Important question for Cliff or a very kowledgable user

J

james...

Experienced
Today I tried an experiment. I'll first just tell you exactly what I did.

1.Loaded a JCM800 sim. Changed the tonestack to CAE 3+
2.Changed all the preamp parameters in the JCM800 to reflect the CAE 3+ defaults. I did NOT change poweramp parameters. Left them as they were supposed to be.

The idea was to create a sim that had the preamp section of a CAE 3+ and the poweramp section of the JCM800. Plain and simple.

Immediately after listening to my result I realized a crucial error in my plan...

The Drive section of the preamp is still from the JCM800. Changing the tonestack is only half the battle. This crushed my plans.

Cliff...can't we have an advanced parameter (like the tonestack type) that changes the drive type?

If it's impossible to do this without releasing classified data, I will understand...but I still might cry.
 
james... said:
Today I tried an experiment. I'll first just tell you exactly what I did.

1.Loaded a JCM800 sim. Changed the tonestack to CAE 3+
2.Changed all the preamp parameters in the JCM800 to reflect the CAE 3+ defaults. I did NOT change poweramp parameters. Left them as they were supposed to be.

The idea was to create a sim that had the preamp section of a CAE 3+ and the poweramp section of the JCM800. Plain and simple.

Immediately after listening to my result I realized a crucial error in my plan...

The Drive section of the preamp is still from the JCM800. Changing the tonestack is only half the battle. This crushed my plans.

Cliff...can't we have an advanced parameter (like the tonestack type) that changes the drive type?

If it's impossible to do this without releasing classified data, I will understand...but I still might cry.
Click to expand...

I asked him this almost a year ago ( I think the title of my thread was "deconstructing the PT-100" ) and I never got an answer ....

Hopefully you will this time !

I'm "dying" to know too ....
 
One idea worth trying is running the CAE with sag set to 0 (no power amp sim), then input it through the Tube Pre sim, and adjust its power amp parameters akin to the ones in the JCM sim. Worked well enough for me with the Mesa MarkIIc+ through JCM800 for the Master of Puppets sound.
 
Alex EShadow said:
One idea worth trying is running the CAE with sag set to 0 (no power amp sim), then input it through the Tube Pre sim, and adjust its power amp parameters akin to the ones in the JCM sim. Worked well enough for me with the Mesa MarkIIc+ through JCM800 for the Master of Puppets sound.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here ...? But I'm looking for an FRFR solution ..., and it doesn't sound like that is one ?
 
The only way you can spot on do this (as far as I know) is take the JCM800 sim, turn the sag down to zero (which switches the power section off) record a clean (no effects at all) guitar riff or what ever, loop it in to the input of the axe fx. Make your chain in the Axe CAE Amp1 > PEQ > JCM800 Amp2 > Cab then out to your frfr speaker. Then tweek the pre section of the JCM800 and the PEQ for all your worth for days whilst the guitar loop is running through it, bypassing and enabling the JCM800 until there is zero difference in sound when it is engaged or bypassed. If you get there (you'll have a totally flat JCM800 pre) then you can run the sag up and you have a CAE pre run in to a JCM800 power section. I tried and failed (or got bored trying) but may be possible.

Another way, the way I do it is mess with the power section on the CAE (which should be a Mesa 2:90, or was anyways) power tube bias and even tonestack type and placement get me most of the way there. Kinda like the ADA MP-1 can make a 6L6 power section sound more EL34ish.

Mark.
 
Yeah I think it's safe to say the only practical way to do this is if we get some sort of drive switch option.
 
Alex EShadow said:
One idea worth trying is running the CAE with sag set to 0 (no power amp sim), then input it through the Tube Pre sim, and adjust its power amp parameters akin to the ones in the JCM sim. Worked well enough for me with the Mesa MarkIIc+ through JCM800 for the Master of Puppets sound.
Click to expand...
What Alex is suggesting here, is to have *two* amp blocks feeding into one-another. The first is set to emulate the CAE's pre-amp (and also emulate the absence of a power amp section), and the second is set to emulate the JCM800's power-amp (and also emulate the absence of a pre-amp section). The entire sequence therefore emulates a CAE pre-amp block feeding into a JCM800 power-amp block.

Personally, I think this is a brilliant workaround for all those out there who have always wanted to mix-and-match pre- and power-amp sections from different models.

Daniel
 
Yeah the workaround you guys are suggesting is pretty creative and cool, but not a practical solution unfortunately.

-Too much processing wasted on two amp blocks...

-Not exactly the real thing.
 
What might be cool is to have a preamp-disable feature (like Sag = 0 disables the power amp) AND for both of those disable features to release unused resources. So one preamp + one power amp = the same resource usage as a regular amp block.

No problem if we're still limited to 2 amp blocks, regardless of what's enabled or not. That way, we can combine any preamp with any poweramp ;)
 
I haven't read every single word in every post, but basically, we are not going to be able to mix and match preamps with poweramps. Cliffs have stated this several times.

Only way to get the CAE with a Marshall power section, is to get him to change it in the amp block.

DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT! :mrgreen:
 
tonygtr said:
I haven't read every single word in every post, but basically, we are not going to be able to mix and match preamps with poweramps. Cliffs have stated this several times.

Only way to get the CAE with a Marshall power section, is to get him to change it in the amp block.

DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...


Not change, but add CAE models with EL-34 power section. Sounds like a great wish list item to me. :cool:
 
ElectricPhase said:
tonygtr said:
I haven't read every single word in every post, but basically, we are not going to be able to mix and match preamps with poweramps. Cliffs have stated this several times.

Only way to get the CAE with a Marshall power section, is to get him to change it in the amp block.

DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...


Not change, but add CAE models with EL-34 power section. Sounds like a great wish list item to me. :cool:
Click to expand...

But where will it all end. I'd kill for Cliff to model a Mk2c+ 2 model with a Plexi or JCM800 power section. Would there be enuff space on the eprom? Maybe on the Ultra but then what about the standard users? Also its all the time needed to do it, the guys are all running at full tilt already..........
 
andrito222 said:
Hi not sure if this has been said before but i feel that there might be a need for some of us to have an fx send and return in the preamp/poweramp section of the amp section, now i know many would think this is useless since all the options that the axe fx gives you for routing effects etc, but i use the axe fx to a tube power amp and i use the power amp section on in the axe fx as i feel it makes the tone more dynamic and real, so when i put delays specially after the amp section they thin out pretty quickly, thats because its not getting the juice of the power section of the axe fx.
anyway thats my 2 cents :)
Click to expand...

FractalAudio said:
Impossible unfortunately. I can't divulge why but it has to do with advanced processing techniques.
Click to expand...

He also said (can't find the quote, was about a year ago) that defeating the pre is not something he's looking at, possibly exposing tho he did say maybe one day.......
 
james... said:
If Cliff could find some way to let us mix poweramps and preamps none of that would be a problem.
Click to expand...
"Finding a way" is most definitely not the issue. Because doing so would make it much easier for a competitor to reverse engineer what Cliff has done, he has chosen not to break those two components apart.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
[quote="james...":2cvriczl]If Cliff could find some way to let us mix poweramps and preamps none of that would be a problem.
Click to expand...
"Finding a way" is most definitely not the issue. Because doing so would make it much easier for a competitor to reverse engineer what Cliff has done, he has chosen not to break those two components apart.[/quote:2cvriczl]
I understand this.

I meant, if he could possibly find a way to let us do it (without) compromising the info.

He has already exposed the preamps. I suppose exposing the poweramps would be a lot worse though.

There must be a way though...
 
james... said:
[quote="Jay Mitchell":3npv1ihr][quote="james...":3npv1ihr]If Cliff could find some way to let us mix poweramps and preamps none of that would be a problem.
Click to expand...
"Finding a way" is most definitely not the issue. Because doing so would make it much easier for a competitor to reverse engineer what Cliff has done, he has chosen not to break those two components apart.[/quote:3npv1ihr]
I understand this.

I meant, if he could possibly find a way to let us do it (without) compromising the info.

He has already exposed the preamps. I suppose exposing the poweramps would be a lot worse though.

There must be a way though...[/quote:3npv1ihr]

there is a way but he's stated before that it's not going to be implemented. as stated a few times in this thread.
 
...[/quote]

there is a way but he's stated before that it's not going to be implemented. as stated a few times in this thread.[/quote]

Maybe easiest would be to add a send/return serial loop inside the amp blocks: so people with this special need could use two amp blocks to mix different preamps and power amps: send from amp1 into return of amp2.

Just an idea, no need of this feature for me, there are already too many parameters to tweak and enough possibilities to personalize your sound!! ;-D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom