What do you want from a modeller that the current options don't give you???

[MirrorProfiles]

+1

The ability to flip between different speakers in each cab would be great. I’m surprised nobody has tried this, but then again it requires having to build an IR pack per speaker per cab, and that scales out to a massive project.

some people already make and sell packs like this *ahem*

That was something I was keen for from other products, when I’m micing a cab, I’ll try all the speakers. And while some speakers are just duds, quite often it’s context dependent and having the variation is really handy. Since making them, I’ve kind of learned how the position in the cab affects the sound.

Amplitube captures SOME different speakers of the same type - in a 4x12 it seems to be one in the top position and one in the bottom. There seems to be something a little hokey about mic positions and how they do things that doesn’t make me trust them 100%. I tried to ask for more information and they don’t really reveal much on what you’re given/what to expect, the benefit of making your own is you know exactly how they expect to be used for the most accurate performance.

But yeah, if the IR’s can be embedded into a dedicated product with a nice interface and interactions as well as physical modelling and other niceties then IR’s can go straight in the bin. There’s so much room for cabs to be handled better than just plain IR’s.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Not a lot. More seamless firmware updating - I wish that all happened straight from the device and was auto-prompted. Doesn’t have to be Wi-Fi , could just be USB connection to a host computer, but once it’s connected to internet-connected-device it checks for update, tells you one is available, asks you if you wanna update, and prompts you through the process.

 

[laxu]

I think cabinet modelling could also do with a similar level of obsession, IR’s are great but it would be great if there was more focus on the physical properties and interactions, as well as variations of different speaker types, positions in the cab etc.

I'd love that too.

Will we see "Improved cabinet wood resonance simulation" or "Added virtual movable ears emulation" in the Axe-Fx IV fw release notes?

 

[metropolis_4]

The two things at the top of my list:

Two groups of Scenes/Snapshots that can be selected independently from each other. So I could do things like have my amps and drives in Scenes A and my delays/reverbs/modulations in Scenes B.

Expanded Songs/Setlists. These are great but I need a lot more slots per song. Ideally I would love to be able to just program a single list of presets/scenes and be able to step through them so I could do a whole show with a single footswitch

 

[the-trooper]

Pickles. Stick a cucumber on one end, get a pickle on the other. Did you ever pickle pickles? You know how much work that is? And the smell of vinegar that stays in your sinuses?
Would probably have to come with some sort of a warning about sticking things in it...
Other than that, nothing.

 

[jay mitchell]

Point-to-point adjustability. A 'breadboard' modeler.

What could you do with this that you can't do now with the matrix layout in every generation of axe-fx?

 

[jay mitchell]

That was something I was keen for from other products, when I’m micing a cab, I’ll try all the speakers. And while some speakers are just duds, quite often it’s context dependent and having the variation is really handy. Since making them, I’ve kind of learned how the position in the cab affects the sound.

That has nothing to do with speaker/cab interaction and everything to do with the proximity of the mic and cab to environmental surfaces. Think about it: the floor reflection will occur earlier and at a higher level relative to direct sound when you mic a bottom speaker vs. when you mic a top speaker. Other surfaces - walls, ceilings, gobos, etc., - can cause similar effects and create the erroneous impression that "position in the cab affects the sound."

 

[FuzzyAce]

What could you do with this that you can't do now with the matrix layout in every generation of axe-fx?

I don't have an Axe... currently. Can you explain it to me?

 

[jay mitchell]

I don't have an Axe... currently. Can you explain it to me?

Axe-Fx devices of all generations use a M x N grid for component placement and signal path routing. It's 4 x 12 in the first two generations, 6 x 14 in the III.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

That has nothing to do with speaker/cab interaction and everything to do with the proximity of the mic and cab to environmental surfaces. Think about it: the floor reflection will occur earlier and at a higher level relative to direct sound when you mic a bottom speaker vs. when you mic a top speaker. Other surfaces - walls, ceilings, gobos, etc., - can cause similar effects and create the erroneous impression that "position in the cab affects the sound."

Speakers in the top half of a slanted baffle consistently measure differently than speakers in the bottom half of a baffle. Easy to test by rotating a cab around to maintain a similar level from the floor, or by micing cabs that are stacked on top of each other. I’m not talking about impedance interactions here so much as the frequency response of a mic’d speaker in different cabinet designs (different baffle arrangements etc).

I have a graph somewhere of about 20 cabs featuring various speakers - there is a consistent relationship between the difference in top vs bottom speakers in angled vs straight cabs.

Not saying the nearest speaker and surfaces having an influence isn’t a thing, because that obviously is too.

 

[FuzzyAce]

Axe-Fx devices of all generations use a M x N grid for component placement and signal path routing. It's 4 x 12 in the first two generations, 6 x 14 in the III.

What do you mean by component placement? Do you mean you have the ability to change virtual values like coupling caps and bias resistors, etc, because that's to what I'm referring.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Isn't that what this is?

View attachment 14982

No. I mean adjusting the global input level for the guitar sensitivity.

 

[Jarick]

Physically interacting with them like I would interact with an amp and pedals, or at least much closer to that. All of the digital tones are there pretty much across the board, but I don't like working with editor apps and little screens with encoder knobs.

Awareness and compensation for output/monitoring, especially with regards to the cabinet simulation. That's tricky but think of something like Slate VSX or Sonarworks, maybe there's a pick list of common headphones, monitors, and speakers.

Basically when I hear the amp modeler in my room and it sounds really muffled or bright or scooped or bassy, it's hard to diagnose that and know where to compensate in the modeler to improve the sound. Let's say it's too scooped...do I tinker with the high and low cuts in the cab, or adjust the amp EQ, or go on an IR safari, or try and do something else, etc.

 

[timbuck3]

amp x...could have been great but i fear it wont happen

 

[paisleywookiee]

amp x...could have been great but i fear it wont happen

I think it’ll sink the company. I feel as though he bit off more than he can chew.

 

[timbuck3]

I think it’ll sink the company. I feel as though he bit off more than he can chew.

well...i wouldnt go that far...but at 2k...

 

[dk_ace]

FM16 with a dual function expression pedal built in. Helix style hardware editing, fractal sw editor, instant switching, new axe3 reverbs, big scribble strips, more processing power and more block instances.

D

 

[fazer]

Hmmm - right now I would say support forums that are happy to deal with all points, positive or negative. Most of the more expensive modellers probably have those already but… the company who made a modeller I bought recently doesn’t.

 

[Lysander]

I think cabinet modelling could also do with a similar level of obsession, IR’s are great but it would be great if there was more focus on the physical properties and interactions, as well as variations of different speaker types, positions in the cab etc.

The ability to flip between different speakers in each cab would be great. I’m surprised nobody has tried this, but then again it requires having to build an IR pack per speaker per cab, and that scales out to a massive project.

AmpliTube has supported this since forever, AFAIK. Rumor has it we might get that soon in hardware format.

 

[Lysander]

Gotta say, it warms my heart how all replies are focusing on features, and no one's asking "sound better"

I think we've long crossed a quality threshold for modelers. Any of the big boys on the market today can be made to sound spectacular.