Will the Axe have profiling?

P

peterc52

Member
Hi everyone!

I'm new to this forum, so hello. :D

I've just bought the Kemper to try it out, and it sounds good, but I would really like to try out the Axe-FX II as well, so I ordered one from G66 a little over a week ago and it should be here in about a month, but here is my question:

I love the thought that I can profile my own amps and record with them, and I believe that's the KPA's strenght! But will the Axe-FX have that one day? Have Cliff stated anything?

Best regards Peter from Denmark :p
 
peterc52 said:
Hi everyone!

I'm new to this forum, so hello. :D

I've just bought the Kemper to try it out, and it sounds good, but I would really like to try out the Axe-FX II as well, so I ordered one from G66 a little over a week ago and it should be here in about a month, but here is my question:

I love the thought that I can profile my own amps and record with them, and I believe that's the KPA's strenght! But will the Axe-FX have that one day? Have Cliff stated anything?

Best regards Peter from Denmark :p
Click to expand...

already has it: it's called tone matching.
check firmware update V6.0
 
I know it has tone matching, but it isn't the same.

Will the AFX be able to, in the future, profile an amp with a mic attached in front of an amp? Like the KPA.
 
You have that with tone matching too. The end result of either profiling or tone matching is that your multieffect unit is able to almost exactly replicate the sound of the amp you matched/profiled. So if the end result is the same, why is profiling needed if tone matching achieves exactly the same (even more actually, in my opinion)?
 
First yes it can also mic your amps and profile them.There is a multitude of inputs to do so.

But then why do you want to do that-->you will get the colouring of the mic too.Axe on this is far more advanced as you can take even a recorded FLAC of your favourite tone as base for your tone match/or profiling whatever you may call it.

And still it gives you a myrad of effects and 66 (if I recall correct) amps.

But no the mic is not build in.

Still try to get what you are aiming for

Roland
 
I have no made any TM´s myself yet.

But it seem to me that the result (99% acurate copies of an amp sound) is achieved with both the AXE and the Kemper.

The AXE has no microphoneinput. So you will need a preamp for that. BUT it has all the effect that you could possibly want( Yeah yeah - I know that some of you guys have wishes for specific obscure effectes, that i havent even heard of:).

Did a gig yesterday as sideman in a POP (NOT pOOp) band. And the AXE shined all night. in all the genres.

I live in Denmark myself. Fell free to PM me if you have any questions.

Greetings

AAEN
 
Last edited:
It's a simple question with a simple answer: no. Whether it's a technical impossibility or due to legal issues, I don't know.

Tone Matching is a completely different thing. Seriously, don't even begin to compare the two.

His question is about functionality, not quality, so accept the differences, ok? 8)
 
Trazan said:
It's a simple question with a simple answer: no. Whether it's a technical impossibility or due to legal issues, I don't know.

Tone Matching is a completely different thing. Seriously, don't even begin to compare the two.

His question is about functionality, not quality, so accept the differences, ok? 8)
Click to expand...

Agreed on the differences, the Axe-fx II only does the linear aspects at this point.

However, I don't believe you have enough information to definitively state (at this point) when or if it will have this one day (which was the main question).
 
javajunkie said:
Agreed on the differences, the Axe-fx II only does the linear aspects at this point.

However, I don't believe you have enough information to definitively state (at this point) when or if it will have this one day (which was the main question).
Click to expand...

True, not definite, but I'm preeeeeetty convinced it won't :) The original thread about profiling was removed, and there were rumors about legal issues concerning the profiling method. Also, the platform is so different it would seem like a complete new "box" would have to be made inside the Axe. And if there are legal issues involved, they likely won't be solved until AFXIII anyway.
 
@OP - Peter, I've posted this before, both here and on other forums.
If you want to EXACTLY replicate the sound of your amp.. DON'T buy the Axe-II or KPA... KEEP and PLAY the AMP.
No digital device can do that - it's inherent in tube amp design that no two amps are identical. Close but not identical.

The Axe-II can get REAL CLOSE, and give you MANY AMPs (up to 81 now? - so many I forget) to choose from, plus 68 cabs (plus 50 of your own), PLUS a whole bunch of STELLAR effects (reverb, delay, etc), the ability to swap out tone stacks, and so on.... and you can mix and match all of that and save them into 384 presets !!

If you want that FLEXIBILITY -versus tone matching a specific amp.. do yourself a favor and get the AXE!!
If not and you ONLY want to match your specific amps.. keep and play that amp. Save your $$ !
You will save yourself a lot of time and grief.
 
It now has Tone Matching which is arguably the most important part of profiling.

Profiling consists of four parts:
1. Finding the input EQ.
2. Finding the "shape" and bias point of the nonlinear transfer function.
3. Finding the output EQ.
4. Finding the compression, or sag, characteristics.

The Axe-Fx II with V6 uses a hybrid modeling/profiling approach. The Axe-Fx modeling is much more complex in that it does not use a single waveshaper with adjustable shape and bias point. It uses multiple dynamic nonlinearities including preamp and power amp modeling. Profilers distill everything down to a single static waveshaper and then adjust the shape (probably a x+k/x-k waveshaper) and bias point of that waveshaper to try and match the measured transfer function. They then find the input and output EQ and the compression.

With V6 the Axe-Fx II uses a combination of modeling and profiling. The amps are modeled using our exclusive multiple dynamic nonlinearities that very accurately replicate actual tube triodes and our new power amp modeling which fully recreates the behavior of a tube power amp and output transformer. The models are then refined by applying test tones to the actual amp to find deviations between the real amp and the model. For example, traditional circuit based modeling cannot account for things like parasitics since these are not represented by the schematic. So we now augment our traditional circuit modeling with measurements from the actual amp and store that data in the model.

With Tone Matching you can morph a model to match other amps. This works best if the model and amp are similar.

There are numerous advantages to this approach. These advantages include full control matching. The drive, tone, etc. controls behave just like the real amp. You're not just getting a snapshot of the amp at some setting. Another advantage is full separability of the amp from the cabinet. Due to inseparability of linear responses, profiling lumps the amplifier output with the cab response. The multiple nonlinearities also capture the complexities of amps that rely on both preamp and power amp distortion. Single waveshaper approaches cannot capture the complex interactions of multiple distorting stages and the concomitant duty-cycle modulation, EQ modulation (which produces note bloom and swirl) and the vagaries of feel.

The one disadvantage is that you only get the amps that we have modeled. If you have an amp that is very unique that we haven't modeled then Tone Matching may not fully capture the essence of that amp. Profiling allows you to capture that amp at your favorite settings with your favorite cab. Another disadvantage is that modeling is very labor intensive. We have to enter all the circuit data, measure the control tapers, verify the model accuracy and then apply all the fancy test tones and capture the refinement data.
 
Great post, Cliff! A very unbiased description of two very different technologies.

While reading it I had a crazy idea: you said that you modeled the circuit and afterwards "overlayed" a matching curve to account for the imperfectness of the real amp. Why not make it possible to disable the matching part of the models? So we can have both an accurate model of the real amp and a model of how the amp was supposed to be.
 
FractalAudio said:
It now has Tone Matching which is arguably the most important part of profiling.
Click to expand...
i don't have a KPA and never tried one; seems like a valid product, reading what people thinks about it.
what i really can't understand is WHY people ALWAYS needs to label things;
for me is very simple: both devices let me enter a sound source (be it an "actual" amp or a wave file or whatever) and "copy" that signature sound.
that's all i need to know.
reading people that clearly doesn't have the tiniest idea of what they're talking about makes me smile, or drives me mad, depending on the day :)
i have a degree in electronics, i worked in the field, i can understand what you say, but you won't see me arguing of tehcnical details, because i'm not into deep.

P.S. Let's Face it: the KPA is good, but AXE 2 is the best: period.
 
Para mi, mucho más importante que los perfiles es el sonido que se ha conseguido con la v.6 del Axe fxII, soy un novato con el y tantos parámetros me abruman, pero con esta versión el sonido ha ganado enormemente, y basta elegir un ampli y una cabina, y con los ajustes principales ya se puede conseguir un esplendido sonido, no te digo nada si en vez de ser novato como yo, controlas los ajustes avanzados...
espero poder entenderlo a fondo algún día.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom