Entirely dependent on your preference settings. I'm on page 8 here.
Thanks for the tip. I never worried about the preferences settings, everything is on the default.
Anyway, there are a lot of posts, agree?
Entirely dependent on your preference settings. I'm on page 8 here.
It was "Amp Matching" but using a modeler since I don't want to disturb the other denizens of my habitat today.
"The following clip compares two devices. One of the devices is a guitar processor. The other device is the Axe-Fx II after having the amp block "tone matched" to the other device using the new "Tone Matching" technology."
"First one is a preset named "DIEZEL CH2". Second one is FAS MODERN matched to it."
"There are currently two modes:
Amp Matching and...
Tone Matching.
In Tone Matching mode you can match the tone of an isolated guitar track."
"It was "Amp Matching" but using a modeler since I don't want to disturb the other denizens of my habitat today."
>I'm confused. I thought the clip that was posted of the "DIEZEL CH2" being duplicated by the AXE II was "Tone Matching", not "Amp Matching". Then you seemed to indicate it was "Amp Matching" in a later post. What did I miss?<
Well, while we're all guessing, I'll make my guess.
I'm pretty sure that that original comparison Cliff made of the Diezel w/ the FAS Modern "matched" to it is an example of "Amp Matching". (Cliff said as much, afterwards, as you quote)
I think Cliff accidentally muddied the waters a bit by using the phrase "tone match" earlier in the same sentence... thus your confusion. But it seem to make sense that what he posted was an example of "Amp Matching", since what's being matched is an AMP, not a recorded TONE.
I'm confused. I thought the clip that was posted of the "DIEZEL CH2" being duplicated by the AXE II was "Tone Matching", not "Amp Matching". Then you seemed to indicate it was "Amp Matching" in a later post. What did I miss? Is there a clip posted anywhere of "Amp Matching" that I missed? I read through the thread but it's so long it's hard to parse.
Help!!!
These were the posts I saw that I thought pertained to the copy of the "DIEZEL CH2" using an FAS amp block and "Tone Matching":
If there was a post of sound clip example of "Amp Matching", can someone clarify which one it is and link me to it. Sorry if I'm dense today.
Thanks.
I see it the other way around if I were to guess (which I am).
It was the "tone" of another amp (modeler) that he was matching, hence "Tone Matching" was being used. It could have just as well been the recorded tone from a record but it was more convenient to use a modeler and not have to learn to play an identical part that was on a recording. He also had to use an amp block in the AXE, which (I speculate) wouldn't be needed for "Amp Matching" or the equivalent of "profiling".
I interpret "Tone = EQ" and "Amp = distortion + EQ". So tone matching would require an amp model to be used in the AXE, while amp matching would be a "profiling" process that would recreate the entire sound, distortion + EQ. That's my GUESS.
Again, I'm guessing - that's why I asked. In any event, he made it clear they are two separate features. Maybe he purposefully interchanged the terms to confuse all of us and is laughing at all the speculation over a cold one and wants it to be somewhat of a surprise when it comes out. Or maybe he made it clear and I just can't read!
It's all good, that's for certain.
I went back to read up on some of his posts and I get that impression as well. I won't elaborate on my take on that since it would be based on pure speculation, but it gets me even more juiced up over this. It would mean it's not a static profile....To me it sounds like the "Amp match" is superimposed over an existing model.
two things I really noticed about this thread: 1. Tone matching. 2. Jocke Skogg you're back!!Now, I want to hear Cliff work his matching skills on a real tube amplifier, miked with something expensive.
I'm not saying that it's exactly the same process or result, but here's a video that shows the general concept. I don't know if it'll be IR or a new block or something completely different, but the basic fundamental idea is demonstrated here.I was interested in this concept, had no idea how it could work ( just dont have the brain for that kinda stuff ) and after hearing the clips posted so far, sure sounded great.
The idea it could replicate a guitar tone just by hearing it is a concept that hurts my brain. Even with the recent release of the Kemper showcasing such behaviour in earlier and more recent videos I still cant get my head around it but clearly not only does the concept and technology exist but is now a reality and as a possible future update on the Axe FX II has me very interested as the difference between having the cabs / amps / eq and ability to spend hours scratching your head trying to get the tones you're after vs a function that can replicate the exact sound you want to me is a gamechanger.
Sadly not everyone who is a good, even brilliant player has the brain or patience to build tones from scratch. And more so there will always be people who would love " that tone " at the push of a button. So yeah, am very interested in this thread and still baffled and amazed in equal measures.
He was using the "Tone Matching technology"
It consists of two parts
Amp matching and tone matching
He used amp matching on that (he states that in the quote your are referencing). Amp matching includes the non-linear aspects .
so he took the Diezel CH2 preset from one device and applied it to the FAS Modern amp on the axe-fx.
I would have no problem losing some IR slots if I know I can copy the sound of my personal cabs (which I like better)