They All Sound the Same, It's About Workflow

Listening closely, I can definitely hear differences between them. If I listen to the dynamics and distortion as notes decay, #2 definitely performs the worst. The distortion remains about the same from attack to decay - real amps breathe and clean up as the signal gets lower. #3 does better with that, but has some kind of aliasing/congestion that isn't as pure as the first and last ones.
 
Yes, you are completely wrong.
If you want to be a member of this forum, you have to comment on every new firmware about how "chewy" or "glassy" the new firmware is. Or how much "more presence" or "tighter low end" it has.
These are the rules.
“Feels snappier” - Apple user #4716290

;)
 
Wow, why am I busting my ass making things so accurate when people can't hear how obviously different the first two are?
You may have crossed the point of diminishing returns in that area. The accuracy has been amazing for years.

This is why I'm excited to see
improvements in other areas. Stuff like the double tap buttons- that's a big usability improvement. FullRes is a big deal. New effects types are a big deal.

You already won the accuracy contest by 1000 miles but thanks for your ongoing commitment to excellence and improvement wherever you chose to spend it.
 
Three takes are modelers, one is the real amp:
https://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/Be_Be_Be.mp3

Deluxe Reverb Vibrato channel
Gain 10
Bass 2
Treble 8

They sound very very close to me on pedestrian headphones-sennheiser hd200 pro-i learned long ago that anything with "pro" in the name probably isn't. Haha.

I know it's not the point of the post, but even if they sounded the same, the difficulty it took to get to that point is a major factor.


When I had a hx stomp, I could dial up workable Friedman tones but it really didn't behave like the real amp and there were weird things I had to dial around that were foreign to the real amp.

The fractal stuff is so close, people can now check their real amps against the models to see if they are behaving correctly. I did this with a Synergy Deliverance model to see if the crackly decay on the green channel was in the Deliverance model (it is)
 
Is that really a necessary comment? Take a swipe at your customers because they didn't see it the way you wanted them to? C'mon man...
I mean...it's a fair comment.

Maybe he was having a bad day and maybe it could be considered in bad taste.

But, the fact that people don't like hearing that their $300 monitors set up wrong in their untreated room doesn't give an accurate representation of what was recorded shouldn't be news to anyone.
 
That's not what it said though. It could have easily said that. What it said was "you don't hear it like I wanted you to and fouled up my comparison so you have inferior ears or inferior 'equipment'."

Comes with the territory though. Geniuses are often a little hard to get along with.
But, what you're suggesting is what I read, at least.

IDK...maybe I've been on the internet long enough to just give basically everyone the benefit of the doubt that they didn't mean something as a personal attack. Or maybe I give people too much leeway or too much benefit of the doubt. Whatever.

There are a lot of people who just plain haven't experienced just how much of a difference good monitoring makes. I had my head in the sand for a long time, partially because my first experience with a well-made room coincided with my first experience with quarter million dollar speakers. I incorrectly attributed the sound to the speakers for a long time...but the room was the much bigger component of how amazing the sound was there.
 
Interesting that the Axe-Fx model sounded better to me than the real amp. At least in that it had a tad more pleasing treble/presence or the real amp had a (very) light blanket/sheet over the cab or something.

The guys that couldn't hear the difference likely just need better monitors or a few more listens. My hearing isn't great and I've got tinnitus, but I listened on some Meze 99 Classics and the differences were readily apparent after jumping back and forth on the MP3 a few times.
 
The guys that couldn't hear the difference likely just need better monitors or a few more listens. My hearing isn't great and I've got tinnitus, but I listened on some Meze 99 Classics and the differences were readily apparent after jumping back and forth on the MP3 a few times.
To clarity from my earlier posts (not that it matters), with damaged hearing also (tinnitus), I could clearly hear that there were volume differences (2,3 were lower/less present imo), but as I understood the comments from Fractal, they were looking for some validation that customers could hear the quality differences given that a lot of effort has gone into bringing Axefx modelling well beyond where it's at in other modellers. What I'm not sure Fractal is understanding from customers like me, is that many of us do not have the skill level required in critical listening to be able to point out those quality differences - nonetheless I've owned Helix, and despite the tinnitusy ears, I can get to tones that speak to me much more easily using Axefx than with Helix/L6 (I just can't parse out why exactly) - as I mentioned in the other thread, some guidance in listening would I suspect benefit a significant portion of the user base here.
 
Back
Top Bottom