Wish Profile pedals

[Cooldrewb]

Just watched a review on the Quad Cortex and they were talking about how it profile pedals. This would be awesome to do in the AxeFX.

 

[nicolasrivera]

Amps too and a touchscreen!

 

[yek]

The results of profiling pedals aren't very promising so far, with Cortex or Kemper.

 

[Bodde]

The results of profiling pedals aren't very promising so far, with Cortex or Kemper.

I have seen a few new videos of the Cortex, Pete Thorn and so. I think the pedal capture was quite good. Only judging from those videos. But I think it can only do drive and fuzz pedals? Not that I am that much for profiling.

 

[JTI]

Amp gain always wins out. Whether in the digital realm or the "real" realm.

 

[unix-guy]

Amp gain always wins out. Whether in the digital realm or the "real" realm.

That's certainly one opinion

 

[darrenw5094]

The results of profiling pedals aren't very promising so far, with Cortex or Kemper.

The QuadCortex nails overdrive pedals in the 2 youtube videos that I watched, including Tom Quayle's one

 

[lqdsnddist]

I don’t see how you could model the complex interactions of a fuzz pedal and a passive pickup. You could capture a given snapshot of its tone, but the unique cleanup, sag, bloom etc of the circuit and how it dynamically relates to changes in volume and tone pot, attack etc I don’t think could be profiled. It’s hard enough to model the actual passive circuit

 

[darrenw5094]

I don’t see how you could model the complex interactions of a fuzz pedal and a passive pickup. You could capture a given snapshot of its tone, but the unique cleanup, sag, bloom etc of the circuit and how it dynamically relates to changes in volume and tone pot, attack etc I don’t think could be profiled. It’s hard enough to model the actual passive circuit

They can only do Overdrive and Distortion and some Fuzzes. For now.

 

[Cooldrewb]

I'm sure as time goes on it is only going to get better and if Fractal did it I'm sure it would be the best out there.

 

[Bodde]

I don’t see how you could model the complex interactions of a fuzz pedal and a passive pickup. You could capture a given snapshot of its tone, but the unique cleanup, sag, bloom etc of the circuit and how it dynamically relates to changes in volume and tone pot, attack etc I don’t think could be profiled. It’s hard enough to model the actual passive circuit

I guess that's the problem with all profiles or captures; it's just a snapshot of one instance of knob settings. It doesn't capture the interaction/response of the knobs or the interaction of guitar with amp or pedal.

But I am not sure if (Axe fx) modeling does emulate the exact response or behaviour of the knobs of the original amp? Say the treble, mid or bass knobs of a real Fender Deluxe amp. Does the Deluxe amp model also have the same same frequency reponse in the treble, mid and bass knobs for example? or does it only model gain and mastervolume and are the treble, mid and bass settings the same for all amp models?

 

[yek]

Does the Deluxe amp model also have the same same frequency reponse in the treble, mid and bass knobs for example?

Yes.

 

[Bodde]

Yes.

So Axe fx modeling models all the knobs and their reponse just like the knobs on the original amps? Same goes for knobs of the pedal models?

 

[Smilzo]

I don’t see how you could model the complex interactions of a fuzz pedal and a passive pickup. You could capture a given snapshot of its tone, but the unique cleanup, sag, bloom etc of the circuit and how it dynamically relates to changes in volume and tone pot, attack etc I don’t think could be profiled. It’s hard enough to model the actual passive circuit

The "profiling" method load the stompbox input with various frequency and levels, so it nails the cleanup an dynamic someway. Obviusly the snapshot depends on stompbox setting. Capturing a stompbox seem way more simple than an amp... Cliff could find a way to "profile" the old drive algo (filter-clip-filter), in addition to the newer one (based on components... more accurate but cpu intensive).

 

[Rex]

So Axe fx modeling models all the knobs and their reponse just like the knobs on the original amps? Same goes for knobs of the pedal models?

Yes. When your edit an amp model, you can choose from dozens of tone stacks from different amps. Those dozens of options wouldn’t be there I’d there weren’t different tone stacks for each amp model.

 

[yek]

Capturing a stompbox seem way more simple than an amp...

Not according to C Kemper:

 

[My name is mud]

Yes.

One day we need to know if the answer is yes , or no . In my house it was « no », then cliff said that the original buttons of the amps don’t have the same course that the fractal ones .

 

[yek]

Amps: answer is yes, except for Master and Presence/Depth and GEQ behavior.

Drives: answer is yes.

 

[unix-guy]

So Axe fx modeling models all the knobs and their reponse just like the knobs on the original amps? Same goes for knobs of the pedal models?

Amps: answer is yes, except for Master and Presence/Depth and GEQ behavior.

This is the full answer

 

[Smilzo]

Not according to C Kemper:


View attachment 78073

Because Kemper (if I read it correct) use two topology (clean and distort) to capture the amp feel, and you know amp topology is one (fender with 2 stages or 3 stages) or marshall (3 stages+CF); I could add soldano (add a cold stage). Real amp differ from caps and resistor value, so model it is simple. Instead distortsion box have lot of topology, a generic topology lead to inconstistent result. But this is kemper. I was not talking about kemper, but fractal.

The old drive modeling (still on FM3 or previuous AX3 firmware), according to Cliff, is filter/clip/filter. If used as a base for a snapshoot it could provide at least the same result as the drive on AX3 previous firmware. That is not half bad, IMHO....