Posts by ampjunkie

    I use two Yamaha FC7 volume/expression pedals. These are about $45 USD each. Extremely rugged rubber. The only thing people complain about them is the longer throw, but I like the distance and the sensitivity. Also, these things are made in Japan and have been in production for decades. Many people have had them for decades also ...

    • Lerxst Amps Omega Amp 50W Head -- with Lerxst Omega 4x12 Cabinet (Basically a custom hand-wired signature amp, originally made for Alex Lifeson that is based on a Marshall Silver Jubilee)
    • Panama Amps (mentioned before)

      • Fuego
      • Inferno
      • Shaman
      • Loco
    Quote

    Scott doesn't delete posts simply because they are negative toward Fractal, and he doesn't use the forum to push any brand-Fractal or otherwise. He's actually extremely impartial and open-minded. The only people who have a beef with him are people that have gotten in trouble there, and I can say with complete confidence that they are almost always the source of the trouble, not innocent victims.


    I've been reading TGP for many many years, and this is definitely not true. There is a bias towards Fractal on TGP (and against every other modeler). Both Scott and Alec (owner and moderator) are Fractal fan boys. It is subtle, but they are there at every turn to stick up for Fractal. They are walking billboards for the company. The most common response from them when they state their views is that it's "only my opinion" along with the cliched "gamechanger. " Yet the way it is phrased, it's almost stated as fact and that your opinions don't really mean much if it's against Fractal. It's true that they don't rag on Kemper. But they rarely give kudos to Kemper.


    Just read this very long (but entertaining!) thread and you'll begin to see the biases that people have -- including the owners and moderators of that forum.


    http://www.thegearpage.net/boa…er-axe-fx-debate.1411293/


    Summary: someone doesn't like the Axe-FX -- thinks Kemper is better. Says he owns Kemper, Axe-FX II, and Ultra. Scott as well as Cliff (Fractal owner) don't believe him -- call him a troll. He posts a photo which shows all 3 units as requested by Scott. They claim it's fake and go to great lengths to discredit him. Looks like a lynching. Neither take the high road in their approach. Turns out they are wrong and both have to apologize. Just goes to show how fast they are to be on the defensive when faced with any negativity towards Fractal -- a true symptom of fanboism. :)

    Bogner Ecstasy 100B
    Egnater IE4 into VHT 2/50/2
    PRS Archon
    Bogner Helios


    Can strike all of the above off the list except the Bogner 100B. I've seen the IE4 on RE, but not sure if it went into a VHT 2/50/2. Archon and Helios available commercially.

    Running two amps/models/rigs at the same time can sound harmonically richer, and can be a way to sound more like the typical doubled guitar parts, if mixed in stereo, and one of the two side has a small amount of pitch shift and a tiny amount of 100% wet short delay.


    For someone who wants that sound live, two KPAs is an ideal way to do it.


    Agreed -- that would be a cool sound. But if you are talking about doubling the guitar sound, normally it isn't done using very different guitar tones. The doubled tones are usually very similar, so it's easily handled by the sound engineer with outboard gear. Unless you are talking about doubling an electric with an acoustic (very common). In which case a KPA isn't going to get you that anyways.


    Can you give a case (song) of two amps played at the same time (doubled) but are drastically different in tone (not counting acoustic guitar doubling)? Maybe I just listen to guitar bands that don't use this technique. Sure, it's cool to be able to do live, but I don't think it's that common recorded -- much less live.

    I would like to have someone put forth a good example of the need to ever run two or more amps in parallel (not serially as I have never heard of someone micing an amp and putting that into another amp). I know it's done in the studio to get multiple takes/tones of the same guitar part. But it isn't a must as it can be replicated via re-amping. There are three situations where people play:

    • Studio recording: it's sometimes desired to have multiple amps running in a mix. But in the studio, I think it's rarely cut live. You can re-amp to your heart's content, so you really don't need one Kemper to run two profiles in parallel. Simply record one dry track and re-amp with one profile, then re-amp with another and layer and mix as needed. Or just double-track like they used to (Randy Rhoads). In the studio, I am sure the engineers would rather have these separated as tracks so they can apply different EQ, compression, delays, etc.to each amp tone.
    • Live playing: it's rare to see multiple amps running at the same time. You might have multiple amps to get you clean, rhythm, lead (a la Eric Johnson) but they never run at the same time. It's rare to see it.
    • Bedroom noodling: do you really need multiple amps running at the same time? I guess it would be cool to have a Fender in the left channel and a VOX in the right. But is this feature really practical given the extra computational power needed? :-)

    I would love to see a true double-blind test between old and new FW. Just the expectation of the new FW with all the new algorithms, etc. can easily convince you that it sounds better -- or 100% more realer! Just because it models more accurately doesn't mean that it will sound better. Maybe "improved" modeling just means extra fudge parameters to make it sound better ...which is what I gather from the press release on the models being more based on empirical data. Ironically, if you continue down this path of modeling based on empirical data (less on circuit schematics), you arrive at -- THE KEMPER! :-)


    BTW, for this new FW from Fractal, here's the same caveat:


    NOTE: This firmware represents a significant update in the amp modeling and the amp models themselves. Many models have been redone. Although care was taken to ensure as much compatibility with existing presets as possible, your presets may be altered.

    I think it really depends on what kind of sound you are looking for. I found it very useful to research what was used on specific recordings by specific guitarists. For example, I have noticed that for guitarists like Alex Lifeson or John Petrucci, they like to use a combination of mics -- like SM57, MD421, etc. And maybe mix the two. On Petrucci's sound, see here: http://www.musicplayers.com/fe…006/0306John_Petrucci.php


    Alex Lifeson has used a variety of mics though the years, but recently it seems to be SM57 and U47, again mixed to a mono track.


    I also noticed that many people use the Royer R-121 -- esp to add girth and low-end. If you listen to IRs, you will easily hear that.


    For my tastes, I like recordings which use SM57, MD421, and R-121 for lead and rhythm. Usually miced very close to the grill and slightly off the cone and on-axis. For clean tones, I still like the U87, U47, or AKG 414 or some mix.

    Thanks again :)


    I've read that you can mechanically set the pedal to accommodate two approaches, "seated" and "standing": for what I've grabbed, it should change the pedal's physical excursion, allowing to choose "the first" or "the last" portion or its range of movement. Have you tried it?


    :)


    I have not tried it as I use the default which is seating position (I think).