D
DM45110
Guest
It is absolutely possible to nail a real amp's sound with the axe fx, no doubt. I do it all the time to have backup sound with me when playing with real amps and cabinets. and by the way, I've gone all the ways through IR Cabs (commercial and own ones), Axe Amps, real amps, pedal platform amp with amp-in-a-box pedals, pedals in front of the axe fx and so forth.... but I ended up with real amps and cabs again (all Bogner) and using the axe fx as pre- and post-amp effects unit only.
Back to the topic: I have my sound with me as backup in the axe fx, in case a tube or a fuse says goodbye during a show. I managed to nail the sound of my real amp pretty much spot on. But here comes the drawback of the axe: I'm shaping "pedal" blocks (graphic eq and volume regulation) in front of the amp. One block is used to take out some lower mids while reducing the volume by a great amount to get a cleanish sound in the OD channel of the amp.
The amp stays clear and crisp all the time, while the axe fx gets dull und muddy when that factor comes in. Another block is used to boost some higher frequencies to get e plexi-ish quack into the sound of the real -> not possible with the axe fx, it behaves totally different to the amp.
Same with a univibe in front of both "sound generators", axe fx sounds very different to the amp.
Same with a TS type boost in front of the amp.
The only thing that generates similar outcome is an uncoloured boost in front.
So I assume that isn't taken into account when the amp models are programmed (or whatever they are manufactured, I'm a player, not a computer guy)
I guess this is not what some of you want to hear, but test it yourself with some real gear. And now let the bashing of the thread begin =D
PS: I only review what my AXE FX II is putting out, don't know if the III is more realistic.
Back to the topic: I have my sound with me as backup in the axe fx, in case a tube or a fuse says goodbye during a show. I managed to nail the sound of my real amp pretty much spot on. But here comes the drawback of the axe: I'm shaping "pedal" blocks (graphic eq and volume regulation) in front of the amp. One block is used to take out some lower mids while reducing the volume by a great amount to get a cleanish sound in the OD channel of the amp.
The amp stays clear and crisp all the time, while the axe fx gets dull und muddy when that factor comes in. Another block is used to boost some higher frequencies to get e plexi-ish quack into the sound of the real -> not possible with the axe fx, it behaves totally different to the amp.
Same with a univibe in front of both "sound generators", axe fx sounds very different to the amp.
Same with a TS type boost in front of the amp.
The only thing that generates similar outcome is an uncoloured boost in front.
So I assume that isn't taken into account when the amp models are programmed (or whatever they are manufactured, I'm a player, not a computer guy)
I guess this is not what some of you want to hear, but test it yourself with some real gear. And now let the bashing of the thread begin =D
PS: I only review what my AXE FX II is putting out, don't know if the III is more realistic.
Last edited by a moderator: