Love 3.0 , but....

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think we have a winner, for the Bludo PAB anyway. I lowered bias excursion and increased the negative feedback, and that seemed to take care of a lot. I can't directly compare since I don't have anything I can reamp through 2.05 then through 3.0, but I think I'm back in business.

So yeah, I think for my part we can wrap this. Good re-education for me...these are similar things you'd do with a real amp if the bass was breaking wind.
I am curious about one thing however. In a real world scenario would one be more apt to tinker inside the amp to remedy this issue or just run some pre-eq into the amp?
I’m wondering what that bias excursion adjustment would do to the other channels of the amp, if they might be effected in a negative way. (Or perhaps positive way.) it just seems to me that pre-eq / low cutting etc might be a more realistic approach?
 
Here is a revised view (3 vs 3 w/No IR Delay and 2.05 vs 3 w/No IR Delay)


That is still a major difference between 2.5 and 3.0. I don't recall ever hearing such a massive difference between concurrent firmware versions, especially in a recording. Differences always seem to be more prevalent in the room. Cliff does F&^%ing rule!
 
That is still a major difference between 2.5 and 3.0. I don't recall ever hearing such a massive difference between concurrent firmware versions, especially in a recording. Differences always seem to be more prevalent in the room. Cliff does F&^%ing rule!

There is definitely a difference but it's much better and I think tweak able now. It was very hard with the "comb filtering thing" and I think I can adjust with presence, less bass or treble but I'll play it in a rehearsal setting first. The response from Cliff, Matt and Chris is always amazing.
 
I am curious about one thing however. In a real world scenario would one be more apt to tinker inside the amp to remedy this issue or just run some pre-eq into the amp?
I’m wondering what that bias excursion adjustment would do to the other channels of the amp, if they might be effected in a negative way. (Or perhaps positive way.) it just seems to me that pre-eq / low cutting etc might be a more realistic approach?

Obviously most people wouldn’t tinker inside the amp for this. What I was hearing wasn’t responding well to either the low cut in the pre-EQ or to the bass control. The low cut should be equivalent to putting a PEQ in front. But as I mentioned in the OP, there are quite a few different ways to cut bass, and some of them are a lot clearer than others in terms of how they work.
 
Was this an existing preset that you had previously changed those values and saved, or were you using the default settings to start with? Sorry if this was mentioned already elsewhere...

Thx

Short answer is both. And it’s how I part of how I found what I think is a different bug that I mentioned in a separate thread.
 
Obviously most people wouldn’t tinker inside the amp for this. What I was hearing wasn’t responding well to either the low cut in the pre-EQ or to the bass control. The low cut should be equivalent to putting a PEQ in front. But as I mentioned in the OP, there are quite a few different ways to cut bass, and some of them are a lot clearer than others in terms of how they work.
Well I suppose even with the real amp if you had exhausted every other possibility of getting to where ya need to be, you would then go on in and make the internal adjustment(s). So really in that regard, this is no different.
 
Try Factory 1 #785. I'm using that paired with a mix of a Suhr G1265 cab with SM-57 and R121 mics.
I flip around between using EV12L’s & 65’s but I always gravitate towards the M160 mic, although the 313 is becoming a new close second when i find em. Was that Suhr cab from a pack? I have a ton of cab packs. I’m thinking it rings a bell. Not that important if you don’t remember off the top of your head, don’t go looking for it. Was just more curious which speakers you like. Btw, I’ve also had some nice results throwing in the Scholz Sugar Cone which is in the 1x12 Carol-Ann which we have starting at Factory1 174-203. Personally I’m partial to # 189. Which is the M160. I like that IR for a lot of things though.
Anyway, thanks!
 
FET Pre before the amp, I think I did 4 scenes.. use your guitar vol to dial in how much gain ya want. And I didn’t set any low cuts, and didn’t touch any tone controls on the amp, just MV, Input Drive & OD. You can always bring the low cut up in the FET. Whoops I just noticed, scene 4 is supposed to have the amp boost ON & Filter Block off.. lol, it’s all so confusing with the channels now!!:D
EDIT: I fixed the patch and added a scene with FAT ON also try that scene with, I think it’s 5 with the Amp Boost on & Filter Blocks off. I ran out of amps, even though they are same amp you have to use a separate amp Channel if you want to have any of the amp switches on unless ya tie it to a modifier/FS.
 

Attachments

  • BLUDO PAB +.syx
    48.2 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:
I think my issue with the new firmware isn't really the tone. I use the angle amp and its pretty forgiving but now it seems the pick attack or feel is harder for me to play without being sloppy and before the notes practically played themselves. I just need to work on being a better player with this firmware.
 
That is still a major difference between 2.5 and 3.0. I don't recall ever hearing such a massive difference between concurrent firmware versions, especially in a recording. Differences always seem to be more prevalent in the room. Cliff does F&^%ing rule!

To my ears the 2.05 tone in WITELITE's last recording (at 0:18) sounds more open than 3.00 (at 0:23) even after fixing the cab. 3.00 freq response seems flatter and less lively compared to 2.05. Perhaps it is just mid emphasis in the 2.05?

@WITELITE, I'm curious if you have been able to get 3.00 close to your 2.05 tone, and if so if you'd post the results.
 
Install 3.00. Move on. Make music.
If that would be so easy... I struggled for some time to make my bass sounds better on2.5 than on XL+, then 3.00 messed it up, I started to fix it, 3.01 once again messed it up (where is the low end ???) and now I am struggling to get it back...
 
This new firmware sounds amazing. I immediately noticed a difference in the clarity of my riffs. My III simply sounds amazing , BUT ...........I’m out of dog food.
I bought a 25 lb bag when 2.05 came out , and now I’ve got to drive all the way back to the store and get dog food.... again , after 3.01.

@FractalAudio , if you would just stop improving the III , life would be so much easier.:)
Thanks for doing what you do. The III is awesome. Just - awesome.
( please don’t stop ).
 
This new firmware sounds amazing. I immediately noticed a difference in the clarity of my riffs. My III simply sounds amazing , BUT ...........I’m out of dog food.
I bought a 25 lb bag when 2.05 came out , and now I’ve got to drive all the way back to the store and get dog food.... again , after 3.01.
My car wont start. A coincidence? I dont think so.
 
This new firmware sounds amazing. I immediately noticed a difference in the clarity of my riffs. My III simply sounds amazing , BUT ...........I’m out of dog food.
I bought a 25 lb bag when 2.05 came out , and now I’ve got to drive all the way back to the store and get dog food.... again , after 3.01.

@FractalAudio , if you would just stop improving the III , life would be so much easier.:)
Thanks for doing what you do. The III is awesome. Just - awesome.
( please don’t stop ).

Don't know if you meant to throw shade on me or what, but that's kinda how this sort of remark comes across, especially when the thread has resulted in a couple of different good outcomes: one was that we learned the bass modeling HAD changed (not in the release notes), and that there were some helpful ways to deal with it. The other poster who had issues with his preset learned why.

Chill out? You must not be in the midwest. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom