Axe FX III - the Blog

Gadget · April 2022

I had an Ultra, XL MkII and am now considering a Axe FX III.

As you can proobably tell, I've had a love/hate relationship with these, boiling-down to basically two opposing views of such units:

1) It's a collection of the best amps, cabs, mics and effects in the world, all in one internally configurable package at a comparitively very reasonable price.

OR:

2) It doesn't actually contain any of those things, and is simply a dedicated guitar PC, with hardware accelerated software emulations, and therefore pretty expensive for a beefed-up NI Guitar Rig type thing.

However, over the years I've realised there's no such thing as the 'best, do-it-all' piece of gear and therefore running a modeller doesn't mean I have to ditch all my amps, pedals and other rack gear.

With that in mind, my main thoughts at the moment turn to how I can integrate the latter with the AF3.

Jonathanthomas83 · April 2022

Gadget said:

I had an Ultra, XL MkII and am now considering a Axe FX III.

As you can proobably tell, I've had a love/hate relationship with these, boiling-down to basically two opposing views of such units:

1) It's a collection of the best amps, cabs, mics and effects in the world, all in one internally configurable package at a comparitively very reasonable price.
OR:
2) It doesn't actually contain any of those things, and is simply a dedicated guitar PC, with hardware accelerated software emulations, and therefore pretty expensive for a beefed-up NI Guitar Rig type thing.

However, over the years I've realised there's no such thing as the 'best, do-it-all' piece of gear and therefore running a modeller doesn't mean I have to ditch all my amps, pedals and other rack gear.

With that in mind, my main thoughts at the moment turn to how I can integrate the latter with the AF3.

That's absolutely the best way to look at it, yes. I too, took that view for a long time but as soon as I figured out what you have there, I made peace with the fact that things like the Kemper and Fractal are great tools to have around to compliment the main gear.

Roland · April 2022

It’s the whole toolbox which attracts me. Today I’m comparing the EQs of my IEMs, the Matrix Q12 which I use as a stage monitor, and the SRM450s which we use in the PA. My acoustic guitar simulation is excellent in my IEMs, a little bright through the Q12, but boxy through the PA. The looper gives a constant reference sound whilst I play with PEQ and GEQ blocks, and use tone matching to generate compensating IRs.

Yesterday I was playing with subtle chorus to double the acoustic, switching between £1,000 worth of different chorus pedals, and ABing different settings of the same pedal.

Last week I was trying out Tyler Grund’s suggestions for the Vibroverb and Super Reverb. Without the AxeFX I would need two expensive amps, a soldering iron, and a list of components. With it I can AB between transformers and negative feedback settings.

Roland · April 2022

19.06 is released. It includes changes to the transformer settings which I was playing with last week. So I know what I’ll be doing over Easter.

Roland · April 2022

I’m really pleased. I’ve made a massive improvement to my acoustic simulation. With my covers band I use an acoustic simulation in five out of 25 songs. It saves having to take a fragile acoustic to a pub gig, avoids guitar changes between or during songs, and means there’s no feedback problems at high volume.

The acoustic simulation uses three blocks: an MBC to adjust the sustain of the bass notes, an IR which matches my neck pickup to an acoustic guitar, and a PEQ to fine tune the sound.

Having recently made a new guitar I wanted to remake an IR for it. At short notice I didn’t have access to a decent recording mic. So I turned to YouTube to find a suitable recording. Many were poor, or with artefacts introduced in post-processing. This one turned out well, yielding matches for a Taylor 716 and a Martin D42.

https://youtu.be/QIrV9t7XAZY

In other news the 19.06 upgrade was a non event

FarleyUK · April 2022

Roland said:

In other news the 19.06 upgrade was a non event

In what way? There's been changes / corrections to the amp algorithms which have made quite a difference to my ears - plus the songs and setlists feature.

Roland · April 2022

FarleyUK said:

In what way? There's been changes / corrections to the amp algorithms which have made quite a difference to my ears - plus the songs and setlists feature.

Some users have reported problems with their pedal settings, and with midi settings getting lost. I didn’t notice any of that.

The amp change is mainly about the transformer winding calculation. I was expecting a significant impact because transformer matching on the Vibroverb is something I’ve been playing with. My conclusion is that, at the settings I’m using, with a lot of negative feedback, the impact is not that noticeable. I haven’t experimented with other amp types.

For our current set list I use one preset for all but one of the songs. I’ve got used to working with five scenes: Clean, Edge, Crunch, Lead, Acoustic, and turning on effects as required. I like that simplicity. The set list feature doesn’t add anything that I need. At some point I’ll look at whether it can improve the stage lighting options, or set tempos.

welshboyo · April 2022

@Roland regarding your Acoustic Sim, not that it in any way it exactly replicates a Martin or whatever but I have a great patch and IR from the Austin Buddy pack that translates really well to FOH for Acoustic Stuff - give me a shout if you want to demo it

Roland · April 2022

Thanks @welshboyo. I have wondered whether there would be enough interest in having a general show and tell day for modellers. The interesting thing for me is not how close model get to actual amps, but how things are configured to work easily in a live situation.

When I started acoustic modelling I did look at Austin Buddy’s patch. It might have changed since, but at the time it wasn’t quite the sound I was after. So I ended up making my own, and now incorporate it as a scene in each live patch.

The core acoustic sound comes from tone matching the electric guitar pickup I want to use to the acoustic guitar sound I want to hear. So the starting point is to make my own IR. Once I’ve got the IR adding compression and EQ aren’t that difficult.

Roland · May 2022

What to do with set lists? Jekyll and Hyde are pulling me both ways.

On the one hand I’ve spent several years honing things down to operational simplicity. I avoided multiple presets because of the sheer effort involved in propagating a configuration change. With multiple patches I had to write the patch number against each song in the set list. Of late I’ve reduced things to one patch, with five scenes. This, plus pickup switching and a few added FX, have seen me through a whole covers gig.

Now that we’ve got a competent keyboard player and drummer in the band I no longer need to keep things simple in order to hold it together. Two other factors have recently come into play. The Vibroverb is providing the amp sounds I need, and I can propagate them easily across patches. The setlist function introduced in 19.06 means that I don’t have to remember which patch to engage for each song. It opens up an opportunity to get sophisticated. Add a touch of chorus on the bridge of one song. Use a two beat delay on the solo in Maneater, but keep a 500ms delay on other lead sounds. No longer be restricted to fixed drive levels in Edgy and Crunchy scenes.

It’s tempting to go as far as one patch per song, and give each song its own lighting pattern.

Is anybody using one patch per song? How do you find the workload of keeping patches in step?

DefaultM · May 2022

I got the Austin Buddy Axe FX 2 pack and they're some of the worst sounds I've ever heard. My own patches were better, and my patches are shite hence buying other people's.

Roland · May 2022

@DefaultM My modelling journey has been a long one. In part learning about modellers. In part learning about sound. Mainly it has been about deciding how I want to manage my guitar sound through a live performance.

In that time I’ve looked at a lot of people’s patches. Every time I’ve wanted something different to what’s provided. For years I assumed that I was wrong. Maybe my ears were different. Maybe I didn’t understand. Eventually I realised that only I understand how Roland plays, and know what Roland wants to hear. I’m sure that Austin Buddy knows what he’s doing. His patches just don’t work for me.

Other peoples’ patches show techniques, but not complete answers. I haven’t posted my patches, or my IRs, because I’m sure they’ll only work for me.

DavusPG · May 2022

I've also given up on other people's patches. I might load them up if there's something I'm curious to see how it was done but the sounds very rarely sound good to my ears. I was also very disappointed with the Austin Buddy pack.

Over the years I've learned that what sounds good at home volume doesn't translate to gig volume and vice versa so I mostly tweak things at rehearsal, but keep that to a minimum now I have a collection of sounds that work to my ears.

Next thing I'm experimenting with is a kitchen sink preset using scene ignore to swap 4 different amps in and out of my most used sounds. The Cooper Carter G66 tutorial was handy for that, but again after downloading and looking at the preset I discarded it and applied the ideas to one of my own

Jonathanthomas83 · May 2022

Same here, I bought a load of Fremen packs and they're bloody awful for me. My guess is that they're build with guitars and pickups that I don't use and he likes things to sound different to what I do. Exactly how Roland puts it.

welshboyo · May 2022

Same here too, I bought the AB Live Gold Pack as I too was convinced I was doing things wrong - apart from a few ideas (and actually the acoustic2electric IR & patch) it was basically tosh - I panicked at the weekend and loaded up a preset from that pack to get me through a a few gigs (as I didn't have time to tweak my own built patches to be right) as I understood them to be tweaked for live use - I've never had such a bad sound...back to my own built patches and the 2nd night's gig was much improved sound-wise. Won't waste money again on these so called "expert" patches.

Back to @Roland 's question around patches vs songs - I tend to use a Do It All patch for 80% of the set (mainly Rock stuff - Toto, VH, Journey, Police, etc etc) - that DIA patch does have 2 variations (due to CPU limits on the FM3) with Flanger/Chorus etc but still the same basic patch.

I then have specific patches for certain songs - Talkbox (Formant) for Bon Jovi and a multi Pitch patch that has various channels of either Octaver or Virtual Capo for things that need it in a Stevie Wonder/Funk type medley that we do or Sweet Child o Mine if it gets wheeled out (I 'kin hate that song)

And thats it!! 5 patches for the whole set - I could quite easily do it all on 1 and very often do - its not as if the punters actually care that I haven't got the exact Electric Mistress/JC120 combo for the Police stuff...

DefaultM · May 2022

When I used it live I took a matrix power amp, zilla 2x12 and I just used one patch with a Fender amp for clean and Friedman BE for gain, then all the fx as stomp boxes on the mfc.
I got bored taking it in and out of my recording set up all the time so swapped to a combo amp and individual pedals. I always miss it though.

LastMantra · May 2022

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Same here, I bought a load of Fremen packs and they're bloody awful for me. My guess is that they're build with guitars and pickups that I don't use and he likes things to sound different to what I do. Exactly how Roland puts it.

I'd have thought you'd need to treat these things kind of like presets and just use them as a kind of base that needs tweaked to your own situation.

Jonathanthomas83 · May 2022

LastMantra said:

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Same here, I bought a load of Fremen packs and they're bloody awful for me. My guess is that they're build with guitars and pickups that I don't use and he likes things to sound different to what I do. Exactly how Roland puts it.

I'd have thought you'd need to treat these things kind of like presets and just use them as a kind of base that needs tweaked to your own situation.

Never build your house upon sand.

In all seriousness, they just sounded awful with my guitars so even as a base preset, it sounded bad and included a lot of sound design choices that I'd never personally choose.

Gadget · May 2022

I'm surprised you've all individually felt the need to buy preset packs. Are those provided from the factory that bad?

Jonathanthomas83 · May 2022

Gadget said:

I'm surprised you've all individually felt the need to buy preset packs. Are those provided from the factory that bad?

I think they've vastly improved them in recent times. But the irony of this is that it was when I had your old unit, mate, and at the time, presets were generally considered to be awful, so I didn't even bother trying them...perhaps I should have, in hindsight. I loved that old thing and am missing having a Fractal unit around.

ToneControl · May 2022

Gadget said:

I'm surprised you've all individually felt the need to buy preset packs. Are those provided from the factory that bad?

Used to be very bad, more recently just poor

octatonic · May 2022

Gadget said:

I'm surprised you've all individually felt the need to buy preset packs. Are those provided from the factory that bad?

It isn't really that- it is that the entire chain matters, including the room.

I've never bought a commercial patch, I don't need them- but I have checked out quite a few.
They are IMHO presenting the same problem as all presets do, they aren't designed with your specific guitar, with your monitoring system/guitar speaker in mind and then there is the sense of aesthetic on top to further compound matters.

You *might* get lucky and find the odd one that works really well but mostly not.

The whole custom preset industry (if you can call it that) just relies on people being lazy and/or thinking that someone else has the *the real knowledge* they can access.
It is, in a word, bullshit.

Here is how to design a good, basic, Axe FX patch.

1. Select an amp you like. Let's say a JCM800 model.
2. Select a cab you like that is know to work well with the amp you selected. Let's say a greenback loaded 4x12 miked up with an SM57.
3. Turn it up to a level you like where the signal isn't clipping, around -2 or -3db.
4. EQ to taste.

That is essentially it.
Endlessly swapping IR's, amp models, doing PEQ tweaks etc- it is going to result in a small percentage difference and will waste time better spent on playing.
Beyond that it is simply about managing options in terms of effects but the basic amp modelling doesn't need to be more complicated than this.
I see a lot of people getting turned around by having endless options, thinking they need to use stuff just because it is there.

I focus on being task driven- what do I need as a bare minimum to get the job done?
Because adding in more stuff = more complexity = more stuff to potentially fuck up.

There are two issues modellers still haven't really addressed, 1) level changes between patches and b) translation from one output destination type to another.

This is where a lot of people come unstuck because they use their eyes rather than their ears.
Let's say you have a clean sound that is outputting -2db on the meters and then switch to a high gain distortion sound that is also outputting -2db on meters. Depending on the EQ curve of the two patches/scenes you often find you get a perceivable lack of clarity when switching from the clean sound to the distortion sound. That is because in a band situation distortion gets buried- there is often more bottom end to a high gain sound so although the meters are saying the levels are matches, they aren't.

So people get into an empty room for a sound check and their high gain sounds are mush.
They then go about trying fix the issue before the gig and then when the room fills up the sound changes again.

I think this is eventually where AI/ML will come into play- much as we already have with plugins like Izotope RX.
I'd be surprised if companies weren't already working on the issue.

Translation is also an issue when moving from one set of monitors to another, one room to another etc.
When I put the Trinnov system in the studio a lot of the issues I had around translation (for mixing records) went away.
Now that is a very clever but expensive device that requires careful set up, I wouldn't expect anything like that to arrive in a guitar modeller, but something like it could- essentially a ML derived corrective EQ tat takes a patch you designed at home and 'converts' it to something stage worthy.

Gadget · May 2022

Jonathanthomas83 said:

Gadget said:

I'm surprised you've all individually felt the need to buy preset packs. Are those provided from the factory that bad?

I think they've vastly improved them in recent times. But the irony of this is that it was when I had your old unit, mate, and at the time, presets were generally considered to be awful, so I didn't even bother trying them...perhaps I should have, in hindsight. I loved that old thing and am missing having a Fractal unit around.

Ah, I see.

I am tempted to try again for the third time with the Axe Fx, but feel kind of like a moth to a flame because of it.

Each previous time I've hoped it's going to 'wow' me away from all my other gear.

I'm a bit more pragmatic about that now and appreciate it's just one of many tools and doesn't have to be to the exclusion of everything else, but it does make me hesitate when I continue to hear mixed views three generations in.

I think the biggest difference with a modeller is 'feel'. It's the most common complaint I read and was my experience too. But, the sound through small monitors or headphones was no worse than any of my other gear monitored thus, and the recorded tones could sound great, so if it's only about losing the 'moving air' I can handle that, but it would be nice to hear that plug-in-and-play has been improved.

Roland · May 2022

For me the AxeFX isn’t about amp modelling. It’s about managing the sounds I need so that they can be switched and controlled easily during performance. As @welshboyo said, you can do a gig using one patch. That’s where I’ve got to. One patch which gives Clean, Edge, Crunch, Lead and acoustic simulation, with options to switch in a few FX.

It’s all built at home, where it’s tested at volume, and using IEMs. At rehearsal I make notes and, unless something is massively wrong, make adjustments when I get home. That’s how I deal with matching patch and scene volumes. If I want louder clean then I can turn up my guitar, which I normally run at 50%. If I need a louder crunch then the guitar volume will only add more overdrive because the amp is already compressing. I have a Get-out-of-jail card with a +5dB mid boost, but the hard work is done in getting the settings right through practice.

What I want to experiment with is whether there is sufficient benefit to making song specific copies of that single preset, and using the setlist feature to manage them during a gig. Potentially it gives me three things:
1. Song specific tempos, so that I don’t have to tap in the tempo from the drummer’s click.
2. Song specific variations of Amp block and FX block settings. Useful for My Favourite Game.
3. Less to think about at the start of every song. This will mean that when we play, for example, Brass in Pocket I don’t have to remember to engage Scene 3, and turn the Chorus on. Then there’s the big one: not forgetting to turn the Eb detune off after Superstition.

Gadget said:

Each previous time I've hoped it's going to 'wow' me away from all my other gear.

The wow for me come from having access to a range of amps that in the physical world I wouldn’t have access to. That I don’t have to lug them around, and deal with flaky valves. It also comes from the quality of the FX which I can use if I wish.

Roland · May 2022

The wet day has kept me out of the garden, and a broken gear box on my grinder has kept me out of the workshop. So I’ve been looking at set lists. First off I made an FC layout:

The top row, working from the right, gives:
- next song
- previous song. Handy if you tap the first button twice
- ability to turn Chorus and Delay on and off
- cycle through the set lists. I though this would reset a list to song one. It doesn’t. You have to do it from the front panel. So I might use the button for my get-out-of-jail 5dB boost.
- a link to the current patch in case I want to edit it, or choose another setting within the patch. This button also changes the FC layout from Setlist to Preset.

Keying in the song list is tedious. I made it worse by having a separate patch for every song, and creating separate sections for Intro, verse, chorus, bridge, solo and outro. The reasoning behind that will become clear later. My single Vibroverb patch was copied twenty-something times to create one patch per song. Then I started playing through the set, making changes as I went.

A lot of this is about ease of use when playing. The first thing I realised is that I tend to think “drive” rather than “bridge”, and when I see “Chorus” I’m thinking effect rather than section of the song. That will change with practice.

The compromise of using one patch for a whole gig is that I use the guitar’s controls, and my fingers, to provide variety. With one patch per song I can have much more variety, and do things which would otherwise need multiple foot taps where I only have time for one. Of course there’s the downside that I become locked into the pre-established patches, with less scope for on-the-fly changes. I need to see how this works at a rehearsal. The Go To Patch button might see some use.

With multiple sections per song I have the ability to make further adjustments. I can also use Scene MIDI to trigger lighting changes, even when the sound doesn’t change.

Roland · May 2022

Set list is keyed in, one patch per song, each copied from a base patch. Some patches already differ from the base, with subtle amp and FX changes. The amp setting changes are two fold, tailoring the amount of drive more closely to the needs of the song, and changing the amount of sag. The big step forward is the Scene Midi block, where I’m changing lighting patches, even if the sound doesn’t change. Our next gig is Jubilee Saturday, so I’ve still got time to tinker.

Snags · May 2022

@Roland Do you publish a gig list anywhere for upcoming events?

Roland · May 2022

@Snags Not this year. For a number of reasons we’re only booking two gigs per month. Our next, on Saturday 4th June, is a shakedown gig at my local pub, the White Lion in Rempstone. You’re welcome to come if you want to drive that far.

Snags · May 2022

Two a month is still a healthy number. I just wondered. I'm not often up that way, but work is having me about the place at the moment, and I thought it might be interesting to check out "known faces" is there's a coincidence of timing/geography at any point.

Roland · May 2022

Tinker, tinker, tinker. Once upon a time, and not so very long ago, I’d step on one or two buttons to set things up for a song and that was it.

With one preset per song I’m having to hit buttons with every verse, chorus, bridge, solo outro to change sound, or lights, or both throughout each song. It’s a lot more work. Instead of grabbing a few minutes guitar practice I find myself turning on two computers (AxeEdit and lighting controller) and running through our setlist surrounded by parts of the lighting rig so that I can check that all the lighting cues work.

I know that a lot of people would hate his level of complexity. What I don't know yet is whether the increased work will make the band look and sound better, or bring us down by distracting me from my part of the performance.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Axe FX III - the Blog

Comments