Maximum Number of Amp Models

Rex said:
You can't do it magically, but you can do it logically with the advanced amp parameters. :)
Click to expand...

Great...turn a Tweed Deluxe (5E3 circuit) into a high power Tweed Twin (5F8A). Go for it. Please send me the file when you're done!

Thanks.
 
jshirkey said:
Great...turn a Tweed Deluxe (5E3 circuit) into a high power Tweed Twin (5F8A). Go for it. Please send me the file when you're done!

Thanks.
Click to expand...

IMO this is the wrong way to approach this. One thing that the tone match feature in the Axe has taught us is that it is about the sound and not about the circuit that happens to achieve it in real life. Every amp sounds different, even amps of the same model/type because of tolerances in components, tapers of knobs, and so on. If you are looking for a particular kind of sound, please send a high quality clip of the sound that you are looking for. I'll have a go at it. I can guarantee you that with the >70 amp models + tone matching, I'll get scary close.

If Cliff wants to add extra amp models to the Axe, that is great, but to me they do not add that much to the product anymore, they are merely shortcuts to getting a particular kind of sound that you can also achieve with some tweaking of the amp models that are already in there, combined with tone matching.
 
Arjan said:
IMO this is the wrong way to approach this. One thing that the tone match feature in the Axe has taught us is that it is about the sound and not about the circuit that happens to achieve it in real life. Every amp sounds different, even amps of the same model/type because of tolerances in components, tapers of knobs, and so on. If you are looking for a particular kind of sound, please send a high quality clip of the sound that you are looking for. I'll have a go at it. I can guarantee you that with the >70 amp models + tone matching, I'll get scary close.
Click to expand...

Maybe you're right. I really don't know. There definitely is an enormous difference between a 20 watt 5E3 and an 80 watt Tweed Twin, though. The circuit and all of the components--including an enormous power transformer in the Tweed Twin--have to play a significant role in producing the tone. It's the sum of all the parts, as you said. If tone matching alone could produce all of the sounds we seek, then there would be no need for further amp modeling from the ground up. But I sure haven't heard Cliff say that was the case. In fact, he's procuring more amps to model as we speak. So there has to be some advantage to doing full-scale modeling vs. tone matching, cool as it is.

I have a pretty huge collection of amps, including a boutique tweed twin clone on its way in a couple more weeks, so I plan on doing a lot of tone matching in the near future. If I'm happy with the results, great. If it doesn't quite work out in certain instances, I'll probably come back begging for some more amp models. lol
 
jshirkey said:
Great...turn a Tweed Deluxe (5E3 circuit) into a high power Tweed Twin (5F8A). Go for it. Please send me the file when you're done!
Click to expand...
Not my job to do your work for you. :)

I'm not sure which amp sim would be the best place to start if your goal is a Tweed Twin. Figuring that out would take research I haven't done; that's not my job, either.

My point is that the advanced parameters in the amp block address most of the design choices that an amp builder would make. Using the existing amp models as a starting point, those parameters contain the recipe for most any amp type.
 
Rex said:
Not my job to do your work for you. :)

I'm not sure which amp sim would be the best place to start if your goal is a Tweed Twin. Figuring that out would take research I haven't done; that's not my job, either.

My point is that the advanced parameters in the amp block address most of the design choices that an amp builder would make. Using the existing amp models as a starting point, those parameters contain the recipe for most any amp type.
Click to expand...

No chance in hell I'll ever do that work. Too busy...plus, I'd rather spend my time playing. Life is short, after all, and I'm not getting any younger.

I also don't happen to think it's possible, but that's based on nothing but conjecture. I'd love to be proven wrong.

If it was possible, as I wrote above, why would Cliff even bother modeling amps anymore? Why not just post instructions for recreating amp models with the tools we already have, and users could do it themselves?
 
vAmp said:
I'm still convinced there's room for 200 in G1 and Cliff once gave the impression there's shitloads of space in G2 for amps (unless they've redistributed that memory for other unforeseen stuff that came up, which I believe was not even possible in G1).
IOW: silly to worry about, IMO ;)
Click to expand...

That's great if that's the case. After thinking about this more, I'm not sure that Cliff will divulge this info publicly.
 
Genghis said:
Yeah, C is a great idea... unless of course you're the developer and have to support the product. You'd pretty much have to have different firmware for every user.
Click to expand...

Not sure that's true. If the amp model data is grouped together in memory storage locations, it seems plausible that those locations could be over-written with new data - much like user cab IRs work now.

To be clear, I'm not talking about importing data from anywhere. It would be models that FAS makes & puts on their website for download. They would still control what the data looks like.
 
jshirkey said:
If it was possible, as I wrote above, why would Cliff even bother modeling amps anymore? Why not just post instructions for recreating amp models with the tools we already have, and users could do it themselves?
Click to expand...
For the same reasons you gave in your post. When people look at the task of creating amp models on their own, they think:

jshirkey said:
No chance in hell I'll ever do that work. Too busy...plus, I'd rather spend my time playing. Life is short, after all, and I'm not getting any younger.
Click to expand...

Just look at how happy everyone is with the fact that they don't have to spend much time tweaking advanced parameters in v6.00.
 
Rex said:
For the same reasons you gave in your post. When people look at the task of creating amp models on their own, they think:



Just look at how happy everyone is with the fact that they don't have to spend much time tweaking advanced parameters in v6.00.
Click to expand...

It's one thing to tweak parameters, even advanced ones, to see what path they lead you down (which is something I just got done doing, in fact). It's quite another thing (is it not??) to build/model an amp from scratch using those same parameters.
 
FA could charge per amp model, say a percentage of the actual cost of a new amp head???

Maybe with a flat discount like 30%?? off the real amp's MSRP ;-p

How many customers would pony up on a pay-per-play basis?? If the price was right, I would!!
 
VegasGuitar said:
FA could charge per amp model, say a percentage of the actual cost of a new amp head???

Maybe with a flat discount like 30%?? off the real amp's MSRP ;-p

How many customers would pony up on a pay-per-play basis?? If the price was right, I would!!
Click to expand...

Sounds more like a Line 6 way of doing business. FAS hasn't charged for firmware yet.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Forum Runner
 
VegasGuitar said:
FA could charge per amp model, say a percentage of the actual cost of a new amp head???

Maybe with a flat discount like 30%?? off the real amp's MSRP ;-p

How many customers would pony up on a pay-per-play basis?? If the price was right, I would!!
Click to expand...

I'm glad Fractal Audio Systems hasn't taken this route, so far.
 
What I could foresee is a V7 or V9 which would include, in the amp block, an "Optional Amp" section, if there's a space issue (which is not a given at all).
For example, say there's room for 200 amps. Once you get to 150 model (Lord, what would I do with 150 amps when I use 3 now!), the slots for the last 50 could be made a separate amp bank that is downloadable.
Maybe that could work, but that's for FAS to say.
 
Even if we stay with the list we got, we should be thankful that we don't have to tote even one up three flights of stairs ...... My back thanks you FAS!!
 
Phostenix said:
That's great if that's the case. After thinking about this more, I'm not sure that Cliff will divulge this info publicly.
Click to expand...
If he suggests there is shitloads of extra space in G2 for amps (which IMO he did somewhere), that's enough for me.
Even if he did divulge exact numbers (if it were even possible), he's known to lie from very early on... ;) See: HRI
 
jshirkey said:
It's one thing to tweak parameters, even advanced ones, to see what path they lead you down (which is something I just got done doing, in fact). It's quite another thing (is it not??) to build/model an amp from scratch using those same parameters.
Click to expand...
You're absolutely right.
 
They could cut the amp models down to a handful and still have pretty much any tone imaginable. Just would require a bit more EQing perhaps. Personally I don't care for this "Marshall X, Fender Y" model thing almost all modelers do. It doesn't matter what model amp it is if it sounds like I want. At the moment none of the amps I use are what I thought I would use to get my tone. I'd say we would be just fine with Fractal Audio's "idealized" own models.

Not to mention the cab models make a bigger difference anyway...
 
I like how the lack of response from Cliff leads to everybody arguing over solutions to a problem that might not even exist.

Why don't you just assume there's plenty of memory space left for more amps and we can all be happy :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom