Is Axe Fx too perfect sounding?

Sorry, i don't get the OP, if you do that with a real amp, what does this sound like either...?

C'mon play yer guitar :)
 
The Axe-Fx represents the current state-of-the-art. Whether or not this is good enough for you is personal decision. Personally I find the Axe-Fx superior to tube amp solutions. In 10 years the state-of-the art will hopefully be advanced from today.

As I was telling the beta team the other day I failed a double-blind test. We were comparing a 1968 Plexi Superlead to the Axe-Fx model. I played for a while, switching back and forth, and then stopped, kind of angry and proclaimed "that's the amp". I was angry because I thought "well, algorithms still aren't there, amp sounds better". Looked up and the A/B selector was set to Axe-Fx. I literally got a bit startled and my mouth fell open. This was using the Quantum release candidate.
 
The Axe-Fx represents the current state-of-the-art. Whether or not this is good enough for you is personal decision. Personally I find the Axe-Fx superior to tube amp solutions. In 10 years the state-of-the art will hopefully be advanced from today.

As I was telling the beta team the other day I failed a double-blind test. We were comparing a 1968 Plexi Superlead to the Axe-Fx model. I played for a while, switching back and forth, and then stopped, kind of angry and proclaimed "that's the amp". I was angry because I thought "well, algorithms still aren't there, amp sounds better". Looked up and the A/B selector was set to Axe-Fx. I literally got a bit startled and my mouth fell open. This was using the Quantum release candidate.

just curious was your double blind test arranged using a FRFR cabinet, or the same (or comparable) speaker used by the Plexi Superlead? what was the exact setup? the reason I ask is that a lot of the qualities we assign to "amps" are (at least that's so true for me) more than 50% due to the actual speakers. a concrete example would be the VOX AC30. I used to own a marvelous AC30 head+ matching cabinet (the hand-wired edition which had the ability to disable all bells and whistles and sound loud as hell, and you could also run it at 15W). well.... the magic was actually coming from the (original) cabinet, which loaded 2 alnico blue speakers that sounded like poetry... they were AMAZING. now that amp was still a great amp. but playing it thru another cabinet took away a lot...
that said I LOVE the Axe (I used to have the ULTRA and now the XL) and I use it with a guitar cab (2*12 zilla with V30 and G12H) as I could never "train" my ears to FRFR :)

I used to play in a Zed Zeppelin tribute band and people were complimenting me all the time, and this was years ago with the ULTRA. I guess now it would be even better. now let's focus more on refining/adding effects please :):)
 
Last edited:
To the OP (Freemind), my .02...

Thought #3: "Some people" are intrinsically opposed to modeling, and will always come up with some reason (valid for them, I guess) as to why it will not replace their cherished electrons in glass tubes. My answer is: Who cares? People can believe anything they want and they are entitled to that belief. [...]

Play music, have fun, who cares how you reach musical nirvana as long as you get there?

TT

Though I consider the OP to be irksome, I am motivated by Tommy Tequila's thoughtful response to submit one of mine own:

Yes, utilizing its current firmware, the Axe FX II is capable of producing both idealized and raw tones.

In my opinion, this capability is not problematic- rather, it is desirable. The device in question is a Utopian tool for the independent artist. The only question worth pondering is that of taste, as one man's ideal might be anathema to another; fortunately, such determinations are entirely subjective.
 
I don't agree with the idea of "too" perfect, but the amps really are idealized. I love and play amps in the Fractal that never impressed me in person. There is also some extra magic happening where not only do the amps sound great, but they sound like they are always in the best sounding part of the room. I don't know if you've ever had a great amp that you've had lots of experience with, and then you take it to a new spot, or move it around in a studio space and then all of a sudden the amp just comes alive but that's what I experience with the axe. I don't hear room in the IR'S, but across most settings the amp seems to be in the sweet spot. It's like I flip the on switch and the stars are aligned

People can find any reason they need to rule out the axe fx. I'm just glad I have mine
 
Begs the question of if the amp models are too perfect, why one simply doesn't do one of the 50 or more ways to make an amp "worse" ?

Adjust Xformer match, B-time, squish, way over or under bias it, etc, etc. Literally tons of parameters you can adjust to make a great amp sound less than great, and according to the OP, all those "imperfections" are what makes music sound good.
 
I don't know about recording but I will tell you that i have done extensive side by side comparisons with my 5150 III head through my 4x12 cabinet and the Axe FX into the effects return so both are using the same exact power amp and cabinet and it sounds so close I promise you couldn't tell the difference. The thing I love about it is I can also run the Axe through my 6l6 rack mount power amp, make a couple of tweaks and you can't tell the difference between the two also.

I haven't done much recording with the Axe yet but when I would record before it was always a struggle because I had to have my amp cranked to get a good sound and if you haven't heard one a 5150 III cranked it is, how to say it politely? "A LOUD MOFO" so I'm thinking if it solved that problem for me I'll be a happy camper....lol
 
Alright, to make it clear - I believe that the Axe Amp sims are top notch with all the authentic natural and great sounding "imperfections" of real amps, with all the posibilities to sterilize them out in the settings and making the sims sound digital. But what about Cabs? I don't have experience with recording real tube amps with mics, so I can't really compare the results.
 
With quantum it sounds and feels so close who would be able to tell the difference?

OP, I think it is more about...
1) the playing : the attitude and how you attack and control your guitar. They're all really good musicians.
2) the production : for instance the first RATM album was all recorded on a neve board, it adds a colour on the top of a tube amp or an axefx. The mics can also pick up the sound of a certain room.
3) the mix : a mix can make you sound more hi-fi or low-fi with a tube amp or with an axefx similarly. And also, the sound of guitar and bass are usually mixed in a way that it's hard to seperate the two when listening to the whole mix. Usually guitar tracks on their own are a lot thinner than you'd expect. In some cases almost lifeless!
 
Alright, to make it clear - I believe that the Axe Amp sims are top notch with all the authentic natural and great sounding "imperfections" of real amps, with all the posibilities to sterilize them out in the settings and making the sims sound digital. But what about Cabs? I don't have experience with recording real tube amps with mics, so I can't really compare the results.

Please re-read #2 again in my reply to you on the previous page as to the many ways you can use/record with the AxeFX.

If you don't have experience with actual amps/cabs/mics, then trust the people who DO have that experience who happily use/record with the AxeFX, and stop gnawing on this bone.

The ONLY results that count are the ones that YOU get playing YOUR music. Stop typing, go play some music and find your own answer. It's all there.

TT
 
But what about Cabs?

Well, here's the thing. Most of the IRs I've used, and heard sound exactly like a recorded cab. The problem is that this can actually be a good thing or a bad thing, depending upon the mix.

The reality is that, when you are recording a guitar cab, there are just so many variables, and your overall mix dictates a lot of this. Essentially, one recordings perfectly mixed cab is another recordings sore thumb.

I personally shoot for a cab tone that DOESN'T sound like a recorded cab. In order to do that, I use the stereo Ultrares cab, and make certain cuts in the highs, and lows, and then start finding characteristics that complement each other in such a way that it negates the "mic" feel as much as possible. It's never 100%, but with some work, and critical listening it can be fairly close. The new dephase parameter makes it a bit easier too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Everyone's got an opinion. ...me too. :D

To my ears and my perception of perfect/ideal I think these terms well describe the Gen 1 AxeFX at firmware v11.0. A lot happened with that firmware to help simplify the process of building record-ready tones. It has the polished sound of post processing to fit in a mix nicely.

The AxeFX II seems to have been heading away from this as the standard output in favor of raw, realistic amp tones - tones requiring post processing in the same way a real amp mic'd and recorded may require to sit right in a mix. Fortunately all of those tools are provided in the AxeFX II along with the many, many quite accurately emulated amp models.

The OP has a point in his mention of the potential limitations of IR's when compared to the amp modeling. If there's a weak point in modeling it may well be in the lack of a modeled dynamic speaker emulation. If I recall correctly the current DSP's aren't quite up to modeling a reactive load and it's direct interaction with the amp model's output section. We're likely waiting for more powerful DSP's before we'll see any such emulation.

In the meantime I personally don't feel that IR's limiting one's potential to emulate the entire signal chain, be it for polished, post-processed tracks or a simple, raw amp sound - warts and all.

The results, for better or worse, are on the user - not the tool.
 
I know what you mean for when going direct. So much of how a guitar sounds on a record depends on how it was recorded, the techniques.

Sent from my XT1021 using Tapatalk
 
If I recall correctly the current DSP's aren't quite up to modeling a reactive load and it's direct interaction with the amp model's output section. We're likely waiting for more powerful DSP's before we'll see any such emulation.

The Axe-Fx models the speaker as a reactive load and its interaction with the virtual power amp. Always has.
 
It's wrong settings 100%! Use the same settings and you sound just like the real amp. F.ex. check my video:



Most people don't have experience A/Bing real vs Axe-Fx. I have a lot of that experience. They can easily be made to sound identical without going into advanced settings and sometimes the same exact EQ settings give me the same result like in that Mark IV video. That's a real mic up vs my IR shoot method. Pretty damn identical. High five me!

Some records have been recorded live in the same room. Not sure if that's the case with RATM in the OP but it kind of sounds like that so it could be that there's some amp bleed in the overhead mics etc. which sure is a bit harder to recreate. I haven't been successful with farfield IRs trying to recreate that effect. It all has to do with the "bad mic placement" because drum overheads were not placed to sound good for guitar. It just helps tie a guitar sound into the drum sound when they're coming in through the same mics. It's a subtle thing but it does sound good.
 
Well, more or less, I have nothing more to add to this. Thanks everyone :)
Just please read into my points more, cause yall react as if I'm hatin the axe... I was just asking questions. I love my axe. Especially since Quantum.
But for now - I am convinced that there's probably no significant difference between an IR and a mic setup.
Maybe in the future I'll do some tests with real cabs, when I have the opportunity. I may find my own little sweet spots, as I will have more control, then capture my own IR's.
 
It's wrong settings 100%! Use the same settings and you sound just like the real amp. F.ex. check my video:



Most people don't have experience A/Bing real vs Axe-Fx. I have a lot of that experience. They can easily be made to sound identical without going into advanced settings and sometimes the same exact EQ settings give me the same result like in that Mark IV video. That's a real mic up vs my IR shoot method. Pretty damn identical. High five me!

Some records have been recorded live in the same room. Not sure if that's the case with RATM in the OP but it kind of sounds like that so it could be that there's some amp bleed in the overhead mics etc. which sure is a bit harder to recreate. I haven't been successful with farfield IRs trying to recreate that effect. It all has to do with the "bad mic placement" because drum overheads were not placed to sound good for guitar. It just helps tie a guitar sound into the drum sound when they're coming in through the same mics. It's a subtle thing but it does sound good.


This video has done more for my tone in 5min then ive been able to do in 5 years. Thanks. A lot!
 
Back
Top Bottom