Real Mesa TC100 vs AF3 into guitar cab - looking for advice

Jambi said:
Unfortunately, this is the truth. The “real” Mesa power amp does something that cannot be replicated completely with a Matrix. Through the FX Return? Sure, all day. For better, or for worse.
Click to expand...

This is where I am at, too. It's in the power amp. Those big-ass output transformers just cannot
be replicated by the Matrix's power section.

I have always felt that in the low-end response of an amp that size really does matter. It's why you
can get more thump out of a 100w Plexi than a 50w Plexi, for example. Increased wattage equals
increased headroom and increased headroom = a bigger/tighter/thumpier low end. :)
 
Maybe try to match real preamp / Axefx preamp first by running Axefx w PA off thru TC return and comparing to TC alone - or comparing Axfx>TC return vs TC alone both thru load box +IR to take the real cabs out of the equation to start - so the approach would be to match pre/pwr amp/ cab separately, then combining only after
getting matches separately.
 
I had a similar experience with my JCM. Never investigated deeper and moved on to other amp models
 
Remember that there is variance in components. If Fractal's model is accurate to the reference Mesa Triple Crown they used, that does not mean it's going to be the same as your amp. Pots alone tend to have anything from 5-20% variance depending on the make and model. So the same settings on both devices will not produce the same result. Instead use your real amp with your favorite settings as your reference tone and try to adjust the equivalent Axe-Fx controls to match it. They will not be at the same settings but the end result tonewise should be close.

An important thing to do is to use a decibel meter. Even a small +3 dB volume difference will be heard as better usually. A phone app is good enough if you don't own a decibel meter, the important thing is to use the same device as reference at the same distance and position, for example 1m away at some halfway point between the two cabs. Accuracy of the decibel meter app matters less than being able to set both rigs to a volume that the phone app considers to be the same. If you have an iPhone I find the SPLnFFT app is very good and was within 2 dB of my real (though cheap) decibel meter.

I also agree about trying to match the preamps first using the real amp's poweramp. This way you can rule that part out and focus on getting the poweramp and speaker configuration right. Turn off poweramp modeling and run the Axe-Fx to the fx return of the TC100. You could even setup your Axe-Fx to switch between the two with routing something like this:

IN1 - Amp -> OUT2 -> TC fx return

Then you could use the "copy input 1 -> OUT3" feature in the I/O settings to send OUT3 to TC front panel input.

You could then use the TC's fx loop switching feature to toggle between the two if the TC effects loop can be set to series. When fx loop is enabled, only the signal from Axe-Fx amp modeling would be heard and when disabled you would hear the signal through the front input.
 
if you do a A/B while micing a cab, Put the axe in the return of the head and use the triple crown preamp bloc from the axe
 
drop speaker LF resonance down down down lower, as low as 50 Hz, as low as 40 Hz...sweep it from the minimum value up until it feels as low as the amp, then you can boost/cut the amount or adjust the Q to focus it more. all that booty shaking meat is down around 50Hz
 
laxu said:
I also agree about trying to match the preamps first using the real amp's poweramp. This way you can rule that part out and focus on getting the poweramp and speaker configuration right. Turn off poweramp modeling and run the Axe-Fx to the fx return of the TC100. You could even setup your Axe-Fx to switch between the two with routing something like this:

IN1 - Amp -> OUT2 -> TC fx return

Then you could use the "copy input 1 -> OUT3" feature in the I/O settings to send OUT3 to TC front panel input.

You could then use the TC's fx loop switching feature to toggle between the two if the TC effects loop can be set to series. When fx loop is enabled, only the signal from Axe-Fx amp modeling would be heard and when disabled you would hear the signal through the front input.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this idea, I'll give it a shot. I agree, it would be good to make sure the preamp matches perfectly first using the real amps's power amp. Then once I know this is a perfect match I'll go back to tweaking power amp & speaker settings in the AF3. The fx loop is series in the TC100 and it also has MIDI control so I can set my presets to engage/disengage it.
 
I am with Sprint on this eliminate the cab, go after the preamp , Do you like this tone below ?

This guys has a pretty accurate sound of the amp and it is , through a Suhr Reactive load and on OH bogner V30 cab IRw sm57

The tricky part on the TC is the pres is actually in the preamp not the power amp , to simulate that you will need to use the high treble in the pre of the axe , turn down the pres and play around with the interaction between the high treble ,
Also make sure you have the Tube screamer input boost on to simulate the tight switch as it is on in this clip
his setting are pretty easy to see 6.5 on bass. 4 mids , 4 presence 6 treble , 6 master , 6 gain, tight on

**for the record I still don't hear a lot of bass

Try and see how close you can get that with a V30 57 IR. using the reactive load Impedance curve

 
Here’s what I got so far, global eq, I’m using a mark 2c+ so using the 5 band, but this is the closest I’ve gotten
 

Attachments

  • 292A0046-1F95-4FBA-ABAF-53E955847DFA.jpeg
    292A0046-1F95-4FBA-ABAF-53E955847DFA.jpeg
    1.9 MB · Views: 25
laxu said:
I also agree about trying to match the preamps first using the real amp's poweramp. This way you can rule that part out and focus on getting the poweramp and speaker configuration right. Turn off poweramp modeling and run the Axe-Fx to the fx return of the TC100. You could even setup your Axe-Fx to switch between the two with routing something like this:

IN1 - Amp -> OUT2 -> TC fx return

Then you could use the "copy input 1 -> OUT3" feature in the I/O settings to send OUT3 to TC front panel input.

You could then use the TC's fx loop switching feature to toggle between the two if the TC effects loop can be set to series. When fx loop is enabled, only the signal from Axe-Fx amp modeling would be heard and when disabled you would hear the signal through the front input.
Click to expand...
Just a quick update for those that are interested...

I did exactly what @laxu suggested above and I have the preamps on the AF3 & TC100 sounding virtually identical at this point. I'm doing constant A/B comparisons and both sound incredible. All those low frequencies that were lacking before are present now. The only notable change I made to amp settings to get the match was I had to crank the gain to 10 in the amp block (it's at around the 3:00 position on the real TC100). So the difference is clearly all in the power amp.

I'm going to run with this setup for a few days to do more testing and then I'll switch back to the Matrix and focus on poweramp / speaker settings again as that's clearly where things were lacking before. Maybe I'll never get the Matrix and power amp modelling to sound exactly like the tube power amp of the TC100... but I'm bound and determined to try. :)
 
Last edited:
Rekster said:
Just a quick update for those that are interested...

I did exactly what @laxu suggested above and I have the preamps on the AF3 & TC100 sounding virtually identical at this point. I'm doing constant A/B comparisons and both sound incredible. All those low frequencies that were lacking before are present now. The only notable change I made to amp settings to get the match was I had to crank the gain to 10 in the amp block (it's at around the 3:00 position on the real TC100). So the difference is clearly all in the power amp.

I'm going to run with this setup for a few days to do more testing and then I'll switch back to the Matrix and focus on poweramp / speaker settings again as that's clearly where things were lacking before. Maybe I'll never get the Matrix and power amp modelling to sound exactly like the tube power amp of the TC100... but I'm bound and determined to try. :)
Click to expand...
As I am trying to match my JMP-1 rig (similar to what you're doing). I'll share that looping a riff, and scrolling through all the Speaker Impedance Curve options, was very helpful. It's getting better....almost have it.

(I'll put my flame suit on) - I also did a Quad Cortex capture with the exact same rig. I did both a QC capture and Axe Tone Match - using the Fractal LB-2 load box. The QC captures the low end much much closer than my Axe (even when using a live Tone Match). No idea how or why, but the QC gets a nice bouncy, chewy low end palm mute chug. That being said - the top end on the QC is a little ice picky....the Axe is smoother and clearer.
The devices were fed the exact same signal....hard to fathom why the low end comes out very different.
Need to spend more time with the Axe power amp settings.
 
BBN said:
(I'll put my flame suit on) - I also did a Quad Cortex capture with the exact same rig. I did both a QC capture and Axe Tone Match - using the Fractal LB-2 load box. The QC captures the low end much much closer than my Axe (even when using a live Tone Match). No idea how or why, but the QC gets a nice bouncy, chewy low end palm mute chug. That being said - the top end on the QC is a little ice picky....the Axe is smoother and clearer.
The devices were fed the exact same signal....hard to fathom why the low end comes out very different.
Need to spend more time with the Axe power amp settings.
Click to expand...
When I had the QC and FM3 Cygnus had just come out, I also made some captures of my Bogner Goldfinger and Victory VC35 amps. I felt that the QC captures were about 98% accurate to the real deal, firmly in that "I don't care which one I am using" but obviously the capture block EQ doesn't work like the real amp EQ so the moment you adjust that it is no longer accurate, but that doesn't matter as long as it sounds good!

Anyway, I have also tried matching those amps with the FM3. While the FM3 does not model either amp directly, the Victory is in the Vox AC30 meets Matchless DC30 territory so those amp models on the FM3 could be dialed to sound very close. For the Bogner I instead used a combination of Fender Super Reverb (for the clean channel), Marshall Superlead and Bogner Shiva models to match to the Goldfinger's different channels and modes.

Running through the Fryette PS-100 I found I could get all of them to sound and perform very similarly. But the key thing here is of course that the poweramp remains the same. I have also tried running through the hybrid poweramp of my BluGuitar Amp 1 Mercury Edition and found that worked well too, but it's a poweramp that actually sounds and behaves like a tube poweramp to my ears.

Purely solid-state poweramps like the Matrix might be more problematic as you will need to rely more on matching the poweramp modeling on the Fractal to your real cab. I find that even with the tube poweramp, messing with the speaker impedance curves gives desirable results. I use a closed back 4x10 with 10" Greenbacks which is a bit of a rare setup and find that it behaves closer to how my amps sound direct to the cab if I set the FM3 speaker impedance curve either to "resistive load" or to the "4x10 JTM" curve when using the Fryette PS-100. I haven't tried matching it more accurately than that and could not decide which setup I liked best. I expect that at band volumes the "resistive load" setting would be better whereas at home volumes having some hyped lows/highs makes things nicer sounding.
 
Rekster said:
Just a quick update for those that are interested...

I did exactly what @laxu suggested above and I have the preamps on the AF3 & TC100 sounding virtually identical at this point. I'm doing constant A/B comparisons and both sound incredible. All those low frequencies that were lacking before are present now. The only notable change I made to amp settings to get the match was I had to crank the gain to 10 in the amp block (it's at around the 3:00 position on the real TC100). So the difference is clearly all in the power amp.

I'm going to run with this setup for a few days to do more testing and then I'll switch back to the Matrix and focus on poweramp / speaker settings again as that's clearly where things were lacking before. Maybe I'll never get the Matrix and power amp modelling to sound exactly like the tube power amp of the TC100... but I'm bound and determined to try. :)
Click to expand...
Great, that's one hurdle less. For the gain thing, try setting the Fractal amp block's gain also to 3:00 but then turning up the Input Trim control instead.

Also remember that your output levels from the Fractal will matter so check the I/O meters on the Fractal and check that your output settings are set to "unity gain" for the output going into the real amp's input so you are not running a hotter signal to the real vs virtual amp. The fx loop might expect (or work best with) line level signal though.

Personally I haven't had to mess with the poweramp settings on any of the Fractal amp models so I have faith with their accuracy. Remember that the master volume does not work the same as it does on the real amp so try adjusting that differently than the real amp. I would definitely try different impedance curves and other amp block Speaker tab settings until you get to something that closer matches your Matrix + cab setup.

Make sure you match volumes with a decibel meter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom