctuations due to temp, power source, etc that can add up to small differences in the overall sound.
 
Last edited:
lastcaress83 said:
I agree and I always meant to do this but full time job+wife+babies have kept me from spending the amount of time it’d take.

Somewhere in this forum is a post from Cliff, maybe from the axe II days, where he posted sound samples asking people of the could hear a difference in the midrange because I think he’d encountered someone who could reliably pick out the real amp from a side by side. That clip is a great example.

I think it’s most likely that power and components in models are functionally “perfect” whereas in the real world there are constant fluctuations due to temp, power source, etc that can add up to small differences in the overall sound.
Click to expand...
Great summary imo. I wonder if Cliff plans to add an “environment” setting that swings various components in small percentages hehe.

That said I have a 1975 superlead Ive cranked up and a dimed plexi preset and neither have let me down. Dumb luck maybe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom