Fractal Talk

[[Nathan]]

Are we about to descend into the same philosophical discussion here……

IMO if fractal is all about amp authenticity and they’re tracing circuits and have all the pieces of mojo to replicate an amp, well….. replicate the amp. I want it warts and all because that’s a testament to how good the fractal tech is.

I understand why having more usable ranges and tapers can be more desirable but these should be separate to the core amp model. Have a second model or have an option for an idealised mode of the amp. But if I could only choose one option I’d rather the 1:1 copy and do my own pedal chain and dialling to get it right.

 

[laxu]

Are we about to descend into the same philosophical discussion here……

IMO if fractal is all about amp authenticity and they’re tracing circuits and have all the pieces of mojo to replicate an amp, well….. replicate the amp. I want it warts and all because that’s a testament to how good the fractal tech is.

I understand why having more usable ranges and tapers can be more desirable but these should be separate to the core amp model. Have a second model or have an option for an idealised mode of the amp. But if I could only choose one option I’d rather the 1:1 copy and do my own pedal chain and dialling to get it right.

I think it's a very rare case where the authentic setting is just very dumb, to the point it boggles the mind why the original makers of the amp released it that way.

There's a surprising amount of amps out there that make me wonder if the developer ever tried using it when you have amps that go to 100+ dB volumes with the MV on 1, or have controls that have a weirdly poor range. E.g any Bogner's treble control is unusable for half of the knob travel because it gets so dark if you turn it below noon.

 

[James Freeman]

I voted against it because to me authentic response for a knob is not useful, when that knob's behavior is utterly stupid. If the presence knob does fuck all for 3/4 of its travel, then it's just a bad design.

If we extrapolate this, would people enjoy if they had to adjust the Mark V models' master volume between 1 and 1.5 to find a volume level that works for them, and the rest goes straight to "too loud" at 90W? Because that's pretty much the case with the real amp if you don't use the output/solo circuitry.

I'm not really interested in copying settings from real amps which is the only case where like-for-like behavior might be useful. But even then the real amp is going to have 10-20% variance on every potentiometer, so how useful is trying to use the same knob positions in the first place compared to dialing by ear?

I beg to differ, as someone who will (maybe) never own a real IIC+ I would very much like an authentic response, yes even from the linear eq slider that don't do much until the extremes of their range.
Reason is I want to experience the amp as is, warts and all, yes even if think that the designer of this amp/pedal made a rookie mistake.

 

[[Nathan]]

I think it's a very rare case where the authentic setting is just very dumb, to the point it boggles the mind why the original makers of the amp released it that way.

There's a surprising amount of amps out there that make me wonder if the developer ever tried using it when you have amps that go to 100+ dB volumes with the MV on 1, or have controls that have a weirdly poor range. E.g any Bogner's treble control is unusable for half of the knob travel because it gets so dark if you turn it below noon.

Yeah I get it, even things like the jvm gain for a bunch of modes is doing nothing past 4, but I’d still rather just see this replicated.

I’ve never used a Herbert IRL but it would be kind of disappointing if the fractal model took a bunch of liberties with changing values to make things easier…. Then I get the real thing and realise you only have this tiny range in reality.

I get both approaches and it’s why I think a “sim mode” and “idealised mode” is a neat solution. Most probably wouldn’t need an alternate option but for the extreme cases or amps Cliff thought a bunch of changes would be beneficial, they can have options for each.

 

[mavrick102000]

Tried quickly matching AxeFX's JVM OD1 Orange to Bogren's JVM:

https://samply.app/p/J4gA6u2bmS3f1btP11sM

No idea what settings Bogren used, but to get it close I have to crank the EQ quite a lot. Annoyingly I don't have the real amp to compare with, but I don't remember it being so dark that I need to crank the top end like this. Maybe someone with an AxeFX and a JVM410H can compare? Even with these settings, it doesn't have the same aggression in the upper mids and top end, and playing it feels less aggressive IMO.View attachment 43559

IIRC @Whizzinby has both

 

[- ★ - BROCKSTAR - ★ -]

 

[unix-guy]

To avoid the amp sounding too muffled and fuzzy/farty. The real amp has a channel volume and a global master, here they’re combined. Just another mental separation you have to do vs using the real thing.

5150 Presence Knob

Rev. D of the schematic which was Jan. 15 2013 specs 30mA per tube. This was changed to 27.5 mA per tube somewhere between then and Dec. 11 2015. There apparently haven't been any changes to that spec since. So in the past 10 years every amp shipped has been at least 27.5 mA. We talking OG...

forum.fractalaudio.com

I wonder why they didn't update this model?

• Added “Global MV” control to JS410 amp models. Master Volume has been renamed “Channel MV”. These two master volume controls can be used to balance the tone into the power amp (as in the real amp). The Channel MV decreases the high frequencies as it is turned down whereas the Global MV is transparent.

• Improved accuracy of TX Star models. Global MV controls have been added as the Channel MV in these amps affect the tone (and interacts with the Presence control).

 

[KingsXJJ]

FM9 9.01 released.

 

[unix-guy]

FM9 9.01 released.

On Thursday

 

[- ★ - BROCKSTAR - ★ -]

FM9 9.01 released.

old news.. we're already in line waiting for fm9 firmware 10

 

[KingsXJJ]

On Thursday

Oh! I didn’t know. I don’t have one but didn’t see it mentioned so just have a heads up.

NEVERMIND. LOL.

 

[norminal]

I beg to differ, as someone who will (maybe) never own a real IIC+ I would very much like an authentic response, yes even from the linear eq slider that don't do much until the extremes of their range.
Reason is I want to experience the amp as is, warts and all, yes even if think that the designer of this amp/pedal made a rookie mistake.

This.

 

[Mongillo19]

"The power of the Axe-Fx III provides the perfect platform for our state-of-the art Cygnus amp modeling, the most expressive, musical, and accurate we’ve ever created."

Accuracy is the name of the game (as it should be)

 

[KingsXJJ]

old news.. we're already in line waiting for fm9 firmware 10

Old news…. @unix-guy already corrected me.

 

[KingsXJJ]

"The power of the Axe-Fx III provides the perfect platform for our state-of-the art Cygnus amp modeling, the most expressive, musical, and accurate we’ve ever created."

Accuracy is the name of the game (as it should be)

I feel differently but I respect that notion and support it somewhat. Many of the amps modeled are not perfect. Most amps have some design compromises. But they are highly enough regarded so they can be excellent.

I’d like to see two versions offered in the same model just like some of the parameters. Authentic and Optimal (advanced or whatever)

When Cliff mentions specifics and optimizations to get that last yard I seem to recall him talking about some design choices in the original that were sub-optimal. For those that desire that, warts and all use Authentic. Done!

For those not caring so much about Authenticity but caring more about the best possible tones… let Cliff offered an Optimized version based on his knowledge of amps and his ears. I believe everyone would get exactly what they want and prefer that way… but I’m sure someone will have an issue with the idea anyway.

 

[Orvillain]

My assertion is that being authentic as possible precisely gets you the best possible tones.

If that isn't true for you, then you might as well use a Kemper or Boss GT-1000.

 

[laxu]

I wonder why they didn't update this model?

My guess is that they don't make any real sound difference in that model, it's just that the master taper works a bit different.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Under 1 seems like a pretty extreme setting though. You'd think e.g 3 or 4 would be about the same. I'm not aware of anything but the Dual Recto that seems to start distorting very early, like above 2 on the MV.

Most amps start overdriving the poweramp at 5-7 on the MV.

But I don't have a Fractal anymore so can't join this JVM settings-a-thon.

Depends where the channel volume is set though. If it’s fixed at 10 it’s very different to using it at 3. I often find the AxeFX dark and run MV settings a little lower than I would on real amps. Without access to both controls all bets are off with familiarity.

I voted against it because to me authentic response for a knob is not useful, when that knob's behavior is utterly stupid. If the presence knob does fuck all for 3/4 of its travel, then it's just a bad design.

If we extrapolate this, would people enjoy if they had to adjust the Mark V models' master volume between 1 and 1.5 to find a volume level that works for them, and the rest goes straight to "too loud" at 90W? Because that's pretty much the case with the real amp if you don't use the output/solo circuitry.

I'm not really interested in copying settings from real amps which is the only case where like-for-like behavior might be useful. But even then the real amp is going to have 10-20% variance on every potentiometer, so how useful is trying to use the same knob positions in the first place compared to dialing by ear?

IMO staying true to the original (measured) circuit is essential. Opinion should not come to it, everyone has all kinds of ideas of improvements and where you draw the line can be open to debate. Things are the way they are for a reason. Even if you don’t like it, carrying it over into the model means the user can use their own familiarity.

If 15 amps all have their own “it’s the same except for ______” it takes a load more mental navigation to remember which things are the same and which are different. They are amp models, they should match the real life equivalent. Fractal models have enough details to remember amp to amp, I don’t want any more curveballs.

If there is an improvement to be made that’s worthwhile, someone can do it to the real amp. And if that becomes so popular that it replaces the “bad” design, then the digital version can model that too.

Amps should stand the test of time in the real world first, and then be modelled IMO.

 

[Stone]

I cannot tell you what's accurate or not seeing as I dont own any of these expensive amps and be able to compare,
What I do know is that i can replicate the tones to sound like the recording which often times is more than sum of just the amplifier it's a whole chain.so thats accurate enough for me.

 

[- ★ - BROCKSTAR - ★ -]

I just want more blocks