Guitar Amp vs Modeler - Can You Tell The Difference
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 сер 2024
- In today's video, I'm trying to find out if we can hear the difference between a real amplifier and an amp modeler. For this experiment, I'm using an AXE FX 3 and a Matchless Independence 35 Valve guitar amplifier.
The Studio Rats are core band members Paul Drew on guitar/production/mixing, drummer James Ivey and Dan Hawkins on bass. They collaborate with singers and musicians to produce radio-ready songs.
#matchlessamplifiers #axefx #axefx3 - Розваги
I thought the AXE FX 3 sounded markedly better in every example but was expecting it to be the amp, amazing!
I own an Axe Fx 3 and an FM9. I recently sold all my amps, two Mesa Boogie Roadsters, a Mesa Stiletto Ace, a Mesa Express 5:50 head with Mesa 2x12 cab, a Mesa Tremoverb, a Victory V40 Deluxe , a Victory Sheriff 44 and a Fender Princeton.
I used the funds of the sales to buy more guitars.
The Axe Fx units are unmatched. Tonally they're just perfect. Live, they're flawless. As a creative tool, Fractal, even in the world of modelling, is unbeatable. You're only limited by the ceiling of your own imagination.
My first Fractal was the AX8 which I toured since 2018. All the time playing certain shows with amps, other shows with the Fractal. Eventually the Fractal completely won out.
I still adore amps, but for me, the Axe Fx wins out.
Thanks for a great video.
Wow. I was dead wrong. Thought for sure the Matchless was source 1 because of how harmonically rich and responsive it was. I thought to myself, if ever a day comes that modelers sound that good, I'm selling all my amps. Well I have an FM-9 on order!
same here, I thought the exact same thing.
Mine just came in. Excited to try.
I plan to get one after my HX stomp dies.
The difference is when you are playing in the room. You will hear and feel the difference.
@@EJH-jn6mo I agree. In the room and on stage, tubes are still king. But when recording, it's gotten really hard to tell the difference.
I also prefer the sound of performance no.1 (and I was convinced based on my ear that no.1 was the Matchless tube amp). Thank you for this A/B comparison. Subscribed to your channel based on this video.
I felt the Matchless still pulled some midrange tones that the Ax didn’t in your example. Still is very cool because of the ease of taking that out live. Living in Texas affords me to play outside a lot and most places we play have never heard of “quiet stages”. Praise Jesse.
And one can tweak that midrange on the Capture to match it too, if one had the desire to. I liked both examples actually, had to crank it louder to hear the amp. differences. This Neural Tech. is astonishing, digital going into a stage 3 or generation 3. stage 1, the original stuff, Pods/Vox tonelabs, stage 2 kemper, and now generation 3 using Neural Capture.
Hi Paul, great video. For what’s it worth my ears guessed right on an iPhone. But what really confirmed it was watching your face and body language. You smiled way more playing the amp and generally looked to enjoy playing it more and played more carefully and dynamically on the amp. And hit the axe harder and less carefully. I own a HC30 and a quad cortex and love both for what they are and reckon the axe/modeller sounds better in studio or mix, but the feel and enjoyment that comes from playing an amp, especially a matchless, is well, matchless!
tube amp in room feeling the amp wins but for recording and travel the Axe FX is the way to go as well as less maintenance issues.
I preferred number one. I thought it was the Matchless. Awesome.
Ditto
Yeah, I thought so too. Wow never thought I would prefer a modeler just based on the sound😮
Bullshit with some of these people that say " i could hear the harmonics better on source 2" or the midrange, yea my ass. Im with u guys , the axe fx sounded superior and im not a fan of the axe fx. One of the most famous bands that use it is metallica and their sound live just sucks, to me personally at least. I dont know maybe its just the way they dial their tone. But anyways great video
@@livem18Not the high end. The transient.
Great video! As a Fractal user, and I mainly use the Matchless models, I could pick the 1 and 2; it's not a perfect replica as you say, but it sounds awesome, so great. And the AXE FX is 1000% more practical than amps and a pedalboard in every way. I was so impressed with the Boss unit, that was a real suprise. Massive value for money.
Hello everyone. I have been working as a guitar technician for a long time. And first of all, I love analog amps and effects. But I think devices like the kemper or the Axe-FX are simply more reliable and above all, less susceptible to local problems such as electricity and weather. A wet speaker just sounds different and if tube amps that don't get enough power they just sound like sh.. and what we all want is always the same sound. So it was a real relief for me as a technician to have the same sound ready every day and almost every sound engineer was happier with the signal.
The difference I perceive for myself is the sound behavior of the low end. Tubes give the bass more punch and warmth. Here it helps to send the DI output of the AXE-FX or Kemper or any other digital amp through a tube DI or preamp again. It gave the sound a rounder and warmer overall ton and a little less digital on certain sounds.
But in the end there isn't an amp for everyone and there are professionals and amateur musicians and everyone needs the right tool for their area and the ideas of how an amp should sound are also very different. Therefore everyone should play the amp he wants. None of us invented playing the guitar ;)
Best greats from Germany BRS
I have tried both at Gigs. I spent 12 Months with an Axe FX and currently use a Friedman Twin Sister. The axe fx was great but it doesn't sound like a real amp. Its 90% of the way there. The Friedman comes alive at certain volume levels that I just couldn't get from the Axe FX. Nothing wrong with the Axe-FX. I think there is a real difference between playing at the volumes you regularly hear on UA-cam and the volume levels that are used at a gig. Playing both in a live mix is where the Amp really shone through. Thanks for the video:)
how do they both sit in a mix? That is real test at least for recording purposes. Miking amps is a pain and maintenance of tubes as well as space required.
The few small differences come down to small changes in settings, not a fundamental tone difference, where the Axe and Match sound so alike it’s uncanny.
Amazing the tools we have in 2022😀
Cant wait for the video comparing the axe fx to the gx100! I dont have a lot of money, so I'm probably gonna get the gx100. Your videos about it are such a blessing and they're really helping me already, so thanks for that Paul!
I actually preferred #2 for the clarity and the chime. I don't think I would have been able to tell the difference in a live room with a drummer and bass player though.
I'd also like to hear a comparison between Boss and AXE.
I think the clarity and chime of the am (2) is the thing, that also helps to give the guitarist the transparency of his tone within the band, so you will hear him better.
Great video Paul. As much as I was totally wrong about Choice 1 being the Matchless, I think you are bang-on when you mention the inconvenience of lugging an amp around, micing etc etc. I bought a new Marshall combo over the past year but I think my money would have been better invested in the Axe FX; I'll settle with my GX 100 for now since you proved it's also a great unit. I'd love to see anything more you have to show on the GX 100. Thanks for taking the time to do this video Paul!
When somebody says “To tell the difference” that statement is aimed for the listener… as to “To feel the difference” is for the player; and its a completely different ballgame…
Great playing and video!
I preferred source 1 but I could hear some additional harmonics and compression which led me to predict that source 2 was the amp plus the hum was more convincing but was a very interesting comparison. Defo would like to hear a comparison between the axe fx and boss as it sounded really good 👍🏻
I vastly preferred no.1 to no.2. Very happy with my FM3 now. thanks for the comparison video.
Great video !!!
They both sounded good but I thought sample 1 always sounded a little better.
I would super appreciate a comparison between the Axe-FX III and the Boss GX-100.
I thought that was the amp. So fooled me. LOL.
I love when people do these videos. I used to be a purist and once the fractal stuff started getting REALLY good i stopped being able to tell…and when they somehow managed to make it FEEL like a tube amp, well the battle was won (for my needs of course haha). I just upgraded from Axe8 to FM9. Can’t wait to use it live in my u2 tribute.
I could tell, had no doubts. I admit the difference is tiny. But tiny differences make a big deal to how comfortable or inspired I am. I would totaly use that moderler to do a job but for my own enjoyment it would have to be the valve amp. Shame as I wanted to be fooled so I can convert to digital full time for the practicality but the tech is not there yet. I had the Boss gx100 and it was good but I could feel the latency and it annoys me. I have a Helix Stopm now and use it when I can't fit the half stack in the band van. Maybe in another 20 years they will nail it. I hope so. BTW Paul you play great and if I was at one of your gigs I would enjoy it either way.
The main difference to me is how they handle mids. The mids in most modellers, including the Axe FX, sound less fundamental and have less sustain, than most analog amps. Even the cheapest amps does this better. I hear a cardboard type sound in modellers that I just don't agree with, and I've had quite a few. When I try dial the mids up, they start to sound bad..But I would think it is quite subjective then, because many don't love mids, and therefore might prefer modellers. And some have amps with scooped mids, which it might not be such a big leap to a modeller. You may even be able to compensate with a pedal for handling the mids, and you may even prefer less mids in your tone for recording or doing rhythm behind a singer. I believe the mids are where the modellers can improve, though. Btw, the Boss sounded much better than the Axe in that regard, to my ears.
Totally agree with this, I’ve used the Helix for about 3 years now, for me modellers do have that “cardboard” sound like you said, at the same time amazing machines, I don’t really know how to explain it but using real amps for about 17 years prior I knew the difference between the two straight away
Wow, thanks for the video. I was sure that source one was the matchless! What a nice surprise. The Fractal folks seem to have done something very special. I wish they had native plugins for daw too.
I hear you.. but
Sold all my valve amps except my favorite, added an FM9 ( for my live rig) with a powered full range wedge and keep my AxFX III in my studio. Same tone any where I go. Never been happier with my setup or sound. Fractal is the way to go. The guys in the band agree. Bass player just switched to a AX8. He loves it.
Yay! I managed to guess correctly, although in my case, having owned an Independence, Avalon and HC30, I’ve been fortunate to spend a lot of time with Matchless amps. I am currently getting my head around the recently acquired FM9 Turbo and despite being a skeptic (I fully believed I’d get it, plug it in, play around with it and then box it up and send it back), I’ve been blown away with the quality of the tones. The patches are useable straight out of the box. The Bogner Ecstasy patch was a litmus test for me. The chewiness I associate with the Bogner blue channel was there and instantly sounded familiar.
I love your reviews and comparison videos. i quite often use them to compare and contrast sounds in my modeler when I'm trying to dial them in.Thank you for that! So, I got my tele out and grabbed my Matchless setting in my modeler and proceeded to play along with you to hear the differences between all three. At first i wasn't sure which was which, because mine had subtle differences in verbs and delays. Mine sounded more like example 2. The individual notes had the same body to them and the same darker transients in the high end. When i heard the GX-100, i pretty much knew for sure example 1 was the Axe FX. The upper end of the GX was closer to the Axe, those transients seem to be a common thing between most modelers. What am i using? The far too often kicked to the curb Headrush pedalboard. I must have it dialed in fairly well, and in a large part, thanks to you Paul. You always have great tones to listen to.
I was absolutely convinced that number 1 was the Matchless! The way it compresses, glassy sounds and even the hum in the quiet parts made me so sure of myself. The AxeFX is sooooo very convincing, it’s scary! Both great sounds, but I proud myself in being an audiofile, boy was I wrong on this
I was the same I loved example 1 better than 2 just sounded warmer was so surprised it wasn’t the tube amp
@Brett
Yup.
@Brett It's easy to get caught up in the whole "exactly by what percentage does this modeler copy this sound", but at the end of the day a good sound is a good sound. It might not be 100% but that's not the point, the point is that a lot of people (Paul included, evidently) may actually prefer the sound of the modeler. Nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make the real amp any less great.
@Brett
It can be said that the best modelers sound pretty close to good tube amps, but the feel is never the same. The dynamics and immediacy of tube amps, the even ordered harmonics and overtones, and the magic "singing" quality of tube rectifier sag will never be perfectly mimicked in the digital realm.
Same here. Thought source 1 filled the room better. However I'm not a professional musician not sure that matters.
I boguth the FM-9 two months ago and my jaw remains planted on the floor every time I play. It is off the hook impressive for it's range of capabilities and top tier tones. Hundreds of amps and hundred of cabs allow endless combinations to personalize tone in ways totally impossible in the "real" world. 3/k is peanuts for what this thing does and allows you to do and experience. Best music gear I've purchased in my lifetime bar none.
Called it…. Only because I’m wearing high quality headphones and can hear the slight brittleness of the Axe FX’s high end. Also, the Matchless has a little more body, making it sound warmer. Great post! Looking forward to more like this.
i don't have anything against modelers, but i do like the feel of an amp on stage behind me. it's like driving a v8 or a tesla. i tried the headrush and just preferred my old school amp. headrush fun and nice sounding usually, amp always inspiring. both recorded sounds were really nice.
source 1 amp, both nice.
hmmm, got it wrong. that's cool.
Been saying for years modellers have reach the stage where in a full mix you can't tell the difference because certain frequencies will be covered but when played alone there is a difference. In a blind test most will be unable to tell. One thing modelling hasn't been able to do is the touch response of valves which a player who's used to can tell but it's getting closer.
Nope its definitely already past that. Every time I think thats the case I find the setting on the axe which is making me thing that and bam! The amp is reacting exactly as I wanted it to ... even if thats less accurate to the actual amp. maybe its a little negative feedback or presence, or bias, or swapping out the tubes or giving it more input signal .... its always in there.
I picked number 2 because I thought number 1 was a bit fizzy and didn't sound natural. Thanks for the comparison
Preferred #2 and also guessed right to my own surprise. Maybe it's because I'm experienced on both modelers and real miking. #1 still sounded amazing , no alternative outshines the other.
A year old, I preferred one every time and therefore the Axe as it was more open. Great video Paul I continue to watch you as I am up for eithre a Marshall studio JTM or Boss Katana artist II. I do have an Axe Fx III and sold most of my pedals which paid for it. I do studio mainly and I use the J45 a lot as I like that sound compared to a Vox. I am also playing with Mooer and Nux to see if they can be similar as sometimes I get really close with the Prime P1 and Mighty air. The Axe to me if people used would put TPS out of business as Mick is anti modellers. I love that you are open and actually show comparisons I shall continue to support you
My how the tables have turned. Back in the stone ages you would keep a pod as a backup if your high end tube amp went down. Now the high end tube amp is the backup.
I was most surprised how the fractal took the external boost. The input reacting to external gear was one of my hang ups for looking into higher end modelers. Looks like that is no longer an issue.
I use Kemper, helix etc and think they are great. I believe the sound of digital gear has come a long way even to the point of being indistinguishable especially in the mix or at a gig. But, I think I can feel the difference when sat in front of my real amp compared to the Kemper profile of it. However my biggest concern is, are we letting the convenience of modelling/Profiling take us to the point that it’s no longer economically worthwhile for amp manufacturers to make valve amps. Are we effectively killing off the very thing we’re modelling. After all the valve amps are the reference tone all modelling seeks to accomplish!
Great comment, and yes I agree.
I would love to hear a comparison with the gx100
Will do
Love your vids Paul. I've used modellers with Atomic CLR behind me. Playing live is the main problem, dialing them into the room at a gig is close to impossible. A great demo for you to demonstrate is to plug your Matchless amp and cab with the same settings you had at previous gig and TURN the amp to low low volumes (dont touch the eq)
I've done this with my Friedman Smallbox 50 that proves to me real amps win playing live because of the dealing in quick process. Most amp guys fiddle with the eq before every gig try doing that with the Axe FX. Why don't more people bring up this dilemma ?? Super playing great vids love your stuff. Love to hear your thoughts.
I preferred the Axe FX and really thought it was the other way around. But sometimes hearing these things in a full mix of music can yield a much different result. I've often found that modeled guitar tracks can often get lost and require more "work" to mix correctly (eq, compression etc.). In my experience, real amps, even with load boxes/ IRs stay present and require much less work at the mix stage. But to be fair, I've used various plug ins, a Kemper, and an HX stomp, but not Fractal. I'm going to give them a go.
I'm surprised at how different the two sounded. I preferred the Matchless, but I questioned myself as to which was which until you played the BOSS GX-100. It sounded a lot like the one I was thinking was the Axe-FX, which solidified it for me. Turns out I was right. Neither sounds bad though, just different. I've been thinking about getting an FM3 and I'd be perfectly happy with that sound.
Glad to know I preferred the axe fx3 as I’m waiting on one to arrive in the next few days. Getting exciting!
Wow! I was convinced that the first one was the amp. I'm very impressed
I was right. What proved it for me was the evenness of the harmonic overtones in the valve amp. The digital amps always sound less even in the cleans. When overdriven, digital tends to lose clarity compared to a good valve amp. It may be the algorithms when it compresses.
I thought source 1 was the Amp. Really great stuff although both are very similar. I will say for a live setting the amp is probably a better choice opposed to just sending your signal to the P.A. Another overlooked aspect of this debate is the visuals you get with a stack on stage. Kind of adds to the experience when people see real amps, also feels better to be on stage with a real amp
Yeah I prefer an amp too, but it is impressive how far emulators have come and having one as backup can't hurt. But it's not for me. I'd rather have an amp to it's sound perfectly than an emulator that can do any sound well. But a lot of gigs people just mike up a small cab and that goes into the PA and monitors. In such a setup it doesn't make a big difference if you have an amp or not.
I definitely want to see a comparison with Axe and Boss GX
I've seen bands like Brit Floyd ( a superb Pink Floyd cover band), they use Ax Fx on all guitars and sitting in the seats you would never know the difference. The only amp they had onstage was a bass amp. Saw King Crimson a few years ago and Fripp was using an AX FX and he sounded great, Tony Levin used a Kemper for his bass, and again you would never know the difference.
Hey Paul. First of all, fantastic playing and super cool voicings which I have figered out and so I'm very happy having added those to my repertoire.
And thank you for the video of course.
I think the boss sounds fine and sounds somewhat like it should sound like. If I prepare a Burger at home and try to recreate a BigMac, you would recognise, that what I made should be the recreation of a BigMac, but you definitely know also, that it isn't the real deal. (Sorry for the analogy, not saying that the BigMac would ever be better than a home made one...)
The fractal and the Matchless though are indistinguishable. Yet there are differences, but I wouldn't be able to tell them apart and that makes the fractal so desirable. Speaking of the price, the fractal is still a reasonably priced unit. One beautiful Tubeamp could not be bought with almost twice the money, a fractal costs. And, the fractal's tubes don't blow, the pedalboard cables don't have intermittend contacts, I can carry it without pain, if it get's stolen or rained on, that would be annoying, but not heartbreaking.
Don't get me wrong. I love amps. The engineering, the warmth of the tubes, the hum, the smell, the feel, the way the look, the history - everything. But a fractal makes live so much easier... Unfortunately...
By the way: I so hoped, that #1 was the Matchless, because I liked it better, but it was the fractal. That was a surprise to me...
Dude, same. I thought the Matchless was the first and was like "yeah, it sounds a little better" Absolute shocker lol.
I feel like they're different enough that I would be able to tell a big difference if the amp was my day-to-day which I think is the measure by which we should judge modelers (of course that is only my opinion). Wow I just made it to the place where you said that you prefer the AxeFX -- I guess my assumption was dead wrong. Thanks for the content. Cheers mate.
Great video, thank you for taking the time to create and publish.
I was wrong as well, I was thinking source 1 was the amp. Nice..... Thanks for the info, making me think twice about buying a modeler. Modeler seems to be the better choice.
Hi Paul,
first of all: I love to listen to you. You are a such great inspiration: I love ur playing, Ur tone. So beautiful. Thank You.
I´m in the "modeller-theme" since the first standard, then the kemper, the II-XL now the AXE-III. - I am old. I´ve owned many Tubeamps over the years before modelers came up.
When comparing the Axe with cheaper/other units, I think, that it is impotant to look, what an AXE III can do beside all tweaking the best "tube-like-tone":
I dont need a mixer in a small studio. The Axe III is the perfect 8in-8out audiointerface intergrated into any DAW, with an awesome ASIO Driver, no latency,. With Axe Edit it is the most versatile gear I´ve ever owned. Its an audiointerface -superunit. From this perspective the Modeller is an Addon. UAD has unison. - In terms of Amps: nothing compares to the AxeIII. - Take a good mic, the Tube Pre from the Axe, tweak a lill with some other block. No hum, no noise, give the singer a lill reverb and compression and record the Pure signal without, right into the DAW, with a scable GUI in Axe Edit III and save every setup in a Preset, scene, block...
Thanks for Ur work. Ruben
I got it right! I’ve just been using tube amps for far too long to not get it right & so knew example 1 was not the Matchless immediately.
That first riff example Blew My Mind…
Could hear the real from the first notes, listening from the speakers of a Samsung smartphone. But have to admit these modelers have made a big progress. Good content mate! Also the first riff is hot. Now the advice: is there any modeler with the same tone quality but even way more essential in features, in the $1000 range?
Fractals sound amazing. I think some of you are nuts. I love my FM9 and would not sell it until the 4 eventually comes out.
I could hear the difference on earbuds and I thought 2 was the Matchless (but I wouldn't have been surprised if it had turned out to be the other way round). I've never used either unit personally, but I thought 2 had more "Voxiness" and 1 sounded stiffer.
Wow that matchless is something special. To be completely honest on every example i could tell. However, I still bought an fm3 for its versatility.
i could tell witch one was the amp, i think that the magic happens when you crank the tube amp up that's where the sound that the modeler can't get. that being said i've been using the line 6 helix effects only with a tube amp since 2015, but i think it also depends on most places. you can't play that loud. to get that great tube sound we all love.
Paul, I would love to hear the GX-100 compared to the Axe-FX model. I love your playing. Keep up the great work!
Cheers! Vid coming soon.
They both sounds great to my ears and I'd be really happy with either. The modellers sound near enough as makes no difference these days and you get a lot more for your money.
WOW! I loved source one and am super surprised it was the AxeFX!
Your recent videos on the IK Tonex have sold me on that unit!
Thanks for your great videos!
Myself I am keeping an Eye on how this Tonex goes, I suspect that they may come up with a PRO model pedal, since so many are gripeing that it does not have fx loop, and stereo capabilites, among a couple others, also watching what capabilities or compatibilities with the software between amplitube 5 and Tonex. You could sure tell when the release of the tonex pedal was by how many reviews there have been.
@@ksharpe10 I don’t mind that there isn’t an effects loop or stereo (I believe the reverbs are stereo). I kind of think of it like my real amps. When I use my real amps, I always use them with my Captor X and run the amp/Captor combo either in a loop on the HX Effects or put a stereo delay/reverb and modulation after the amp and use the HX in front. I don’t mind doing post effects after the “cab” and I also have the option to put my Cab M after the post effects. For me, it’s never been a problem in terms of tones.
@@JagStar The tech. is just astonishingly Good.
@@ksharpe10 Mine arrived last Friday but I haven’t had time to open it up yet. Hoping to get to it in the next day or so. I’ve been playing with the free version of the ToneX software and can honestly say I am super excited for the hardware. The plug-in sounds and feels so authentic. Can’t wait to profile my amps.
@@JagStar Supposedly the term Profile is a Kemper patent term. Most guys are using Capture, when the Tonex Capture is being processed you can turn the sound on, and hear it being processed, and later in the process it sounds like a person playing the guitar thru it, this Neural stuff is really amazing. It is why the Tonex is more advanced than a Kemper, I think in a year or so you might not even be able to give away a kemper, they should have updated their stuff, now they will have to play catchup to be competitive again. They had 10 plus years, so they had a good run.
hi!!!at once i made the difference!!!the ax effect is brighter and sound less natural , is brighter too whereas the amp sounds more complete and more bassy, saw the same difference with justin derriko playing fractal!!!!
yeah i can hear the difference. with some tones it is harder to differentiate but not most of the time. no hate for modeling, have an HX stomp I use as as hired gun and for some recording, but when I am making my music it is on a tube amp because they have a special something to my ear - and i've been trying for the last couple years to get that special something from modelers with no success. there is just nothing like a the sound of a Sun Face starved for voltage going into some hot valves
Cheers, Excellent video & both excellent tones! Source #1 was generally the brighter than source #2, except in the first playing example. Looking forward to the upcoming AXE (hovering) over the Boss.
I would love the comparison with the Boss GX-100. I tried one today at the store and I hated it. Not necessarily the sounds, but the user experience. I sat there for 15 minutes and couldn’t manage to modify or create a preset. But if it in fact is as amazing as you claim and if it sounds decent in comparison tot eh Axe Fx, I would give it another chance 😉.
I didn’t think about this vs that. I just focused on what sounded better to MY ears and MY brain. I’ve been listening to rock n roll since I was 8 years old and I’m nearly 40 now. So I’m not really an average listener. I did this without headphones btw.
1.) #1 a bit scratchy #2 better
2.) #1 sounds ok, but also scratchy #2 softer, not as gritty
3.) #1 I guess AMP because of the feedback #2 Sounds Better
4.) #1 sounds high & gritty #2 a bit better
5.) #1 ok #2 worse than 1
I think both sounded great (as did the Boss), but I preferred source 2. I'm a Fractal guy and I honestly did guess correctly on which was which. I've gone through a lot of this; comparing the real amps to the models. Truthfully, most times I prefer the Fractal models since you can tweak them to do what you want them to do. I still love my amps, as I'm sure you do as well, but the digital realm offers so much in tones and flexibility. I'm lucky to have both.
Did I miss where he explained the signal chain? Axe fx can definitely go direct but was the matchless put through a mic’d cab or a load box, and an IR loader? What IRs?
Sounds fantastic btw (both). I echo another comment. Ex1 sounded better to me and I thought for sure it was the real amp until the reveal. Cliff Chase is amazing 🤩
All Guitars in this song are completly recorded with the MOOER GE200 Amp Modeler.
Rain Air - Sitz Platz Bleib (Rammstein Style) Official Video
ua-cam.com/video/xxxjsjRtIRg/v-deo.html
Great show! I love how you always keep your videos short and to the point. You said: "the way I can connect up my IEMs to the AxeFX just makes it a no brainer". Are you referring to simply coming out of the headphone jack in the back or some other configuration sir? I just got an FM9 this week and have not configured my EIMs for my home studio yet.
In a post in the FA Forum the main developer of the Firmware gave some reasons also for the differences in tone, like values/quality in electronic components from one production round to another on real amps. Also I guess the whole tone chain has an impact on the final result. I love my AFX3 and while it is not cheap and still for some uses u need to spend some money for example in good monitors, the versatility that provides in unparalleled, plus it offers mind blowing effects. I honestly do not know how it can get much better tone wise.
Oh man... I was also "tricked" by the AxeFX... I thought the clarity of highs are tweaked on the AxeFX. Both sound great!!! Thanks Paul
Cheers Djordje.
I'm late😊. I'll say this till I'm blue but it's so easy to pick the Axe. Listen carefully to the ATTACK. TRY RIGHT NOW. On the 1st one listen to the String slide - how compressed it is, like a comp pedal. Now the Acdc type riff. Hear the string tap(slight chug in the break) "Daa Da Da CLICK". Now, why? Because there's no proper tube voltage drop at the initial strike. Instead of evening out, it stabs. The high gain amps especially, all sound like there's a pedal in front. No initial sag, just solid state type attack. This is why you hear comments from some people that the Axe sounds better than the real amp which think about it, that's impossible right? the real amp is what it's trying to model so how can it be better? That's illogical by the very definition of what Emulation is. It fails to model the tube amp. So what people really like is the sound of a pedal type attack. The fact is some people crave Tubes but they don't actually know what tubes do to the signal or what they actually sound like.
I'm ranting 😅but having listened to these fan boys on Axe forum,and the like, swarm all over - like a cult - anyone who actually can hear the nuances, its creepy.
This is a type of player who buys a Mesa or 5150, amps thick with epic gain, and they put a 50 dollar pedal in front. I say buy a modeler. (BTW, I've been buying them since forever - I'm a fan)
Axe voicings are good. The gain is good and effects are great. But the actual tube emulation is poor. It's a shame cause Line6 models tubes correctly, (they actually own the amps, and dig deep with readings) but they lagged on other aspects).
I have the Line 6 Helix and you are absolutely right that they are more practical and are here to stay. Love the Helix and it’s versatility.
Yes would love to see Axe FX and Boss GX-1000 comparison video!
I find the digital equipment most suitable for large stages with very professional equipment but for small concerts in pubs, I think that the original amplifier is more suitable and that the sound technician is in charge of putting in a microphone. There is no need for so much digital equipment.
Agreed 👍 I could tell the difference a little bit I think but honestly I prefer the sound of the modeler. I have been a tube amp snob my whole because the reality is when your playing live in front of a Marshall stack at high volume and gain there is nothing even close!!! However the reality and practically and sounds and end of the made me change my mind . Plus anyone in the audience doesn't care or have any idea.. lol .. 🤘🤘great video
I have quite a bit of tube amps including soldanos and a fender twin. Used to have fun running them through my boss tae and recording tones.
The fractal is just so good and a breeze to get sounds in terms of the simplest tones to the most complex. And the feel difference to me was kinda negligible. My tube amps are kind of there to look pretty in my studio these days. But to each their own.
The axe fx iii sounds fantastic in this video.
for the no pedal test, I like #2 more, a bit more mid, more dynamic. with the pedal, I like #1 more, natural and soft
sir, please do the comparison between fractal AXE FX3 and GX-100. I recently purchased a GX-100 and I love to learn more about it.
I have an FM9. I like the distorted amps/tones on it a lot better than the cleans. And that’s consistent with what I’m hearing here. The distorted axefx here sounds better with the distorted amp and the clean real amp is more open and dynamic than the axefx… IMO BUT, you can really tweak the tone on the fractal
I can tell the difference. I have a tweed bassman and deluxe, Mesa boogie’s etc and the fractal models, while useable don’t sound or feel the same. However, They do sound good and Are really useful. 90% of session I do I use the fractal. Gets the job done and not having to use headphones etc is great
I was convinced that source 2 was the modeller, and found it lacking in comparison to source 1,
which I was sure was the amp..
I was shocked to discover that source 1 was the modeller, as I thought it sounded
clearly better..
Not sure of how much was down to tweaking between the two, but the modeller is obviously excellent for recording purposes at least.
I too would love to watch a comparison
between the GX100 and Axe Fx 3, as I own the Boss..!
Thanks for the videos..
I liked the sound of the modeller a bit more than the matchless sounded in this video. I’m sure the matchless would sound better in the room.
WOW. The reveal blew me away. I was convinced example 1 was the amp, and 2 was the modeler
Playing live with the Axe FX has been an excellent experience. The MFC 101 with 3 expression pedals provides more than enough control over different presets and effects. I use a Mesa stereo tube power amp and a 4X12 Marshall cabinet wired in stereo, plus direct outs to the mixing console. I have several boutique amps (Fuchs, Cornford, Bogner, etc) but at this point haven't used any of them for a couple of years.
That's what happens when you have an AxeFX🙂
First I thought 1 is the amp, as the sound seemed to have more attack. So I thought 2 is the modeler and was wondering why it sounds so transparent and clear. Now I know why, because 2 is not the modeler but the amp.
As good as the AXE3 is, I can almost always tell the difference between it and a real amp by the way it deals with the upper mids and highs, especially on distorted tones. They are always more grainy and displeasing to the ear on the modelers. So for me it wasn't too hard to pick them out correctly on this comparison. The modelers have gotten MUCH better and more realistic, and I have an AX8 which I love. But there is still something about the roundness, smoothness and three dimentionality of real amps/cabs mic'ed up in a room that is tough to beat. There are some tricks though you can use to bring the modelers more in line towards that sound. You basically set very narrow notch filters at 2k, 3.6k, and 5k, and play with bringing those down incrementally until at least the harshness is reduced without destroying the mid/high end. But even that only helps. It still doesn't nail it totally.
Both sound great, but it was pretty easy for me to tell which was which in the comparison.
It was all about the high frequencies for me. I was correct in my choice. I too gig with a modeler out of convenience. And, they do sound very very close
Source 2 is way more warmth and less high treble, the problem of modern modelling is all those high frequencies that doesn’t appear in a vintage analog world u hear the signal more growl on the digital which means it’s more distorted overall sound, I prefer the 2 way more natural.
There is a difference, but it isn’t that one is good and the other is bad. Have to say the boss sounded really nice and opened my eyes to what is available now.
Wonderful review. Thx. IMO it is difficult to compare audio wise only. Based in my experience I find it more practical to try them and also weigh in the responsiveness and dynamics while playing. Audio wise….they both sound wonderful but to me sure I would rather play the guitar and then see If i feel a difference.
I got the guess right by noticing the spike in the mids that the n°2 had , which is usual when using real amps
Throughout all the examples, without spoiling myself I preferred #1 consistently by a large margin. And for some reason I was neither surprised, nor shocked that it was the axe fx.
I really wanted 2 to be the Axe-fx as for me that is what I liked way better. Nope. Damn. Much prefer the real amp. Cheers for doing this.
This is a great video. Well done!
Man part of me really wanted 2 to be the axe fx but in my heart of hearts those great mids were coming from a cab speaker. It would be cool if a modeller tried to mimic the pre amp/power amp portion of the signal chain but did NOT try to mimic the speaker, and then you set it up in your own cab. I don't know if you can set it up like that but if you can would be interesting to see if that would get the two sounding closer (and frankly get the Axe sounding better). If this is already what you did, then idk it's the power of the toobs.
what a beautiful chords man!!! really nice!
Thanks for listening.
Hi Paul,
I'm flabbergasted by finding out that I was all wrong guessing what's what ... to me the first versions of all the riffs and runs you played sounded livelier, more transparent, and punchier. I would have betted the farm on those being the real amp examples - but as it were those were the Axe Efx emulations. And I know how good your Matchless sounds...
Andreas from Germany
Wow. Done me there. I preferred fx.I have a lightning reverb so, a bit surprised.
All the best