Fractal Talk

[GTR37]

I've been scoring a short film with a few ambient stock presets from the FX3 these past few days. It works so well!

There are some amazing ones in there IMO
I have used warped vinyl and a slide guitar to get a old bayou vibe
Emerald oceans I think was another one that had terrific swell effects as is Soundtrack
And IMAX scene
If someone has not run through some of the special effects ones , some are mind blowing
Some of AdminM like Blade runner and disco club with sequencers are spectacular

 

[James Freeman]

.... I don't think I like the Mark IIC+ or IV models in the AxeFx, they seem bloated as if there is too much low end before or between the gain stages, even with the 'typical' 0,0,10 tonestack settings, I can't get the tight chug and texture I hear on the Metallica albums or YOUTUBE, particularly with the FAT / Treble Shift engaged, the Mark models are just too bloated and not tight enough in my personal opinion.

Best reference I found on youtube and in my opinion much tighter and crunchier than the Fractal models with the same settings.

 

[Mongillo19]

.... I don't think I like the Mark IIC+ or IV models in the AxeFx, they seem bloated as if there is too much low end before or between the gain stages, even with the 'typical' 0,0,10 tonestack settings, I can't get the tight chug and texture I hear on the Metallica albums or YOUTUBE, particularly with the FAT / Treble Shift engaged, the Mark models are just too bloated and not tight enough in my personal opinion.


View attachment 44807


Best reference I found on youtube;

Is this on the latest .05 firmware?

 

[James Freeman]

Is this on the latest .05 firmware?

Yes.
The models (IIC+ and IV) sound slightly mushier/fuzzier and less tight than any reference I can find.

 

[Mongillo19]

Yes.

Did you feel like it was better prior? Not sure if you did a test recently

 

[- ★ - BROCKSTAR - ★ -]

Yes.
The models (IIC+ and IV) sound slightly mushier/fuzzier and less tight than any reference I can find.

Suggestion? Maybe try a different guitar pick? It can alter the attack a lot based on what is being used. That could be a big difference between you and the videos online.

 

[DLC86]

.... I don't think I like the Mark IIC+ or IV models in the AxeFx, they seem bloated as if there is too much low end before or between the gain stages, even with the 'typical' 0,0,10 tonestack settings, I can't get the tight chug and texture I hear on the Metallica albums or YOUTUBE, particularly with the FAT / Treble Shift engaged, the Mark models are just too bloated and not tight enough in my personal opinion.


View attachment 44807


Best reference I found on youtube and in my opinion much tighter and crunchier than the Fractal models with the same settings.

Are you aware of the different taper on the GEQ in the Axe?

EDIT: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/dialling-in-the-usa-iic.142085/post-1683116

 

[JiveTurkey]

Are you aware of the different taper on the GEQ in the Axe?

 

[James Freeman]

Are you aware of the different taper on the GEQ in the Axe?

Of course, but the post preamp geq is not part of gain shaping so it's not a factor, also, I use 0,0,10 setting for tonestack so taper are not a factor there either.
I'm using Fishman Classic pickup on the JB tone option,they are tighter than EMG 81 and still.

 

[Mongillo19]

Of course, but the post preamp geq is not part of gain shaping so it's not a factor, also, I use 0,0,10 setting for tonestack so taper are not a factor there either.
I'm using Fishman Classic pickup on the JB tone option,they are tighter than EMG 81 and still.

Yeah I will say the clip you used definitely is a little thicc compared to the the videos.

I didn't go into detail on the videos but how were the running the amp? Loadbox, mics, etc?

Might play a decent difference. But as we know FAS updates are a blessing and a curse sometimes

 

[DLC86]

Of course, but the post preamp geq is not part of gain shaping so it's not a factor, also, I use 0,0,10 setting for tonestack so taper are not a factor there either.
I'm using Fishman Classic pickup on the JB tone option,they are tighter than EMG 81 and still.

Yeah, it's not part of the preamp but it still can affect the tightness if the power amp is being pushed (and so MV is important too in that regard).
And even Input Gain vs Overdrive settings if it has a bright cap.

PS: I know you're not a noob, but sometimes we can miss or forget obvious things

 

[MTB1973]

.... I don't think I like the Mark IIC+ or IV models in the AxeFx, they seem bloated as if there is too much low end before or between the gain stages, even with the 'typical' 0,0,10 tonestack settings, I can't get the tight chug and texture I hear on the Metallica albums or YOUTUBE, particularly with the FAT / Treble Shift engaged, the Mark models are just too bloated and not tight enough in my personal opinion.


View attachment 44807


Best reference I found on youtube and in my opinion much tighter and crunchier than the Fractal models with the same settings.

Yes, I agree with you 1000%

 

[yek]

I don't think that recorded tones or YouTube really are the correct reference material to judge a model's tone stack.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I don't think that recorded tones or YouTube really are the correct reference material to judge a model's tone stack.

Maybe not as an absolute reference, but there’s enough clips on youtube of almost any amp that go through the range of all pots and give a pretty good idea for what to expect. For example, for Amplitube it’s probably the best way to gauge correct input level settings for amps that I don’t have access to.

I wouldn’t use solely youtube examples, but I think they can back up real world experience by demonstrating a number of real world examples in typical use.

I’d also say the AxeFX excels at reproducing the sound of recorded tones. It has everything there to recreate recorded tones, so I think it’s a realistic target to aim for. If there are 10 different clips of the real amp, the AxeFX should be able to get in the ballpark.

 

[yek]

Maybe not as an absolute reference, but there’s enough clips on youtube of almost any amp that go through the range of all pots and give a pretty good idea for what to expect. For example, for Amplitube it’s probably the best way to gauge correct input level settings for amps that I don’t have access to.

I wouldn’t use solely youtube examples, but I think they can back up real world experience by demonstrating a number of real world examples in typical use.

I’d also say the AxeFX excels at reproducing the sound of recorded tones. It has everything there to recreate recorded tones, so I think it’s a realistic target to aim for. If there are 10 different clips of the real amp, the AxeFX should be able to get in the ballpark.

Agreed, but I was responding to the specific presented case.

 

[AlbertA]

.... I don't think I like the Mark IIC+ or IV models in the AxeFx, they seem bloated as if there is too much low end before or between the gain stages, even with the 'typical' 0,0,10 tonestack settings, I can't get the tight chug and texture I hear on the Metallica albums or YOUTUBE, particularly with the FAT / Treble Shift engaged, the Mark models are just too bloated and not tight enough in my personal opinion.


View attachment 44807


Best reference I found on youtube and in my opinion much tighter and crunchier than the Fractal models with the same settings.

What cabinet? What SIC?

 

[James Freeman]

I don't think that recorded tones or YouTube really are the correct reference material to judge a model's tone stack.

It is more about the gain structure of the preamp than the tone stack. Notice I've posted in text "0,0,10" and also an image of my settings, this should remove any pot taper diffrences and also produce the tightest response.

What cabinet? What SIC?

These are not a factor in preamp gain structure, or anything else post preamp like GEQ etc.
Master is at 1 and not clipping.

 

[2112]

I was going to reply to this with the mandatory "Marks are hard to dial in", "they're sensitive to guitars & playing style" and "what sort of maniac runs gain and overdrive that high with the fat switch on!" but I don't have a life so I did a quick A/B with my Mark IV Rev B and the equivalent model in the Axe-Fx FW 28.05. Disabled the Axe power amp and ran it into the fx return of the Mark to take out the GEQ/power amp//presence/load variables so it's really just comparing the preamps. PRS Custom 24 with a JB in the bridge.

First 2 clips are the preamp settings @James Freeman posted. Next two have the gain at 6, fat off & bright on which is my go to tight/dry recipe.

 

[James Freeman]

@2112 Thank you very much for posting this.
Not sure which one is first (not specified) but the first one is bloated and way less crunchy than the second, like two different amps.

EDIT:
I LOVE the gaslighting from Fractal fans but sorry not sorry, I trust my ears first, and it sounds like Fractal's Mark models are in need of a complete remodeling.
While Fractal is at it, please bring us a PEQ with authentic Linear sliders, that's part of the experience.

I want to love Mark models (by any company) but there's always something fucked up with them, I guess it's the elusive Mark magic that can't be bottled.

 

[norminal]

I was going to reply to this with the mandatory "Marks are hard to dial in", "they're sensitive to guitars & playing style" and "what sort of maniac runs gain and overdrive that high with the fat switch on!" but I don't have a life so I did a quick A/B with my Mark IV Rev B and the equivalent model in the Axe-Fx FW 28.05. Disabled the Axe power amp and ran it into the fx return of the Mark to take out the GEQ/power amp//presence/load variables so it's really just comparing the preamps. PRS Custom 24 with a JB in the bridge.

First 2 clips are the preamp settings @James Freeman posted. Next two have the gain at 6, fat off & bright on which is my go to tight/dry recipe.

The last two sound very close.