NAD: Friedman JJ Junior Head

[Baba]

Since I got the amp, I've been less happy with modeled tones. They often sound weird to me now, either lacking punch and clarity or sounding two dimensional or not reacting as I'd like with my guitar volume. Clean stuff can be fine but the higher gain stuff doesn't scratch the itch. Where the amp through a load box and IR just sounds right now.

So I was spinning through software options and remembered that Tonex exists. Spent a good chunk of time figuring out how to route everything this morning, but got a capture of the JJ Junior made through the Captor (no cab).

Sounds fantastic! Really close to the amp sound and feel, actually may clean up a little better than the amp. With an IR and the basic Tonex effects, it's a really good setup for practice. I've been learning songs this week focusing on slowing them down and playing accurately, really nailing the chords, not rushing. This will be a great option.

I did upload the capture to the cloud and will shoot another later once the Suhr Reactive Load arrives. Will be neat to compare those two.

But with the new Tonex software, you can lock the cab IR (like on Kemper), and I found a bunch of the other user captures sound really similar as they use a quality load box too. Technology is crazy!

So would you say, pertaining to this particular amp/experiment, in order of tone/feel, it would go:

1. The amp itself
2. Capture tech
3. Modeling

?

 

[Jarick]

Dang the initial estimate was yesterday. Hopefully today?

Yeah should be out for delivery today. A lot of packages lately have been 1-2 days behind. No worries!

 

[Jarick]

So would you say, pertaining to this particular amp/experiment, in order of tone/feel, it would go:

1. The amp itself
2. Capture tech
3. Modeling

?

Just with this limited testing, seems that way. I really like the amp with load box into Fractal for effects. I have not been digging any of the models as much...they're either missing something in the midrange or just dull overall. The Tonex software seems really close to the amp. I may have to try and set up a real A/B at some point but I don't want to mess with the Apollo setup until I shoot more captures with the new load box.

It's interesting because for years I keep reading the modelers are basically the same as amps, and many people sell off all their amps when they get the modeler, and if you can't get them the same you don't know how to dial them in. But I'm really enjoying the amp sound and feel overall. It's kind of plug and play.

It will be interesting if that's a honeymoon thing that wears off or if there's really a difference for me longer term.

 

[Jarick]

Okay just to shout out @2112 as the Fractal master...

Watched his video on tone matching, now that I have a better load box:



The result after about 5-10 minutes of tinkering, EQ difference between the two:

Comparing amp vs model settings (mirroring Fractal's numbering):

Amp / Model:
BE Channel / BE V1
Presence 4 / 5
Master 2 / 4.5
Treble 5 / 5.5
Middle 5 / 6.5
Bass 7 / 3.5
Gain 7 / 7

The real amp has a lot less bass and a lot more midrange than the amp model.

Other changes to the Fractal:

Change negative feedback from 9 to 7 (less low end)
Move depth frequency down from 200 to 150 Hz (less muddy, more deep thump)
Change impedance curve to LB-2 UK (kind of close to the Suhr?)
Set all the speaker parameters to 0 (speaker drive, compression, compliance, thump)

It's not exactly the same but way closer now. The amp has a little more natural feel and response on chugs and a little more of a glassy/splatty thing up top. But significantly better than before!

 

[mbugbee]

Okay just to shout out @2112 as the Fractal master...

Watched his video on tone matching, now that I have a better load box:



The result after about 5-10 minutes of tinkering, EQ difference between the two:

View attachment 41545

Comparing amp vs model settings (mirroring Fractal's numbering):

Amp / Model:
BE Channel / BE V1
Presence 4 / 5
Master 2 / 4.5
Treble 5 / 5.5
Middle 5 / 6.5
Bass 7 / 3.5
Gain 7 / 7

The real amp has a lot less bass and a lot more midrange than the amp model.

Other changes to the Fractal:

Change negative feedback from 9 to 7 (less low end)
Move depth frequency down from 200 to 150 Hz (less muddy, more deep thump)
Change impedance curve to LB-2 UK (kind of close to the Suhr?)
Set all the speaker parameters to 0 (speaker drive, compression, compliance, thump)

It's not exactly the same but way closer now. The amp has a little more natural feel and response on chugs and a little more of a glassy/splatty thing up top. But significantly better than before!

Have you tried swapping the models power amp tubes to el84? That might account for some of the bass difference.

 

[Ross Davies]

Alright thanks to @Mongillo19 I have a Suhr Reactive Load incoming! Hopefully a good upgrade from the Captor sonically and for quality. The Captor DI level knob is bad and won't give me a stable level anymore, so good timing.

Ross from Two notes here - sorry to hear this - I am happy to troubleshoot this with you if needed! Dont hesitate to drop me a DM. :)

 

[Jarick]

Ross from Two notes here - sorry to hear this - I am happy to troubleshoot this with you if needed! Dont hesitate to drop me a DM. :)

Thanks for the response! I bought this used and the pot was always bad. Is the DI level pot just a standard pot that can be replaced or maybe try Deoxit?

 

[MirrorProfiles]

It's not exactly the same but way closer now. The amp has a little more natural feel and response on chugs and a little more of a glassy/splatty thing up top. But significantly better than before!

Can relate so much to the experience you've described in the thread. I love modelling and firmly believe it to sound indistinguishable to the real amp BUT the path to get there is totally different and nowhere near as intuitive. The real gear just IS, with modelling you ideally need the real amp side by side to compare with, and often end up doing tweaks that you wouldn't normally do without having a reference to compare against.

Using real gear just gets you there much faster, and without those doubts lingering in the back of your mind.

 

[MTB1973]

Just with this limited testing, seems that way. I really like the amp with load box into Fractal for effects. I have not been digging any of the models as much...they're either missing something in the midrange or just dull overall. The Tonex software seems really close to the amp. I may have to try and set up a real A/B at some point but I don't want to mess with the Apollo setup until I shoot more captures with the new load box.

It's interesting because for years I keep reading the modelers are basically the same as amps, and many people sell off all their amps when they get the modeler, and if you can't get them the same you don't know how to dial them in. But I'm really enjoying the amp sound and feel overall. It's kind of plug and play.

It will be interesting if that's a honeymoon thing that wears off or if there's really a difference for me longer term.

Very interesting comparison. This has been my personal struggle with modelers - without the real thing sitting next to you, it’s difficult to tweak the modeler to match it. The bass setting in particular is interesting as I find many high gain fractal models bass heavy on my setup in my opinion.

 

[laxu]

Can relate so much to the experience you've described in the thread. I love modelling and firmly believe it to sound indistinguishable to the real amp BUT the path to get there is totally different and nowhere near as intuitive. The real gear just IS, with modelling you ideally need the real amp side by side to compare with, and often end up doing tweaks that you wouldn't normally do without having a reference to compare against.

Using real gear just gets you there much faster, and without those doubts lingering in the back of your mind.

On top of that, setting up the closest like for like comparison is it's own challenge. Most modelers don't even let you tinker to the level of Fractal, and you still have output systems, loadboxes, volume levels etc to deal with.

I think you save a lot of grief if you just ignore the rabbit holes and dial things to "I like these tones". I say if you can't get a good tone out of most better modelers on the market, the problem exists between guitar and strap.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Most modelers don't even let you tinker to the level of Fractal, and you still have output systems, loadboxes, volume levels etc to deal with.

It’s a bit of a catch 22 because often enough you don’t need the sheer number of parameters Fractal offer to get you there. SOMETIMES one of them will be just the ticket, but in my experience Line 6 or Neural DSP can get just as close. There are times Fractal’s deeper editing is just the ticket, but Line 6 and Neural’s models are captured in a “most commonly used” rig where they sound mostly like you’d expect.

I say if you can't get a good tone out of most better modelers on the market, the problem exists between guitar and strap.

I agree, but the discussion here is more about how real amps don’t require that deeper level of adjustment or back and forth. I think the days of having to really battle to get a useable tone are confined to the past - everything sounds pretty good with minimal effort. But rather than the bar being “sounding good” to “sounds like my real amp”, then it changes a bit. If you A/B to real amps, real amps just get there faster.

 

[Whizzinby]

It's interesting because for years I keep reading the modelers are basically the same as amps, and many people sell off all their amps when they get the modeler, and if you can't get them the same you don't know how to dial them in. But I'm really enjoying the amp sound and feel overall. It's kind of plug and play.

I’ve been screwing around with a song for a week and couldnt quite get the gained up tones I was looking for, so I just fired up the JVM into the Suhr RL and there was an instant thought of “Well now that’s f’ing awesome”. Much more in your face, much more cut. Just slaps.

Modeling isn’t going to hold any of us me back from mediocrity, (lol) but I’m still reminded the best piece of gear to get amp tones is….





an amp.

 

[Ross Davies]

Thanks for the response! I bought this used and the pot was always bad. Is the DI level pot just a standard pot that can be replaced or maybe try Deoxit?

No problem at all - it is indeed a standard pot and you could try some switch cleaner - this might rectify it as a first step. If you need a replacement part, our support team is always on hand at Support.Two-notes.com. If you do submit a ticket, let me know your ticket ID and I will get this fast-tracked for you!

 

[Jarick]

It’s a bit of a catch 22 because often enough you don’t need the sheer number of parameters Fractal offer to get you there. SOMETIMES one of them will be just the ticket, but in my experience Line 6 or Neural DSP can get just as close. There are times Fractal’s deeper editing is just the ticket, but Line 6 and Neural’s models are captured in a “most commonly used” rig where they sound mostly like you’d expect.


I agree, but the discussion here is more about how real amps don’t require that deeper level of adjustment or back and forth. I think the days of having to really battle to get a useable tone are confined to the past - everything sounds pretty good with minimal effort. But rather than the bar being “sounding good” to “sounds like my real amp”, then it changes a bit. If you A/B to real amps, real amps just get there faster.

For me it's been eye opening to have that frame of reference. Memory is bad, especially auditory memory. Chasing the "sound in your head" is never ending for me because that sound just keeps changing. Kind of like drifting around in the ocean.

I will say out of the box I think the Helix Friedman sound was closer to the JJ Junior than the Fractal BE. I'd have to compare again but it may be worth a closer look at the Helix. I'm pretty close now though with the Fractal.

 

[Jarick]

I’ve been screwing around with a song for a week and couldnt quite get the gained up tones I was looking for, so I just fired up the JVM into the Suhr RL and there was an instant thought of “Well now that’s f’ing awesome”. Much more in your face, much more cut. Just slaps.

Modeling isn’t going to hold any of us me back from mediocrity, (lol) but I’m still reminded the best piece of gear to get amp tones is….





an amp.

I've got to mess around a bit more with the IR-X but I think that gets pretty close with a lot of the low fuss. Honestly I'd still like to try an IR-D, or even get a Little Sister. But after seeing our tax bill I'm going to be in sell mode rather than in buy mode for a while...

 

[Jarick]

No problem at all - it is indeed a standard pot and you could try some switch cleaner - this might rectify it as a first step. If you need a replacement part, our support team is always on hand at Support.Two-notes.com. If you do submit a ticket, let me know your ticket ID and I will get this fast-tracked for you!

Thanks!

I read that the Two Notes captor impedance is really more designed around the DynIR cab system, which is interesting. I'll have to check out more of those plugins.

 

[Ross Davies]

Thanks!

I read that the Two Notes captor impedance is really more designed around the DynIR cab system, which is interesting. I'll have to check out more of those plugins.

Thanks for getting back to me. To an extent yet, however our DynIR will work well in line with any loadbox response - for example our new Reload II sounds particularly awesome with DynIR emulation via GENOME at the tail end of the signal chain. Just as a note, if you are a registered Two notes hardware customer, you get a copy of GENOME for free - in terms of redeeming this, please see the link here: https://www.two-notes.com/en/grab-your-complimentary-copy-of-genome-today/

If you have any questions, let me know - always happy to weigh in!