They All Sound the Same Again

3 is a real plexi normal suitably muffled sounding. 1/2 are bad plexi normal representations from brand other.
 
1. Best tone/sound. Would guess an FAS, either Axe III, FM9 or FM3
2. Close 2nd. Not as much presence or definition, might guess the real amp
3. Less than desirable repro of an amp. Far less presence, definition, more muffled tones with mud.
 
Through my live rig and then NS 10's ...... toss up between 1 and 2 - couldn't say ........ 3 sounded like there were 14 blankets over the speaker.

Ben
 
I would tend to think Cliff wouldn’t have posted this if #3 was FAS, which I believe it wasn’t. The other 2 were similar.. but I listened to it on my phone (a bad representation) 3 was absolute dullsville.
 
Interesting, I thought they were all 3 pretty damn close, not sure if an IR is being used. As others mention, 3 seemed a tad darker but nothing as bad as remarks I'm seeing, not knowing what the amp is it's hard to even want to guess, amps have different tone stacks and that's what defines them from my experience, so if the tone stack of the amp is actually on the darker side then it definitely is a factor. It could be any of the 3 that's the real amp, the beauty is the fact they are that close naked, in a mix forget it you'd never know. I am listening on a cell phone not a mixing console or headphones , regardless. Great stuff
 
316ms said:
Interesting, I thought they were all 3 pretty damn close, not sure if an IR is being used. As others mention, 3 seemed a tad darker but nothing as bad as remarks I'm seeing, not knowing what the amp is it's hard to even want to guess, amps have different tone stacks and that's what defines them from my experience, so if the tone stack of the amp is actually on the darker side then it definitely is a factor. It could be any of the 3 that's the real amp, the beauty is the fact they are that close naked, in a mix forget it you'd never know. I am listening on a cell phone not a mixing console or headphones , regardless. Great stuff
Click to expand...
Must be pretty lousy cell speakers. The difference between the first two and the third is very noticeable even on cheap headphones.
 
Hmm, that last clip is rough... not only is it real muffled and congested in the low end, but there's this, I don't know exactly, I hear this lively beat frequency content to the ringing harmonics of that last chord as it decays that the first two seem to agree on and the third has none of at all... that feels like the ball game to me.

Seems to be a bit more presence or "air" or something to the first clip that you may or may not want depending on the situation, but they're not a million miles apart I don't think, doubt you'd even notice the switch in a mix.
 
amp - axe - ?

Some of the examples you've been posting sound like some frequencies are restricted. Narrow the bandwidth to consume less processing power? I heard this in many of the old digital units back in the , like only a part of the frequency range was used... and it sucked.
 
To me the first amp sounded present and great, I thought it was a good tone. The second sounded duller, and I didn't really feel any mojo there. The third sounded like a blanket was over it. I can't guess what is real and what is not, but I wouldn't use tones two or three as they were; I'd use tone 1 in a heartbeat.
 
The first one sounds the most open and "in your face", 2 is similar but lacks a bit of air, 3 muffled and lifeless.

So first thing I'd say is:
1= amp
2= axe
3= something else

But since the difference between 1 and 2 is not so subtle as in previous comparisons I could venture to guess that this time there's no axe fx at all and both modelers are something else. Maybe
 
2 gets my vote for tone and real amp. 1 seems brighter and I’m guessing it’s the fractal. Not bad but definitely more “cut through” than 2. 3 sounds like a fart. I’m guessing it’s a helix because all helix users do is fart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom