6160 Block.I had copied your reply, but I just deleted it.
I know you said it was a 5150; What I was asking was which 5150 in the Axe did you use?
6160 Block.I had copied your reply, but I just deleted it.
I know you said it was a 5150; What I was asking was which 5150 in the Axe did you use?
MV @ 10. Everything else @ 5.Was this just simply dialing up the preset with all knobs at noon, with all modeler I/O settings set at defaults?
Gain at 3.MV @ 10. Everything else @ 5.
Thank you! This is fun.6160 Block.
Gain at 3.
Thank you!
I think it's more about how they work with the guitar signal rolled down...So what this proves is that other modelers knob settings are inconsistent with the actual amp. Doesn't necessarily prove that they can't replicate a tone or that they suck as bad as the recording would suggest.... They just may need tweaking and deviation from the actual amp knob settings to get closer.
With that said, I don't think they can do better than FAS, especially in this example
I would expect something "Algorithmically Perfect (TM)" to behave very closely to the actual amp.So what this proves is that other modelers knob settings are inconsistent with the actual amp. Doesn't necessarily prove that they can't replicate a tone or that they suck as bad as the recording would suggest.... They just may need tweaking and deviation from the actual amp knob settings to get closer.
With that said, I don't think they can do better than FAS, especially in this example
I would expect something "Algorithmically Perfect (TM)" to behave very closely to the actual amp.
My man's out for blood. lolI would expect something "Algorithmically Perfect (TM)" to behave very closely to the actual amp.
True, not sure what other modeler's global settings can be adjusted to account for stuff like this - but if I was in a shop testing modelers and came across something as shitty as this, I'd move on pretty quickly without messing with global settings.I think it's more about how they work with the guitar signal rolled down...
I hear what you're saying, but listening to the actual preset through my headphones is like, WOW, it sounds absolutely killer! And helps me hear the differences in the other tones, not just the ones you may be able to compensate for with different volume on your guitar, e.g.So what this proves is that other modelers knob settings are inconsistent with the actual amp. Doesn't necessarily prove that they can't replicate a tone or that they suck as bad as the recording would suggest.... They just may need tweaking and deviation from the actual amp knob settings to get closer.
With that said, I don't think they can do better than FAS, especially in this example
OHHH..... THIS is why you did the video! @FractalAudio
https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/john-mayer-on-digital-modelers.2325249/
No. That video is also 2.5 years old and predates Cygnus.OHHH..... THIS is why you did the video! @FractalAudio
No. That video is also 2.5 years old and predates Cygnus.
OHHH..... THIS is why you did the video! @FractalAudio
if your friends have ears you won't have to tell themTGP thread is 2 days old, and the exact timestamped moment is when Mayer is critical of FAS modeling for guitar volume response (yes, the video is old and he's commenting on old FAS tech). Regardless of video date, these types of comments from giants like Mayer will stick with people. This audio comparison seems like a response to that thread, as well as a dig at other modelers. But hey whatever.
Either way, as I've said before and will continue to tell my friends, FAS modeling is the best. Keep up the good work Cliff.
if your friends have ears you won't have to tell them