• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Real JP2C vs Axe-Fx 3 sim comparison

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah. I like to compare the axe to a modern dslr or mirorless camera. While the defaults are very nice, only a pro knows how to unlock the power of a raw file and make insane pictures with it. While an amateur or consumer may be satisfied, they'll never, or rarely reach the level of a professional with just the default setting.

But I still agree that the models should be tweaked a little to be more accurate. I guess that Petrucci or Metallica have a dedicated person who sets up their fractals. I once saw that in a video with Big Mick, that they were not really amazed by default sound they got, but after tweaking, it sounded great.
 

My name is mud

Inspired
Petrucci still use his head for dist

well I have done the test removing a lot a thing and the result is way better ! I will post the video as soon as I edit it
 

hubula

New Member
Not trying to be a smart*ss, but it has been stated numerous times, I'm sure it's in Wiki too - this is all about pot tapers difference and nothing else. Cliff has expained why he did that intentionally.
I would expect that as someone who sells presets for Axe 3 and FM3 you would be aware of this fact.
 

neale dunham

Inspired
NomaKills.

I hear your pain.

When I first got my Axe 3 I was using a Marshall JVM Satriani head and Cab and was absolutely delighted that Fractal had modelled my "perfect" amp.

I did exactly what you are doing and complained that things reacted differently.

Fast forward two years and my Fractal rig doesn't even incorporate a Marshall JVM.

Why?

Because in my extensive use/testing I have found amp models that totally outstrip my original idea of the perfect tone.....

My advice to you is to forget about what you "think" is a great guitar sound, and start building your own signature tone from the huge array available in this thing. I surprise myself everyday. For example, I just downloaded firmware 15.01 and made an Absolutely Killer Slayer/Metallica Tone from a Fender Bassman 59???

This definitely would not be possible using the real amp. It just doesn't have the tone shaping capabilities to do so.

Yes, you may find that certain amps do not respond Exactly as you hear them. In your clips, and on my system, there is way more bass circa 100hz to 200hz than the Amp head, especially on the palm mutes. Nice playing by the way, but I couldn't help noticing that when you played the Axe clip how much bigger the sound is. Your original amp sounded tiny in comparison.

The other point I wish to make is that on hearing both the clips, within 5 minutes tweaking on the Axe I could pretty much match the tones identically without too much work. The basic intrinsic sound is there. You can hear it.

The best way to think about the Axe 3 is to forget the past and embrace the future. Otherwise you will be chasing old tones that sound dated forever.

Yes Angus Young had a great guitar sound in the Seventies comparably. But does his guitar sound exactly like that on the latest Album?? No.

Its bigger and larger than life..... Which is what The Axe fx has done to the Petrucci sound in your clip.

All the better in my opinion.
 

My name is mud

Inspired
Not trying to be a smart*ss, but it has been stated numerous times, I'm sure it's in Wiki too - this is all about pot tapers difference and nothing else. Cliff has expained why he did that intentionally.
I would expect that as someone who sells presets for Axe 3 and FM3 you would be aware of this fact.
Sad . you dont wanted to be a smartass but finally troll me in the end. When I buy a tv remote , if pushing 1 go to channel 2 on the tv , I dont really care about some explanations that try to hide a default or a bad conception of it . then what I do or not do for a living is out of the context , never knew doing something professionally involve to be an untouchable and omniscient god .
 

My name is mud

Inspired
PART 2 ! NEW comparaison
when you remove most of the options of the head (shred mode, 5 band EQ , no pulled presence , less gain ... ) they sounds more alike.
You dont buy a jp2C to have this type of sound , but in the end, only the options disabled needs to be revisit

 

My name is mud

Inspired
my last test dont have this problem anymore cause they both running the torpedo captor , the real head and the axe 3 through the poweramp of the jp2C
 

My name is mud

Inspired
so this is a preamp comparaison only now . with all the head options disabled . (never use the amp like this lol , it sounds so much better with the eq and the rest on)
 

Sash

Member
Sorry, but this is nonsense. I'm out of here.
Absolutely!
I can understand his point but that's happened when you dial in a sound per eyes and not per ear.
The Axe has way more capabilities than the original Amp when you are willing to try it out.
I sold my Friedman BE100 Deluxe because I can nail the tone with my Axe Fx but it's stated many times that the controls aren't work in the same way.
So I guess he never will be satisfied except playing his real Amp and that's absolutely OK.
I will never go back to a real tube Amp because of the limitations.

I speak from the view of a payed studio musician and the Axe III gives me everything and way more above that I need for my work.

Cheers
Sash
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
There still seems to be a language barrier issue.

It's not that the Graphic EQ isn't the same, the TAPERS are not the same. On the real amp the controls do virtually nothing until you get near the ends of the range. If you move a slider to, say, 3/4 of its range it does almost nothing. If you were to set the model's slider to the same position you would get significantly more boost. I didn't model the nonlinear slider behavior because IMO it's a design flaw. Graphic EQs should have a nice, linear-in-dB response. Otherwise the graphic EQ is very accurate. The frequency and Q behavior is spot-on.

If you have pulled the presence knob on the amp you have to activate the Presence Shift on the model. Otherwise they will sound VERY different. Presence shift gives a much more focused sound. I always use the Presence Shift. You can't compare the amp with a switch engaged to the model without the equivalent switch engaged. Of course it will sound different.

The tapers of the other controls should be very close including the Presence and Master Volume.

We didn't model the Shred Mode switch because it's just a High Treble boost. Use the High Treble control to dial in the desired amount of high treble. In this case the model is SUPERIOR to the real amp because you can adjust the desired amount of upper treble to your liking rather than being stuck with a fixed amount.

Using a Torpedo as a load will give significantly different results because it's not a realistic impedance.

JP himself was very impressed with the model and the model was matched to his PERSONAL head that he sent me.
 

AJ Vargas

Experienced
Cliff, out of curiosity, we know that from time to time you like to pull out your amps to do some new measurements, specially when you make new discoveries aka eCliffanies. Since JP didn't wanted to sell you his amp, do you see this as a problem to keep track of this particular model?
 

cybermgk

Inspired
the frustating thing for me , is using a sim of an amp I never had , without knowing if it really act like the real deal, this is what I dislike after doing this test . It destroys the dream to have a high fidelity amp sim collection away .
Sorry , I just don't understand this thinking. If it doesn't act exactly like the 'real amp' because it provides MORE tonal ground, is imho a good thing. But ultimately, if it can A Sound great, and B Provide the tone you want and need, who the heck cares? I don't.

I'll be honest, your obsession here, sure seems like a purposeful attack.
 

DLC86

Fractal Fanatic
There still seems to be a language barrier issue
Then I'll translate it for you:

"Non è l'EQ a non essere uguale, sono i TAPER ad essere diversi. Sul vero amp i controlli non fanno praticamente niente finché non arrivi quasi a fine corsa. Se muovi uno slider fino a, diciamo, 3/4 della sua corsa non fa quasi niente. Se setti gli slider della simulazione otterresti molto più boost di quella frequenza. Non ho modellato il comportamento non-lineare degli slider perché secondo me è un difetto di progettazione. Gli EQ grafici dovrebbero avere una risposta lineare per dB.
A parte questo l'EQ grafico è molto accurato. Il comportamento di frequenze e risonanze è identico.

Se hai tirato la manopola del presence sull'ampli vero devi attivare il "presence shift" sulla simulazione. Altrimenti suoneranno MOLTO diversi.
Il presence shift rende il suono molto più "a fuoco". Uso sempre il presence shift. Non puoi confrontare l'ampli con un interruttore attivato e la simulazione senza il corrispondente interruttore attivato. È ovvio che suonerà diversamente.

I taper degli altri controlli dovrebbero essere molto simili, inclusi il Presence e il Master Volume.

Non abbiamo simulato l'interruttore dello Shred Mode perché è semplicemente un boost sulle alte frequenze. Usa il controllo High Treble per regolare la quantità di alte frequenze.
In questo caso la simulazione è SUPERIORE all'ampli reale perché puoi regolare a piacimento la quantità di alte frequenze anziché essere essere costretto ad usarne una quantità fissa.

Usare un Torpedo come carico darà risultati significativamente diversi perché non è un'impedenza realistica.

JP in persona è rimasto molto impressionato dalla simulazione che è stata matchata alla sua PERSONALE testata che mi ha inviato."
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
Then I'll translate it for you:

"Non è l'EQ a non essere uguale, sono i TAPER ad essere diversi. Sul vero amp i controlli non fanno praticamente niente finché non arrivi quasi a fine corsa. Se muovi uno slider fino a, diciamo, 3/4 della sua corsa non fa quasi niente. Se setti gli slider della simulazione otterresti molto più boost di quella frequenza. Non ho modellato il comportamento non-lineare degli slider perché secondo me è un difetto di progettazione. Gli EQ grafici dovrebbero avere una risposta lineare per dB.
A parte questo l'EQ grafico è molto accurato. Il comportamento di frequenze e risonanze è identico.

Se hai tirato la manopola del presence sull'ampli vero devi attivare il "presence shift" sulla simulazione. Altrimenti suoneranno MOLTO diversi.
Il presence shift rende il suono molto più "a fuoco". Uso sempre il presence shift. Non puoi confrontare l'ampli con un interruttore attivato e la simulazione senza il corrispondente switch atrivato. È ovvio che suonerà diversamente.

I taper degli altri controlli dovrebbero essere molto simili, inclusi il Presence e il Master Volume.

Non abbiamo simulato l'interruttore dello Shred Mode perché è semplicemente un boost sulle alte frequenze. Usa il controllo High Treble per regolare la quantità di alte frequenze.
In questo caso la simulazione è SUPERIORE all'ampli reale perché puoi regolare a piacimento la quantità di alte frequenze anziché essere essere costretto ad usarne una quantità fissa.

Usare un Torpedo come carico darà risultati significativamente diversi perché non è un'impedenza realistica.

JP in persona è rimasto molto impressionato dalla simulazione che è stata matchata alla sua PERSONALE testata che mi ha inviato."
That's easy for YOU to say.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom