Axe FX 10.0 Marsha Vs. the real deal poll!

[Rough Boy]

Thanks for letting us know. :munch


http://www.shareimages.com/images/thumbs/0/0/2/43271-qZyWmpubk6CnlZyVmao-splooge.gif (http://www.shareimages.com/image.php?43271-qZyWmpubk6CnlZyVmao-splooge.gif)

holy diver!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0bhEBa2KyA

[Julia343]

:barf

I mean really?

[mattball826]

How so? Few people on this or any forum are as familiar with performance than Pete!

i played along and took my guess. pete is excellent player! i heard great demos from other players (samhillband) and say same thing. good for an idea of sound but does not cover the whole landscape. clip is only part of the view so to speak. do i like the new models for axe fx? yes i do.

my keyboard player has beautiful baby grand piano. he has roland keyboard with that similar sound preset. it sounds good on the surface, but you have to be there to appreciate the depth of the acoustic piano. its not as easy to take the acoustic piano to gigs, but for record session he used only the acoustic piano. not to give argument, but to show example. many choices for people today. modeling makes some things much easier. so its all good in my book. these all are investment imo. i use big variety of modeling gear and collect them too. one day someone might want an rp-10 or boss gt-6! maybe not. to me, not worth selling for such a loss. when axe fx III comes out, i'll buy it too.

[Ken]

OK...I'll play.

#1 Axe-Fx
#2 Masha

#2 had something I liked better, a deeper warmer tone, and really not by much, but just enough to make me think #2 is the real Masha.

I kept using the mouse and sliding back and fourth on my media player and they tended to blend together after so many repeats so I just went with what I heard the first go around.

In a recorded mix, it's a wash and I don't think anyone would know the difference.

[sinasl1]

i played along and took my guess. pete is excellent player! i heard great demos from other players (samhillband) and say same thing. good for an idea of sound but does not cover the whole landscape. clip is only part of the view so to speak. do i like the new models for axe fx? yes i do.

my keyboard player has beautiful baby grand piano. he has roland keyboard with that similar sound preset. it sounds good on the surface, but you have to be there to appreciate the depth of the acoustic piano. its not as easy to take the acoustic piano to gigs, but for record session he used only the acoustic piano. not to give argument, but to show example. many choices for people today. modeling makes some things much easier. so its all good in my book. these all are investment imo. i use big variety of modeling gear and collect them too. one day someone might want an rp-10 or boss gt-6! maybe not. to me, not worth selling for such a loss. when axe fx III comes out, i'll buy it too.

ya it's true, if you have real amps and cabs set up and the axe set up too, and you play the axe through monitors/in ears or whatever, but then plug in to your amp/cab setup, you are just going to invariably have more fun, no doubt. The feedback loop between the cabs and the guitar is a huge deal. It's organic. Now wether or not your cab and amp sounds as good in the pa as the modeled stuff, that's another story. I think the answer is- it depends. On how good your tone is, how good the mics are and their positioning, etc. Wether there's a bunch of bleed from the stage, and on and on. Years ago I tried a Palmer speaker simulator in a rehearsal- compared to a mic on my cab. Same amp, just running into one of those pdi-09's, and also into a mic'd cab. In my in ears, I much preferred the mic. Walked out front, and to my amazement the pdi sounded better (at least to me that day)... It was just punchy as hell...

[ben_allison]

Stop teasing!

[AndrewSimon]

Everybody relax, it was a trick question.
Both clips are the AXE-FX.

:mob

[Julia343]

Unfortunately the problem with the cabs and tube amps when you're a single woman is moving the damn things around. I no longer have gorillas living at home. So I'm ditching the tubes and going modeling.

[Todd Bishop]

I'm dying to know which ones the real deal and which one is digital. When's the cat gonna be let out of the bag?

[gtr37]

I like the first one .both sound really good ..

i would say 2 is the Marsha it is a little more open sounding

[sinasl1]

Ok ok ok

enough's enough :)

the majority of you Gear Pagers guessed it-

1 is axe fx,
2 is the real Marsha

I found it interesting that most rig talk forumites preferred the 1st clip... Other way around on TGP. Maybe because rig talk is more metal guys and 1 was a bit more aggressive in the upper mids?

Anyways, thanks for voting and commenting, this was fun!

No winner or loser to me, both are great tones, great pieces of gear, and they serve different purposes!

[Sherman90]

Ok ok ok

enough's enough :)

the majority of you Gear Pagers guessed it-

1 is axe fx,
2 is the real Marsha

I found it interesting that most rig talk forumites preferred the 1st clip... Other way around on TGP. Maybe because rig talk is more metal guys and 1 was a bit more aggressive in the upper mids?

Anyways, thanks for voting and commenting, this was fun!

No winner or loser to me, both are great tones, great pieces of gear, and they serve different purposes!

:cool:

Although they share the same fundamental sound signature, there are quite audible differences between the two clips. Having said that, I repeat that I had no real preference between the two. In fact, although I felt that the real Marsha was recognizable based on what is considered a conventional "tube" characteristic (harmonic overtones), I think I prefer the more solid, even tone produced by the Axe!

Thanks for this illuminating exercise, and forget rig-talk!

[Down and Out in NYC]

I new it ALL along. Actually I had no idea which was which but I liked the 2nd track a lil better. My name is Paul and I am a metal guy.

That was kinda cool.

Thank You Pete

[banjoze]

I could hear the difference between the two in my studio monitors pretty easily and was confident that the 2nd was the real amp, but I wish I could explain in scientific terms what was different. The graph of the two looked more similar than I would have expected given the difference my ears discern....

I'm kinda confused by that actually. Maybe I just don't know how to read the graph....

[nickthenail]

Thanks Pete! That was fun :)

[Dr Git]

Thanks pete...crap I couldn't wait to hear from you...lol

[riffy]

Pete,
That was great! Thank you. Regardless of which was what...lol
If 6 were 9 I still preferred the sound of the Axe-FX, number 1.

[Leonardo]

Peter, thanks for the demo.

I think it would be interesting to explore the difference between the Faustine, Suhr ISO and THD Hot Plate line outs with the Red Wirez IR. Perhaps you could start by uploading the THD and Suhr clips? :)

[stratzrus]

I thought they were extremely similar, enough that whatever subtile differences there were didn't matter.

[bmi]

All attenuators compress the sound that's what makes me choose the number 2 for the Marsha.
This time i've been enough lucky to win but it shows that what we hear is the Marsha sound a little bit compressed. So the 2 records should be more closer than what we got here.
I will be curious to hear the #1 with a little compressor. I'm sure that you can get something almost identic to #2.

[sinasl1]

All attenuators compress the sound that's what makes me choose the number 2 for the Marsha.
This time i've been enough lucky to win but it shows that what we hear is the Marsha sound a little bit compressed. So the 2 records should be more closer than what we got here.
I will be curious to hear the #1 with a little compressor. I'm sure that you can get something almost identic to #2.

Hmm? I thought consensus was they were almost identical already? :)

I wouldn't makes blanket statement, like "all attenuators compress the sound".

I'd say fixed loads do, yes. But these new reactive attenuators wehave now are a different animal.

[bmi]

Yes, they were almost identic and...?
Compress #1 and i'm sure that you get a new file almost identic again but more closer to #2.;)

(this is my opinion all attenuators compress the sound sorry, even the ones with reactiv load like my SE100)

[gasman]

By clicking on "ir sample" inside space designer it doesn't let you load them..works here.
thands Ed

I think first is real but I´d like first will be axe

second in axe

[Julia343]

What I found interesting is that at loud level I preferred #1, but at lower level I preferred #2. They were nearly identical.

The other thing I've noticed is that modelers tend to have a little more high freq edge than tube amps, but that's something that can be remedied with EQ. Me? I'm just real tired of moving heavy gear around.

You know what would have been interesting.... if you'd recorded the samples with the cab modeling off, then run them into Eleven LE plugin with the amp model turned off and used the cab model there and used the "cone breakup" slider to your liking, then ask it again.

[ben_allison]

I voted that I preferred 1... and couldn't have cared less which was which. That said, I'm stoked to get my Axe!

[iggypop]

I ended up choosing the #1 - Axe, for the game, and couldn't be happier.

[Brick_top]

I choose #2. Something about the chords ringing sounded better. Looked as if they are better in tune.. I don't know

[Carol-AnnAmps]

This is a good example of what I was saying on the other thread. Recorded the AXE is superb.

I would say 1 is the Axe, it has the lower mid range thing and a certain compression I always hear in Axe models, it's the 'tone' of the unit itself....which I actually don't dislike, but the second clip has more frequency balance and width. I'm familar with the Marsha, it's a great modified Marshall amp and this sounds like it. The volume differences between the clips made it a little more awkward as my first instinct was to say No.2 was the Axe because for some reason the lower volume was clouding my judgement. Also the attenuator adds it's own signature that wouldn't be there if this was an end to end recording. Speakers are a big part of the equation with a real tube amp and they are missing so it will never record the same.

Both great clips and both useable.

You would hear much more of a difference if the amp was recorded using multi-mic methods how a tube amp would be recorded professionally.

However, it does show how close the Axe can get in what has become a typical recording environment these days.

Two thumbs up. For most recording, why set up a full tube rig unless you are paying a Producer a lot of money.

Personally I had no preference, both sound like good modified Marshall tones to me.

[Luke]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.

[ben_allison]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.

Worth repeating.

[R.D.]

Worth repeating.

+1 ...

[macula56]

i like number 1 better. great feel. 2 sounds good too. either one would sound great on any stuff i play and any room i play in.

[lukeII]

I voted for 1 as my favorite because I thought it sounded more open and alive. As an Axe FX v10.01 owner I am glad I did. I must admit that I had a hard time choosing between the 2 clips as they are both really good... I actually thought the AXE FX was clip 2 so I guess my ears are worth jack.

[mattball826]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.

already have been several including original post just explain things. would be different live with real cabinets. he is just detailing how he made the clips. for recording side, maybe nobody notice or care to pick out the details. maybe some did, just were not quick to be the first on dance floor in a packed room.

this is not to debate a product. we all know axe fx is great and it can speak for itself. these clips used for demonstration of what it can do. i didn't see too much bias in anyone's posts. almost all said sounds great.

[acwild]

The clip with the tube amp sounds better, whichever one that is. :D

[Scott Peterson]

And the slew of "Ahh, I knew it all along. It's easy to tell because..." posts come like expanding foam after Pete spills.

What'd be funny if then he'd come on and say... 'oops - my bad... it's the OTHER way around!" then you'd see so much backpedaling that folks would hurt themselves.

:D:D:D:D

Either way, as I noted, it really doesn't matter. And for all the folks with their e-cred on the line, missing the forest for the trees, yet again it is right in front of you: there is a viable alternative to the vaunted 'toobz ONLY' golden rule. It ain't 1996 anymore. ;)

[Scumback Speakers]

You know he gave it away right in the title of the thread...

[Brick_top]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.

I voted #2 because it sounded better to me, but I had no ideia which was the real amp.

Fairly enough I like things from the first clip aswell. but there is something about how the chords ring that I like best.

[ben_allison]

You know he gave it away right in the title of the thread...

Yeah, I commented on that a few pages back:

1's way more fizzy. 2's way more fizzy.

People just focus on different parts of the spectrum, or vote based on a sub-conscious obligation to the title (fake vs real, so #1 must be fake).

Honestly? They each sound similar, and differ slightly in a few areas.

[stratzrus]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.Agreed 100%.

If I had voted I was going to vote for #2 being the Marsha, but only due to hearing the noise before the playing started. Once someone else posted about it I felt it confirmed my suspicions.

But I didn't vote because I couldn't make a determination based on the actual guitar tone. I think a lot of the stuff that people are claiming to hear could only possible be distinguished doing an A/B comparison switching back and forth several times, with no other instruments playing.

To me, that's not a difference worth noting.

Thanks for the exercise Pete, well done.

[Kenny D]

This was a great thread, Mr. Thorn. Well done!

[Sixstring]

Thanks for the comparison on the two tones Pete. I believe that this just shows how good Cliff is with what he has come up with.

It was really hard to tell which was which and as I posted before it's splitting hairs. Put in the context of recording other than the cleaner noise floor of the Axe, if the rest of the instruments were their it wouldn't make a difference.

I'm sure with a little more EQ'ing and noise gating it would have been impossible to tell the Marsha from the Axe.

[MightyGuru]

Damn I'm good!

Great poll Pete. BOTH clips sounded awesome...it really speaks well to the AXE-FX.

Ok ok ok

enough's enough :)

the majority of you Gear Pagers guessed it-

1 is axe fx,
2 is the real Marsha

I found it interesting that most rig talk forumites preferred the 1st clip... Other way around on TGP. Maybe because rig talk is more metal guys and 1 was a bit more aggressive in the upper mids?

Anyways, thanks for voting and commenting, this was fun!

No winner or loser to me, both are great tones, great pieces of gear, and they serve different purposes!

[Leonardo]

Wow! All the whining because the AxeFX didn't win the poll is pretty lame.
I voted without paying any attention to the title, and before reading the thread. I didn't notice the noise floor.
Both sound great, it's an interesting test but won't define which is "better". They're different tools that excel in different situations, and one can't really replace the other.

[Scott Peterson]

Wow! All the whining because the AxeFX didn't win the poll is pretty lame.
I voted without paying any attention to the title, and before reading the thread. I didn't notice the noise floor.
Both sound great, it's an interesting test but won't define which is "better". They're different tools that excel in different situations, and one can't really replace the other.

Seriously, whining? Where? :huh

[Brick_top]

This thread has slowed down a lot since pete told which was which :munch

[Sherman90]

Seriously, whining? Where? :huh

+1

I don't see any whining. Both clips were mightily impressive. Although we have to remember that we're dealing with RECORDINGS here, I think I actually preferred the Axe-FX!

[splatt]

i didn't vote, myself,
since
a) i believe that "proving" the worth of the axe-fx is in playing it for oneself
and critically gauging what one's own needs may be,
not in remotely listening to a recording of someone else playing it, and
b) those aren't generally the kinds of tones & musical context to which i can most relate.

that said, the actual question seemed to be:
"which side of the clip do you prefer?"

in that, i quickly & definitely preferred the 2nd half of the clip
--- though i listened thrice, rocking back'n'forth between similar sections of each,
in order to triple-check my 1st reaction ---
but thought that both were excellent.

dt / spltrcl

[Kenny D]

I didn't vote either, actually. Personally, I didn't really like either of the tones. Both were a bit harsh (scratchy, brittle, etc.) for my tastes.

Personal ideas of what makes good tone aside (everyone will differ on that), the Axe-FX rendition of the Marshall sound was impressive - too darn close for me to call, noise floor not withstanding.

Anyone looking to achieve good tone without hauling around 200lbs of gear should simply admit that the technology is available to do the job.

Guitars, amps and other musical instruments are just tools to do a specific job. You use the tool that makes your job easiest - whatever that means to you. As for me, I think modelling has finally "arrived."

[Julia343]

Sorry I messed up the voting by mentioning the telltale noise of a tube head -- exactly the same as I get with mine. The first clip started immediately which indicates the lead in was trimmed. Next time I'll keep my yap shut. I have some comments to make though:

* clip 1 was louder -- slightly. This was noticeable when you played the clip at low volumes, but not so noticeable when you played the clip loud.

* When the clip was played at low volumes clip 2 sounded slightly smoother. When played loud there was no distinguishable difference. I used my mixing monitors for this test. I mix at low volumes which make any flaws in a mix apparent.

* Please folks, when you do a test like this mess with us a bit more. Use a fade in and fade out on each clip. It's not difficult. And make sure the volumes are exactly the same even if you have to automate the track. It takes about 10 minutes more.

* Personally, I don't care as long as it sounds good. Both clips sounded very good. But consider this: you get one to three basic tones with the Marsha. You get how many with the AXE Ultra? For about the same price.

And then no two Marshas are going to sound exactly the same either just due to variance in components, tubes, etc. The Marsha used for the AXE model was a different one than the one used in this test, right?

KennyD: "Anyone looking to achieve good tone without hauling around 200lbs of gear should simply admit that the technology is available to do the job."

+1000

As a person who was trying to rearrange my studio over the weekend I had to move a 200 lb stack of two Avatar Contemporary 212s, and a 70 lb amp head. My hands and forearms after all these months had finally healed to the point where I could actually play decently again. I had to move that f***ing stack 3 times which meant moving each component 6 times. I don't have gorillas living here anymore. I reinjured my arms and can't play again for another couple weeks. I'm selling all of my tube gear, cabs, and going with a modeler (Eleven Rack due to finances and that I'd rather spend the balance of the proceeds on a really nice graded action 88 key keyboard) and a QSC K10.

[traviswalk]

I feel better about myself and my ears after choosing it correctly!

[iaresee]

I feel better about myself and my ears after choosing it correctly!
This statement is true. :)

[ben_allison]

I feel better about myself and my ears after choosing it correctly!

This statement is true. :)

50-50 shot'd.

[R.D.]

And then no two Marshas are going to sound exactly the same either just due to variance in components, tubes, etc. The Marsha used for the AXE model was a different one than the one used in this test, right?

FYI - It's my understanding that Dave sent Cliff - Prototype # 1 to base the model around. Pete Thorn owns Marsha # 2 ( prototype - ? not sure about that ) ....

[iaresee]

50-50 shot'd.

Plus: doesn't say which one I picked. I picked the correct one -- but what's correct? ;)

[stratzrus]

I didn't vote either, actually. Personally, I didn't really like either of the tones. Both were a bit harsh (scratchy, brittle, etc.) for my tastes.

Personal ideas of what makes good tone aside (everyone will differ on that), the Axe-FX rendition of the Marshall sound was impressive - too darn close for me to call, noise floor not withstanding.:agree

I didn't want to get into this, but now that it's been said, both clips sounded harsh to me as well. I heard it in the first clip and thought it must be the Axe FX not dialed in the way I would have, but then the second clip had the same harshness and sounded so close that I didn't want to do extensive A/B-ing using studio grade headphones due to the high end unpleasantness. I would not be surprised if listening to the clip over the internet exasperated this though. I suspect that MP3 conversion and compression made this sound worse than it did when originally recorded.

Of course this is all a matter of taste as Kenny noted, but his post reflects my feelings exactly.

[ben_allison]

Plus: doesn't say which one I picked. I picked the correct one -- but what's correct? ;)

I picked one as my favourite (like the poll asked), and it turned out to be the Axe Fx... I win!

[ben_allison]

:agree

I didn't want to get into this, but now that it's been said, both clips sounded harsh to me as well. I heard it in the first clip and thought it must be the Axe FX not dialed in the way I would have, but then the second clip had the same harshness and sounded so close that I didn't want to do extensive A/B-ing using studio grade headphones due to the high end unpleasantness. I would not be surprised if listening to the clip over the internet exasperated this though. I suspect that MP3 conversion and compression made this sound worse than it did when originally recorded.

Of course this is all a matter of taste as Kenny noted, but his post reflects my feelings exactly.

I felt the clips were way "crispier" than I'd like, but it's ok because I've heard a lot of non-crispy Axe clips.

There's so much to tweak...

[Carol-AnnAmps]

Let's keep in mind that clip # 1 was winning before people started commenting on how the noise floor of clip #2 gave it away. It was only after this revelation that people started to prefer #2. Funny how people always hear things to support their biases after they are sure they are in the clear to voice them.

The CA model is noisier than the real amp in many situations if you don't gate it....so theres no real substance to this argument. There are a lot of variables which could increase or decrease the noise floor with either technology.

[Kenny D]

... I'm selling all of my tube gear, cabs, and going with a modeler (Eleven Rack due to finances and that I'd rather spend the balance of the proceeds on a really nice graded action 88 key keyboard) and a QSC K10.

Don't feel bad about not getting the Axe-FX. I originally wanted the Axe-FX also. I picked up an 11 Rack from GC to try it out via their 30 evaluation policy before I did the same with an Axe-FX at almost 2.5x the price. Long story short, I fell in love with it.

Since I don't need all the built-in FX that the Axe-FX boasts (I have TC gear for that) I just decided to keep the 11 Rack. The 11 Rack smokes. It's easy to tweak and sounds awesome through my Mesa 2x12 cabs.

I may eventually buy the Axe as well but for now, I feel great about my decision.

Modelling gear has come leaps and bounds since the old days. I also own a Line 6 Ax2-212 and I hate it. Talk about harsh! The new stuff just kills, IMO.

:JAM

[electronpirate]

I didn't vote on which is which, but I did say I liked the 2nd one better (by a HAIR...)

But ain't selling my AxeFX anytime soon.

Thanks for the ride Pete!

[stratzrus]

I felt the clips were way "crispier" than I'd like, but it's ok because I've heard a lot of non-crispy Axe clips.Agreed. I think it sounded the way it did due to sonic characteristics of the amp it was emulating not any inherent harshness in the Axe FX, I have plenty of presets that don't sound that way. In addition, as I said before, I don't think the MP3 format did either clip any favors. I have heard many times that original clips sounded better than what ended up being downloaded on the net.

[traynor_garnet]

:agree

I didn't want to get into this, but now that it's been said, both clips sounded harsh to me as well

The problem is that the DI changes the tone of your amp. When I had mine it had the same high end fizz and harshessness when ran into an IR. I hear this same sound in the Axe as well; it sounds "good" but only good.

In terms of comparisons in the OP, you are hearing the amp, into a DI, into an IR vs the Axe into an IR. You are not hearing the amp directly into an IR (which would be impossible).

The amp-->DI-->IR does sound quite simlar to Axe-->IR. That is all this comparison can offer, but it is interesting to hear nonetheless. WAY better results come from attenuating the amp (with the Faustine) and miking a speaker. In this case, I think the distinction between the Axe and the real amp would be much more striking.

TG

[LPMojoGL]

OP -- Hey man, thanks for the post! I've always dabbled with multi-effects boxes and modelers. No doubt modelers have come a long way from the RP-5 or POD. It's nice to have so many tone toys available. Now if I just had your chops...

[VanWhelan]

1 is axe fx,
2 is the real Marsha


Hey man, thanks for posting the soundclips and giving us some good entertainment for a few days. Even though some people could tell which was which - I have to admit that this just goes to show that the Axe-FX is a really good piece of gear. Honestly I couldn't tell which was which, but did give the edge to clip #2, which ended up being the Marshall.

Anyway, I guess my point is that I gotta give the Axe-FX its due. I think that someone has finally been able to bridge the gap between tube amps and modeling technology. I only wish that I had the money to get one of those things - they're so damned expensive.

Thanks again - VW
:JAM

[Julia343]

But in a real world application using your DAW you are going to do:

1) AXE > EQ (plugin) > IR

or

2) Amp > DI > EQ (plugin) > IR

or

3) Amp > DI > EQ (plugin) > mic model + cab model depending upon your software

So you can pretty easily get rid of the harshness caused by the DI and the IR or whatever.

[sinasl1]

The problem is that the DI changes the tone of your amp. When I had mine it had the same high end fizz and harshessness when ran into an IR. I hear this same sound in the Axe as well; it sounds "good" but only good.

In terms of comparisons in the OP, you are hearing the amp, into a DI, into an IR vs the Axe into an IR. You are not hearing the amp directly into an IR (which would be impossible).

The amp-->DI-->IR does sound quite simlar to Axe-->IR. That is all this comparison can offer, but it is interesting to hear nonetheless. WAY better results come from attenuating the amp (with the Faustine) and miking a speaker. In this case, I think the distinction between the Axe and the real amp would be much more striking.

TG


Hi, Edmonton dude... I'm from there too ya know!

Anyways, you may have missed my 2nd posted clip. If you use a good line out (the Faustine or the Suhr ISO line out are nice in my book) you can get excellent results, and it's not a night and day difference from miking a cab. Listen:

http://music.mp3lizard.com/peterthorn/

click on G12M vs. Red Wirez IR

so this is a PT100 into a greenback, mic'd with a 57. into an API pre, into Apogee interface, into logic Then you hear the same amp, same riff, but I used the Suhr ISO line out to take a tap off the amp,into my interface and into a Red Wirez greenback/SM57 miking cap edge at 1" IR.

There are differences in these tones, because of course the IR is of a different (similar) speaker, in a different cab, different mic position, etc. But they are SIMILAR, no? They could be of the same cab, same mic, but just a different mic position. If I'd told you that you'd probably believe me.. the notion that taking a line out off an amp and using an IR gives you some vastly inferior tone- I'm in total disagreement with that.

[Brick_top]

Hi pete,

Would there be any possibility of you making another comparison clip but this time reamping?

[traynor_garnet]

Hi, Edmonton dude... I'm from there too ya know!

Anyways, you may have missed my 2nd posted clip. If you use a good line out (the Faustine or the Suhr ISO line out are nice in my book) you can get excellent results, and it's not a night and day difference from miking a cab. Listen:


There are differences in these tones, because of course the IR is of a different (similar) speaker, in a different cab, different mic position, etc. But they are SIMILAR, no? They could be of the same cab, same mic, but just a different mic position. If I'd told you that you'd probably believe me.. the notion that taking a line out off an amp and using an IR gives you some vastly inferior tone- I'm in total disagreement with that.

Those clips sound great. In fact, better than than either clip in the Axe vs. DI link.

When I had my Faustine the DI simply didn't sound as good into my IR cabs. Too much high end "frizz" and sometimes muddy. To check it out, I even ran the DI signal into my cab (or my mixer then my cab) and compared it to the sound of the amp directly into the same cab; the amp into the cab (even attenuated) sounded better. Perhaps not "vastly inferior" (I don't think I wrote that) but second place nonetheless.

Much of this will depend on the amp, style of music, the combination of all these individual factors/pieces etc etc. On top of that, you play higher gain stuff than I do (and many of the Axe FX clips I hear are also higher gain). Given all this variation, it is impossible to make any blanket statement.

For me, the real test is just breaking up or semi-dirty tones that vary according to the guitar's volume. In this situation, I think the amp into a mic'd cab always sounds better than a DI or the Axe (from the Axe clips I have heard). But this is for me.

BTW, thank you SO much for not turning this into a juvenile "axe sucks/axe rulz" thread. Like any piece of gear, it has its pros and cons and there really is no universal "best."

TG

[jski59]

Both clips sounded great...I own a Friedman-modded Marshall and regardless if it's tubes or not, Dave certainly has an ear for good tone.

Anyway, Pete thanks for these tests...now quit screwing around with this stuff and finish that solo album!

[Felixun1]

Obviously no significant difference in sound, but what does this indicate? That plugged into the same cab sim in your recording software, both end up sounding the same. But that just makes me wonder how many other marshall-sounding amps or modelers would end up sounding about the same run through the same software setup. IMHO there isn't much doubt that for recording purposes, modelers and software can be used to achieve as good if not better than tube amps with far less hassle.

To me, a more meaningful comparison would be in a live setting, A / B testing the marshall through a 4 X12 mic'd through the PA, against the axe fx direct through the PA. My prediction: the crowd will be too drunk to notice or care.

[_pete_]

This has been a great thread and I thank Pete for starting it.

If I've learned anything at all from this thread it's that the clips could have been recorded 42 different ways and guitarists would still complain that it should have been done another way.

We should all just realize how lucky we are to have the choices that are available to us these days.

[sinasl1]

Both clips sounded great...I own a Friedman-modded Marshall and regardless if it's tubes or not, Dave certainly has an ear for good tone.

Anyway, Pete thanks for these tests...now quit screwing around with this stuff and finish that solo album!

I will I will but I'm leaving on tour now! Today! Too much to do...

[sinasl1]

Obviously no significant difference in sound, but what does this indicate? That plugged into the same cab sim in your recording software, both end up sounding the same. But that just makes me wonder how many other marshall-sounding amps or modelers would end up sounding about the same run through the same software setup. IMHO there isn't much doubt that for recording purposes, modelers and software can be used to achieve as good if not better than tube amps with far less hassle.

To me, a more meaningful comparison would be in a live setting, A / B testing the marshall through a 4 X12 mic'd through the PA, against the axe fx direct through the PA. My prediction: the crowd will be too drunk to notice or care.

A speaker and a mic is just a filter. An IR is an accurate "picture" taken of that filter. Listen to the clip just a few posts back that I posted. I don't think it disadvantages the head very much at all, taking a line out tap off of it and running it into an IR. I'm speaking from experience.... listen to that clip. Here's the link again, both sounds sound like a mic'd greenback to me:

http://music.mp3lizard.com/peterthorn/

click on G12M vs Red Wirez IR

When I have a SS power amp, the Axe, and my Marsha head and my Faustine here, later in the summer maybe, I'll do what you describe- Head into mic'd cab, and Marsha sim into SS poweramp into the same cab, without moving the mic.

I love my heads and cabs, I'm not about to sell anything, but I bet I could probably make it sound as close as the 1st clip in this thread sounds. At least to a microphone.

Wether or not it "feels" the same in the room or whatever, I guess that's another story... I'm not sure about that one.

[bmi]

Can i get a link to the wave files?

[captain_bob]

I like the first clip the best. Now I really want an AxeFX!!

[banjoze]

Regarding the G12M vs. the Red Wirez IR. I (marginally) prefer the Red Wire. But, both are awesome. I'm not sure what I would prefer if the IR was an actual match for the cab, speaker and mic... That's a crazy powerful demo to me... maybe even more so than the original in the thread.

[octatonic]

Any chance of posting that patch, Pete?

[GreatGreen]

I could barely tell the difference. Actually, if you had told me they were the same amp, just recorded on different days in a venue without 100% stable electricity or something, I'd believe you.

If I was forced to describe a difference though, I'd say that the real amp sounded just a tiny bit more clear in the midrange, and the Axe-Fx sounded just the slightest bit more hairy or fuzzy in the midrange, and maybe it was slightly, slightly less clear/fuzzier around the edges of a couple of stops. Also, the real amp seemed to have a little bit more snarl in the chords.

If I didn't already know I was listening to different amps, I wouldn't have guessed it though.


edit: The more I listen to it, the more differences I can tell. The real amp seems just the slightest bit more 3D with chords, and the Axe-Fx sounds ever so slightly more flat with them. I don't really know how to describe it other than that.

I still love my Axe-Fx though. It's the best musical purchase I've ever made. ;)

[GSVBagpuss]

Loving the Darkness riff! And I can't tell them apart, which probably means my membership of TGP should be suspended until my cork sniffery skills are increased ;)

[Csgband]

I have been lurking around reading about the axe-fx, that test was great.
I have always been a tube analog guy, I like it easy.
My problem is I buy stuff check it out and move it along and that cost money.
I feel this could help with my want to try all kinds of things.
It seems mostly I am hearing high gain or Marshall type sounds. How does it handle say a roots rock vibe?
Amp on the verge of break up.
Does it react well to the guitar controls?
If anyone can help or point me to a posting that would be great.
Thanks, chris

[sinasl1]

I have been lurking around reading about the axe-fx, that test was great.
I have always been a tube analog guy, I like it easy.
My problem is I buy stuff check it out and move it along and that cost money.
I feel this could help with my want to try all kinds of things.
It seems mostly I am hearing high gain or Marshall type sounds. How does it handle say a roots rock vibe?
Amp on the verge of break up.
Does it react well to the guitar controls?
If anyone can help or point me to a posting that would be great.
Thanks, chris

search on YouTube for Melissa Erheridge private sessions- I used it on that show on some lighter gain stuff with a strat, watch "if I Wanted To", specifically, that's an ac30 tb model with some red wirez IR's ( a blue and a greenback).

[Csgband]

thanks, I will check it out.
Chris

[Csgband]

search on YouTube for Melissa Erheridge private sessions- I used it on that show on some lighter gain stuff with a strat, watch "if I Wanted To", specifically, that's an ac30 tb model with some red wirez IR's ( a blue and a greenback).

Wow, that is pretty great. did you use the Axe FX for all the songs?
I never would have guessed it was not a tube amp.
PS, Great playing and tone.

[Julia343]

search on YouTube for Melissa Erheridge private sessions- I used it on that show on some lighter gain stuff with a strat, watch "if I Wanted To", specifically, that's an ac30 tb model with some red wirez IR's ( a blue and a greenback).


thanks. I needed this music today.

[Ben R]

search on YouTube for Melissa Erheridge private sessions- I used it on that show on some lighter gain stuff with a strat, watch "if I Wanted To", specifically, that's an ac30 tb model with some red wirez IR's ( a blue and a greenback).

I found it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upS_CPIdSNg

Cool.

[sinasl1]

Wow, that is pretty great. did you use the Axe FX for all the songs?
I never would have guessed it was not a tube amp.
PS, Great playing and tone.

Hi, yes i did use the axe fx for all of that show.... thanks!

[gasman]

Hi, yes i did use the axe fx for all of that show.... thanks!

direct to desk??

[Scott Peterson]

direct to desk??

Yes. He's said that multiple times.

[drneely]

Something I would love to hear would be the Marsha, then the axe feeding the marsha's power section on the Marsha patch. Then played through a guitar cab and mic'd traditionally. Has something similar been done before? That to me could make a very cool comparison. Who's with me??

[stratzrus]

I never would have guessed it was not a tube amp.
PS, Great playing and tone.I have always said that certain individuals have been able to get spectacular results out of the Ultra so the tones are clearly in there. Pete and Cliff immediately come to mind but they aren't the only ones.

An instinctual knowledge of what parameters need to be changed in order to get the tones you want can make all of the difference in the world. Trial and error can eventually get you there, but having that little light that goes off in your head saying, "It needs just a little more of this and I need to cut that to cop this tone." (and being right on the money) is priceless.

I think it comes to many players in time.

[Craig Walker]

Liked #2 better.

I was like "now I'm gonna feel stupid when it's the AxeFx...."


Nope. :p

[Csgband]

Hi, yes i did use the axe fx for all of that show.... thanks!

I just ordered my Ultra, thanks for your help. I found your clips and videos very helpful.

I am a tube guy all the way but I believe that this is another tool for me to use, I know I will have to put in the time to get the results but to me it seems like the next logical step.

Chris

[Jay Mitchell]

Liked #2 better.

I was like "now I'm gonna feel stupid when it's the AxeFx...."


Nope. :pSo tell me: how do you feel about gloating over a "correct" guess several days after the answer has been made public? :roll

[GtrDr]

Buried in a mix, I couldn't tell the difference. Playing it in the same room, the real thing wins every time. The Fractal is for direct recording

[electronpirate]

So tell me: how do you feel about gloating over a "correct" guess several days after the answer has been made pubic? :roll

Pubic?

But I agree. Gotta love the 'I was right!' sentiment folks. Come on now, they BOTH sounded great.

And GtrDr, who goes out of his way to crap on the proceedings. Get a life, and get out of this thread if your world is completely restricted to tube amps. Most of us have both, and are not so narrow we don't need to pick one or the other.

:hide2

[Brick_top]

Buried in a mix, I couldn't tell the difference. Playing it in the same room, the real thing wins every time. The Fractal is for direct recording

Not trying to be rude or anything, but can I assume you made that experience?

[pfrischmann]

thanks. I needed this music today.

Yeah,
that was awesome!

I think I forget sometimes, these are tools to make music. Music being the end-game.
It seems like everything you had going on sounded just right. I certainly could not tell the difference if you hadn't said something.
And you know what? you sound just like Pete Thorn....Imagine that!

[Craig Walker]

So tell me: how do you feel about gloating over a "correct" guess several days after the answer has been made pubic? :roll


Both sounded good.

But it just confirmed to me that "that thing" I heard when I owned it wasn't my imagination.

In a band mix I probably couldn't tell them apart.


[and I didn't see the thread till after it was 'revealed', but I didn't look at the answer before making my choice]

[Jay Mitchell]

But it just confirmed to me that "that thing" I heard when I owned it wasn't my imagination.Nothing has been confirmed by this experience. "That thing" could be literally anything, and it could be completely unrelated to modeling vs. the "real thing."

[and I didn't see the thread till after it was 'revealed', but I didn't look at the answer before making my choice]Right....

[R.D.]

Right....

+1 ....

[Craig Walker]

You can "right" me all you want. I don't come to this section that often.

Saw Pete had posted clips and clicked the thread.

And if you read the whole quote correctly, I said "confirmed to me"...

Perhaps you'd like to wave your fanboy wand and make me feel differently? Geez.

I'm allowed to have an opinion when someone posts an A/B clip. Wasn't that the point?

[Jay Mitchell]

I'm allowed to have an opinion when someone posts an A/B clip. Wasn't that the point?Lessee here, clips get posted June 20, identities of the clips revealed on June 22, and you post your hindsight "opinion" on June 30. Can you say "stacked deck?"

If you missed the poll prior to the revelation, your opinion after the fact is of zero relevance to the subject at hand. It only matters when you have to use your ears to decide which one you like better.

[Julia343]

I did notice that the poll suddenly shifted after I mentioned the break and tube noise just before the second clip. But the two clips were so close tonally, that the differences were really irrelevant. You'll be playing this Axe thing for recording -- the differences between tube and Axe become irrelevant. You'll be playing in a band live? same thing.

But this whole thing is about making music. If the Axe (or any other modeler) facilitates your being able to create music more easily than a tube amp (easily includes moving the f***** thing) I say go for it. Someone who is more concerned with the overall music and how everything blends together isn't going to care even if you used a Roland Cube if the thing worked well sonically in the context of the music.

[Craig Walker]

Lessee here, clips get posted June 20, identities of the clips revealed on June 22, and you post your hindsight "opinion" on June 30. Can you say "stacked deck?"

If you missed the poll prior to the revelation, your opinion after the fact is of zero relevance to the subject at hand. It only matters when you have to use your ears to decide which one you like better.



You're being obnoxious.

You questioning my integrity of when I said I heard and saw the thread isn't appreciated.

I don't know who you think you are, but "your opinion" doesn't mean jack to me. I did use my ears.


Are you a employee of Fractal? Why all the over sensitivity?

[mtmartin71]

But this whole thing is about making music. If the Axe (or any other modeler) facilitates your being able to create music more easily than a tube amp (easily includes moving the f***** thing) I say go for it. Someone who is more concerned with the overall music and how everything blends together isn't going to care even if you used a Roland Cube if the thing worked well sonically in the context of the music.

Exactly. In fact, if there were ever a last post to make on the subject, this would be a good candidate.

[GuitarKidd]

I think the test should be redone with at least a minimum of 4 comparisons... Give people more than one option to vote on... and I do like the idea of fading in and out so that what we are hearing is the meat of the tone...

[sinasl1]

I think the test should be redone with at least a minimum of 4 comparisons... Give people more than one option to vote on... and I do like the idea of fading in and out so that what we are hearing is the meat of the tone...

well I won't be redoing the test, I'm leaving on tour in 18 hours.... no time. Someone else can do it :) I know... you do it! Buy a Marsha and an Axe, a Faustine, a mac pro and some monitors and an Apogee interface and have at it....

Seriously, isn't the example I gave good enough? Everyone always wants something different.... "you shoulda mic'd the cab and used a poweramp, you should give 4 comparisons, you should fade in" (i don't get this one at all, because the attack, or leading edge of the note, is so important to me)...

sorry, not trying to get on your case. Just pointing out that this stuff takes time, and the gear, and I don't get anything back from it...

[sinasl1]

Buried in a mix, I couldn't tell the difference. Playing it in the same room, the real thing wins every time. The Fractal is for direct recording

tell that to uh, me, and to Dweezil, and Megadeth and the other fine folks who use the thing live

[Scott Peterson]

tell that to uh, me, and to Dweezil, and Megadeth and the other fine folks who use the thing live

And before the 'well with a pro pa.....' stuff starts, I am just a regular Joe and I have over 200+ shows live... direct to FOH.

[Moat]

Seriously, isn't the example I gave good enough?

I, for one, thought it was the best comparison clip I've yet ran across - kudos to Pete for putting in the thought, effort and expertise to attempt such an accurate, consistent representation.

Best to you on tour, Pete!!

[ben_allison]

well I won't be redoing the test, I'm leaving on tour in 18 hours.... no time. Someone else can do it :) I know... you do it! Buy a Marsha and an Axe, a Faustine, a mac pro and some monitors and an Apogee interface and have at it.... don't get anything back from it...

Exactly. Everyone feels so entitled.

If they want a better test, then they're more than welcome to do it themselves.

So many leeches on the Internet.

[_pete_]

well I won't be redoing the test, I'm leaving on tour in 18 hours.... no time. Someone else can do it :) I know... you do it! Buy a Marsha and an Axe, a Faustine, a mac pro and some monitors and an Apogee interface and have at it....

Seriously, isn't the example I gave good enough? Everyone always wants something different.... "you shoulda mic'd the cab and used a poweramp, you should give 4 comparisons, you should fade in" (i don't get this one at all, because the attack, or leading edge of the note, is so important to me)...

sorry, not trying to get on your case. Just pointing out that this stuff takes time, and the gear, and I don't get anything back from it...

:aok
You said that more tactfully than I would have.


IMO 300+ posts from this group of 'obsessive tonehounds' (myself included) debating which is which says quite a bit. I doubt that anyone was absolutely 100% certain before the reveal. If it were obvious, this thread wouldn't have gone over one page.
The Axe FX proved itself here without question. In a mix the two clips would be completely indistinguishable and in a mix is where it matters.
Mr. Thorn has nothing to prove.

[stratzrus]

Buried in a mix, I couldn't tell the difference. Playing it in the same room, the real thing wins every time. The Fractal is for direct recording...the two clips were so close tonally, that the differences were really irrelevant. You'll be playing this Axe thing for recording -- the differences between tube and Axe become irrelevant. You'll be playing in a band live? same thing.I think "wins" depends on the criterion. If you are saying that for the average user, with average sound reinforcement, a given tube amp in a quiet room would sound better than the Axe FX emulating that amp, I can see that, but that's an extremely narrow comparison.

Once ensemble playing comes into play, or in the hands of an expert user with top gear, it's a different story.

[Ventanaman]

I just want to thank Pete for providing these clips. This kind of work is time consuming and I would consider Pete a Marsha expert.

On to more important thread hijacking issues ... how is the Suhr PT100 coming along? Please keep us up to date on the amp boards at TGP.

[drneely]

Just for the record I never said anything about what you should have done, just mentioned something I would love to hear (with regards to power amp and cabs with mics). Mainly asking if it had been done before and if anyone could point me in that direction. So no disrespect or anything. Big fan, enjoy the tour.

[stratzrus]

On to more important thread hijacking issues ... how is the Suhr PT100 coming along? Please keep us up to date on the amp boards at TGP.So far from what I've read, production is expected to begin after January 1, 2011.

[OutterLimits]

......Just pointing out that this stuff takes time, and the gear, and I don't get anything back from it...

Most of us really appreciate the time and effort, Pete ... it is excellent having a pro's pro come on here and do things like this comparison test.

[trainwrecker]

Most of us really appreciate the time and effort, Pete ... it is excellent having a pro's pro come on here and do things like this comparison test.

This....it's really a great thing that a guy like Pete, who's played with some pretty major league talent, as well as being a hell of a guitarist himself, takes the time to "be one of us", chasing tone, comparing things, trying different things. We're all very appreciative I'm pretty sure.

[mwc2112]

And before the 'well with a pro pa.....' stuff starts, I am just a regular Joe and I have over 200+ shows live... direct to FOH.

Heck, for my church gig I was using an Ultra up until about a month ago when I sold it (we're in the process of moving and I wanted the extra cash). Been using an X3 Live since then and everyone from my bandmates to the soundman to even my wife has remarked that while the guitar still sounds good, it's definitely missing a lot in terms of presence within the mix and overall sound quality.

So... gonna try and pick up another one (probably Standard) soon. ;)

We're all very appreciative I'm pretty sure.

+1!!!

[Jarrett]

Been using an X3 Live since then and everyone from my bandmates to the soundman to even my wife has remarked that while the guitar still sounds good, it's definitely missing a lot in terms of presence within the mix and overall sound quality.That was my experience as well. I could rotate $3000 amps in and out every week and no one could tell, but when the Ultra went everyone was like, "Where's the magic box? You sold the magic box? Why?" Everyone could tell the difference when the Ultra was in the house.

[troykennedy]

Dude! I need that patch!

[shasha]

sorry, not trying to get on your case. Just pointing out that this stuff takes time, and the gear, and I don't get anything back from it...Well even though it isn't anything tangible, you got my respect and appreciation for the effort you put into this stuff. :bow

I honestly thought that clip 1 was the real deal. I've been using the Marsha and thought that clip 1 sounded a bit better to me, I thought that clip 2 sounded closer to what I had been getting, but I'm still using stock IR's for the moment so all bets are off. Clip 2 sounded just a tad harsher to me, but I didn't sit there and analyze it for hours either.

I hate to say it (since I'm still pretty new here), but there is just no way that if someone heard either of these in any kind of environment that they would be able to say that one was superior or even noticeably different to the other except for in an isolated side by side comparison and even then...

Now it may sound a bit different because of monitor, FRFR or whatever live vs an amp and cabinet, but in the mix it's indistinguishable. But just imagine if the mic on the amp moved a 1/2" or something; that tone is going to be a lot more different than difference between the two in the clip.

There's not even close, pretty close, close enough and than ridiculously close. I think that this falls in the latter category.

[JPenn]

I could tell a slight difference in those but I had no clue which was which. Both are very fine clips, neither sound better (to me) and they prove to me that it's too close to worry with.

Pete enjoy your tour (I do realize I'm very late to the party!), and thanks for taking time to even participate in the discussions here and HRI.