5150
Inspired
By using re-amping and the same DI track for the Fractal and the real amp, the player and guitar are factored out.
Yep, agreed.
By using re-amping and the same DI track for the Fractal and the real amp, the player and guitar are factored out.
Maybe that's because you don't get the point of the test?
Apparently not. It's not a model to model comparison, it's across all models tested (as well as others which were not). Hearing something that is system wide is literally impossible in a one to one scenario as there is no other proof of it.I get the point of the test.
I get the point of the test.
No, they are factored IN.Yep, agreed.
This. I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp.Are you sure? If you want to keep all variables the same, the test would be set to answer the question whether people notice the difference or not.
And that's not the question.
The question is whether people can notice a pattern in a seemingly random set of parameters. So the more variability, the better.
I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp.
This. I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp.
I think the Title and one pick was then already the "wrong" question (and yes i do really understand and agree with what your saying, not the fact there is sonic imprint as Although I heard many high end vids and songs lately and i did think i felt something, im not sure its the pre amp/amp modelling of the axe fx).This. I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp.
But I'll say it again, and please -- this is critical -- IF! If, if, if, someone (not me) is saying that there is a noticeable sonic imprint, it has yet to be shown or demonstrated after all this time. And IF that person wanted to demonstrably, repeatedly, and reliably illustrate that there IS, then the only way to do that would be a double blind test, created with scientific methods applied.
I think the Title and one pick was then already the "wrong" question (and yes i do really understand and agree with what your saying, not the fact there is sonic imprint as Although I heard many high end vids and songs lately and i did think i felt something, im not sure its the pre amp/amp modelling of the axe fx).
The start of it all should have been: do you hear any similarity (i.e. sonic footprint or whatever that is axe fx related) and which ones (takes/#) are those
but indeed random takes would be ok for only this... for your sake I hope people get it (lol).
but for take 2 i really hope it will be more close and accurate so people will not choose because of frequency changes due to IRs used, mic position difference, bla bla bla... but of course with lots of takes with real amps and axe fx. And not one choice, but definitely choosing all takes where you think there could be sonic imprint!
And if you use real cab with same mic and position and everything behind the same, one rules out a lot
And I have to say if some people keep saying that they hear it, some real good double tripple octal testing would be in order to realy prove this else its better to close the subject.
(on the other hand there is no new fw we can tweak or test or debate or write about lol)
And yet here we are. The game was fun, really. I'm not picking on the game. "Spot the amp!" I get it. I mean, I've seen this literally dozens of times, many of them right here on this forum. And never once, over all the years have I seen a single person who can reliably pick the Axe vs. real amps.
Yet as soon as the OP's best buddy was told which one was the amp -- lo and behold! -- his magic ears knew all along that clip x was the real amp. Yep, he knew it the whole time.
I have stated, a number of times, that I do NOT think there is a sonic imprint. Does that mean there isn't? Of course not. I'm not so young or convinced of my own knowledge and skills to assume that my hearing is the be-all end-all.
But I'll say it again, and please -- this is critical -- IF! If, if, if, someone (not me) is saying that there is a noticeable sonic imprint, it has yet to be shown or demonstrated after all this time. And IF that person wanted to demonstrably, repeatedly, and reliably illustrate that there IS, then the only way to do that would be a double blind test, created with scientific methods applied.
When trying to determine and isolate, through testing, the potential effects of individual component parts within a complex system, you simply do not change multiple variables from test to test. I don't know any scientist (and I've worked with MANY at the Army Research Lab, NASA Goddard, UPenn, and Johns Hopkins labs, with actual scientists) who would disagree with that statement.
That's all I was saying. Sorry for the argument from authority. Not trying to be a jerkwad here. Also not sure that I'm succeeding in trying not to be.
What's the lesson to be learnt here? We all had a 20% chance of guessing the real amp (1 out of 5) and 20% of us got it right (8 out of 40). It's exactly the average score. So as far as statistical analysis is concerned people can not tell the difference between the Axe-Fx and a real amp.
Yeah it's very weird. People don't seem to understand the point of a blindfold test. The test itself was really interesting IMO and I loved taking part but what's happening right now is "Donald Trump ridiculous".I didn't listen to the clips. I followed this thread more for the fun factor, and because it was a good psychological demonstration of what happens when there is no placebo, which is this:
Yeah it's very weird. People don't seem to understand the point of a blindfold test. The test itself was really interesting IMO and I loved taking part but what's happening right now is "Donald Trump ridiculous".
FAS Modern 1 won this comparison, the only one that is not even based on a real life amp. I thought that would end this discussion about a sonic imprint but right now we have people saying they have the correct lottery numbers after the winning numbers were announced. Do these guys also still have training wheels in their bicycles? I have metaphors like this to last a full page.