SLO100 - Axe versus Amplitube

Both sound mushy, buzzy and over saturated IMHO.
2 sounds "better".
 
Jbmetal said:
The second is definitely the Axe.
Click to expand...

I disagree, though I do think B is better dialled in for this kind of music.

I wrote the following as my response on another forum, but since I've picked differently to people (so far) here I thought I'd join in to make the debate more interesting:

-------

Bass seems almost out of control on A, but B sounds comparatively flat dynamically. So I'm calling A is Axe FX and B is Amplitube, which sounds decent but more 'modern', in that easy to hear the note but not too dynamic kind of way. A might have too much thump going on but B really didn't seem to punch very much.

I'm willing to be wrong, it could just be how they're dialled in, but that is how I call it on my headphones - A is Axe B is Amplitube.

-------

I recently bought an XL but I haven't got round to really testing the Soldano model, also I do have Amplitube but haven't bought the Soldano model so I'm only going off the clips and not personal experience. FWIW I am really enjoying the Axe FX 2 XL, I think it is fantastic. I just need to work out what I'm doing wrong with my HD500x as a footswitch so I can use it with my band, but I will post about that in an appropriate thread.
 
yek said:
Both sound mushy, buzzy and over saturated IMHO.
2 sounds "better".
Click to expand...

I imported the files in to Logic and applied a low pass filter to tame some of the fizz. For my personal tastes both tones had too much fizz as they were presented, but once it was reduced the differences became clearer. Before doing that I agree B sounds better, but after removing some fizz B sounded flat dynamically whereas A sounded more like what I'd expect from a 100 watt amp.
 
I've found that Amplitube can get relatively decent sounds with the right IR cab, but it doesn't get the same feeling of playing through a real amp. At the end of the day, if you had the time and patience in a studio/home, you could dial some half decent sounds in via Amplitube (not clean, only driven stuff).

Having said that, it is very difficult for me to tell any huge differences between those two recordings, I do prefer B but TBH I'm not really a fan of either (with no disrespect - it's just a preference thing).
 
I think with the more saturated, high preamp gain sounds, the IR becomes the even-more dominant character of the sim. Since this is the same IR in both samples I'm not surprised the difference is so minimal.
 
chucma said:
I've found that Amplitube can get relatively decent sounds with the right IR cab, but it doesn't get the same feeling of playing through a real amp. At the end of the day, if you had the time and patience in a studio/home, you could dial some half decent sounds in via Amplitube (not clean, only driven stuff).
Click to expand...

I didn't listen to the recordings because these kinds of exercises are pointless but I agree with the above. I own both products and using them both it is very easy to decide which is more satisfying/preferred. In fact I don't really care much for AT in comparison to other VSTs much less the AF2.

Modelers and VSTs are GREAT at recording and have been for a LONG time now. The original POD could do JCM800 recordings that were indistinguishable from the real deal in the hands of a good producer and could easily shame the real deal when recorded by some newb in his basement. I.e. For home studio use by folks that have limited gear (cabs, mics, etc) modelers are much easier to good recorded tones from than an amp. Go to youtube or soundcloud for more data, LOL.

Having an AF2 I have pretty much abandoned VSTs since I find them unsatisfying in comparison and not worth the pain/effort in spite of them being capable of producing good recordings by most standards. If that's all I wanted though I could have stuck with the POD2 and called it a day. I'd put AT dead bang in the middle of the road for the current state of the art.
 
Well, I suppose I'll ruin the suspense.

SLO A is the Axe FX and SLO B is Amplitube 3. They're incredibly close. The Axe FX is imparting this uber-woofiness in the lows, and actually I've noticed it in many of the high-gain amps. I think that perhaps Amplitube is pre-filtering some of the lows out in order to handle higher gain tones, or their model is just inaccurate.

For me.. I prefer the feel of playing the Axe, but I prefer the sound of Amplitube.

I'm sure I could tweak the Axe to get rid of the low woofiness, but sometimes... I just don't want to tweak. I want to play guitar! The very things that give the Axe its strengths are also its weaknesses imho.
 
AndyTNBD said:
I'm sure I could tweak the Axe to get rid of the low woofiness, but sometimes... I just don't want to tweak
Click to expand...

'tis but a tweak to the Low Cut in the Cab Block...
thumbsup.gif
 
AndyTNBD said:
I'm sure I could tweak the Axe to get rid of the low woofiness, but sometimes... I just don't want to tweak. I want to play guitar! The very things that give the Axe its strengths are also its weaknesses imho.
Click to expand...

You can't take 30 seconds to cut some lows ? Passive EQ, Low cut option, eq the cab etc, tons of whats to quickly accomplish this ?

Its like playing a guitar that is out of tune. Sure it takes a minute away from playing to actually tune the thing, but then its so much more enjoyable to play once its in it.
 
what ir are you using? if it's inherently boomy/hyped low end ir it could just be as easy as choosing a different one.

i also don't understand "i can't be bothered to spend a few seconds tweaking out what i have issues with when i know exactly what it is".

not even touching on "i think the Axe feels better but the Amplitube sounds better".....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom