Digital Igloo (Eric Klein, YGG)

[MirrorProfiles]

I’m pretty sure this is FAS’s approach as well, aside from the originals and models that are specifically noted as being modeled from existing schematics (Ford Dumble), as Cliff likes to have the amp or pedal in his possession to be modeled.

just speculating here, but aren’t the schematics somewhat adapted to fit into Fractal’s topology? So the amp circuits kind of “overlay” over Fractal’s model. I think Fractal’s amp block has the means to build basically any amp, but because it has a certain structure that’s why it’s not possible to have all modes and switches in the same amp block? and isn’t it designed around valve gain stages, so amps like an 8100 wouldn’t really work?

I could well have misunderstood but that’s how I’ve interpreted it. It’s not really a blank canvas, even if it is as flexible as one could possibly need.

 

[laxu]

just speculating here, but aren’t the schematics somewhat adapted to fit into Fractal’s topology? So the amp circuits kind of “overlay” over Fractal’s model. I think Fractal’s amp block has the means to build basically any amp, but because it has a certain structure that’s why it’s not possible to have all modes and switches in the same amp block? and isn’t it designed around valve gain stages, so amps like an 8100 wouldn’t really work?

I could well have misunderstood but that’s how I’ve interpreted it. It’s not really a blank canvas, even if it is as flexible as one could possibly need.

There is a Roland JC120 model though, so it can support solid-state models.

There's separate models for some amps (e.g Friedman BE) where there's a bunch of switches. These work in a varied way. Some switches are simply available from the standard set of bright/fat/saturation etc switches. Some seem to cause changes throughout the signal path so Fractal has made a separate model for this so the model behaves right.

Line6's system seems either more flexible, or they don't model some things that Fractal does.

 

[Eagle]

Ironically the only time I have AB tested any digital amp and couldn’t tell the difference in the room was a Kemper profile I had just made with a the same cab as the play back for both.

 

[Digital Igloo]

What is the reason for the HX Originals not having Master volumes? Checked the 3.7 release notes, but there isn't any info.

Again. I like it this way. One less thing to care about.

Mainly because they came from Catalyst amps, which have their own Master volume knob.

 

[AFKAEjay]

Again, not saying our amps sound or feel objectively better—only that they are nigh identical in sound and feel to the original amps we modeled. Because unlike most other companies, we maintain the real amps in our building and constantly compare them.

Seems like accuracy is an important principal atm…why is that? I’m guessing it’s mostly marketing related…it proves “digital can do this”.
Assuming there comes a point where “the customers” are convinced digital can do it…could that be a tilting point where the focus shifts from accurate sounds….to good sounds?

 

[LScottK]

Seems like accuracy is an important principal atm…why is that? I’m guessing it’s mostly marketing related…it proves “digital can do this”.
Assuming there comes a point where “the customers” are convinced digital can do it…could that be a tilting point where the focus shifts from accurate sounds….to good sounds?

This question has been debated on the Fractal Forum multiple times. In Fractal Audio's world the aim is to also be as accurate as possible to Fractal's reference amps. One of the reasons given was that "good tone" is subjective. What one person thinks sounds good may sound like a$$ to someone else. So aiming for a "good" sounding amp model ends up being futile because some will like the result of "good" but others will think "good" sounds "bad". Accuracy becomes the path to avoid getting into this never ending debate.

This was the outcome of discussions I read on the Fractal forum. I'm guessing that Line 6 follows a similar thought process. Obviously, this is only my opinion, so @Digital Igloo can give an authoritative answer that I certainly cannot.

 

[AFKAEjay]

This question has been debated on the Fractal Forum multiple times. In Fractal Audio's world the aim is to also be as accurate as possible to Fractal's reference amps. One of the reasons given was that "good tone" is subjective. What one person thinks sounds good may sound like a$$ to someone else. So aiming for a "good" sounding amp model ends up being futile because some will like the result of "good" but others will think "good" sounds "bad". Accuracy becomes the path to avoid getting into this never ending debate.

This was the outcome of discussions I read on the Fractal forum. I'm guessing that Line 6 follows a similar thought process. Obviously, this is only my opinion, so @Digital Igloo can give an authoritative answer that I certainly cannot.

Yeah…it objectifies the capabilities of a device. Part of why I appreciate capturing…I can confirm digital can do it myself when I capture something.
The silly side of that, is that appearantly I/we don’t trust our ears to judge what good sounds like..and we need some old amp as a reference/confirmation.

 

[Digital Igloo]

Seems like accuracy is an important principal atm…why is that? I’m guessing it’s mostly marketing related…it proves “digital can do this”.
Assuming there comes a point where “the customers” are convinced digital can do it…could that be a tilting point where the focus shifts from accurate sounds….to good sounds?

Yep, which is where our Line 6 Original amps come into play—designed to sound and play great, right out of the box. My only sticking point is when someone calls our other HX amps "inaccurate." It's like... Dude, if anything they're often accurate to a fault. Certain other companies sacrifice accuracy for a hyped and/or dumbed-down sound (superfluous filtering, audio compression, smoothed-out dynamic response, severely limited tonestack ranges [WTF?!], removal of virtual componentry, etc.). Sure, they might be easier to dial in for beginners who may not really care about tube amps, but IMO, a $1500+ multieffect designed for professionals shouldn't be welding unremovable training wheels onto its Marshalls, MESAs, Voxes, and Fenders.

Perhaps naysayers are espousing an "inaccurate compared to what I imagine the real amp sounds like in my head" thing, which frankly warrants a facepalm. Every single person who's been in our studio to do the A/B/X thing (engineers, session musicians, dealers, distributors, artists, influencers, and users coming in for Open Houses, etc.) is blown away by how they can't tell when switching between the real amp and model. In one case, we set up dummy switches and asked "which switch is actually switching between the real amp and model?" just so no one could feign hearing/feeling differences they couldn't.

 

[laxu]

This question has been debated on the Fractal Forum multiple times. In Fractal Audio's world the aim is to also be as accurate as possible to Fractal's reference amps. One of the reasons given was that "good tone" is subjective. What one person thinks sounds good may sound like a$$ to someone else. So aiming for a "good" sounding amp model ends up being futile because some will like the result of "good" but others will think "good" sounds "bad". Accuracy becomes the path to avoid getting into this never ending debate.

I've been getting tones I was happy using for so many years and generations of digital modelers already. I've been happy with the tones even when some amp model I used was found to have a bug that made it behave in an inaccurate manner. So at least for me, the accuracy or lack of it wasn't much of a real issue if I liked the end result. I was still convinced that the modeler sounded like a tube amp, because I felt I was getting all the things I love about tube amps.

I would expect no other result from Fractal forum because so many people have jumped on it with the promise of accuracy, having a gazillion real amps modeled etc. The reality is that 95% of the people on that forum would think a new firmware sounds better if Fractal just said it does, even if there were no actual changes to the code. Most haven't played more than a fraction of the real amps modeled, including me. We instead put a lot of trust on the manufacturer in this regard.

Line6 and Fractal have put the bar very high for this stuff, so if you want to release a modeler claiming to sound like certain amps, you better be accurate. There are probably some unhappy Fender TMP developers working hard on the amp models right now.

Maybe eventually we will get to a point where the tide turns and people are more open to purely fictional digital amp models as the tech has now proven itself. The Line6 Catalyst amps are already stepping towards that direction, but are somewhat compromised by their intended price range and requiring a speaker that plays ball with all the amp models rather than shines with only a few of them.

I'm kinda hoping Boss would be bold enough to make the "GX-1000" only feature their own custom amp models. Their "this is what you get, deal with it" approach is probably the best way to push people to just accept it as its own thing.

 

[SeeD]

Every single person who's been in our studio to do the A/B/X thing (engineers, session musicians, dealers, distributors, artists, influencers, and users coming in for Open Houses, etc.) is blown away by how they can't tell when switching between the real amp and model. In one case, we set up dummy switches and asked "which switch is actually switching between the real amp and model?" just so no one could feign hearing/feeling differences they couldn't.

This is why I love capturing, as it`so much fun starting and 5 minutes later I have the same sound as my reference source ( Cabs, Drives, Boost, Amps, EQ ) and that I can stack these in a single preset
I hope you guys get that tech in the next modeler

 

[LScottK]

For fun, here are some photos of a custom cabinet that the bass player in one of my bands in the 90s made for my AX2. I sold it about 20 years ago. Of course, I wish now that I never had, but it's long gone, so too late now.

Wood is walnut, maple, and bubinga (the thin strip accents embedded in the maple). It turned out to be impractical for gigs, though I still used it for a couple of years. It was kind of harsh sounding by itself, but sounded great and cut through in the band mix.

I bought my Axsys 212 (later upgraded to the AX2 in the pictures below) from Musicians Friend in 1996(?) as a pre-order, before they were even shipping. It was a cool amp that I used for gigs for 3 or 4 years. Enjoy!