Scott: speaker settings

clarky

clarky

Axe-Master
Hi Scott...
quick question..
are you still using your snazzy speaker settings in the amp block??
and iirc, you devised all this around V6.2..
this being the case, did you find that you needed to make any adjustments for V8.0?

the reason for the question.
all my presets were built in 6.2
7.0 partially broke them [nothing serious, just some minor tweaking needed]
then 8.x quickly came along.. and I've had a lot of work in the studio which has taken priority over sorting out my presets..
but Axe-Fest UK is around the corner..
just the insentive I need to finally make me spend a little time fixing my presets..
and if I'm going to be fixing things.. this is a great opportunity for my to try out your ideas..
 
In a word, no. Did not use this post 6.x. I will post more soon. Not home right now.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner
 
hey... thanks for getting back to me..
when you announced / described your speaker thing, it sounded like you took a great deal of time / effort in figuring it out

so yes I'd be very interested to find out why you reverted in 7.0+
as this implies something changed from 7.0 on in a good way

that said... the line of research you embarked on would have be hugely beneficial no matter what..
you can never know too much right...
 
I'm no expert, just a simple but happy user.
Playing live with power amp and cab, I have found Scott's settings to still be relevant.
Especially turning down Hi Resonance.
I use his numbers as a guide and fine tune by ear.
I'm on v8.01a , going into VHT 2502 and Rivera 2x12 w/ EVM12L's

Per
 
I've found that when recording, turning down the low resonance seems to make things a whole lot easier. Really tames the lows and helps the guitar tracks sit in the mix better (this, of course, is assuming that the low end is going to be covered by the bass guitar). I still use a high pass filter, compression, and limiting when recording but simply adjusting the low resonance works like magic for me. I don't play live but I would imagine the same could be true in live situations.
 
Here's a longer answer. (Easier to type on the computer as opposed to doing it on my phone, LOL).

When I was working on this initially; it was trial and error. The speaker Resonance tab essentially sets the way the output transformer affects the speaker cab resonance in a dynamic way. That affects the frequency response over a dynamic range. At the time I was working with the factory supplied IR's, Red Wire and Own Hammer (generation 1) IR's.

Two factors contributed to not using them. The first factor is the actual IR's. I started working on the beta IR's from OwnHammer and beta on the James Santiago IR's. That was a major epiphany for me. What I was doing with the Speaker Tab Resonance was a round-about-way of dealing with the cabs to get them to 'fit' what I wanted them to do. The second factor was the modeling development by Cliff in versions 7.x and 8x.

When it comes to tones, I tend to be a guy that: a) knows what he wants; b) is obsessive about getting what I want; c) will go to any lengths necessary to get them.

This box is a wickedly fun deep tool box for guitar tone.

The new IR's from Own Hammer and James Santiago both are taking the preamp into the chain along with the mic. They have character and color. The one thing missing, IMHO, from the "Generation 1" cab IR's across the board was the preamp/mic color timbre and texture to the tones. Thus far the world of Direct-to-FOH/FRFR has revolved around getting accurate tones, but focused on the goal of 'amp in the room' when that's frankly - I believe now - short sighted and not what I want. I want the fully blown, totally professional realism that the ENTIRE chain from the guitar to the tone offers. That brings the neglected and ignored mic preamp into the equation (and often EQ applied at the input stage to the mixer).

So if you are following me, instead of the: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic" being the 'complete' chain we are working with 'in the box' it now would be like this: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp - EQ" just like the pros do in the studio *and* live. Alex Lifeson carries a Universal Audio Apollo as part of his live rig. That hit me in the back of my mind... oh.

The speaker resonance tab is powerful; but I was using it to solve an issue I was having in other places. It does work to do what I did; but I honestly (and let's face it, I'm on a journey as everyone else is - NOT a destination) do not feel that with the newer 'fully realized' "Generation 2" (my term) IR's and advanced modeling paradigms that Cliff added in versions 7.x and 8.x that I personally need to work with those settings in the Axe-FX II. That may or may not hold true for *you*; but I can only speak for myself.

My way is not the 'only' way; it's just my way.

I hope that explains it.
 
haaaa.. it's funny.. cos when you describe it like that it actually seems pretty obvious..

and of course.. it totally never occurred to me.. lol..

I've finally made a date with myself to spend a day re-dialling my 6.2 presets to 8.1a..

my chain is currently

guitar -> wah -> vol -> Axe IN -> fx -> amp -> fx -> geq -> cab -> Axe OUT

my cab is set mic = none
and I use the 4x12 25W cab because to my ears it's the most neutral
especially being gentle in and around the highs, and not over bearing with the lows

whilst I have my presets 'in bits' I'll certainly try your idea to reverse the cab and geq, and play with some other cabs and mics
especially as I've not tried out any cabs since 6.2 [lack of time more than anything]

cool that we're having this chat today...
cos my 'update presets date' is tomorrow...
so me and the lil' black box are gonna have a day of fun and games...

thanks for the info / insight.. it's always good to try new things...
and when you're running the tone marathon, it's funny how when you get a yard from the finish line
it seems to get forever stuck a yard away no matter how hard you run.. lol..
 
this is a typical example of my preset layout

RiffSolo1St1.jpg


swapping the cab <- -> GEQ is now on the things to do list..
 
The new IR's have the mic and mic preamp 'baked in'; so my essential chain looks like this: Guitar -> EFX --> Amp --> Cab --> EFX --> Output

Here's a screenshot of my personal template (reworked post Axe-Fest incorporating a vast pool of knowledge and experience offered there) and twisted/tweaked/torqued into my own personal mish-mash:

10-11-201211-45-44AM.png
 
Scott Peterson said:
The new IR's from Own Hammer and James Santiago both are taking the preamp into the chain along with the mic. They have character and color. The one thing missing, IMHO, from the "Generation 1" cab IR's across the board was the preamp/mic color timbre and texture to the tones. Thus far the world of Direct-to-FOH/FRFR has revolved around getting accurate tones, but focused on the goal of 'amp in the room' when that's frankly - I believe now - short sighted and not what I want. I want the fully blown, totally professional realism that the ENTIRE chain from the guitar to the tone offers. That brings the neglected and ignored mic preamp into the equation (and often EQ applied at the input stage to the mixer).
Click to expand...

Even if only subconsciously …, I’ve realized this since the beginning …, even WAY back in 2006 when I started using Line 6 POD’s ….

I’ve always felt that’s why it’s not a huge stretch for some guys to make the switch and others seem to fight it endlessly ….

Personally I WANT the fully produced studio sound coming back at me; others want the RAW sound of the Amp, relatively un-filtered by the balance of the “studio-signal” chain ….

Again, I.M.H.O. - Once you understand this phenomenon and either embrace it or build your system to minimize the effects of it away …, then and only then do you begin to get comfortable with what the entire modeler paradigm has to offer ( regardless of the platform you use ) !
 
now that's interesting.....

do you think there is a difference / some specific merit in placing the fx post cab??

mine were pre cab cos in my own lil' visualisation, these fx were in the fx loop..
which I know kinda don't make complete sense cos I can't drop them in between the preamp and power amp within the amp block and so my thinking was that this was the next best thing....

your thoughts though have made me think in terms of the complete chain...
like you say.. end to end...

so how about this..

guitar -> Axe IN -> typical pre-preamp fx [vol/wah/comp] -> amp -> typical loop fx [cho/pitch/etc] -> cab -> "studio" [rev/dly/eq] -> Axe OUT

I'm just wondering if there's anything to be had from trying to reproduce the complete chain as acurately as possible
or is there little to gain and this is sort of overkill
 
clarky said:
now that's interesting.....

do you think there is a difference / some specific merit in placing the fx post cab??

mine were pre cab cos in my own lil' visualisation, these fx were in the fx loop..
which I know kinda don't make complete sense cos I can't drop them in between the preamp and power amp within the amp block and so my thinking was that this was the next best thing....

your thoughts though have made me think in terms of the complete chain...
like you say.. end to end...

so how about this..

guitar -> Axe IN -> typical pre-preamp fx [vol/wah/comp] -> amp -> typical loop fx [cho/pitch/etc] -> cab -> "studio" [rev/dly/eq] -> Axe OUT

I'm just wondering if there's anything to be had from trying to reproduce the complete chain as accurately as possible
or is there little to gain and this is sort of overkill
Click to expand...

Answer: Most people record dry and add effects after - in the mix.

So.... Using the Axe-FX I can do that in a live setting. So effects after the cab? YES. :D Viola. LOL. :D If you are putting effects after the amp block but before the cab block; you are not putting them between the preamp and power amp. You are putting the effects after the power amp and *before* the cab. That's an important consideration.

That's part of the fun; you can create your own reality with the routing grid. That's one basic premise where the people lacking understanding get hung up.

Just try everything you want (it is pretty easy, fast and efficient to do in the Axe-FX) and decide for yourself what you prefer. What I like is what I like and only because I like it. It's not anything but my own personal 'thing'. I don't share my presets generally because they do not make sense if you don't have the expression pedals and midi controller to handle everything; and then again, the way I set those up is completely individual for me and my thing too. My goal in working with other people and their Axe-FX is not to get them doing what I do, but to get them to discover their OWN thing and do that. To me that is the biggest factor in the favor of the Axe-FX over most any other hardware based solution out there.
 
totally agree 1000%..

yeah I do appreciate that you can't get between 'pre' and 'power' in the amp block..
I guess I was trying to do the next best thing...

if nothing else you've convinced me to run some experiments additional to those I had planned..
that can only be a good thing...

thinking back...
the other reason I placed the cab last was so that I could easily make the change to run out1 and out2 [one with cab and the other without]..
but to be honest.. I'm not so fussed about that right now... I'll cross that bridge when / if I need to..
 
Scott Peterson said:
Here's a longer answer. (Easier to type on the computer as opposed to doing it on my phone, LOL).

When I was working on this initially; it was trial and error. The speaker Resonance tab essentially sets the way the output transformer affects the speaker cab resonance in a dynamic way. That affects the frequency response over a dynamic range. At the time I was working with the factory supplied IR's, Red Wire and Own Hammer (generation 1) IR's.

Two factors contributed to not using them. The first factor is the actual IR's. I started working on the beta IR's from OwnHammer and beta on the James Santiago IR's. That was a major epiphany for me. What I was doing with the Speaker Tab Resonance was a round-about-way of dealing with the cabs to get them to 'fit' what I wanted them to do. The second factor was the modeling development by Cliff in versions 7.x and 8x.

When it comes to tones, I tend to be a guy that: a) knows what he wants; b) is obsessive about getting what I want; c) will go to any lengths necessary to get them.

This box is a wickedly fun deep tool box for guitar tone.

The new IR's from Own Hammer and James Santiago both are taking the preamp into the chain along with the mic. They have character and color. The one thing missing, IMHO, from the "Generation 1" cab IR's across the board was the preamp/mic color timbre and texture to the tones. Thus far the world of Direct-to-FOH/FRFR has revolved around getting accurate tones, but focused on the goal of 'amp in the room' when that's frankly - I believe now - short sighted and not what I want. I want the fully blown, totally professional realism that the ENTIRE chain from the guitar to the tone offers. That brings the neglected and ignored mic preamp into the equation (and often EQ applied at the input stage to the mixer).

So if you are following me, instead of the: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic" being the 'complete' chain we are working with 'in the box' it now would be like this: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp - EQ" just like the pros do in the studio *and* live. Alex Lifeson carries a Universal Audio Apollo as part of his live rig. That hit me in the back of my mind... oh.

The speaker resonance tab is powerful; but I was using it to solve an issue I was having in other places. It does work to do what I did; but I honestly (and let's face it, I'm on a journey as everyone else is - NOT a destination) do not feel that with the newer 'fully realized' "Generation 2" (my term) IR's and advanced modeling paradigms that Cliff added in versions 7.x and 8.x that I personally need to work with those settings in the Axe-FX II. That may or may not hold true for *you*; but I can only speak for myself.

My way is not the 'only' way; it's just my way.

I hope that explains it.
Click to expand...

This !

IMHO the part about having the mic pre incorporated in your sound is essential to achieve "holy grail" tones equalling the best recorded guitar tones.
I use the digital AES out of my Axe II to a Metric Halo ULN-8, and I´ve been utilizing the (outstanding btw) character preamp modelling in the ULN-8 on every one of my presets for both electric and acoustic guitar, and the difference with the character preamp modelling on or off is huge.
I have never had better acoustic guitar sound in my life.
I really look forward to trying out these new IR's.
RB
 
Last edited:
I also use efx's in parallel after the cab(s), I was used to doing so in recording and live scenarios in my pre-Axe days.
I've tried the other efx routing options, but parallel effects after cab(s) sounds best to me.
You get the sound of the amp + speaker with effects on top, instead of the sound of the amp + effects through the speaker.
 
Scott Peterson said:
Here's a longer answer. (Easier to type on the computer as opposed to doing it on my phone, LOL).

When I was working on this initially; it was trial and error. The speaker Resonance tab essentially sets the way the output transformer affects the speaker cab resonance in a dynamic way. That affects the frequency response over a dynamic range. At the time I was working with the factory supplied IR's, Red Wire and Own Hammer (generation 1) IR's.

Two factors contributed to not using them. The first factor is the actual IR's. I started working on the beta IR's from OwnHammer and beta on the James Santiago IR's. That was a major epiphany for me. What I was doing with the Speaker Tab Resonance was a round-about-way of dealing with the cabs to get them to 'fit' what I wanted them to do. The second factor was the modeling development by Cliff in versions 7.x and 8x.

When it comes to tones, I tend to be a guy that: a) knows what he wants; b) is obsessive about getting what I want; c) will go to any lengths necessary to get them.

This box is a wickedly fun deep tool box for guitar tone.

The new IR's from Own Hammer and James Santiago both are taking the preamp into the chain along with the mic. They have character and color. The one thing missing, IMHO, from the "Generation 1" cab IR's across the board was the preamp/mic color timbre and texture to the tones. Thus far the world of Direct-to-FOH/FRFR has revolved around getting accurate tones, but focused on the goal of 'amp in the room' when that's frankly - I believe now - short sighted and not what I want. I want the fully blown, totally professional realism that the ENTIRE chain from the guitar to the tone offers. That brings the neglected and ignored mic preamp into the equation (and often EQ applied at the input stage to the mixer).

So if you are following me, instead of the: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic" being the 'complete' chain we are working with 'in the box' it now would be like this: "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp - EQ" just like the pros do in the studio *and* live. Alex Lifeson carries a Universal Audio Apollo as part of his live rig. That hit me in the back of my mind... oh.

The speaker resonance tab is powerful; but I was using it to solve an issue I was having in other places. It does work to do what I did; but I honestly (and let's face it, I'm on a journey as everyone else is - NOT a destination) do not feel that with the newer 'fully realized' "Generation 2" (my term) IR's and advanced modeling paradigms that Cliff added in versions 7.x and 8.x that I personally need to work with those settings in the Axe-FX II. That may or may not hold true for *you*; but I can only speak for myself.

My way is not the 'only' way; it's just my way.

I hope that explains it.
Click to expand...

Scott, just saw your post (very informative as usual) and the new Own Hammer IRs. Just to clarify as I use a lot of your tips, are you no longer really tweaking the Speaker Resonance tab per your post a while back? Also, are you still using Jay's far field mic's in your cab block? Right now I use his FF 65 with an M75. Just curious how else these new Own Hammer's have changed your programming...I'm very intrigued by the idea of incorporating the mic-pre into the equation. Thanks!

Reggie
 
Last edited:
I don't know what Fractal used to shoot the internal Axe-FX II IR's but RedWirez uses "a Neve 1073 and a pair of 1084's". Since the Neve's provide preamp colouration it seems to me that the difference between the new Ownhammer and Santiago IR's, and the RedWirez IR's, is the equalization done in the channel strip. Still, that would explain the angst that we sometimes go through to get things sounding just right.

An epiphany for me a few weeks ago was seeing the PEQ work that Tyler (Gamedojo) had done in his Plexi patch. The first PEQ boosted the mids but the second PEQ had a number of peaks and valleys across the frequency spectrum. The character of the tone disappeared when I turned off the second PEQ. He was using RedWirez IR's btw.

So, I think that the "game changer" being discussed is really equalization. With RedWirez (and perhaps Fractal internal?) you get "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp" and with the new Ownhammer and Santiago IR's you get "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp - EQ". RedWirez leaves the equalization to you, which means you can take it any direction you want (as Tyler did). It also means you need to address it, or accept "neutral" as your tone. Ownhammer's new IR's, on the other hand, address this for you. Arguably this limits your creativity, so Ownhammer counters by providing a number of flavours or voicings (e.g. modern, vintage, etc.). Now, if Ownhammer provided a neutral voicing (which I believe is planned) we "can have our cake and eat it too". We can use a predefined voice or create our own.

Terry.
 
Tone Seeker said:
So, I think that the "game changer" being discussed is really equalization. With RedWirez (and perhaps Fractal internal?) you get "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp" and with the new Ownhammer and Santiago IR's you get "Guitar - EFX - Amp - Cab - Mic-Preamp - EQ". RedWirez leaves the equalization to you, which means you can take it any direction you want (as Tyler did). It also means you need to address it, or accept "neutral" as your tone. Ownhammer's new IR's, on the other hand, address this for you. Arguably this limits your creativity, so Ownhammer counters by providing a number of flavours or voicings (e.g. modern, vintage, etc.). Now, if Ownhammer provided a neutral voicing (which I believe is planned) we "can have our cake and eat it too". We can use a predefined voice or create our own.
Click to expand...
I think it really depends on how you define 'neutral'. You define it as uncolored miced sound. No mic preamp or additional equalizer coloration.
I'd define it 'neutral' different: The ideal miced sound with balanced frequency response that sits pefect in a mix.

I think that Ownhammer tends more to the second definition. I think that is the better starting point for creative sound shaping, because you don't have to deal with balancing a miced sound first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom