Thinking of swapping my FM3 for an HX Stomp

[Postretro]

I'm aware that there is a gap between the real life and the AxeFx. But that is not the point. The JC120 is just a digital model that fits into the parameter feature-set of the AxeFx amp block. To solve this issue, there are two ways..... first: use a dedicated bass amp block or build your own "bass amp" by using pre filter, compressor, tube booster, EQ and the console parameter in the cabinets block to mimic a modern bass amplifier preamp topology......

Creating a bass amp from blocks is completely legitimate. It just won’t have a depth or presence control which a lot of bass amps do. I was not complaining at all about the difference between the analog JC120 and the Jazz 120 model. The fact that the model allows for a presence and depth control on the ideal page is a big advantage to my mind. I don’t think there has to be an absolute choice between a bass amp and going straight into the board. In fact, I wish there was a tube booster with switchable tube types, hardness, bias excursion, bias, voltage, and slew rate adjustments. Some bass players like Victor Wooten use both an amp and a straight-to-board setup.

I love FAS modeling. I completely understand wanting to defend it against any suggestion that it might be lacking in some way. I just want to explore some possibilities for jazz bass with the amp models and the amp parameters that are already available. I believe that it is quite possible to increase note-to-note clarity in an amp model, while still benefiting from the color an amp model can bring to the sound. There is no doubt that each compressor has their own color to add. But, the same thing could be said for recording guitar. An amp model is unimportant. All you need is a chain of effects. Of course, not everyone is going to feel that way all the time.

An amp model is not limited in the ways a real-world analog amp is limited. A tube amp model can have the Speaker Impedance Curve of a solid-state amp. A tube amp model can have no bias excursion at all. In fact, a tube amp model could be designed with giant coupling caps that had no bias excursion, blocking distortion, or any other negative side-effects. A tube amp model can have a perfectly clean and transparent output transformer. A tube amp model can have sag, or not have sag, at any voltage. A tube amp model could run at voltages that no tube construction or tube materials would allow. Individual vacuum tube models could easily be designed that never went into clipping. Each tube’s non-linearities could even be adjustable. They could made to be more subtle or more overt. Yet, each tube model would still bring its own sweet yet cleanish non-linearity to color the bass tone. A tube amp model could have giant coupling caps and still have an amazing slew rate — that was completely adjustable!

I don’t have all of those options. But, FAS has already made several of them available to anyone who wants to experiment with the amp parameters. My efforts to rig an amp model to reach into jazz bass amp territory may be limited and they certainly may fail. But, I have already learned a lot from the process. So, I have no regrets. And, am still a long way from exhausting all the possibilities that FAS makes available.

There is no reason why a tube amp model could not completely surpass a SS bass amp in clarity and note-to-note separation. And, at the very same time, wildly expand the range and wealth of the tonal colors (non-linearities) while also making the dynamics of the bass amp widely adjustable.

I may not have all the options to accomplish that, myself. But, I will explore all the options FAS makes available just to see how far the possibilities go. My experience is that, even if I fail, I will always learn things that I could not have easily learned any other way. And, pleasantly, every once in a while, I don’t fail.

 

[jzucker]

Would it be accurate/useful to say that a bass amp signal path would have these general qualities:

EQ/Spectrum-- essentially the amp's influence on tone, the tone-stack itself, the cab IR, and its filters
Dynamics-- essentially how much the various elements squish the dynamic response. And does it do so in a frequency dependent (i.e., multi-band) way?
Non-Linearities-- aspects/elements that add "warrmth", "drive", "distortion", and otherwise add harmonics not present in the dry signal

Would it be fair to suggest that once you have the dynamics and non-linearities where you want them-- i.e., season to taste, then the rest (and, perhaps the hard part) is to get the EQ curve where you want it for the whole range of your instrument?

My big question is: How much of this quest for a good, modern, clean, SS bass tone can be solved with aggressive and skillful use of filters and EQ?

Also, would it be possible to use the FM3's pitch tracking to modulate some notch filter's frequency-- providing a bass player only played monophonically? How useful would that type of function be? Would the pitch tracking for bass be stable & quick enough to be useful?

Yes, i think it's legit to create a composite bass amp using a compressor, eq, etc. However, there's something nice about being able to tweak the bass, mid, treble of the amp and not have to go into specific frequency bands of a graphic or para eq and tweak there. Additionally, i'm not an expert with the fractal effects or the various amp characteristics enough, nor do I want to make a career out of tweaking hidden parameters. I also play guitar and I find that I'm not really interested in adjusting the advanced pages of the guitar amps either. I tend to just like to tweak the parameters on the actual and ideal pages minimally. There's also the issue of adjusting stuff on the gig. Nobody wants to be on the gig and scrolling through pages with the poor UX of the fm3 to adjust advanced parameters...

 

[stub]

Yea, I'm open to learning about the necessary amp tweaks to get the right basic tone, response, color, etc. Then use that as a basic structure to build on. I don't think I need a bunch of bass amp tones. Just a few good ones. I'll have some time tomorrow to try out these SS patches from Postretro.

 

[Xcdchdchjjf]

I think OP should take a trip to Fractal headquarters and knock this preset / amp out over coffee with Cliff. Sure it would take CC 5 mins to make one... SS Bass.... to OP spec.

 

[Postretro]

@stub, I am reaching beyond what I know. And, I have discovered that I am acclimated to nasal sounds. Go figure, I am not a Bass player much less a jazz bass payer. I imprinted really hard on the 1966-67 Superbass Marshalls and pulsonic-coned celestions. Both of those probably sound quite nasal to a bass player, especially a Jazz bass player. I need to track down that quality more objectively and change it if possible. It could be .022uf or smaller coupling caps, which would be a limit. It could be the tonestack, tonestack location or tonestack frequency. Possible, moving the Tonestack location might help overwrite at least one coupling cap. Although, there are details about moving the tonestack location that I don't know.

So, what I am saying is that any cold, careful, critical takes on the sound are very helpful. Point out limitations and things that sound missing from the tone. All thoughts are welcome. I will eventually come to a limit of what I can do. But, who knows? Even then, there are still useful modifications that may help bassists get closer to a cleaner amp sound -- if that is what they want. The Speaker Impedance Curve is complicated. But, once you find a few ways to manipulate the curve, ones that work for you, it is a great item to customize. Shutting down all the bias excursion takes a little life and color out of the sound. But, it also makes the amp cleaner. Same with setting the output transformer drive to be cleaner. That mostly just cleans up low frequency distortion. A hotter bias will be cleaner. More NFB will be cleaner. But, there are trade-offs. A cleaner sound will be less colored. It is really about the sound you want to hear and play. There may be crowd-pleasing settings, for different crowds. But there is no ultimate ideal.

IR's are a case all of their own as phase interference produces more problems for a clean bass sound than it does a distorted guitar sound. I have found that a single IR of a modern single speaker Bass cab is a big step forward to a good string-to-string separation. And yes, a very quick way to get there is to not use an IR and just use a chain of effects. A multi band compressor will go a long way toward producing a more amp-like sound that has some similarities to presence and depth.

But, there is an advantage to looking at things as a continuum of possibilities instead of as a static final answer. FAS offers many amazing continuums of possibilities. I am sure they will only become more numerous and continue to broaden. And, I trust Cliff's foresight and direction in whatever priorities he is undertaking right now. I am very interested in the amazing future of FAS products and software. That is why I think that spending my time learning, maybe even mastering in some small way, these deep amp parameters is an investment in a very solid future of great sounds.

There are mundane things I have to take care of right now. But, by Monday morning there should be a few patches to try out and comment on.

 

[Deleted member 55227]

Creating a bass amp from blocks is completely legitimate. It just won’t have a depth or presence control which a lot of bass amps do.

From a technicians perspective (as I am, I said that before), most bass amps have output stages pretty similar to a linear power amp used for public address applications. Which have no NFB and no current feeback because it's completely unecessary to mimic the tube power amp behavior. Let's take the classic Gallien Krueger 800RB model, which is also featured in the HX Stomp...... this has a linear power stage, no negative feedback loop - and if it has a presence or a depth control, these control are just simple high/low shelf EQ.

So, there is still two ways to go - either try to mimic the topology of a modern bass amp with simple blocks or wait until FAS comes with a dedicated bass amp block around. Mimic bass amps on top of a tube amp topology block is way too complex, since most of these parameters in a guitar tube amp will work not the same as for modern solid state bass amplifiers.

 

[Postretro]

From a technicians perspective (as I am, I said that before), most bass amps have output stages pretty similar to a linear power amp used for public address applications. Which have no NFB and no current feeback because it's completely unecessary to mimic the tube power amp behavior. Let's take the classic Gallien Krueger 800RB model, which is also featured in the HX Stomp...... this has a linear power stage, no negative feedback loop - and if it has a presence or a depth control, these control are just simple high/low shelf EQ.

So, there is still two ways to go - either try to mimic the topology of a modern bass amp with simple blocks or wait until FAS comes with a dedicated bass amp block around. Mimic bass amps on top of a tube amp topology block is way too complex, since most of these parameters in a guitar tube amp will work not the same as for modern solid state bass amplifiers.

@PacoCasanovas, I won't say that you are wrong. But, I do think it is still worth trying. And, I am not convinced that it is simply impossible. There are some patches that you can critically appraise, if you like. And there is also a text file with the basic reasons and details for each amp parameter change. Even if the patches fail to satisfy people looking for a particular jazz bass amp sound. The individual parameter changes might still be useful to someone who would like their tube bass amp to be a little cleaner, or tighter, or less colored, or have less inter-modulated distortion for multiple notes or triads on the bass. Anyway, there are two patches that shoot for a cleaner, low IM Jazz bass tone. One is based on the Citrus Bass Amp and the other is based on the Jazz 120. If you feel like checking out how they sound to you. It will give you an opportunity to be critical of me in very specific ways. The text is there to make each parameter change clear and understandable to others.

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...d-jazz-bass-models.183546/page-3#post-2262289

 

[supersonic182]

None of those are even close to the kind of amp I need for my music. Not a single one unfortunately. I have tons of IRs for bass cabs. bergantino and Aguilar SL112 (which is what I use for my real amp). I'm sure for rock band stuff it's sufficient but I feel like hx stomp offers way more in the way of bass amp specific stuff. The fractal tube pre is particularly disappointing for the kind of stuff I play. Just as a reference, here's a quick clip I recorded on guitar and bass.

I like the bass sound but when I compare it to my real markbass, the real amp blows away the fractal. If I run the fractal with any of the amp models through the effect return of my markbass without the cab IR engaged, the result is dull and lifeless.

I thought I wanted a Stomp for more bass amp “models” until I had one and experienced it’s awfulness. Fractals models sound so damn authentic. I don’t believe you if you can’t make one of them sound how you need to. I main the guitar, and you’ll never see me saying the amp model matters that much. Learn 2 tweak.

 

[stub]

I thought I wanted a Stomp for more bass amp “models” until I had one and experienced it’s awfulness. Fractals models sound so damn authentic. I don’t believe you if you can’t make one of them sound how you need to.

I've had a couple L6 devices and they never did it for me. The amps, FX, and reverbs were all sub-par and not pleasant (YMMV)-- I've had nicer results from other brands/models. I agree with the general consensus that Fractal is in another league.

The operating theory that Postretro is pursuing is that using the one solid-state amp (JC120), and perhaps one or more good tube amps, one can tweak them to develop one or more responsive bass amp hotrods that will out-perform (or at least equal) a dedicated SS model for bass.

 

[Thirtyandseven]

One of my gripes of this community is the thought that the amount of bass centric effects in the Fractal units are acceptable. It’s complete BS and essentially along the lines of the attitude that the bass player should just sit in the back and plug direct in the board and shut up.

Honestly, I wouldn’t even recommend the FM3 to people using it for bass only. I only keep using it because I prefer the guitar tones to my helix. It’s just not a good tool for bassist. The synth is broken now since 5.02. The amount of bass centric effects is laughable. However, if you REALLY like the 70s SVT (it’s a great model of it FWIW) and don’t want to really use anything else (I know there’s TWO more amps don’t worry) then it’ll work for you. Otherwise, I would get a hx stomp or the helix or even the pod go.

 

[Postretro]

@Thirtyandseven, I am looking for angry critical bass players to try some of my clean bass amp parameter mods. I would appreciate your best and most honest criticism. If you can spare the time. There is the one patch below and another earlier version in another recent and previous post.

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...d-jazz-bass-models.183546/page-3#post-2263039

 

[stub]

One of my gripes of this community is the thought that the amount of bass centric effects in the Fractal units are acceptable. It’s complete BS and essentially along the lines of the attitude that the bass player should just sit in the back and plug direct in the board and shut up.

Some companies release separate hardware versions for guitar and bass, which is mostly just a waste of money, since they often share mostly the same circuit and DSP. Boss's SY-1000 has two separate boot modes, so you can either be in bass mode, or guitar mode, but switching requires a mode switch and power cycle. Sometimes companies provide a handful of bass amps and bass-specific effects which can seem like something of a "courtesy".

In the case of Fractal, the quality of the effects is so good, the depth of tweaking is fantastic, and the flexible signal path adds versatility. In my opinion these make the FM3 a reasonable option for bass. The flexible and high-resolution EQ, and option for user IRs allow you to tailor the tone in great detail. As has been repeated on this thread, we'd love to see more bass amps, including modern a good modern solid-state option.

 

[JTI]

If I was a bass player; I'd probably just get a Sansamp of some sort and stfu.

 

[BBN]

If I was a bass player; I'd probably just get a Sansamp of some sort and stfu.

Agreed....or grab an IR (Tonematch) of a Sansamp. I'm sure I've seen some on Axe Exchange.

 

[Thirtyandseven]

Some companies release separate hardware versions for guitar and bass, which is mostly just a waste of money, since they often share mostly the same circuit and DSP. Boss's SY-1000 has two separate boot modes, so you can either be in bass mode, or guitar mode, but switching requires a mode switch and power cycle. Most often, companies provide a handful of bass amps and bass-specific effects.

In the case of Fractal, the quality of the effects is so good, the depth of tweaking is fantastic, and the flexible signal path adds versatility. In my opinion these make the FM3 a reasonable option for bass. The flexible and high-resolution filters, and option for user IRs allow you to tailor the tone in great detail. As has been repeated on this thread, we'd love to see more bass amps, including modern a good modern solid-state option.

I do use the FM3 for bass but it only works because I’m in a 90s rock cover band. SVT and P bass covers 99% of that style. An SVT isn’t number one choice for every style. That said, I’ve had a lot of fun matching the tones of QOTSA and Blink 182 uses the bright switch on that amp. Spent a lot of time with multi band compression, and EQ to get a tone I like. I do think that Fractal makes the best modeling product out there but it’s frustrating that’s it so limited on the bass side of things.

If someone, who only plays bass, asked to suggest one over the other I would go with the helix product family without question. It’s not close to me. There’s way more flexibility with not just amps but bass centric effects as well.

With that said, Tony Franklin still uses a POD HD500 lol

 

[Deleted member 55227]

If I was a bass player; I'd probably just get a Sansamp of some sort and stfu.

no, you can't. The Sansamp is emulating a ampeg SVT - for rock/blues/metal this might be a great choise, but not for a fretless modern jazz player who wants a different tone shaping - it will not work - these players bass also as a lead instrument. The axefx is a tube amp modeling tool, since the history of guitar tones is based of vintage tube designs. Even most modern amps all fall into the typical basic circuit paradigms, by adding a few more gain stages. So the AxeFx can emulate them, even made parts of the circuit tweakable which the original design didn't have...... but emulating a device that is outside of that topology is rather complex or impossible. Most tube guitar amps are used for bass instruments in the earlier days, just with a different frequency responce but not really made especially for bass...... this changed in mid/late 70s, when companies start building new designs made for musicians that featured the bass as a lead instrument or more than just laying down the fundament.
So if the AxeFx III want to be a bass tool - IMO, FAS should add a dedicated modern bass amp block to break out of the classic tube amp topology. But I guess this will not happen, since there is way too much R&D for a very small group of buyers....you can build your special needs by adding individual blocks together, Comps, EQs, TubeDriver, Crossover, made add a chorus or a auto filter effect. But more effect on bass is way too overkill, isn't it? ;-)

 

[Deleted member 55227]

and of corse - in a Fractal message board, nobody would give L6 credits for their products to sound solid and for pro usage, totally understandable. But as I don't have biases, I can because I own one (HX Stomp).....it is a great unit, but not so complex and powerful as a FM3 or the AxeFx. You can't build the exact same tech for less than half the price - it isn't possible. But it's more than just plastic and toy sounding as some might say (because they needed the virtual goldstars and likes to stay alive.....which is a typical social media illness)

 

[JTI]

and of corse - in a Fractal message board, nobody would give L6 credits for their products to sound solid and for pro usage, totally understandable. But as I don't have biases, I can because I own one (HX Stomp).....it is a great unit, but not so complex and powerful as a FM3 or the AxeFx. You can't build the exact same tech for less than half the price - it isn't possible. But it's more than just plastic and toy sounding as some might say (because they needed the virtual goldstars and likes to stay alive.....which is a typical social media illness)

I have a Stomp. And multiple Boss products. Currently no FAS products. No goldstars for me

 

[Paulzx]

and of corse - in a Fractal message board, nobody would give L6 credits for their products to sound solid and for pro usage, totally understandable. But as I don't have biases, I can because I own one (HX Stomp).....it is a great unit, but not so complex and powerful as a FM3 or the AxeFx. You can't build the exact same tech for less than half the price - it isn't possible. But it's more than just plastic and toy sounding as some might say (because they needed the virtual goldstars and likes to stay alive.....which is a typical social media illness)

Totally agree, I own a Helix, I'm in the market for an FM3 when I have some free cash but anyone thinking the Helix products are crap or sub par are delusional - it's still easily the best unit for the money, and it is used by professional players. I started looking at the fractal stuff thinking it would be night and day difference to the Helix but I was wrong, in reality it's a case of small returns because all the top units are obviously very good now. I still believe the fractal units are probably the best (although quad cortex is getting interesting), but to suggest by comparison, Helix products are just toys, is the same rubbish as you see on the Line 6 forum when they are very dismissive of Fractal products.

 

[stub]

There's a leap people make when they prefer one product over another, so they are inclined to denigrate the less-preferred.

My last L6 product was a Pod HD500. I was impressed with the design and pro options. The expression pedal was non-functional (broken). The amps were too squishy (compressed) which I didn't know how to improve (that's on me), the reverbs weren't very nice, and the tremolo sounded weird-- I spent maybe an hour trying to get the tremolo to sound right for me, but I couldn't. Doesn't mean it was a shitty product. Just didn't match my needs. And I knew it fairly quickly. I know two people who love their Helix boards, and one who sold it after a few months.

In contrast, my first impressions of my FM3 were very positive. It took a little time, but I was able to get a fantastic tones that I love. In other words, I didn't have to push the FM3 to get to my ideal. I had to push my own learning a little. The FM3 was just there, ready to do it well.

This thread is important and raises perhaps THE valid question. Is the FM3 as capable for bass specifically, as it is for guitar? AND, would the HX Stomp be a better choice for some players/tone-goals.

The HX Stomp appears to have a nice design, a good feature set, etc. It doesn't have the depth/range/resolution of editing that we see in Fractal products. The reverb demos from both products show that Fractal is way ahead in that regard (IMHO). Does the Stomp's additional bass amp models give it the edge for some players? Perhaps.

Could a well-researched, deep-tweaked amp model in the FM3 come close or perhaps even exceed the options available in the HX Stomp? That is the question Postretro has put on the table. It will be interesting to hear some A/B comparisons with the FM3 vs HX Stomp, once that work is completed.