Stock Cabs Don't Sound Real?

Real is not a word to describe sound?
What band on the frequency spectrum contains the frequencies that make a sound “real” then?

It is not a word that describes sound. It is a descriptive word, but one with no technical meaning. Useless in the context of this request for help, I’m afraid.
It is most definitely a word to describe sound, specifically to describe when something is close to the sound it’s trying to mimic or simulate.
Your insistence that we provide help without you providing audio examples means we can’t help you find a sound that gets you close to what you think is real.

We are shooting in the proverbial dark.

Here, I put a think together to help with describing what you seek: https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Describing_Sound -- but you're a mixing engineer so I'm sure this is stuff you know already.

Also, what happened with this: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/using-far-field-cab-irs-to-fake-mid-side-recording.160150/ -- those are stock IRs that produced a sound you seemed happy with it. Is that not the case any more? Do you want a variation on that tone?
 
I'm on the XL+ (not the III), so I have "only" 189 factory ones.
And I say "only" because I think that should be enough.
Anyway, I do "find it" when I tone match, I get great tones which I've used for a few years now and over dozens of songs, both my own and others'.

Same as above applies. If you can't find it in the 189 stock cabs you probably won't find it anywhere else. Also not in the Axe fx III or third party cabs. Good luck with the search though! :)
 
Anyway, I do "find it" when I tone match, I get great tones which I've used for a few years now and over dozens of songs, both my own and others'.
this is new info to us. you mentioned tone match, but didn't mention that it was satisfactory. now i can suggest something, but i couldn't until now.

we're trying to help you. words alone are difficult to communicate descriptions of sounds, and we don't know all that you know as far as what you've tried, liked, disliked, etc.

we'll need to continue getting info from you by making statements and asking questions so we can help more.

if a tone match is what gets you to the sound you want, then we only now know that you do get a satisfactory result from the Axe-Fx.

the tone match could be pulling out low and high end from the signal that makes it sound more "real" to you.

many Axe2 users use the Low and High cut controls in the Cab block to adjust the sound. i did it on all my sounds. don't let the numbers restrict you either. at times i'd put the low cut all the way up to 300Hz, maybe more, and the high cut down to 1000Hz. this was just sometimes, but it wasn't rare. let your ear guide you, but i'm just saying don't think "oh i shouldn't have to go above 125 Hz" etc. this is a digital modeler and we can use whatever gives us the result we need.

start with that and let us know how that works. IRs were shot differently back then. more recent IR capture techniques are yielding better "more real" results. many would say that on the Axe2 with most full-range setups, you'd need to do the low and high cuts in the Cab block.
 
this is new info to us. you mentioned tone match, but didn't mention that it was satisfactory. now i can suggest something, but i couldn't until now.

we're trying to help you. words alone are difficult to communicate descriptions of sounds, and we don't know all that you know as far as what you've tried, liked, disliked, etc.

we'll need to continue getting info from you by making statements and asking questions so we can help more.

if a tone match is what gets you to the sound you want, then we only now know that you do get a satisfactory result from the Axe-Fx.

the tone match could be pulling out low and high end from the signal that makes it sound more "real" to you.

many Axe2 users use the Low and High cut controls in the Cab block to adjust the sound. i did it on all my sounds. don't let the numbers restrict you either. at times i'd put the low cut all the way up to 300Hz, maybe more, and the high cut down to 1000Hz. this was just sometimes, but it wasn't rare. let your ear guide you, but i'm just saying don't think "oh i shouldn't have to go above 125 Hz" etc. this is a digital modeler and we can use whatever gives us the result we need.

start with that and let us know how that works. IRs were shot differently back then. more recent IR capture techniques are yielding better "more real" results. many would say that on the Axe2 with most full-range setups, you'd need to do the low and high cuts in the Cab block.
Thank you for trying to help.
Sorry if my original post wasn’t clear, I do manage good tones, but like I said, it’s either by using tone match, or by having to use a lot of the cab features I’ve mentioned.
Which seems odd to me, hence I started this thread.
Thank you for the explanation, but I’m not new to the Axe nor to audio, and I’ve tried messing with every single parameter on it.

As for your previous comment in this thread, I went on YouTube to search people playing stock presets.
I found one of Cooper’s videos from a few years, showcasing some stock presets.
There is a night and day difference between his tone and mine on the same preset (not something that’s even close to a difference made by changing guitars).
Even after I tone matched this same preset to his tone, the gain structure was very different.
Right now I’m trying some troubleshooting with resetting, reinstalling firmware and stock presets.
I’ll update again once I’m done, and I’ll show the difference in tone if I don’t manage to solve it or at least find the issue.
 
You can try the York he has a $1
sampler of the MESA cab i posted above

there are a few other things to note
the AX2 does not have some of the same settings and tools that the FM3 or 3 has
these to me make a pretty
audible difference

the impedance curves and matching the amp to the cabinet
the output Compression setting
gain enhancer or feedback

these can change the sounds and feel in a pretty drastic way and add to the actual authenticity
in fact the mesa 212 curve in the Axe3
is taken from measurements of the exact cab in the York pack
 
though i need it less on the III, if at all, low cut and hi cut were key on the II, with any cab. a good starting point is 80-120 on the low end, 6000-7000 on the high end, adjust to taste.
 
I can objectively state as a matter of unquestionable fact with pure authority that the following statement is untrue:

[On the Axe-Fx II XL+] the stock cabs ... sound nothing like micing a real amp

The reason I can state this is that I was present while many of those IRs were captured, and each capture sounded exactly like the mic'd amp it represents. I suspect that what you were trying to say is that they don't sound how YOU mic an amp, which is something I can't contest. The following video speaks to my position:

 
I can objectively state as a matter of unquestionable fact with pure authority that the following statement is untrue:



The reason I can state this is that I was present while many of those IRs were captured, and each capture sounded exactly like the mic'd amp it represents. I suspect that what you were trying to say is that they don't sound how YOU mic an amp, which is something I can't contest. The following video speaks to my position:



Matt, just out of curiosity. Are the amps shown in this video the actual ones used to create their respective models in the AX-FX's?
 
this is new info to us. you mentioned tone match, but didn't mention that it was satisfactory. now i can suggest something, but i couldn't until now.

we're trying to help you. words alone are difficult to communicate descriptions of sounds, and we don't know all that you know as far as what you've tried, liked, disliked, etc.

we'll need to continue getting info from you by making statements and asking questions so we can help more.

if a tone match is what gets you to the sound you want, then we only now know that you do get a satisfactory result from the Axe-Fx.

the tone match could be pulling out low and high end from the signal that makes it sound more "real" to you.

many Axe2 users use the Low and High cut controls in the Cab block to adjust the sound. i did it on all my sounds. don't let the numbers restrict you either. at times i'd put the low cut all the way up to 300Hz, maybe more, and the high cut down to 1000Hz. this was just sometimes, but it wasn't rare. let your ear guide you, but i'm just saying don't think "oh i shouldn't have to go above 125 Hz" etc. this is a digital modeler and we can use whatever gives us the result we need.

start with that and let us know how that works. IRs were shot differently back then. more recent IR capture techniques are yielding better "more real" results. many would say that on the Axe2 with most full-range setups, you'd need to do the low and high cuts in the Cab block.
Ok so this is an update to my previous reply to this message.
I've looked into more videos that showcase stock presets or patches with default amp/cab settings.
I found a few good videos, each with a different firmware, varying from v15 non-quantum, to quantum 5.
Even FW15 sounded miles ahead of the sound I got, playing the exact same stock preset.
It's like they're playing an Axe Fx and I'm playing a POD.
This makes me think something is wrong with my unit?
But then again, what can be wrong with a digital processor?
I've installed almost every firmware version from Quantum 2 to Ares 2, and reset the settings, reloaded the factory presets, there was no noticable change in sound.
I even tried to re-amp a DI track that a preset store once sent me, still the same sound.
I'm still trying to test some things to maybe find out what's wrong.


I can objectively state as a matter of unquestionable fact with pure authority that the following statement is untrue:



The reason I can state this is that I was present while many of those IRs were captured, and each capture sounded exactly like the mic'd amp it represents. I suspect that what you were trying to say is that they don't sound how YOU mic an amp, which is something I can't contest. The following video speaks to my position:


Obviously the sounds in this video have none of the issues I mentioned in my post!
This video further makes me think something is wrong with my unit, but I still don't know if that's even possible.
 
Ok so this is an update to my previous reply to this message.
I've looked into more videos that showcase stock presets or patches with default amp/cab settings.
I found a few good videos, each with a different firmware, varying from v15 non-quantum, to quantum 5.
Even FW15 sounded miles ahead of the sound I got, playing the exact same stock preset.
It's like they're playing an Axe Fx and I'm playing a POD.
This makes me think something is wrong with my unit?
But then again, what can be wrong with a digital processor?
I've installed almost every firmware version from Quantum 2 to Ares 2, and reset the settings, reloaded the factory presets, there was no noticable change in sound.
I even tried to re-amp a DI track that a preset store once sent me, still the same sound.
I'm still trying to test some things to maybe find out what's wrong.



Obviously the sounds in this video have none of the issues I mentioned in my post!
This video further makes me think something is wrong with my unit, but I still don't know if that's even possible.
it may not be something faulty with your hardware, but could be how you're monitoring. not sure if we found out - studio monitors? real cab? something else?

if it's a full range speaker, can you play the youtube video through it and listen - does it sound good? then play your axe through it with similar (or the same) settings. is it different?

if the youtube video sounds good through whatever full range speaker you have, then the axe should too. if it doesn't, there could still be some settings that aren't ideal. again, over text it may be hard to figure out, but we can try.

if you can make a video playing or upload a preset of yours that you think doesn't sound good, we can listen or try it ourselves to compare.
 
it may not be something faulty with your hardware, but could be how you're monitoring. not sure if we found out - studio monitors? real cab? something else?

if it's a full range speaker, can you play the youtube video through it and listen - does it sound good? then play your axe through it with similar (or the same) settings. is it different?

if the youtube video sounds good through whatever full range speaker you have, then the axe should too. if it doesn't, there could still be some settings that aren't ideal. again, over text it may be hard to figure out, but we can try.

if you can make a video playing or upload a preset of yours that you think doesn't sound good, we can listen or try it ourselves to compare.
It’s not my monitoring system.
I’m listening to everything (music, work, YouTube, axe fx), all through my studio monitors, in my acoustically treated studio, and everything sounds great.
I will upload some comparison clips today, right now I’m backing up my axe again to try a couple more things.
 
It’s not my monitoring system.
I’m listening to everything (music, work, YouTube, axe fx), all through my studio monitors, in my acoustically treated studio, and everything sounds great.
I will upload some comparison clips today, right now I’m backing up my axe again to try a couple more things.
ok that was new/confirmed information so we can probably take monitors out of the equation. thanks.
 
It’s not my monitoring system.
I’m listening to everything (music, work, YouTube, axe fx), all through my studio monitors, in my acoustically treated studio, and everything sounds great.
I will upload some comparison clips today, right now I’m backing up my axe again to try a couple more things.

Here's what I'd suggest.

1. Connect the unit to a computer via USB.
2. Record the USB audio at Axe-Fx II computer inputs 1+2.
3. Listen to how this recording compares to what you hear in your monitors.
4. Post the recording files someplace so we can hear them too.
 
Back
Top Bottom