"Tone Matching" Preview

I'd actually like to hear a demo of what I said above.

Take the New Orange Recto model and match it to the actual New Orange Recto head at a high gain setting. Then turn the matched amp models gain down and compare to another actual Orange Recto at low gain.

That would be a cool test. Whaddaya say Cliff and/or M@, or Adam?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
shotgunn said:
I'm wondering if I Amp match an amp at a high gain setting am I limited to that amount gain? Will we be able to achieve that amps low gain sound simply by turning the gain down in the amp model? Conversely, will we be able to amp match a low gain sound and then be able to turn the gain up and have the amps high gain sound?

Make sense?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I might be talking out my a**, but, hey, that's why I'm here...lol

I think I recall reading from one of the mods or Cliff in another thread that part of the process will involve choosing an amp model first and then also setting its gain to approximate the reference amp whose tone you're trying to capture. If that's correct, then it sounds to me like the idea is to take a snapshot of the reference amp as it's currently set (high gain, medium gain, low gain), but selecting the right gain setting is going to help dial it in better (easier? more accurately?). You can then tweak from there.

Maybe (??) it would be smart to "match" the amp more than once if you wanted both lower gain and higher gain settings for best overall results? No clue...just speculating to pass the time. ;)
 
jshirkey said:
I might be talking out my a**, but, hey, that's why I'm here...lol

I think I recall reading from one of the mods or Cliff in another thread that part of the process will involve choosing an amp model first and then also setting its gain to approximate the reference amp whose tone you're trying to capture. If that's correct, then it sounds to me like the idea is to take a snapshot of the reference amp as it's currently set (high gain, medium gain, low gain), but selecting the right gain setting is going to help dial it in better (easier? more accurately?). You can then tweak from there.

Maybe (??) it would be smart to "match" the amp more than once if you wanted both lower gain and higher gain settings for best overall results? No clue...just speculating to pass the time. ;)
Click to expand...

I guess I shouldn't have asked that question here. This is the 'tone matching' thread. My question was actually pertaining to the amp matching feature that is soon to be added.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
shotgunn said:
I guess I shouldn't have asked that question here. This is the 'tone matching' thread. My question was actually pertaining to the amp matching feature that is soon to be added.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I've gotten the latest threads confused myself because I'm subbed to both. But when I replied to you, what I had in mind was the amp matching feature, not tone matching.
 
shotgunn said:
I guess I shouldn't have asked that question here. This is the 'tone matching' thread. My question was actually pertaining to the amp matching feature that is soon to be added.
Click to expand...

The 'tone matching' and 'amp matching' are basically the same process.
1.Pick the amp block that you feel is the closest match to the isolated guitar track or tube amp that you are trying to match. Dial the gain as close as you can.
2.Record a section of the iso track or record yourself playing thru the tube amp into the axe fx.
3.Record yourself using the amp block you selected, and then tell the axe fx to match either the iso track or tube amp you recorded, to the selected amp block.
The only difference is that you will have to mic the tube amp to get the tone into the Axe Fx, and you will be using the USB or one of the inputs to get the iso track into the Axe.

If i am missing anything then let me know, but this is what I understand from what has been revealed since Friday.

edit** By the way, all this recording that I mention, takes place inside the Axe Fx. There is no DAW that has to be used to record the reference tone clips.
 
Last edited:
willowdale said:
The 'tone matching' and 'amp matching' are basically the same process.
1.Pick the amp block that you feel is the closest match to the isolated guitar track or tube amp that you are trying to match.
2.Record a section of the iso track or record yourself playing thru the tube amp into the axe fx.
3.Record yourself using the amp block you selected, and then tell the axe fx to match either the iso track or tube amp you recorded, to the selected amp block.
The only difference is that you will have to mic the tube amp to get the tone into the Axe Fx, and you will be using the USB or one of the inputs to get the iso track into the Axe.

If i am missing anything then let me know, but this is what I understand from what has been revealed since Friday.
Click to expand...

Thanks for a great summary.

A question for those in the know: Will it be possible to use more than one mic to feed the signal to the Axe when doing the amp matching? Or would I have to record two (or more) mics to a DAW instead, mix them to taste to produce the sound I want, and then use the tone matching feature of the Axe?

Thank you.
 
Steeldom said:
... since a certain manufacturer from germany can do it from scratch, I presume the Axe will as well, but I was wondering.
Click to expand...
"From scratch" is how the Axe-FX does it today. There are enough amp parameters in the current models that you can dial in just about any design option that a hardware amp designer has available. You can transform an existing amp model into a number of very different amps just by tweaking. You can dial up pretty much any gain structure you like today, and use it to tone-match when FW 6 comes out.

As to whether you the Axe will be able to set up a gain structure from scratch, I think I'm reading "no," but there will be other firmware releases beyond 6, so who knows where it will go in the future?
 
Clark Kent shows us in 2011 the tools, work and costs of what Cliff seems to build in as Tone-Matching Block in FW 6 for FREE . The working process, possibilities and technical understanding what you can do and what not is demonstrated well in this video, i think ...



Just imagine izotope ozone plugin is the tone-matching block and the software amp would be the axe fx ... than, i assume, you can imagine well how future looks like ....

Hopefully, the sine sweep, the Axe send out for IR capturing can used as test-tone to match miced Amps frequency-responses. This would produce much better results than struggle chords on the guitar in my experience with this technique...
 
Last edited:
This thread was started Feb 19th. It's now March 26th. Any idea when 6.0 will actually be released? We are all looking forward to it.
I've been holding off re-working presets waiting for the release, since it looks like 6.0 will make lots of things better.

All the very best!
Terry
 
Fractal knows. The beta testers may have an idea. The rest of us can only guess. That's the way it is with every firmware release; we learn the release date when it's released.

I'm glad they do it that way. If they set a release date, and an unexpected difficulty comes up that delays it (never happens in real life, right?), they'd get raked over the coals for being late, and the people who worry about "when" will just have more to worry about. :)
 
That's what's so unusual about Cliff and FAS. Most, according to my limited experience, don't announce a pending firmware/software update unless it's to announce bug fixes. But I think Cliff and team just get so excited they want to spill the beans and share the knowledge. On the few beta teams I've been with, the genius coder brain would send a notice to the Beta team of a HUGE update with orders to pound and try to break it. But never any announcements to the big anxious public, until the beta team has had it for a few months and it takes it's final form. The FAS method of disclosure is unusual, I think.
 
One important factor to consider: Which platform produces the most analog, amp-like distortion? (not EQ or Cab emulation) I own both the AFXII and the KPA, and I can say that they both can produce excellent sounds. Having said that, I must say that the sound and feel of the distortion the AFX produces is just more natural to my ears & fingers at this point - I have talked about the inadequacies of the KPA 'distortion engine' on the Kemper board, and as you might expect, I got some serious flames for being so forthright. Some folks even think I'm a 'plant' paid by Fractal to cause trouble on their board.... I also remember when some folks here called me a troll because I said some AFX features needed improving... :)

Guess what - I have a life, and I don't get my jollies by posting things I don't believe - I get them by achieving the kind of tones that make me feel like playing, and become a part of my musical voice so I can 'emote' with maximum effectiveness. My comments on the Kemper board could be very valuable if the right ears were listening. I have always felt that Cliff listens to our input, even if he doesn't always agree - fair enough. From what I have heard (and what my ears hear), the KPA has a master Clean Amp engine, and a master Dirty Amp engine - that would be fine if the distortion produced had the sonic DNA of typical tube amp distortion, but it is somehow harder & less elastic than it's tube counterpart, and no amount of tweaking can make it truly respond/distort like a real tube amp. At this point, I feel the AFXII has the better sounding 'distortion engine', and that is important if you're trying to capture the subtleties of real tube amp overdrive/dynamics.
 
Radley:
Heard.. I could not agree more. FAS was bound to get some competition, even if the AFXII is superior and more powerful, I feel KPA came up with something really really useful that the AFXII needs to cover to some extent in order to stay in business at the top...
 
Radley said:
I also remember when some folks here called me a troll because I said some AFX features needed improving... :)
Click to expand...
Wait... you're not a troll???? ;)

Radley said:
I have always felt that Cliff listens to our input, even if he doesn't always agree - fair enough.
Click to expand...
I envy Cliff ability to separate info over noise in the forum!


Radley said:
From what I have heard (and what my ears hear), the KPA has a master Clean Amp engine, and a master Dirty Amp engine - that would be fine if the distortion produced had the sonic DNA of typical tube amp distortion, but it is somehow harder & less elastic than it's tube counterpart, and no amount of tweaking can make it truly respond/distort like a real tube amp. At this point, I feel the AFXII has the better sounding 'distortion engine', and that is important if you're trying to capture the subtleties of real tube amp overdrive/dynamics.
Click to expand...
That's the point. :)
 
To clarify my comments: The KPA obviously can *sound* very much like most of the amps it profiles - it's when you play things that require a lot of touch/finesse (especially with your fingers), that you notice that the 'tubey cushy-ness' isn't there like tube distortion. Most of this is a result of how the KPA distortion handles the attack phase of the notes, imho. I am fond of the KPA Clarity parameter, which can take a rather messy-sounding distortion and clean it up without losing gain or sustain...
 
jshirkey said:
A "clarity" knob shouldn't be needed if everything else works right, is modeled accurately, and sounds good. Or what am I missing?
Click to expand...

I fully agree. Let's keep the diffusely named and cloaked working parameters to a minimum.

One thing of the Axe-Fx family I admire is, that most parameters have a physical, well documented counterpart and work as you'd expect by this background.
Fortunately, parameters like "thump", "warmth" or "air" are rare exceptions.
Alot of other companies' products are full of those fantasy things.
 
Sebastian said:
I fully agree. Let's keep the diffusely named and cloaked working parameters to a minimum.

One thing of the Axe-Fx family I admire is, that most parameters have a physical, well documented counterpart and work as you'd expect by this background.
Fortunately, parameters like "thump", "warmth" or "air" are rare exceptions.
Alot of other companies' products are full of those fantasy things.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything wrong with having "things" like Radley suggested. As a matter of fact a lot of real amps nowadays have parameters/settings like those and it is an easier/faster way of achieving the tone you are looking for. If for example you want your tone to be spongier, fatter, bloomier, ... would not be cool to have knobs named with the effect they produce that interact with the advanced parameters in the background so you don't have to know anything about how amp works internally? (i.e. http://www.sfdamp.com/images/product/SigX_Front-Detail.jpg)

I have to say that I find very useful the voicing parameter in the Axe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom