Fractal Audio Firmware Update Thread

[2112]

I'd love a fully idealized FAS Mark series model where "all knobs at noon/GEQ flat" corresponds to the orthodox "bass 0, mids 2, treble 10, V shape GEQ". Having the models correspond as closely to the reference amps is fantastic but something like "FAS Thrash" would be great for people who are inexperienced with the reference amps.

 

[James Freeman]

I'd love a fully idealized FAS Mark series model where "all knobs at noon/GEQ flat" corresponds to the orthodox "bass 0, mids 2, treble 10, V shape GEQ". Having the models correspond as closely to the reference amps is fantastic but something like "FAS Thrash" would be great for people who are inexperienced with the reference amps.

but also 100%

Authentic mark eq, when?

 

[James Freeman]

@James Freeman
I’d be really curious to hear your opinions on its technical accuracy vs. Helix. Not in terms of tonal accuracy (e.g. the nuances of distortion texture/realism), but in terms of how the knobs and such behave.

Line 6 physically measure the response of every pot in the real amp and model the actual pots in their reference amp.
If the reference pot is out of tolerance or has unusually weird response they replace the pot and remeasure it.
As far as I know, no other company does that, rest assured you get an extremely accurate model.
I still love my Helix very much.

 

[laxu]

I found that the 100W Plexi models ALL used a weird all Log tonestack, this was fixed in 23.03.
What is weirder is nobody noticed... for years.

I never played a real Plexi either but the tonestack was too fucked to not notice something is way wrong with it.
Says a lot about the user base.

Which just points to people not caring as long as it sounds/feels good to them. To me they dialed very much like I would dial any Plexi style amp and got tones that worked just fine for me.

While fixing the Plexis is good, I think you and I will not see eye to eye with idealized vs authentic controls - I value consistency and convenience, you prefer it to be exactly like the real amp even if the original is pretty stupid and impractical in the way it functions (like 5150 presence or Mesa GEQ sliders).

Reading your somewhat aggressive posts on Fractal forum and here has made me re-evaluate my own stance on modeling. I just don't care about these things anywhere to the same degree.

I've been rocking through my BluGuitar Amp 1 ME + 4x10 Greenback cab rig for a few days at louder volumes and just being really happy with the Marshall style tones and not even wanting anything else.

I almost feel like I am moving towards some highly specific things (Marshalls, Greenbacks, tape delays, plate reverbs) where the 1000 other options modelers give might not mean a thing to me. I like the idea of having everything more than I like actually having it when using it gets more complicated.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Which just points to people not caring as long as it sounds/feels good to them. To me they dialed very much like I would dial any Plexi style amp and got tones that worked just fine for me.

While fixing the Plexis is good, I think you and I will not see eye to eye with idealized vs authentic controls - I value consistency and convenience, you prefer it to be exactly like the real amp even if the original is pretty stupid and impractical in the way it functions (like 5150 presence or Mesa GEQ sliders).

Reading your somewhat aggressive posts on Fractal forum and here has made me re-evaluate my own stance on modeling. I just don't care about these things anywhere to the same degree.

I've been rocking through my BluGuitar Amp 1 ME + 4x10 Greenback cab rig for a few days at louder volumes and just being really happy with the Marshall style tones and not even wanting anything else.

I almost feel like I am moving towards some highly specific things (Marshalls, Greenbacks, tape delays, plate reverbs) where the 1000 other options modelers give might not mean a thing to me. I like the idea of having everything more than I like actually having it when using it gets more complicated.

I definitely lean more towards James's position (or maybe even more ). I see the goal of emulation to emulate specific gear with indistinguishable results. There should be no compromise in tone - I already feel like real amps+load box is a compromise that digital can potentially have an advantage over. There are obviously different constraints on both methods but I feel like using digital models should ideally not be a compromise on using real gear. They need to sound at least as good AND as accurate. The fact thats things are already so close speaks volumes for how achievable this is. The experience of using the models should also present as few barriers as possible.

I think for many other people they see these rather as "digital amps" - you'd use them like you would an amp, but emulating anything specifically has no real importance. As long as its evocative of various tones, and works well in a variety of situations, its good enough. I think many people veer anywhere between the two and everyone's use cases are different.

 

[AutomationBias]

I'd love a fully idealized FAS Mark series model where "all knobs at noon/GEQ flat" corresponds to the orthodox "bass 0, mids 2, treble 10, V shape GEQ". Having the models correspond as closely to the reference amps is fantastic but something like "FAS Thrash" would be great for people who are inexperienced with the reference amps.

I'd just like a Mark 1. It's baffling to me that one of the most iconic amps of the 70s is absent.

 

[Orvillain]

I'm a James Freeman acolyte too, I'm afraid.

 

[Stone]

I definitely lean more towards James's position (or maybe even more ). I see the goal of emulation to emulate specific gear with indistinguishable results. There should be no compromise in tone - I already feel like real amps+load box is a compromise that digital can potentially have an advantage over. There are obviously different constraints on both methods but I feel like using digital models should ideally not be a compromise on using real gear. They need to sound at least as good AND as accurate. The fact thats things are already so close speaks volumes for how achievable this is. The experience of using the models should also present as few barriers as possible.

I think for many other people they see these rather as "digital amps" - you'd use them like you would an amp, but emulating anything specifically has no real importance. As long as its evocative of various tones, and works well in a variety of situations, its good enough. I think many people veer anywhere between the two and everyone's use cases are different.

Like Myself I have No experience as to what a real amp sounds like, having never owned one except for a Katana for a few months
i would not know authentic, the only thing i base tone on is studio album recordings and how the tone sounds on the album, and then use whatever i can to get close to it as much as possible

 

[DrewJD82]

I’ll take the Authentic stuff, but it’s not a pressing issue for me because the baseline is 99.9% there. I use the Marks a ton, got my tones with ‘em idealized and I’ll get my tones with ‘em authentic.

 

[aflynt]

I tend to prefer authentic, especially if I’m used to those amps. That said, pot tapers are all over the place when you compare vintage amps to reissues. I remember over at the Amp Garage people saying that the vintage 30% log taper pots sounded different than the new ones because they had more carbon... beyond just where the controls are set to get the desired resistance value. Not sure if modeling gets down to the level of mimicking the effects of carbon content in pots though.

-Aaron

 

[Rock Chalk]

Authentic controls is a cool thing to have, but I just usually turn em till my ears like what I'm hearing.

 

[Gearzilla]

you get an extremely accurate model.

People frequently say a version of that, and it applies to various brands. Eventually an improvement comes along showing the work in progress nature regarding the previous level of accuracy. What does that say?

 

[JiveTurkey]

I still haven’t made my way to Marks yet.

What else have you found?

I found that the 100W Plexi models ALL used a weird all Log tonestack, this was fixed in 23.03.
What is weirder is nobody noticed... for years.

I never played a real Plexi either but the tonestack was too fucked to not notice something is way wrong with it.
Says a lot about the user base.

To be fair someone may notice something is off but idk if many would be able to come to the conclusion it was a Log tone stack

[best.
Line 6 physically measure the response of every pot in the real amp and model the actual pots in their reference amp.
If the reference pot is out of tolerance or has unusually weird response they replace the pot and remeasure it.
As far as I know, no other company does that, rest assured you get an extremely accurate model.
I still love my Helix very much.

Which just points to people not caring as long as it sounds/feels good to them. To me they dialed very much like I would dial any Plexi style amp and got tones that worked just fine for me.

While fixing the Plexis is good, I think you and I will not see eye to eye with idealized vs authentic controls - I value consistency and convenience, you prefer it to be exactly like the real amp even if the original is pretty stupid and impractical in the way it functions (like 5150 presence or Mesa GEQ sliders).

Reading your somewhat aggressive posts on Fractal forum and here has made me re-evaluate my own stance on modeling. I just don't care about these things anywhere to the same degree.

I've been rocking through my BluGuitar Amp 1 ME + 4x10 Greenback cab rig for a few days at louder volumes and just being really happy with the Marshall style tones and not even wanting anything else.

I almost feel like I am moving towards some highly specific things (Marshalls, Greenbacks, tape delays, plate reverbs) where the 1000 other options modelers give might not mean a thing to me. I like the idea of having everything more than I like actually having it when using it gets more complicated.

So many quotes. I'm in agreement with James as far as the whole point of FAS being accurate as possible. With that extra touch of HX contrarian because my own experience.

Idealized controls or not (and to be 1000%; I know the oscilloscope doesn't lie...I completely concede that); the FAS stuff may have some oddball pot tapers certainly. But when I fire up a Boogie Recto model on it; it sounds like the Dual Recto I've owned. And the single. And an amp in the same family as the Tremoverb I owned. The Mark's sound like the Marks I've owned. The HX may have accurate pots and thank baby jesus for oversampling updates and workflow but there is ZERO comparison between the two experiences. In my experience

That's not me being a snob as I will use the Boss "Uberschall" for band practice because I just ignore the "nowhere near the real amp same universe" aspect and just enjoy the "overly compressed to the point of playing itself" experience. I guess my point is that reverse-measuring the modeled amps component by component by component is nice. But if the knobs are faithful to the schematic and it still sounds like poop; I'm going to use something else that gets me where I need to be 10/10.

*he said; with love and the acknowledgement that poop might be a tad hyperbolic

 

[mikah912]

@JiveTurkey I get what you mean, and I think this whole experience has shown that even the most obsessed and meticulous modeling people miss the mark wide left sometimes. The difference is Cliff is the only one to go back and continually revisit both specific models and his modeling processes in general.

Line 6, on the other hand, tends to jump to a newer model in the same general family. You just gotta live with the warts on the earlier version.

 

[metropolis_4]

If the Vox models sound congested, I send it back

Haha, it’s not going back… but now I’m worried about the cathode biased amps.

I hope they’re not broken again

But if they are I have confidence Cliff will sort it out quickly like he did last time

 

[James Freeman]

People frequently say a version of that, and it applies to various brands. Eventually an improvement comes along showing the work in progress nature regarding the previous level of accuracy. What does that say?

Very good point.
I think it says the companies really believe they are doing the best job they can, at least the honest ones, but there is always room for improvement.
What I post is from personal experience, knowledge, and the desire to share that knowledge with everyone and with an intention to push modelers to their fullest potential.

 

[James Freeman]

Hmm… this one has me a little apprehensive about the updates. I haven’t played it for myself yet, but I remember when Cygnus first came out it messed up the Vox models and they all had a weird congested response in the low mids. I hear something similar going on here that doesn’t sound right to me…

I don't like Fractals Top Boost AC30 model either, something iffy about the Bass knob that turns everything to mud very quickly.
My only other reference is Helix.

 

[mbenigni]

Authentic controls is a cool thing to have, but I just usually turn em till my ears like what I'm hearing. View attachment 15262

Which is, in itself, authentic.

In principle, I'd cast my vote in favor of authentic behavior. If you want to idealize an amp's controls, better to make an "original" model. But if you're modeling a specific amplifier and naming it accordingly, it's misleading for its controls to differ in function, range, curvature, etc.

I'm coming at this from a different angle than many of you: I've only played through a handful of tube amps "in real life". (And even fewer at volumes that would inform with regard to power amp behavior, etc.) For the most part, I rely on modelers to educate me about the amps they claim to emulate. When they differ from the "source material", intentionally or otherwise, they're less effective at doing so.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Idealized controls or not (and to be 1000%; I know the oscilloscope doesn't lie...I completely concede that); the FAS stuff may have some oddball pot tapers certainly. But when I fire up a Boogie Recto model on it; it sounds like the Dual Recto I've owned. And the single. And an amp in the same family as the Tremoverb I owned. The Mark's sound like the Marks I've owned. The HX may have accurate pots and thank baby jesus for oversampling updates and workflow but there is ZERO comparison between the two experiences. In my experience

I kind of struggle to match the real world top end+fizz of a Rectifier. I know a lot of people complain about that part of a Recto but thats such a distinctive part of their sound and something I love. I think the FAS Rectifiers sound great, but I seem to have to dig into more advanced parameters to get them sounding like my amp.

The Mark's sound great, but my main gripe is the experience of using them is pretty far removed from dialling in a real Mark amp.... they're just such a hands on amp and the FAS approach adds in more barriers than most.

Happy to make/share NAM models of my Rev G Rectifier loaded with a Mesa cab (OS or trad) to reference against if anyone feels confident in matching their behaviour.

 

[Rock Chalk]

Which is, in itself, authentic.

In principle, I'd cast my vote in favor of authentic behavior. If you want to idealize an amp's controls, better to make an "original" model. But if you're modeling a specific amplifier and naming it accordingly, it's misleading for its controls to differ in function, range, curvature, etc.

I'm coming at this from a different angle than many of you: I've only played through a handful of tube amps "in real life". (And even fewer at volumes that would inform with regard to power amp behavior, etc.) For the most part, I rely on modelers to educate me about the amps they claim to emulate. When they differ from the "source material", intentionally or otherwise, they're less effective at doing so.

Oh I agree......nothing wrong with wanting everything to be authentic.....my point is that no matter if the knob is authentic or ideal, I'm going to
end up with the same sound either way.......so bring on the authentic!