Fractal Audio Systems VP4 - Virtual Pedalboard

[Shredder777]

Your missing the point by several degrees of magnitude.

Yes and no. I acknowledge that conversion is one piece of the picture, but its a big piece. Things have changed, open your ears.

 

[Eagle]

Yes and no. I acknowledge that conversion is one piece of the picture, but its a big piece. Things have changed, open your ears.

I have. DAC in the dry on a delay or reverb is undesirable however good. You can feel and hear it.

 

[Shredder777]

Well alright then.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Blink twice if you have had a Helix preset named after you in a former forum life

 

[paisleywookiee]

Blink twice if you have had a Helix preset named after you in a former forum life

I remember that; who was that?

 

[JiveTurkey]

I remember that; who was that?

@PLX says there's just a few of us out on the forums. I just forgot to pick new usernames at my handful of spots I did mix it up on the avatar selection

 

[Antipodes]

Like everyone else who has upgraded their gear over the past several decades, I have heard improvements every time I've upgraded conversion.

I have purchased two audio gear over past couple years. A couple years ago I got a Zoom G11 with 123db dynamic range which sounded better DA than my old original RME ufx 118db.

This prompted me to upgrade to a Presonus HD8 124db dynamic range which also sounds fantastic (with better preamps as well), giving it the edge to the zoom, but mostly in usabilty and features.

Interesting comparison with the UFX and the Zoom. If you read the specs, the HD presonus claims 111 dB dynamic range for the intrument in, 116 dB for the mic in and 118dB for the line in and 123 dB for the output. Those are all A weighted specs which usually bumps the value up a few dB. Good for the price for sure.

 

[DLC86]

Attributing tone-sucking and signal coloration to dynamic range is just silly.

Dynamic range is the difference between the highest signal that a system can reproduce and its residual noise level, basically the same thing as SNR but measured with a different technique.
It has nothing to do with tone and 114 dB is more than enough for something that goes into an fx loop, i.e. something that won't get compressed/distorted a lot afterwards.
You will never hear that noise, especially going into analog equipement that in most cases has a much worse dynamic range.

It's more likely that the difference you hear is due to another phenomenon that Cliff himself mentioned in the past.
Basically a distorted preamp produces harmonics well above 20 kHz and even though we can't hear those, they might affect how the power amp reacts if they're not filtered out somewhere in the circuit, because it has to "waste" energy to amplify those as well.

When you put a digital device in the fx loop, especially if it runs at 44.1 or 48 kHz, it basically filters out all ultrasonic content and this might change the response of some amps even though the digital device is technically transparent in the audible range.

If this is the case, you'll probably hear an improvement when using devices that run at higher sample rates.

 

[Shredder777]

Interesting comparison with the UFX and the Zoom. If you read the specs, the HD presonus claims 111 dB dynamic range for the intrument in, 116 dB for the mic in and 118dB for the line in and 123 dB for the output. Those are all A weighted specs which usually bumps the value up a few dB. Good for the price for sure.

Just DA on output is what I'm referring to.

I wouldn't be surprised if the DA in any decent monitor or tv in 2024 sounds better than the original ufx output.

 

[Jarick]

That's interesting to hear.

I don't have a good series switcher to be able to truly bypass effects, just an A/B box. But I have noticed a little "tone suck" with the HX Stomp. Not sure about the QC, doesn't seem like there's as much if anything. Fractal was just the hint of maybe more of a little more top end or something, but pretty subtle. Again I'd need to really set up a way to switch in and out of the system as that's more obvious.

 

[Snax Panther]

Fractal isn't plug and play, it requires tweaking. I had the same issue trying to replace an Eventide Micropitch. Had to do some deep diving in expert mode to adjust HI/Low cut, delay times and modulation. Now it nails. it.

As for the disconnectedness I don't know, I maintain an analog dry path so this is never an issue.

I've got an FM9 and an Axe FX III here at home - one in each of my playing spaces.

I'm definitely more than accustomed to the tweaking.

The VP4 is great, but side by side with my pedals, it isn't even really close.

THAT SAID, if I were out playing gigs frequently, I'd opt for the VP4 for the convenience alone.

 

[Shredder777]

That's interesting to hear.

I don't have a good series switcher to be able to truly bypass effects, just an A/B box. But I have noticed a little "tone suck" with the HX Stomp. Not sure about the QC, doesn't seem like there's as much if anything. Fractal was just the hint of maybe more of a little more top end or something, but pretty subtle. Again I'd need to really set up a way to switch in and out of the system as that's more obvious.

Anything that can run as an interface is pretty easy to AB sound quality.

 

[SonVolt]

I've got an FM9 and an Axe FX III here at home - one in each of my playing spaces.

I'm definitely more than accustomed to the tweaking.

The VP4 is great, but side by side with my pedals, it isn't even really close.

THAT SAID, if I were out playing gigs frequently, I'd opt for the VP4 for the convenience alone.

What pedals are you using? Guess that's a big factor. Mine aren't very unique - Dual Delay, Plate Reverb & Chorus/Micropitch. They were all fairly easy to emulate. I'm sure the more "out there" pedals are more difficult.

 

[Eagle]

Attributing tone-sucking and signal coloration to dynamic range is just silly.

Dynamic range is the difference between the highest signal that a system can reproduce and its residual noise level, basically the same thing as SNR but measured with a different technique.
It has nothing to do with tone and 114 dB is more than enough for something that goes into an fx loop, i.e. something that won't get compressed/distorted a lot afterwards.
You will never hear that noise, especially going into analog equipement that in most cases has a much worse dynamic range.

It's more likely that the difference you hear is due to another phenomenon that Cliff himself mentioned in the past.
Basically a distorted preamp produces harmonics well above 20 kHz and even though we can't hear those, they might affect how the power amp reacts if they're not filtered out somewhere in the circuit, because it has to "waste" energy to amplify those as well.

When you put a digital device in the fx loop, especially if it runs at 44.1 or 48 kHz, it basically filters out all ultrasonic content and this might change the response of some amps even though the digital device is technically transparent in the audible range.

If this is the case, you'll probably hear an improvement when using devices that run at higher sample rates.

I’m not. I’m just going on how my amp feels without the device compared to with it . Also a change in the dry sound that I hear as detrimental. I don’t really care about the numbers. Sounds good is good. The old rack units that l used in the past had better sounding dry through than practically anything today. I don’t know why that is the case but try them and you will see what I mean. I am still going to use my Axe 3 in the loop because it has so much going for it and this is a very nitpicking thing.

 

[DLC86]

I’m not. I’m just going on how my amp feels without the device compared to with it . Also a change in the dry sound that I hear as detrimental. I don’t really care about the numbers. Sounds good is good. The old rack units that l used in the past had better sounding dry through than practically anything today. I don’t know why that is the case but try them and you will see what I mean. I am still going to use my Axe 3 in the loop because it has so much going for it and this is a very nitpicking thing.

My post wasn't directed at you

 

[Shredder777]

My post wasn't directed at you

Thats correct, there are many measures of audio quality, but greater dynamic range from better conversion usually goes hand in hand with lower noise floor and distortion.

There isn't some grand conspiracy. Inexpensive conversion had gotten *much* better over the last couple of years. Even cheap devices today can sound better than pro gear from a decade ago.

I have heard reports of fractal degrading signal quality when used in an amps loop. There are too many variables here and I dont own any fractal to comment on this. All I can say is that converter specs generally correlate with my perception of audio quality. Converter quality sets an upper bound for how good something can sound.

You can test this yourself. If you have a good 4k computer monitor from the past couple years route its audio to a mixer along side your interface output and AB between them. If your interface is 5 years or older you will probably find the monitor sounds better.

 

[Eagle]

My post wasn't directed at you

I guessed that but I wanted to clarify my part.

 

[DLC86]

Thats correct, there are many measures of audio quality, but greater dynamic range from better conversion usually goes hand in hand with lower noise floor and distortion.

Sure

There isn't some grand conspiracy. Inexpensive conversion had gotten *much* better over the last couple of years. Even cheap devices today can sound better than pro gear from a decade ago.

I agree, but i guess there are some exceptions there. And for most applications converters have been good enough for the last 20 years at least, even some cheapish ones.

I have heard reports of fractal degrading signal quality when used in an amps loop. There are too many variables here and I dont own any fractal to comment on this. All I can say is that converter specs generally correlate with my perception of audio quality. Converter quality sets an upper bound for how good something can sound.

I personally doubt conversion is the culprit here, more likely what I said earlier. IME axe fx III and fm9 have been the most transparent guitar devices I've ever used... but I've rarely used them in 4cm with a tube amp.

You can test this yourself. If you have a good 4k computer monitor from the past couple years route its audio to a mixer along side your interface output and AB between them. If your interface is 5 years or older you will probably find the monitor sounds better.

A test like that has a great chance of being faulty... and I honestly doubt a consumer line or headphone out can perform better than an audio interface, even if the latter is significantly older

 

[Shredder777]

I agree, but i guess there are some exceptions there. And for most applications converters have been good enough for the last 20 years at least, even cheapish ones.

Its all relative. When you are used to the latest gen of conversion, older devices become objectionable.

If people are saying some piece of gear is coloring their tone, I tend to believe them. But I can't be certain why.

I absolutely don't believe that because its a guitar signal chain that conversion doesn't matter. Everything matters: Conversion quality, latency, strength of cpu, sample rate, internal bit rate, etc. You have to take everything as a whole.

Maybe the VP4 has the most expensive and best sounding reverb algorithms in a pedal? But its also conceivable that some mainstream company is using better conversion, better audio design, and some people will notice that an inexpensive pedal has less affect on their signal chain, even if the reverbs sound shitty in comparison.

 

[SonVolt]

We need a YouTube influencer dedicated to reviewing the hardware of guitar effects. I asked a question here how the tech specs of the VP4 compared to the SDE-3000EVH and got a very vague response from Fractal. When I started asking specifics they bailed.

EDIT: I just realized I'm not on Fractal's forum.