Fractal Audio Firmware Update Thread

[paisleywookiee]

The Kemper Liquid Profile thing makes it even more complicated when it seems to work well to avoid having many profiles.

To me quantity is a detriment and only makes it harder to pick a few favorites. Think about IRs. Most who buy say a York Audio pack just install the mixes on their modeler and never bother touching the dozens if not hundreds of individual IRs. Captures are the exact same thing, most just want say a dozen or so captures to choose from.

If I have learned something about guitarists using modelers, they want it easy. They want an amp model or capture that says it's "amp XYZ" on the tin, and they want it to sound good out of the box without much effort.

To bring this back to Fractal, I think they also are aware of how captures are becoming table stakes so making it a feature on their unit is probably not smart. Even Kemper's Liquid Profile stuff is moving more towards just modeling like Fractal does.

Profiles are much, much worse than IR’s, because there are far more variables even with the simplest of amps.

The bigger question is who the F wants to cycle through 270 profiles? (Once, much less every time you want a slightly different gain/EQ profile)

I don’t. This is why I don’t like profilers, generally.

It makes perfect sense IF you own the amp, and capture it how you like it. Hence TONEX/NAM being awesome for the cost of entry. But the Kemper/QC? Not so much. If I’m to spend $1000-$2500, I want full control of sound creation.

 

[Mongillo19]

But the Kemper/QC? Not so much. If I’m to spend $1000-$2500, I want full control of sound creation

I wouldn't loop QC in with Kemper in that aspect given it does have full models

 

[mikah912]

Well sure. It’s easy to do 270 profiles when each one takes five minutes. The problem is when the quality isn’t as good. Sure; that’s arguable/subjective.

But it’s actually starting to not be subjective, when people like Leo Gibson have shown waveforms that neither the Kemper or QC is as accurate as the ML-based stuff.

So, do you want quality or quantity?

I look at it another way: What I want from ANY capturing/profiling solution is a comprehensive and definitive series of snapshots that capture the full range of tone and response across every mode/channel/switch of an amp. I also like when the content provider has a range of mics and cabinets for it to interact with because they'll capture a different side than if I used it solely with IRs that anyone can buy.

Now, is that more likely to happen with the 27 profile pack or the 300+ profile pack? Or, put another way, what good does a somewhat mathematically more accurate profile/capture do for me if it only reveals some of what the amp can do and I'm left wanting?

 

[mikah912]

The bigger question is who the F wants to cycle through 270 profiles? (Once, much less every time you want a slightly different gain/EQ profile)

If they're well organized like LRS always does, and you have a "manager" app that's rich with metadata and makes auditioning super quick and easy.....I do.

 

[TSJMajesty]

So, do you want quality or quantity?

I sure as shit wouldn't want to wade through thousands of profiles.

 

[Mongillo19]

I sure as shit wouldn't want to wade through thousands of profiles.

If you all are you wading through thousands of profiles to find one tone, I'm genuinely curious what tone you are going for lol

I think it's similar how people seem to think you need to get into the advanced parameters of the Axe Fx to get a good tone. You can just stick to the basics page and get there. Same for profiles, you truly do not need to sift through thousands to find what you are looking for....assuming you know what you are looking for lol

 

[JiveTurkey]

If you all are you wading through thousands of profiles to find one tone, I'm genuinely curious what tone you are going for lol

 

[paisleywookiee]

I look at it another way: What I want from ANY capturing/profiling solution is a comprehensive and definitive series of snapshots that capture the full range of tone and response across every mode/channel/switch of an amp. I also like when the content provider has a range of mics and cabinets for it to interact with because they'll capture a different side than if I used it solely with IRs that anyone can buy.

Now, is that more likely to happen with the 27 profile pack or the 300+ profile pack? Or, put another way, what good does a somewhat mathematically more accurate profile/capture do for me if it only reveals some of what the amp can do and I'm left wanting?

It's either tedious and comprehensive, or it's easy and leaves something out. Which is why I don't like capture-based products.

 

[mikah912]

I sure as shit wouldn't want to wade through thousands of profiles.

Again, when they're set up properly, there's no need to "wade" through anything. For example, LRS will iteratively update packs with very specific batches. So, for example, V1 of, say, his Mesa JP2C pack will be a number of profiles through an oversized 4x12 V30 Mesa cab with an SM57, 421 and 121. Within that, you'll have subgrouping by channel/switch. Within the Rig Manager, it's broken down even further by gain level, so you get a good idea of it before you ever click on anything. Then, when you click, it loads instantly and lets you audition.

V2 will be of a different cabinet/mic config. Same for V3 and so on and so forth.

It's not only simple, but also kinda fun.

 

[TSJMajesty]

Hmmm, I didn't know that.

 

[laxu]

Again, when they're set up properly, there's no need to "wade" through anything. For example, LRS will iteratively update packs with very specific batches. So, for example, V1 of, say, his Mesa JP2C pack will be a number of profiles through an oversized 4x12 V30 Mesa cab with an SM57, 421 and 121. Within that, you'll have subgrouping by channel/switch. Within the Rig Manager, it's broken down even further by gain level, so you get a good idea of it before you ever click on anything. Then, when you click, it loads instantly and lets you audition.

V2 will be of a different cabinet/mic config. Same for V3 and so on and so forth.

It's not only simple, but also kinda fun.

To me this is basically the same as an IR file browser. "Try it and see if you like what you get" which does require quite a bit of back and forth unless you happen to land on a great setting that you just love right there. That's where the capture or IR vendor can excel and how you get some "household names" like MBritt or York Audio who figure out the stuff for you and give you a setting that sounds great out of the box.

Captures work pretty great when you have done them yourself - it's some favorite settings of your favorite amp. I know with my amps they are usually parked on the same settings and only minor adjustments done based on which guitar I'm playing. Unless it's something more drastic like humbuckers vs single coils or using a totally different cab.

I got more interested in the Kemper with the Liquid Profile feature because that seems to some degree solve the issues of captures where they become more authentically adjustable. Or at least adjustable in a more pleasing manner that works for guitarists better than the generic EQ.

 

[TSJMajesty]

All's I know is I'm playing my guitar, through a Fractal Audio Systems Axe Fx III MkII (that was what this thread was all about, right?), thru a preset that sounds so GD good, that every time I plug in, I don't touch a thing.

Admittedly, it wasn't always this way, but it is now.

 

[la szum]

Yeah, there is no struggle-fest here either. Some must be professionals at getting unworkable sounds and tones.

Me, just an amateur who doesn't know how to do that.

 

[paisleywookiee]

The Fractal takes two blocks to sound great, and only one “page” on each block. It wasn’t always that way, but it is now. And I speak from fickle experience, because I’m on my fourth Fractal of the same gen.

 

[Mongillo19]

Is there anyway to combat the compression from cranking the master on the 800 model? I'm finding it tricky to get a high gain sound without squashing it

 

[paisleywookiee]

Is there anyway to combat the compression from cranking the master on the 800 model? I'm finding it tricky to get a high gain sound without squashing it

I don’t know, that’s actually why I stopped using it. Switched to the SLO (I know, apples/oranges, but same use-case).

 

[Mongillo19]

I don’t know, that’s actually why I stopped using it. Switched to the SLO (I know, apples/oranges, but same use-case).

But from I'm reading it sounds accurate. I'll see if I can tinker with it but will give the SLO a shot if not

 

[paisleywookiee]

But from I'm reading it sounds accurate. I'll see if I can tinker with it but will give the SLO a shot if not

I’m sure it is, I just might not like how an 800 reacts.

 

[la szum]

Is there anyway to combat the compression from cranking the master on the 800 model? I'm finding it tricky to get a high gain sound without squashing it

I never liked the Master cranked on the 800 I owned, and don't on the Fractal either. I just roll it back,
and watch the meter to make sure I am not running out of headroom, and then I compensate with a
Level raise.

 

[la szum]

I generally don't enjoy crushing the Master on ANY amp (apart from maybe a Tweed Deluxe).