TBF, Im not the first one who's questioned the SLO. Several users have noticed it sounds different to what they expect. I'm not saying it's wrong, but I do think it's odd. It's not one amp either - there has been the 5150, the jubilee, the IIC+, the SLO. It just depends what is under the microscope in any given moment. Some things have been attributed down to a cab block/SIC bug. That makes sense for sure, and its good its fixed.
I think all companies who are proud of the accuracy of their modelling should do this. The whole reason I came back to Line 6 in the Helix generation was because I was impressed with how accurate the modelling was when compared to real amps. It required videos from
@GuitarJon and Leon and a few others, mind. I can only think of a few examples that do this:
Just looking through the comments section and I think it all seems to rub off quite positively?
Line 6 would be mad to get involved on every tonal discussion and are understandably just looking from the distance. I know the concerns are being looked at. Regardless, if they just said "hey, the reason things are quite different before is because this time round we did _______ because _______" then everything will make perfect sense to me. In fact, I think comments like this in the past have been what's made users more in tune to the influence of impedance curves and input levels etc.
As it stands, the lack of information (as to why the models are different, and what if anything the user needs to do to address the differences) is just going to lead people to speculate.
its also wild to me that certain people think that pointing out unexpected differences are an attack or poking. It couldn't be further from it - I want to understand what's going on. If users understand the behaviours and quirks of software, they get better results - thats a win for all. I want things to be the best they can be, and it all leads to helping to achieve the best results.