The best modeler is soon getting even better

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

Wow, some of these comments are downright ignorant. Just because something doesn't work for one player doesn't mean it won't for another. Everyone has different tastes and requirements.

What gets me are the people that come in here just to disparage. I use solid state amps, digital amps, modeling software, tube preamps, and just picked up a tube head. I can get a good sound out of any of them. I never posted anything in the "best clean amp" thread, because I don't play cleans. If you see a thread that says "best modeler" and you don't like modelers, why open the thread in the first place?

(I also don't open threads that say "best neck pickup", "best low output pickup", or any other thread that may require knowledge/experience that I don't have.)

 

[uOpt]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

A lot of modeling rigs let you bypass the cabinet emulation. This is, as you can imagine, usually a good thing. However, when I was using a Vox ToneLab with a Marshall half-stack, I sometimes found I liked one or two of the cabinet emulations better than the bypassed setting, and better than the Marshall straight-up with no ToneLab in the mix. I didn't want to, but I did.

Some modelers also let you control the amount of "workout" you give the power amp section of the model. On a minimum or bypassed setting, the modeled power amp behaves very linearly, with little coloration.

That's what I do, too, with a Tonelab.

My point is, however, that you can only use that to go toward the actual cap's sound, or something entirely new. Theoretically you could try to bend it backwards with an analyzer and a graphics eq. That might just work since presumably you don't need frequencies that the cap doesn't do at all.

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

You mean calibrate the response of the modeler so that the speaker output, in the room, matches the measured output of the original amp that was used to make the model? They do it in $400 A/V receivers, so why not?

 

[uOpt]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

You mean calibrate the response of the modeler so that the speaker output, in the room, matches the measured output of the original amp that was used to make the model? They do it in $400 A/V receivers, so why not?

Yeah. I do that in my car stereo. I measured the curve as it comes out of the speakers and then ran the inverse EQ over the mp3s so that I hear is more or less linear.

Didn't stick with it because my car speakers are pretty good and only have a low-low mids bumb which I wanted at the time since I started playing more bass. It it is easily doable these days.

 

[El Dunco]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I have the means to crank my amps and mic them up and tend not to use pure digital in final versions of recordings. I'd wish they'd make version of this that exist in hardware form as well. Rackmount VSTs are stupidly expensive and absolutely not worth it and I don't like the idea of bringing a computer to a gig. I can't imagine anything beating the Digitech RP1000 for my purposes anytime soon. The way it lets me integrate my amps and it's effects and models seamlessly is unbeatable.

If they made something like this in a sansamp type package, maybe with a row of stomp buttons for different presets that I could bring to a show and plug straight into the PA, I'd have use for it.

But it would have to literally be the best modeler. The feedback on my live tone (straight dual rec, KT77s attenuator and the RP1000 in charge of processing, clean sounds and effects) has been unanimously positive even from people who aren't gearheads so I ain't gonna be fixing what ain't broke!

 

[UberMetalDood]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I thought AxeFX was the kind of modelers. Since when did this become "the best?" I wonder if people think computer software sounds better than integrated hardware like AxeFx and Eleven Rack. I would figure that integrated hardware would be superior since they would be specifically engineered with processors and I/O that are optimized for FX processing.

 

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I thought AxeFX was the kind of modelers. Since when did this become "the best?" I wonder if people think computer software sounds better than integrated hardware like AxeFx and Eleven Rack. I would figure that integrated hardware would be superior since they would be specifically engineered with processors and I/O that are optimized for FX processing.

Dedicated DSP has both pluses and minuses. Yes, the software can be written specifically for those chips, but you're going to have limitations of some sort. (With the original Line 6 HD500, you could run out of power stacking too many effects. That's been fixed with the HD500X, which has twice the CPU power.) With software running on a PC, you could have multiple tracks running with effects, and it'd be difficult to run out of CPU power. I typically have 6 guitar tracks LOADED with effects and my computer doesn't even blink. Dedicated units give you only one input and possibly two parallel outputs, so two tracks maximum.

With CPUs getting more powerful, DSP based units end up becoming obsolete, and there's no upgrade for the hardware themselves. Theoretically, with a computer you could spend a few hundred dollars and double your speed every couple of years.

If the Axe FX would ever come out as software (possibly with a PCI/PC Card "key" to prevent piracy), I'd be first in line to buy it. They could easily charge $500 a pop for it, and the only manufacturing cost would be the card itself, which could be done for $100 or so I'm betting.

 

[uOpt]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I thought AxeFX was the kind of modelers. Since when did this become "the best?" I wonder if people think computer software sounds better than integrated hardware like AxeFx and Eleven Rack. I would figure that integrated hardware would be superior since they would be specifically engineered with processors and I/O that are optimized for FX processing.

It is unlikely that there is any significant difference. Obviously if you run out of I/O you are dead but a modern PC laughs at the I/O of a couple of channels of digital audio. Of course you need a decent soundcard to compete.

It's all in the software and Fractal seems to have done the most effective work on software. They choose to sell it as a hardware unit only. Almost certainly the decision to not offer a PC version is purely in the money and reliability region.

Theoretically they could have a couple algorithms in there that are extremely wasteful (haven't figured out how to do the same thing with less cycles) and get boosted with specialized DSPs. But that is much more likely that the total processing power of the Axe-FX II is less than a decent gaming PC (not counting the graphics card).

 

[uOpt]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

BTW, the more complex the algorithms are the better it is to use a regular CPU, not a DSP.

 

[UberMetalDood]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

Eh, that logic doesn't seem to work. If a chip is optimized to handle particular kinds of algorithms then it would be more efficient than a standard CPU. Granted todays CPU's are powerful and capable of handling intense multimedia processing, but just because it's a more powerful processor doesn't mean that it would outperform a specialized chip.

 

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

Eh, that logic doesn't seem to work. If a chip is optimized to handle particular kinds of algorithms then it would be more efficient than a standard CPU. Granted todays CPU's are powerful and capable of handling intense multimedia processing, but just because it's a more powerful processor doesn't mean that it would outperform a specialized chip.

They absolutely are more efficient. It's just that a PC's CPU is much more powerful. The CPU in my computer is about 50 times more powerful (in terms of GFLOPS) as the TigerSharc CPU inside an Axe-FX. Think along the lines of a big block V8 vs the 4 cylinder engine in an econobox. The econobox will get better fuel economy, but the big block has way more power. (There was an article in a car magazine back in the 80s where they removed all the weight that they could from an old Toronado and got it up to 30MPG. It ended up being the driver's seat bolted onto the frame. )

That's not to say that I could run 100 tracks of guitars with amp sims. I'm betting my CPU would start freaking out around 15-20 tracks if I started loading up the effects. That's where the efficiency starts coming into play.

Also, my CPU is a little more expensive than a dedicated DSP chip.

 

[uOpt]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

Eh, that logic doesn't seem to work. If a chip is optimized to handle particular kinds of algorithms then it would be more efficient than a standard CPU. Granted todays CPU's are powerful and capable of handling intense multimedia processing, but just because it's a more powerful processor doesn't mean that it would outperform a specialized chip.

What I am saying is that it is likely that the best modelers do novel algorithms where DSPs have much less of an advantage.

Doing FFT is one thing but you do it once and then what. If you really want to look at what is flowing through there over time you are quickly out of the pure floating point domain. You are quickly into decision making. Think about trying to simulate impulse response. That is very likely an algorithm that deliberately searches (for impulses). On the data that came out of the FFT and on the actual waveform. So that's after the dumb floating point work.

 

[scorch]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I think several points are being missed. A CPU or a DSP are not the basis of the sound in an Axe FX. The code is. 20 channels of audio is irrelevant in the Axe FX. In the twin DSP Axe II, one chip is dedicated to the amp modeling, the other is to effects. DSP are specialized chips designed specifically for the manipulation of analog signals in the digital domain.

Very high-end 3D sonar also uses the Tigersharc chip. Its very powerful. The Axe II has two. A CPU is a generalized tool for a broad number of uses. Yes, new CPU's are very powerful, but the code IS what does the job. Cliff Chase at Fractal is learning on the job. He comes from a background of working in very powerful 3D military and commercial sonar. Which IS the manipulation of sound.

The v11 firmware (beta) just put out is incredibly realistic. I don't miss my old tube amps at all. I used to build my own amps chasing that 'sound in my head'. Now I can do it in the virtual world....for free.

The dis-information and mis-information about these devices are pathetic. Oh yeah, this is the internet isn't it. Where everyone gets to be an expert on everything.

 

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I think several points are being missed. A CPU or a DSP are not the basis of the sound in an Axe FX. The code is. 20 channels of audio is irrelevant in the Axe FX. In the twin DSP Axe II, one chip is dedicated to the amp modeling, the other is to effects. DSP are specialized chips designed specifically for the manipulation of analog signals in the digital domain.

Very high-end 3D sonar also uses the Tigersharc chip. Its very powerful. The Axe II has two. A CPU is a generalized tool for a broad number of uses. Yes, new CPU's are very powerful, but the code IS what does the job. Cliff Chase at Fractal is learning on the job. He comes from a background of working in very powerful 3D military and commercial sonar. Which IS the manipulation of sound.

The v11 firmware (beta) just put out is incredibly realistic. I don't miss my old tube amps at all. I used to build my own amps chasing that 'sound in my head'. Now I can do it in the virtual world....for free.

The dis-information and mis-information about these devices are pathetic. Oh yeah, this is the internet isn't it. Where everyone gets to be an expert on everything.

Can you say what dis-information we're posting here? I'd love to have an Axe FX. I just don't have the money for it. If there was a cheaper alternative where I wasn't paying for the hardware, I'd snatch it up in a second, considering the fact that I already have a decent hardware recording setup. (Quadcore i7, 16 channel RME interface, etc.)

 

[UberMetalDood]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

I think several points are being missed. A CPU or a DSP are not the basis of the sound in an Axe FX. The code is. 20 channels of audio is irrelevant in the Axe FX. In the twin DSP Axe II, one chip is dedicated to the amp modeling, the other is to effects. DSP are specialized chips designed specifically for the manipulation of analog signals in the digital domain.

Very high-end 3D sonar also uses the Tigersharc chip. Its very powerful. The Axe II has two. A CPU is a generalized tool for a broad number of uses. Yes, new CPU's are very powerful, but the code IS what does the job. Cliff Chase at Fractal is learning on the job. He comes from a background of working in very powerful 3D military and commercial sonar. Which IS the manipulation of sound.

The v11 firmware (beta) just put out is incredibly realistic. I don't miss my old tube amps at all. I used to build my own amps chasing that 'sound in my head'. Now I can do it in the virtual world....for free.

The dis-information and mis-information about these devices are pathetic. Oh yeah, this is the internet isn't it. Where everyone gets to be an expert on everything.

When you've fed your family as a C++ & Java programmer then I think that qualifies a person with a certain amount of expertise in computer processing. If you can't understand it then that doesn't mean it's misinformation (disinformation is a term used for people who intentionally distort information in order to obscure the truth. Since we're discussing computer processing here and not advocating for or against particular products, that term is not applicable. - for your information).

 

[scorch]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

If we're going to throw around credentials here I have a degree in Computer Electronics and Robotics and another in Computer Information Sciences. I teach part-time at a local college and I'm a full-time IT mgr. there,also.

But that is irrelevant. The point is I don't want to drag a computer to a gig. What I have now is the most light-weight, compact rig I have ever had. An Axe II and a couple self-powered FRFR speakers. Walk in with everything I need - one trip - and setup and breakdown in five minutes. I bought my first amp in '67 - a Super Reverb. I've been dragging massive equipment around for forty years. To be finally freed of that - and have something that sounds easy as good as the amps I've had in the past is a god-send to me.

Yes, it's expensive up front. No more than a higher end amp (not even booteek). But with over 120 amp models and building and free firmware upgrades that add new amp models (did I say for free) this device is the best bargain around IMO.

You have to hear it to believe it. Now, it's only as good as the person who is tweaking the knobs. You can jack-up lots of parameters and get crappy noise. And it is deep. Having a background in building and modifying amps is helpful but not necessary. The learning curve is just a bit longer.

 

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

When you've fed your family as a C++ & Java programmer then I think that qualifies a person with a certain amount of expertise in computer processing. If you can't understand it then that doesn't mean it's misinformation (disinformation is a term used for people who intentionally distort information in order to obscure the truth. Since we're discussing computer processing here and not advocating for or against particular products, that term is not applicable. - for your information).

If anything, we're actually advocating *for* the advance of this kind of technology.

 

[dominus]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

But that is irrelevant. The point is I don't want to drag a computer to a gig. What I have now is the most light-weight, compact rig I have ever had. An Axe II and a couple self-powered FRFR speakers. Walk in with everything I need - one trip - and setup and breakdown in five minutes.

I'm a studio guy, so moving things around doesn't matter to me. It's just for that $2000, I can get the computer/recording setup, a few amp sims, and a few different pieces of hardware and use them in ways they weren't designed for.



I picked one of those pedals up for $50 used, and along with a $30 overdrive, then plugged into the computer, get a similar sound. (Plugins being EQ, power amp simulator, and cabinet simulator.)

In the end, that's how I get my sound. Yes, it may seem more kludgey than plugging into an Axe FX, but for me, I'd need the Axe FX *and* the computer/recording setup anyway. Hence the desire to have the Axe FX in a software form.

 

[UberMetalDood]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

If we're going to throw around credentials here I have a degree in Computer Electronics and Robotics and another in Computer Information Sciences. I teach part-time at a local college and I'm a full-time IT mgr. there,also.

But that is irrelevant. The point is I don't want to drag a computer to a gig. What I have now is the most light-weight, compact rig I have ever had. An Axe II and a couple self-powered FRFR speakers. Walk in with everything I need - one trip - and setup and breakdown in five minutes. I bought my first amp in '67 - a Super Reverb. I've been dragging massive equipment around for forty years. To be finally freed of that - and have something that sounds easy as good as the amps I've had in the past is a god-send to me.

Yes, it's expensive up front. No more than a higher end amp (not even booteek). But with over 120 amp models and building and free firmware upgrades that add new amp models (did I say for free) this device is the best bargain around IMO.

You have to hear it to believe it. Now, it's only as good as the person who is tweaking the knobs. You can jack-up lots of parameters and get crappy noise. And it is deep. Having a background in building and modifying amps is helpful but not necessary. The learning curve is just a bit longer.

I call your bluff. No real I.T. manager of any suitable gig would work part-time as a tech at a local college. That's B.S. Do you really think you're going to pull one over on someone who intimately knows the industry? But whatever man. You seem to have lost the point of your own argument in your most recent post. The point is that no one here is spreading misinformation or disinformation except you.

 

[scorch]

Re: The best modeler is soon getting even better

If anything, we're actually advocating *for* the advance of this kind of technology.

Bravo! That's all I'm saying. But the Axe II is a dedicated digital signal processor. It doesn't do emails, or 3D graphics, or spreadsheets of all your investments, or sexting your girlfriend (with attached picture of yer tool), or a DAW with the entire New York Philharmonic playing on separate channels.

Its not a computer in the general sense. That is my point. I was always intrigued by the promise of modeling but none delivered. I've done the Boss, Line 6, Avid trip...they weren't there. The Axe II is. And it's due to the considerable coding skills of Cliff Chase. The reason he won't release his code for general computer use is it will get ripped-off. Many people on the Fractal forum have asked for it. He's not going to do it.

The Kemper and Scuffield (?) are probably as good as The Axe II. I've heard very good things about them, I'm just never heard one in person. Digital processing finally has the power to do what we've dreamed about for years. But, it's still about the code. I don't care if you've got dual quad-core processors and 128 Gb of RAM with a RAID 5 array. If the code is crap....you get crap. Powerfully. I deal with over 800 computers and 100 different types of software on our campus. Some good, some garbage. It's a different tool.

I'm just a techie that loves good tube tone. Been chasing it all my adult life. I've finally caught up with it. I'm glad it happened while I'm alive. It's permanently cured me of amp and pedal GAS.