Looks like Fractal Devices are getting a new Modeling Update - Cygnus

Yek

Member
Messages
1,513
So the Real Confirmation should be those with a AxeFX III Running Beta & an FM3 Running the non-Cygnus.

Exactly what I've been doing.

There are some that have this situation & say they can hear or feel a difference.

Can or can't?

If you mean "can't", I don't recall seeing any of those messages on the forum. Do you have a link? And if they exist, it surely is a very very small minority.
 

Fractal Audio

Member
Messages
1,282
Question is why just now? lol

Modeling is still maturing.

I think an apt analogy is CGI. The first Toy Story was amazing. When it first came out we were amazed at how real everything looked but we had no prior basis for comparison. After a while we realized that it wasn't terribly realistic looking.

Over the years the engineers and programmers working on CGI have been steadily perfecting their craft. Each animated film becomes more and more realistic. Water effects were a particular weakness in early movies. Moana has amazingly realistic water effects illustrating the steady improvement in the craft. Avatar showed just how realistic CGI could be and that movie is, what, 10 years old now?

Modeling is the same thing. Over the years we've been steadily improving our craft. We do regular A/B testing against real amps and weigh the feedback from our community to identify areas of weakness. We then try to figure out what the cause of that weakness is and improve it.

We treat amp modeling as equal parts science and art. We've been steadily improving our core modeling algorithms as we gain insight into the unique phenomena that tube amps exhibit.

Cygnus (who was the son of Ares btw) represents our latest insights into several unique traits of tube amps that we had heretofore overlooked.

tl;dr Rome wasn't built in a day.
 

KHAN

Member
Messages
4,620
Modeling is still maturing.

I think an apt analogy is CGI. The first Toy Story was amazing. When it first came out we were amazed at how real everything looked but we had no prior basis for comparison. After a while we realized that it wasn't terribly realistic looking.

Over the years the engineers and programmers working on CGI have been steadily perfecting their craft. Each animated film becomes more and more realistic. Water effects were a particular weakness in early movies. Moana has amazingly realistic water effects illustrating the steady improvement in the craft. Avatar showed just how realistic CGI could be and that movie is, what, 10 years old now?

Modeling is the same thing. Over the years we've been steadily improving our craft. We do regular A/B testing against real amps and weigh the feedback from our community to identify areas of weakness. We then try to figure out what the cause of that weakness is and improve it.

We treat amp modeling as equal parts science and art. We've been steadily improving our core modeling algorithms as we gain insight into the unique phenomena that tube amps exhibit.

Cygnus (who was the son of Ares btw) represents our latest insights into several unique traits of tube amps that we had heretofore overlooked.

tl;dr Rome wasn't built in a day.
So "Realer and Realer All The Time" IS a thing.

Some folks here aren't gonna like this.
 

ejecta

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,358
Modeling is still maturing.

I think an apt analogy is CGI. The first Toy Story was amazing. When it first came out we were amazed at how real everything looked but we had no prior basis for comparison. After a while we realized that it wasn't terribly realistic looking.

Over the years the engineers and programmers working on CGI have been steadily perfecting their craft. Each animated film becomes more and more realistic. Water effects were a particular weakness in early movies. Moana has amazingly realistic water effects illustrating the steady improvement in the craft. Avatar showed just how realistic CGI could be and that movie is, what, 10 years old now?

Modeling is the same thing. Over the years we've been steadily improving our craft. We do regular A/B testing against real amps and weigh the feedback from our community to identify areas of weakness. We then try to figure out what the cause of that weakness is and improve it.

We treat amp modeling as equal parts science and art. We've been steadily improving our core modeling algorithms as we gain insight into the unique phenomena that tube amps exhibit.

Cygnus (who was the son of Ares btw) represents our latest insights into several unique traits of tube amps that we had heretofore overlooked.

tl;dr Rome wasn't built in a day.

As a CG artist for more than 20 years... IMHO that’s not really a strong analogy. Toy Strory and Avtar never tried to emulate “real people in a real environment”. A more accurate analogy would be Polar Express or any replacing of an actor who has passed on like Carrie Fisher or the dude in Hunger Games. People can still tell those characters aren’t real because the technology of motion capture, CG lights, skin subsurface scattering, micro muscle movements under the skin etc still can’t capture every little detail we humans notice in our faces and body movements. Evidently for SOME PEOPLE ... they can still tell the difference in modeler and a tube amp because the tech isn’t there to where humans can’t tell the difference just like people can still tell Princess Leah isn’t a real person in the last few Star Wars films.

All that said I agree the technology is getting better and we get closer day by day. It’s still to be seen however... whether digital tech ever will capture the full analog experience. I think it will but current computing cannot.
 
Last edited:

Kruegmeister

Member
Messages
638
Exactly what I've been doing.



Can or can't?

If you mean "can't", I don't recall seeing any of those messages on the forum. Do you have a link? And if they exist, it surely is a very very small minority.

Only saw Can thus far that I recall
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yek

FPFL

Member
Messages
3,248
So "Realer and Realer All The Time" IS a thing.

Some folks here aren't gonna like this.

Like or not is moot, "real" is just the wrong label.

My Fractal Standard on 2.x firmware was 100% real, never mind Ares to Cygnus on III or FM3. The updates don't make it "more real."

They potentially make it more similar to the modeled thing or a new take to a real world impossible ideal - as the tube amps have both benefits and flaws inherent in their design. Fractal has both "ever more accurate" amps and amps that were never trying to be an imitation b/c they'd explode or never even turn on if they were "real".
 

KHAN

Member
Messages
4,620
Like or not is moot, "real" is just the wrong label.

My Fractal Standard on 2.x firmware was 100% real, never mind Ares to Cygnus on III or FM3. The updates don't make it "more real."

They potentially make it more similar to the modeled thing or a new take to a real world impossible ideal - as the tube amps have both benefits and flaws inherent in their design. Fractal has both "ever more accurate" amps and amps that were never trying to be an imitation b/c they'd explode or never even turn on if they were "real".
"Realer and Realer" was meant with tongue firmly in cheek. It's been used a lot by people putting Fractal down because Cliff has constantly, relentlessly provided updates to improve his product. The responses of "Fractal enthusiasts" seems to rub people the wrong way.
 

JiveTurkey

Trumpets and Tants
Silver Supporting Member
Messages
25,542
4z0nsr.jpg
 

Watt McCo

Member
Messages
12,948
Modeling is still maturing.

I think an apt analogy is CGI. The first Toy Story was amazing. When it first came out we were amazed at how real everything looked but we had no prior basis for comparison. After a while we realized that it wasn't terribly realistic looking.

Over the years the engineers and programmers working on CGI have been steadily perfecting their craft. Each animated film becomes more and more realistic. Water effects were a particular weakness in early movies. Moana has amazingly realistic water effects illustrating the steady improvement in the craft. Avatar showed just how realistic CGI could be and that movie is, what, 10 years old now?

Modeling is the same thing. Over the years we've been steadily improving our craft. We do regular A/B testing against real amps and weigh the feedback from our community to identify areas of weakness. We then try to figure out what the cause of that weakness is and improve it.

We treat amp modeling as equal parts science and art. We've been steadily improving our core modeling algorithms as we gain insight into the unique phenomena that tube amps exhibit.

Cygnus (who was the son of Ares btw) represents our latest insights into several unique traits of tube amps that we had heretofore overlooked.

tl;dr Rome wasn't built in a day.
Less focus on CGI; more focus on comfier theatre seating, better snacks. I don't care if the cartoon movies get any more realistic than they already are, I just need a better UX when going to see them.
 

ejecta

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,358
As a non-CG artist for more than 20 years, I don't think anyone have a problem getting his analogy. :bonk
People who don’t have personal experience get the wrong correlation from a wrong analogy all the time. No surprise there. Not the case here though. Still these movies aren’t trying to sell you on the idea that the CG characters are just exactly like a real human. Sell you enough so to make the story move forward even though your brain tells that’s not real? Absolutely. To sell them as just exactly like real people? No.
 
Last edited:

metropolis_4

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
8,038
I fairly certain that I read that all Models benefit from the Cygnus Change & just that all have not been "Verified" 100% to be correct.
From Release Notes:
"Not every amp model has been updated yet. Some amp models may sound completely wrong. If an amp model is not listed below there is a possibility it won't sound right."

So the Real Confirmation should be those with a AxeFX III Running Beta & an FM3 Running the non-Cygnus.
There are some that have this situation & say they can hear or feel a difference.

But if you like the Sounds/Feels your getting, isn't that all that really matters???

My sincerest apologies to you and everyone else who responded to my comments for forgetting to follow the rules of this thread:

I think we've all learned an important lesson here:

Don't claim something is "good" unless you have done the empirical research and have objective, measurable data to substantiate your claims.

And don't even think about suggesting something is an "improvement" until you have completed your linear regression analysis and submitted your t-test calculations to the committee for review of inferential validity.


If we find you've fudged your Pearson correlations, or switched the samples, you will be permanently branded "Fanboi" and carry the label as a mark of your dishonor.

I forgot and claimed something was "good" before providing the required data analysis.

I will henceforth accept the label "Fanboi" as a consequence of my actions.
 

BWebb

Member
Messages
397
Modeling is still maturing.

I think an apt analogy is CGI. The first Toy Story was amazing. When it first came out we were amazed at how real everything looked but we had no prior basis for comparison. After a while we realized that it wasn't terribly realistic looking.

Over the years the engineers and programmers working on CGI have been steadily perfecting their craft. Each animated film becomes more and more realistic. Water effects were a particular weakness in early movies. Moana has amazingly realistic water effects illustrating the steady improvement in the craft. Avatar showed just how realistic CGI could be and that movie is, what, 10 years old now?

Modeling is the same thing. Over the years we've been steadily improving our craft. We do regular A/B testing against real amps and weigh the feedback from our community to identify areas of weakness. We then try to figure out what the cause of that weakness is and improve it.

We treat amp modeling as equal parts science and art. We've been steadily improving our core modeling algorithms as we gain insight into the unique phenomena that tube amps exhibit.

Cygnus (who was the son of Ares btw) represents our latest insights into several unique traits of tube amps that we had heretofore overlooked.

tl;dr Rome wasn't built in a day.

But the flaw in this line of thinking is that you did have a basis for comparison. The analogy above is apples and oranges because ever since the Axe FX Standard we were told the modeled amps play, sound, and react identical to the specific amps they were modeled after in your test environment. That is the ultimate “basis for comparison” wouldn’t you say?
 

Watt McCo

Member
Messages
12,948
But the flaw in this line of thinking is that you did have a basis for comparison. The analogy above is apples and oranges because ever since the Axe FX Standard we were told the modeled amps play, sound, and react identical to the specific amps they were modeled after in your test environment. That is the ultimate “basis for comparison” wouldn’t you say?
Perhaps improvements in testing that reveal divergence are what lead to improvements in modeling. I imagine there are many degrees of freedom in this system.
 

ejecta

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,358
But the flaw in this line of thinking is that you did have a basis for comparison. The analogy above is apples and oranges because ever since the Axe FX Standard we were told the modeled amps play, sound, and react identical to the specific amps they were modeled after in your test environment. That is the ultimate “basis for comparison” wouldn’t you say?
Exactly.
 

PBGas

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,576
I don't even run these updates until they are out of Beta. Things sound great now as it is. I see this as some fine tuning to make it sound closer to the amp it is being modelled after. To me that is great but I never put it past more then an update with some new features. This has been the longest modelling platform that I have used and held on to because it really does sound fabulous to my ears at least. I also like the workflow and selection of amps.
 

bdrepko

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,967
But the flaw in this line of thinking is that you did have a basis for comparison. The analogy above is apples and oranges because ever since the Axe FX Standard we were told the modeled amps play, sound, and react identical to the specific amps they were modeled after in your test environment. That is the ultimate “basis for comparison” wouldn’t you say?
Not sure who of any consequence ever stated that the models played, sounded, and reacted identical to the real amps. The term realer does not imply identical, it implies closer to.
 

marshall2553

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,779
I did accidentally give myself an A/B test while checking out Cygnus. I accidentally flipped to an amp that hasn't been updated yet and there was an immediately noticeable difference. That was more than enough confirmation for me.
The amps that haven’t been updated yet are still running on the new modeling algorithm. The data for the amp just hasn’t been updated to the format used in Cygnus and it hasn’t been checked against the real amp. It won’t sound the same as that amp would in v15, but it should sound better/different once it has been updated.
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom