Master level default setting poll!

[ML SOUND LAB]

Right now every amp sim defaults it's master level to 5. However that's not the way the real amps work. F.ex. Fenders should have a master level cranked up to 10-ish and modern high gain amps should have really low master settings to achieve the authentic tones that we all want. Wouldn't it be much better to have the amps default to their sweetspot master settings? It would be a million times easier to audition different amps and find the amp that you really like.

F.ex. at first I thought the Fender sims sucked because they had no volume.

 

[jhuggins]

I understand the original reasoning for not doing this was for consistency in sampling multiple amps, but as our poweramp modeling has drastically improved since 9.0 I believe the opposite may now be true. IMHO I feel in order to drastically cut down on confusion and improve efficiency "generally accepted appropriate to real life" master volumes should be set as default, as well as appropriate placement of nonmaster volume amps. This would make the axe fx more "plug and play" for inexperienced new users and become yet even more competitive against the analogue market. ALL IMHO and please feel free to correct me if I am misinformed.

 

[xrist04]

For amps that do have Master Volume controls, what would be the 'default setting' ? :roll:

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Right now every amp sim defaults it's master level to 5. However that's not the way the real amps work.

You mean there's a "default" setting for MVs on amps? I always thought it was just wherever the last guy to play it in the music store left it. :lol:

F.ex. Fenders should have a master level cranked up to 10-ish

There is no "should."

Seriously, are you really too lazy to set the MV where it sounds best to you? :roll:

 

[VegaBaby]

I don't really care where the defaults are set since I know with the amps I'm using where to set them, but FWIW, I think Clark is talking about a default 'sweetspot' of the MV which certainly exists beyond what one likes or not.

IMHO, a feature request like that would really only help new users, which in return may be good for FAS since someone trying the unit may feel more at home right out of the box. For anyone having it had for a couple of months...well Jay, I agree...a bit lazy :lol:

Still giving it a yes for above mentioned reason (the 'out of the box better experience for potential customers').

And regarding volume issues between amp sims. Well, the amp block does have a volume so maybe if Cliff decides to adjust the MVs, maybe the output volumes could get dependent volume levels...

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I think Clark is talking about a default 'sweetspot' of the MV which certainly exists beyond what one likes or not.

One man's "sweet spot" is another man's hell.

 

[VegaBaby]

I think Clark is talking about a default 'sweetspot' of the MV which certainly exists beyond what one likes or not.

One man's "sweet spot" is another man's hell.

So true, but for users who know where their 'sweetspot' is, nothing would really change .

 

[Jay Mitchell]

The problem is this: user assumes something magical about the "default" control settings and leaves them where they are. I'm talking about exactly the same controls that are present on a physical amp, not the advanced parameters. At some future time, (s)he discovers that, woa!, this sim sounds really sweet if I [increase/decrease] the [MV/Treble/Mid/Bass/Drive/etc.] from where it was when I placed the block in the preset.

Point is, controls is controls. If you don't fool around with 'em, you'll never know what they do (and don't do). Defaults are just as arbitrary - and every bit as meaningful - as where the control knobs are set on your amp when you first bring it home.

 

[jhuggins]

I completely agree but default is default now. There may be many users that don't touch any of the controls, just play the presets then get disappointed. I feel like new users would be inclined to leave a fenders master volume at 5 now, not knowing any better and quickly disregard that amp sim thinking it sounds thin and sterile. Default, to me, just means a good starting point or foundation. Once users are comfortable with a starting point they may choose to explore, if they never explore so be it, however I don't think it will slow down ambitious users to learn and understand the tool they have and how it works. Ultimately, I feel it would make the unit sound better "out of the box" and I can certainly see how that would be beneficial for some, and cannot understand how it would hurt anyone else. I am not trying to be argumentative, I am trying to better understand the "downsides."

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I feel like new users would be inclined to leave a fenders master volume at 5 now

Answer honestly: would you ever do that with a physical amp if the MV happened to be set at 5 when you bought it? If not, why would you consider doing that with an amp sim in the Axe-Fx?

not knowing any better and quickly disregard that amp sim thinking it sounds thin and sterile

Interestingly enough, my presets that use Fender sims all have MV set relatively low. I don't agree in the slightest that the Axe-Fx Fender sims sound "thin and sterile" with the present default settings.

Default, to me, just means a good starting point or foundation.

We all have different ideas about what constitutes a "good starting point or foundation," however. My starting points depend on the output stage of the amp being simulated, as well as the tone stack. There is no way I would suggest that Cliff use my starting points as defaults, although I have very good reasons for using them. Everyone has to find his own way.

however I don't think it will slow down ambitious users to learn and understand the tool they have and how it works

IMO the defaults of all the controls with physical equivalents (drive, tone, MV, presence) are essentially meaningless to anyone who has any business fooling with an Axe-Fx. Changing them certainly won't hurt skilled users. I contend that it won't help naive users, however, any more than would an amp manufacturer setting the controls on the amp to specific settings when they ship it.

Ultimately, I feel it would make the unit sound better "out of the box"

I could easily see at least as many people complaining about any new choice of defaults as are complaining now.

The downside is that it will take some of Cliff's time, and for a highly questionable benefit to anyone. For that reason, my preference is that nothing be changed in this area.

 

[jhuggins]

those are certainly very good points, and you are probably right, "correct" is certainly relative to the person. However my biggest concern isn't the high gain amps, but the amps with no master volume at all, as they sit now in the axe they would not sound that way straight from the factory (as far as my limited understanding of tube amps is concerned). To be fair, "sterile" at low master volumes with fender amps was over speculating a bit as I've spent hardly any time actually trying to get a good sound with this setting. If master placement isn't beneficial to those in the market for the axe then I agree it is a complete wast of Cliff's time, but as the audience becomes more divers and reaches those with a limited understanding of how a tube amp works at all (like me initially) it could be worthwhile. I see no difference in placing a master to an appropriate default for an amp with no master volume (i.e. fender vox ect.) than setting a default depth, or power tube bias appropriate to amps that differ in those regards. Again I feel a little silly as you clearly knows more than me in this area, but maybe it's possible that this might have a greater impact for new users than you think and make a negligible difference to those who already understand what they are doing. I will agree that any adjustment on Master Volume amps may be to subjective.

 

[guitarmike]

I have to agree with jay; I don't always find that cranking the master to be the best position on the so called non master sims. It is my experince that lower master settings seem to be best on the hi gain amps - but it does depend on what your after. The slo with a low volume and high master gets - in my opinion- a great marshall type sound.

On a side note (kinda) in some real non master type amps, the phase inverter also clips. In other words, you can really only drive the power section to a point because after that point the phase inverter starts clipping. I don't know for sure and have no way of making measurements, but I wonder if it is actually possible to drive the output of the axe much harder (without the phase inverter distortion) than is possible in the real world. This, of course, would be dependent on the preamp gain - lower volume settings might allow higher master settings. But I find that with higher volume settings and slighty lower master settings I get a better breakup - just my opinion.

So I don't really see to much benefit setting the master any different than it is. Different guitars and pickups as well as taste prevent this to be very meaninful in the broad sense.

I would rather see an in depth chart or publication of some kind describing in specific detail, and comparing the effect of each of the parameters and degree of adjustment possible in relation to its real life counter part - for each sim - with scope shots. I am not holding my breath...

 

[ML SOUND LAB]

This isn't laziness or people not knowing the meaning of the master control. The point is in auditioning amps and getting realistic tones. Sure people at the guitar store leave the master control the where ever but when the amp is in your home and you've read the manual you sure have it in the sweet spot and leave it there. However like you said there's not only one sweet spot on an amp so it's probably hard to decide which one to choose but it sure isn't master on 5 on every amp.

 

[fremen]

Some users, I don't remember who, uploaded a bank with two presets of each amp model with "appropriate" speaker selection and a basic reverb, nothing all. A solution would be to update it with recommended master settings, and volume compensation.

 

[Spellbound]

I voted for yes, but for me it would be enough if I could see at the display that the amp has no master volume. This would be great for all standard controls (master, "drive", bass, treble, mid, presence). Just something very simple like a dot right above the control or something like that.

Why? I always forget which controls are available in the original. Knowing it does not mean that I don't touch it but it is my starting point to leave them.

The idea is from the GearBox (Pod) software. Don't kill me please . There you see the controls the amp has and the others in the right corner very small but you can still handle them if you need. But that is just the idea.

 

[Smilzo]

Some users, I don't remember who, uploaded a bank with two presets of each amp model with "appropriate" speaker selection and a basic reverb, nothing all. A solution would be to update it with recommended master settings, and volume compensation.

I like this better.

The Axefx is a race machine. The firmware has to be fine tuned, no air-conditioning or video player.
Cliff already give us a way to copy fx between preset.

The Axe editor is a different beast. I like a way to copy with a click amp, cab & IR, if user (with a little bit of warning about about legal use of them, and ability to block IR copy on a user basis), an possibly to choose from a set of user prefered sweep spot setting (or factory). That would be great.

 

[VegaBaby]

I voted for yes, but for me it would be enough if I could see at the display that the amp has no master volume. This would be great for all standard controls (master, "drive", bass, treble, mid, presence). Just something very simple like a dot right above the control or something like that.

That's a cool idea. Line6 do that in their GearBox. Not with MV since they forgot to model that :lol: , but with Presence and Mids. Trust your ears, yes, but it's a double-sided sword. At one point we're aiming for super accurate amp sims but still have parameters which don't exist on that amp. Don't get me wrong, I'm modding everything to my liking, but I'm sure the majority prefers the 'right out of the box' approach.

Another example...Some time ago Cliff mentioned that on a Deluxe, since there's no Mid control, for authenticity the Mid should be 6.8. I doubt that a lot of people knew that.

An easy solution would be to have everything at noon that exists on the real amp and the non-existing parameters at their 'correct' default. That way you immediately see what's going on. No harm done.

 

[Stratman68]

I agree with Jay and vote "no". Like real amps have a MV place when you buy them? So what about the guy(like me) that has a Les Paul and 2 Strats? Where should the drive be? Kind of depends what type of music\sound your looking for and where the MV is.
IMHO you guys are spoiled. If a newbie came on this forum and saw all of the I want this and it should have that, first impression would be "this unit must really need help. look at all these folks wanting to change so many aspects. I love my Ultra the way it is and I trust Cliff more than I trust myself or you guys as far as updating the Ultra. Everyone keeps asking for more and more and more. Give it a rest. The Ultra is "perfect" IMHO the way it is. Why not enjoy the marvelous piece of equipment you have.
OK you can all slam me now-I still will have my Ultra and be a happy camper ;-)
Frank

 

[ML SOUND LAB]

I'm not sure what this Ultra is. I know a golf ball named Ultra and they suck. Anyways back to topic. This isn't meant to be whining. There's nothing wrong with the way the Axe-Fx works right now but this sure is one thing that has me going: "hmm... why is it set like this since there's no reason for it?". I can't think of one reason why the master level should default to 5.

Think of it like this. The first time you played an expensive amp, let's say a Mesa, you had no idea how to tweak it and you play with the EQ knobs and nothing seems to work so you hate that amp. Then weeks later someone tells you: "aaah the master level should be low and then the amp rocks" Wouldn't it be a lot better if the master level was low when you first played with it?

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Think of it like this. The first time you played an expensive amp, let's say a Mesa, you had no idea how to tweak it and you play with the EQ knobs and nothing seems to work so you hate that amp. Then weeks later someone tells you: "aaah the master level should be low and then the amp rocks" Wouldn't it be a lot better if the master level was low when you first played with it?

What if you went back and tried what "someone suggested" and it sucked even worse? :shock:

Just because "someone says" you should set MV or some other control at some value or other doesn't mean that's an accurate - or even valid - statement. You guys are acting like there are objective absolutes where none are possible. Everything in this area is a matter of taste. If you've got enough taste to know that MV at 5 isn't a good default for you, then you'll be able to tell when you've found a better setting. Insisting that your setting - or anyone's preferred setting - become the default is silly.

FWIW, even when I'm going for a clean, "accurate" sound in a non-MV amp, I still set MV well below maximum. It may or may not be "accurate," but it produces the sound I want to hear.