Initial impressions from a bassist and first time FAS owner

feliperigby said:
But for this wet and dry side... There is the Mix Parameter there already for all blocks...
Click to expand...

Well almost........Not for the Wha block. I have a couple of presets that I have it in parallel to make it more subtle.

Also, the mix parameter in the Drive block does not give you a 'thru' signal when set to 0%. The signals tone is still affected by the Drive's virtual circuit.
 
Robboman said:
Agree, and props to SeeD for his Axe-Fx bass tones, but Keith the OP has an FX8. I'm a long time guitarist and still newbie bassist.. but in my current band I'm 50% guitarist and 50% bassist, so I would LOVE to see more bass love in the FX8.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhh...my bad. I usually catch that before I reply but it got me this time.
 
If the FX8 had the Grid like the AxeFxII to run in parallel the signal and not on serie... I think that this "thru signal" would appear.
When I use AxeFx2 for effects only with any of my bass amps all my effects block on the grid aren't in serie on the grid.
for me it's sound a lot better (on axefx) :mrgreen
 
Moke said:
Well almost........Not for the Wha block. I have a couple of presets that I have it in parallel to make it more subtle.

Also, the mix parameter in the Drive block does not give you a 'thru' signal when set to 0%. The signals tone is still affected by the Drive's virtual circuit.
Click to expand...

Exactly! "Mix" needs to be available on EVERY effect to better support bass guitar. And for every effect, when Mix is 0 and Level is at noon, the output should be identical to the input.

Still, that won't completely solve the problem for bass in all cases. What's additionally needed is the ability for me to prevent any effect I want from altering any frequencies below a given threshold. For example, I should be able to set any DRV effect to leave frequencies below 200Hz completely untouched. That way I can still crank the Mix to 100% without the bottom end dropping out.
 
keith.f.kelly said:
Exactly! "Mix" needs to be available on EVERY effect to better support bass guitar. And for every effect, when Mix is 0 and Level is at noon, the output should be identical to the input.

Still, that won't completely solve the problem for bass in all cases. What's additionally needed is the ability for me to prevent any effect I want from altering any frequencies below a given threshold. For example, I should be able to set any DRV effect to leave frequencies below 200Hz completely untouched. That way I can still crank the Mix to 100% without the bottom end dropping out.
Click to expand...

The Axe FX has a lot of work-arounds to do this using parallel signal paths with various filters, stereo multi-band compressor, cross-overs, etc.......

But I don't know what the FX8 has available?
 
FractalAudio said:
We listen to our customers and we will address these requests at our next feature request meeting.
Click to expand...

I have no idea if this is possible, but (how many times have you heard that one?? lol)...

Maybe users could purchase some kind of bass pack with more bass amp models and bass fx? I'd love to have that for my Axe-FX II.
 
Moke said:
The Axe FX has a lot of work-arounds to do this using parallel signal paths with various filters, stereo multi-band compressor, cross-overs, etc.......

But I don't know what the FX8 has available?
Click to expand...

The problem with those work-arounds is that they require you to set up more convoluted signal chains and use up valuable capabilities that you might have wanted to use for something more useful. I shouldn't have to run a WAH block in parallel with a dud/no-op block just to be able to mix between it and the original signal... especially when most other effects/blocks have a "Mix" knob built right into them.

The other problem is that this entire thread and area of forums is about the FX8, not the Axe-FX. From what I gather, the Axe-FX has much more flexibility/capability than the FX8 does.
 
OP, just FYI, the presets in Bank L were designed specifically for bass during a one-one session with a session bassist. Have you checked those out? Would be interested for your thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
ccroyalsenders said:
OP, just FYI, the presets in Bank L were designed specifically for bass during a one-one session with a session bassist. Have you checked those out? Would be interested for your thoughts.
Click to expand...

I'll take another look, but I don't recall running across any presets I liked for bass when I was cycling through a bunch of them upon receiving the unit.
 
keith.f.kelly said:
I'll take another look, but I don't recall running across any presets I liked for bass when I was cycling through a bunch of them upon receiving the unit.
Click to expand...

I played with the stuff in bank L a bit last night, and while some of it was entertaining, I didn't find anything in there that I'd ever find useful under real-world live performance situations.
 
jimfist said:
Well, I can't say I disagree. Bassists need to be more persistent and clever in order to get these goodies sitting properly for bass guitar. I wouldn't get too depressed being bummed out that there isn't much bass love here in FAS land. I've been there, and it doesn't get you anywhere. To the contrary, if you can demonstrate excellence in creating tones of any kind, it is usually met with recognition on the forum, and even by the FAS powers that be...so don't give up.

[edit: just saw this is FX8...apologies!] If you have the time, $$ and inclination, I'd recommend the ML Sound Labs 4x10 Ultra Res cab pack (11?), and the Ownhammer 4x10 IRs (needs Cab Lab to convert to AxeFx format). They can be the last bit that puts your tones over the top.

As a previous Sans Amp BDDI owner (sold my main and backup units), I can understand that a BDDI drive/amp model would be cool, as it is a familiar place for many bassists to live, tone wise. However, I've found that the more I've used the AxeFx, the less desirable the BDDI sounds have become. Over time, I've become much happier with the amp/cab emulations in the AxeFxII by comparison.

I had good luck with the Rat distortion in parallel, with the low filter set above 400hz or so, to keep it from getting muddy. From there, you can get it as fuzzy or gritty as you like depending on how much drive you dial in, and by tweaking the tone parameter. Parallel seems to be the key, though.

As for the wah, experiment instead with putting the wah block in parallel (again), and with fairly aggressive settings, blended to taste...OR...try using a Filter block with an expression pedal assigned to sweep the frequency, dabbling with the Q to taste. You might like it better. I agree, though, that the low and high frequency ranges of the wah block need to be adjusted lower to accommodate the sweet spot of the bass...low freq doesn't go low enough, if I recall correctly.

At the same time, I' don't think that it would kill FAS to spend a little time making some decent bass amp starting point presets. We can wish, can't we?
Click to expand...


I'm trying now (late but doing hahaha) this Parallel /Series changes. And for sure the drive block is better.
I don't know what. There's some kind of preserving the low end when you set the Drive Blocks in Parallel...

Of course if you try (As i tried here) to use in parallel, wah and modulaton effects, it's suckd like hell. You can't even listen the effect working...
But for drive is the way to go...
 
selta said:
After spending many months with my Axe-Fx II Mk 2, I would have to argue that the effects work well for bass. Yes, it often does mean needing to go in and sift through the parameters, lots of iterative testing and so on... but usable tones are definitely in there. If they weren't, I would've dumped mine by now. I've also turned several other bassists on to the Axe-Fx II - I've worked with them on building their presets and lending a hand with it, but in the end, each one has kept it and use theirs as much (or more) than I do now. Several "big name" bassists have recently or have for a long while been using these as well... hopefully, now that they have it, the rest of us "little guys" will get a small voice, over time.

It just takes a bit of time. But, once you do sink that time in, and refine your workflow for presets, it becomes easier. Still takes a heap of time, but at least you can get where you're going faster.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the Axe-FX II -- I'm talking about the FX8. Totally different.
 
It's not splitting hairs. It's accurate. You can call amp models effects if you want to, but when the vast majority of people say "effects" they aren't talking about amp models; they're talking about modulations, time based effects, EQs, etc. The FX8 has the same effects as the Axe FX right now (I don't think this is always true).

So when Selta says the effects work well, it's fine to disagree, but implying that might be true on the Axe FX but not on the FX8 makes little sense.
 
keith.f.kelly said:
That's splitting hairs. Amp models are just glorified effects in every modern sense of the word.
Click to expand...
Your initial premise was that the discussion about effects doesn't apply because the FX8 and the Axe-FX8 are two different things. We both know you weren't talking about cab modeling. :)

The truth is that the current discussion apples to both devices, because the effects under question are identical in each device.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom