Has the Axe-FX II Achieved 99% amp modeling accuracy?

[Lionheart]

I can't say the same about the IRs, there are thousands on my computer and only a few are good enough.
So this is the weak part of the concept.

Absolutely not. IRs are extremely accurate. Mic up a 4x12 Mesa cab with a single SM57 and then compare it to the IR equivalent. It's unbelievable how close they will be.

I totally disagree about your assessment of the IR vs the real cab. It's not the weak part by a long shot.

 

[laughyouraxeoff]

Every time I need reassurance, I go youtube, search for amp demos and then compare with what I can achieve with the axe. I listen for details through my monitor headphones.
Most of the time I hear that I can achieve tones on, what I think is, the exact same level of quality, so I am most definitely reassured. I can't talk about feel as I don't know how a real tube amp is supposed to feel, but the sound, to me, is definitely there.
But sometimes - I feel like it's maybe a bit lacking. Dunno whether it's the cab IR's or the amp modelling, the guitar, the player, or simply a false impression. I believe that the axe is very good at producing modern polished tones, but maybe lacking in more vintagie raw tones? As I've worded that once - "Maybe the Axe FX sounds too perfect?". I was accused of being stupid for not liking perfection and was told to get a Line 6, when I said that on the forums...

Here's an example of a raw tone:

Damn he needs to intonate that guitar, sounds like dog shit out of the mix lol. I would not doubt if those tones have been mastered in a way by the engineer.

 

[666was999]

Absolutely not. IRs are extremely accurate. Mic up a 4x12 Mesa cab with a single SM57 and then compare it to the IR equivalent. It's unbelievable how close they will be.

I totally disagree about your assessment of the IR vs the real cab. It's not the weak part by a long shot.

I don't say IRs are inaccurate.
The concept somehow does not deliver in a way that people easily find good IRs. People get lost in large collections and search in a trial and error way for hours and hours. So my whole point is: There is room for improvement.
If it's the accuracy of the IRs? I have no clue.

BTW, my way of thinking about IRs is that they have one single impact curve that is used over all frequencies, there is not a seperate impact curve for each single eq point, right?
If so, the concept obviously isn't maxed out. Someone who hath understanding may chime in and say how they work?

 

[HarrySound]

Absolutely not. IRs are extremely accurate. Mic up a 4x12 Mesa cab with a single SM57 and then compare it to the IR equivalent. It's unbelievable how close they will be.

I totally disagree about your assessment of the IR vs the real cab. It's not the weak part by a long shot.

The IR's are indeed great....FINDING which one your happy with is the nightmare.

 

[∞Fractals]

I thought this thread was about amp modelling - not cabinet modelling?

I think a thread on IRs would be more appropriate as I do find that getting an IR to work for you is far harder than an amp.

I agree with what HarrySound just wrote - finding an IR that makes you happy can be a bear (although I freely admit it's not something I do hardly at all (avoid IRs by using "real" cabs)).

The amps are darn near plug and play; cabinets, well not so much yet (for me). I'm sure more time working with them would change my impression and abilities.

 

[Lionheart]

I agree with what HarrySound just wrote - finding an IR that makes you happy can be a bear (although I freely admit it's not something I do hardly at all (avoid IRs by using "real" cabs)).

Make an IR of your own cabinet, mic'd up the way you like it.

I challenge you to be able to discern the difference between the guitar track using your mic'd cab and the track using your IR equivalent that you made.

 

[Clockwork Creep]

A lot more goes into Brian May's sound than just one Vox(or secret amp) mic'ed up in a standard way. He at least had multiple amps going(definitely on stage), the room ambience is baked into the sound. You could take your axe fx(s)(as many as amps he had on at once, or reamp) and run it thru a cab(same mic techniques) in Queen's studio, and it would sound similarly I'm sure.

If any of that isn't worded awesomely...the only point I'm making is... I hear a lot of the character of the room recorded into the guitar track.

If IR's can capture this "Character of the room" accurately, then there is nowhere to improve. But to me, it seems that cab IR's just capture the tone, but maybe not the ambiance "tail". If so, this works well for close mic'ing, not so well for room mics. And the "Room" knob in the Cab block is just not that good...

 

[Clockwork Creep]

I can't say the same about the IRs, there are thousands on my computer and only a few are good enough.

The problem with IR's is that not only do you have to select the IR, but also adjust the Speaker page, otherwise the IR's won't give you an accurate result on how that amp would sound through that cab.
Especially if the Speaker page is configured for a drastically different cab, the results may be weird. Same goes for real cabs too, actually.
I think this is currently the biggest challenge in Axe FX amp modelling.

 

[barhrecords]

If IR's can capture this "Character of the room" accurately, then there is nowhere to improve. But to me, it seems that cab IR's just capture the tone, but maybe not the ambiance "tail". If so, this works well for close mic'ing, not so well for room mics. And the "Room" knob in the Cab block is just not that good...

A long IR, 3 secs or greater, can accurately capture the room.

But there isn't a way to convolve an IR of that length in real time.

A DAW plugin can do it though because in a DAW tracks can be delayed in relation to one another to compensate for latency introduced by various plugins.

 

[∞Fractals]

Make an IR of your own cabinet, mic'd up the way you like it.

I challenge you to be able to discern the difference between the guitar track using your mic'd cab and the track using your IR equivalent that you made.

Yeah - I've thought of making my own IRs ... it's just that I see how much the professionals (FAS, ML, Ownhammer, RW, etc.) go through to get an IR capture and then all the selecting and editing/mixing they go through to get a few samples/captures they feel they can publish and sell. Plus they have a ton of experience doing it and it's still a lot of work.

Uggghhh ... sounds like brain damage for me to try to get a good IR of my cabs.
(At least now, if I need a cab block, I try to find one of the factory cabs, but the axe doesn't sound the same to me in headphones as it does live through a pair of 2x12s. I hear a lot more "grain" in the distortion than I'd expect.) That being said, I do use V30s and I typically go for a V30 cab if I'm playing in headphones to get closer to what I expect/want to hear. Someday I'll try the FRFR set-up; I just don't have the need/desire today.

 

[favance]

So, you have to think about this magic box like you would in a studio or with the best sound engineer(s) mixing your live or recorded sound. I personally don't know too many guitarists that have mastered these skills. I agree, it would be great to have a plug and play version of the "Cab" block that would automatically select the default cab/mic placement as most would set it up...this would be a great time saver. However, this box was designed to allow the most flexibility for the guys that play guitar and also have a sound/electrical engineering background...and it rocks my world, as an older guitarist that can no longer afford all the amps/effects I've played over the years!

 

[Severed]

Yeah - I've thought of making my own IRs ... it's just that I see how much the professionals (FAS, ML, Ownhammer, RW, etc.) go through to get an IR capture and then all the selecting and editing/mixing they go through to get a few samples/captures they feel they can publish and sell. Plus they have a ton of experience doing it and it's still a lot of work.

Uggghhh ... sounds like brain damage for me to try to get a good IR of my cabs.
(At least now, if I need a cab block, I try to find one of the factory cabs, but the axe doesn't sound the same to me in headphones as it does live through a pair of 2x12s. I hear a lot more "grain" in the distortion than I'd expect.) That being said, I do use V30s and I typically go for a V30 cab if I'm playing in headphones to get closer to what I expect/want to hear. Someday I'll try the FRFR set-up; I just don't have the need/desire today.

It's actually not that much work at all. I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but spent a total of 2 afternoons shooting my own cabs. 1st was with Cab Lab, then again with Cab Lab 2 and better mic's, and learning made me realize it's pretty much a waste of money buying someone else's cab shoots.

2nd to the guys that blindly scroll through cab packs looking for "the" IR every time you create a new patch.... sorry but that's just silly. What you should be doing is selecting the IR 1st based on speaker/cab/mic that fits your needs, and dialing the amp in after IMO.

Also, and again if you shoot your own cabs, you will know what mic in what position will give you the tone you want, and if you stay working with your own IR's, once you make selections and / or mixes, there is no need to do it again.

Hell even if you prefer to give your money to these cab pack makers, at least educate yourselves by doing your own shoots as it helps immensely to understand the different mics and their positions.

 

[HarrySound]

It's actually not that much work at all. I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but spent a total of 2 afternoons shooting my own cabs. 1st was with Cab Lab, then again with Cab Lab 2 and better mic's, and learning made me realize it's pretty much a waste of money buying someone else's cab shoots.

2nd to the guys that blindly scroll through cab packs looking for "the" IR every time you create a new patch.... sorry but that's just silly. What you should be doing is selecting the IR 1st based on speaker/cab/mic that fits your needs, and dialing the amp in after IMO.

Also, and again if you shoot your own cabs, you will know what mic in what position will give you the tone you want, and if you stay working with your own IR's, once you make selections and / or mixes, there is no need to do it again.

Hell even if you prefer to give your money to these cab pack makers, at least educate yourselves by doing your own shoots as it helps immensely to understand the different mics and their positions.

All of that would be somewhat solved with what I said earlier about having a visual of a cabinet and being able to move mics around visually while it automatically blended the IR's shot from the different positions. I guess there's plugins that already do this via a DAW. Thinking about it I think amplitude had something like that......but I never ever liked the sound of Amplitube ewwww

 

[Lionheart]

Thinking about it I think amplitude had something like that.

Nothing near what you're asking. Yeah, it looks fancy, but that's it. It's not loading IRs every time you move the virtual mic. It's applying a filter and EQ. It's absolute garbage.

For what you're asking for, it would require a highly technical program that would demolish your CPU usage. It's just not possible, right now.

 

[Brownmatthall]

Nothing near what you're asking. Yeah, it looks fancy, but that's it. It's not loading IRs every time you move the virtual mic. It's applying a filter and EQ. It's absolute garbage.

For what you're asking for, it would require a highly technical program that would demolish your CPU usage. It's just not possible, right now.

I was thinking what it would take and all I could come up with was a new ir for every single position which is completely unfeasible. Even more so considering it would literally be placebo so you the user could feel better about a technology that's already pretty damn accurate. I get that the learning curve is substantial but have you ever mic'd a cab and gotten a successful tone you've wanted? What would a visual aid do for you that sifting through a list of the sweet spots picked by people with better ears and who know the cabs wouldnt?

 

[HarrySound]

Nothing near what you're asking. Yeah, it looks fancy, but that's it. It's not loading IRs every time you move the virtual mic. It's applying a filter and EQ. It's absolute garbage.

For what you're asking for, it would require a highly technical program that would demolish your CPU usage. It's just not possible, right now.

I'm not talking about patching it in. That's not a possibility or a priority to anyone directly involved with producing products. I'm just putting out an idea for how IR selection and mixing in the years to come could be improved.
At the most I'd expect it would be possible with cab lab.

As for micing cabs. Nope I've never done it, there for I have no visual reference for what my ears are hearing, which is what your referring too when your talking about having experience by actually doing it. It's this experience I'm missing, but I'm not the only one.

 

[Lionheart]

I get that the learning curve is substantial but have you ever mic'd a cab and gotten a successful tone you've wanted?

Yes, I have.

What would a visual aid do for you that sifting through a list of the sweet spots picked by people with better ears and who know the cabs wouldnt?

For the average Joe (and professional), 3rd party IRs are a real treat. Cab packs with "quick start" folders are especially useful for people new to understanding how mic'ing a cabinet works.

 

[Lionheart]

I'm not talking about patching it in.

What do you mean when you say, "patching it in"?

 

[rrogers]

For live purposes, is having the sound of the "cab in the room" desirable? Perhaps I'm in the minority/just have a strange ear, but I don't like adding "ambiance" on top of what is already in a room. In a recording, adding the sound of the room makes sense to me, but not through the PA mains.

 

[666was999]

For live purposes, is having the sound of the "cab in the room" desirable?

When you crank a monitor in a room you already get some 'monitor in the room' effect and maybe that's a good target as well. When you have to much 'cab in the room' ambience and eqing in your signal you hear the room twice, the real room where your monitor sounds and the captured room as part of the signal, one room too much.