V6 firmware: Time to Release the Monster - Speaker Resonance Page

I'm guessing based on this thread,

Are the default settings of the AMP block -> SPKR page parameters are based on

- whether or not the amp in question has negative feedback

- some prototypical 8ohm guitar speaker

??

If so, then an easier guide line might be, under what circumstances would the defaults need to be considered changed? Are there factory IR's that would pretty much require changes... and are they the minority?

Richard
 
I'm guessing based on this thread,

Are the default settings of the AMP block -> SPKR page parameters are based on

- whether or not the amp in question has negative feedback

- some prototypical 8ohm guitar speaker

??

If so, then an easier guide line might be, under what circumstances would the defaults need to be considered changed? Are there factory IR's that would pretty much require changes... and are they the minority?

Richard

Yes, this would be a very good guideline to have.
 
I'm guessing based on this thread,

Are the default settings of the AMP block -> SPKR page parameters are based on

- whether or not the amp in question has negative feedback

- some prototypical 8ohm guitar speaker

??

If so, then an easier guide line might be, under what circumstances would the defaults need to be considered changed? Are there factory IR's that would pretty much require changes... and are they the minority?

Richard

The negative feedback is set in the Advanced menu. The SPKR page only sets the impedance curve of the speaker/OT combo.

The values chosen are prototypical for the speaker used with the modeled amp.

You should not need to vary these parameters much IMO. I only ever vary Low Freq and High Freq. Whenever I'm matching an amp I adjust Low Freq to match the resonance of my reference cabinet. I occasionally vary Hi Freq to get more or less midrange bite.
 
I thought Setting P, and Setting F were pretty obvious (Peterson, Fractal)....

too funny! Competely by accident. I didn't want to use "X" and "Y" because some might assume one or the other... so I just randomly typed letters on the keyboard without looking...
...figures! I can never win.
 
The negative feedback is set in the Advanced menu. The SPKR page only sets the impedance curve of the speaker/OT combo.

The values chosen are prototypical for the speaker used with the modeled amp.

You should not need to vary these parameters much IMO. I only ever vary Low Freq and High Freq. Whenever I'm matching an amp I adjust Low Freq to match the resonance of my reference cabinet. I occasionally vary Hi Freq to get more or less midrange bite.

Very helpful. Thanks Cliff.
 
The negative feedback is set in the Advanced menu. The SPKR page only sets the impedance curve of the speaker/OT combo.

The values chosen are prototypical for the speaker used with the modeled amp.

You should not need to vary these parameters much IMO. I only ever vary Low Freq and High Freq. Whenever I'm matching an amp I adjust Low Freq to match the resonance of my reference cabinet. I occasionally vary Hi Freq to get more or less midrange bite.

Cliff, you seem to be referencing the process you use when matching an amp here. Would it stand to reason that once you've matched an amp and set the speaker resonsance controls to that of your reference cabinet or the prototypical speaker for that amp that the best way to model real world behavior is to leave them alone regardless of future cab selections? Or would you make the same tweaks if say you decided to use a cab that was reasonably different from the prototypical or reference cabinet?
 
The negative feedback is set in the Advanced menu. The SPKR page only sets the impedance curve of the speaker/OT combo.

The values chosen are prototypical for the speaker used with the modeled amp.

You should not need to vary these parameters much IMO. I only ever vary Low Freq and High Freq. Whenever I'm matching an amp I adjust Low Freq to match the resonance of my reference cabinet. I occasionally vary Hi Freq to get more or less midrange bite.

thanks!
 
1) its funny that you think P is your settings because it sounds like crap
2) If your original post was ONLY about a starting point, then you should have just posted RANGES you've used, not exact numbers.
3) My two Clips are a fare comparison because its the axefx's STOCK settings vs. your STOCK settings without claiming which is which (to help with your mind playing games on you). You've claimed your settings and the stock settings are a starting point and the demo was just to show the audio difference of the two starting points (by request by a forum member btw)
4) Sending you the preset to tweak until your happy makes little sense to me. Rather, why don't you take your favorite preset and record, then set it to stock fractal settings, record, THEN set it to your original start settings. This will show the difference between your start settings and your end result.

In the end, if the numbers you posted in your original post sounds like "Poo" right out the gate, thats a pretty bad starting point.... especially when you consider the stock settings of the axe don't sound like "poo". The ultimate question is whats the point of your starting point vs. the stock starting point? What are you gaining by starting with your numbers if they don't sound good?

I'd highly recommend you revisit your OP and remove the numbers you gave. Instead, look at each of your personal presets, and find the Max and MIn value of EACH setting of all your patches, and post ranges of each of the settings. Ranges will A) force people not to use a specific bad sounding setting and B)will show right away that your intention is to TWEAK and not set and forget.

You don't 'gain' anything more than you can hear it better IMHO.

The factory settings are louder. Louder ALWAYS sounds better, even if it doesn't really sound better.

The OP settings are starting points; and where I end up is across the spectrum of high and low. It's like tuning in a radio, there's no set 'range' at all. I will tell you the numbers all move UP. I do pull the midrange 'critical frequency' DOWN in most cases. You can hear it. You can feel it. Once you get there you can easily A/B it with the factory settings (though you HAVE to allow for the factory settings resulting in a louder preset).

I just change the amp type... play. Then reload the preset via MFC... play. You can easily hear - and feel - what's better for *you*. For many folks the factory settings might be perfect. Cliff mentions that in his opinion he thinks the low end does in fact open up the bottom end. So there is play even in that.

This is highly individual. It is exactly akin to turning the power curve/torque curve of your car to match your driving style and preference. What I like and what you like will not match. The clips you presented do not, IMHO, represent this accurately from my perception. The clip sounded like poo IMHO and is not representative of what I'm discussing. Starting points are not finishing points. It is up to the individual to learn their own preferences and act on them.
 
You don't 'gain' anything more than you can hear it better IMHO.

The factory settings are louder. Louder ALWAYS sounds better, even if it doesn't really sound better.

The OP settings are starting points; and where I end up is across the spectrum of high and low. It's like tuning in a radio, there's no set 'range' at all. I will tell you the numbers all move UP. I do pull the midrange 'critical frequency' DOWN in most cases. You can hear it. You can feel it. Once you get there you can easily A/B it with the factory settings (though you HAVE to allow for the factory settings resulting in a louder preset).

I just change the amp type... play. Then reload the preset via MFC... play. You can easily hear - and feel - what's better for *you*. For many folks the factory settings might be perfect. Cliff mentions that in his opinion he thinks the low end does in fact open up the bottom end. So there is play even in that.

This is highly individual. It is exactly akin to turning the power curve/torque curve of your car to match your driving style and preference. What I like and what you like will not match. The clips you presented do not, IMHO, represent this accurately from my perception. The clip sounded like poo IMHO and is not representative of what I'm discussing. Starting points are not finishing points. It is up to the individual to learn their own preferences and act on them.

All good in the information about these parameters!

Scott, could you post two presets, *not* from your personal collection, but two that show this point? That show how the feel etc. improves?

Richard
 
Hopefully this isn't off base of the discussion, to me it isn't, but ir's ( and getting the amps to react to them correctly) seem to be the basis of most of the rabbit hunt. For me much of the percieved difference of tone is due to feel (though there is a pretty big difference between the sound of Scott's settings compared to stock settings), I can create a patch and small changes in parameters make big differences in tone, then record a loop ,play it back as i tweak and the same changes make very little differece, even larger changes dont make the impact i think it does when i have a guitar in my hands. Listening to the clips Cliff posts of his comparisons between amp and AxII impress me much of the accuracy ( i assume created with the stock settings)however working with the ir's available to me ,stock, redwires,and ownhammers it doesn't seem the same. Are the creations you make Cliff, made with ir's created specific to that amp you are working with? If so I for one would love to have availability to the ir's created to model those amp sounds for a starting point! Seems like accuracy of tone matching amps is very dependent on using an ir created from that particular amp or cab. Would this be more of a factor than the resonance settings being discussed?
 
Here you go. I'm not adding any comment just putting them out there. Same everything except Speaker Settings (amp was originally tweaked for Scott/Jay settings)

Setting P

Setting F


Thanks man. There's not much difference that I can tell, but the "P" setting sounds a little choked down and "F" sounds like it's a bit more alive. I know you just picked 2 random letters and P and F don't represent anything. And, this could all sound very different depending on your monitoring system etc. But for me, based simply on this clip, the "F" settings sound better to my ears. Now, I'm curious to know which is which. I would "guess" F is Cliff's stock settings because I notice more high end, and Scott's settings seems to tame the high end a bit. As I've said before, when playing fairly loud through my RCF's, I did like the effect Scott's settings had on some of my patches... could be I had too much high end or presence in the EQ and this helped... who knows...

Thanks again man!
 
I am primarily interested in using this to dial out a bit out the 'flub' with the low end using the Jcm 800 amp. What was the best way to do this?
 
I am primarily interested in using this to dial out a bit out the 'flub' with the low end using the Jcm 800 amp. What was the best way to do this?

Follow the OP.

Just set the Q wider, set the low level to 3.55, lower the Low Freq Res setting to about say 75Hz and then bring it up till it sounds right.

I'd recommend setting the high down to 2.00 and the Hi Freq as in the OP to start and dial that in second.

Then finish up with the mid. Cliff has posted that it should be in the 1500Hz to 1750Hz; Jay suggests setting it higher - around 2900Hz. You decide.
 
Wow! So many people with doubts, I didn't exspect it to work well at once, since some didn't like it....but I thought I need to give it a try.
I just entered the settings from the OP from page #1 and all I can say is that it sounds awesome. Need to try it with the band, next rehearse on wednesday, to be sure that it'll work on stage, but here at home it's awesome.
I even didn't need to touch my ampsettings, they are as they were before. Cabs as mentioned and speakerresonance as mentioned...and boom!
Thank you Scott!
 
Pretty much the same *starting points* then tweaked differently to end with.

Stand by...

Now that the V7 beta beast has been released can you clarify on your stand by? ;)

Not trying to be impatient here. I'm assuming your stand by was because of your inability to talk about the firmware.

Thanks Scott!
 
Follow the OP.

Just set the Q wider, set the low level to 3.55, lower the Low Freq Res setting to about say 75Hz and then bring it up till it sounds right.

I'd recommend setting the high down to 2.00 and the Hi Freq as in the OP to start and dial that in second.

Then finish up with the mid. Cliff has posted that it should be in the 1500Hz to 1750Hz; Jay suggests setting it higher - around 2900Hz. You decide.

Thanks Scott!
 
Back
Top Bottom