Axe FX III - the Blog

DavusPG

It does sound like a lot. Is there anyone else in the band that could take on the lighting duties, or could they be left on an automatic setting?

If it's detracting from your enjoyment playing then I would question it. I played a gig last night and am finding myself looking for increasingly easier options. I used my kitchen sink preset for all but a few songs and within that preset I mostly stuck with the same couple of tones with boost, delay and a bit of wah as and when needed. 

That approach is also seeping into my playing too as I used the same guitar for all but 1 song last night (alternate tuning) and it's the same guitar I've been playing almost exclusively for the best part of 2 months. With the consistency that brings I'm finding that I'm getting more out of it too as I know exactly which pickup selections to go for, when and how much to roll off the volume, how the tone knob reacts. That combined with a mostly one preset approach for the majority of our songs is definitely having a positive impact on my playing and enjoyment.

Roland

Yep, that’s where I was last month. I agree about the simplicity of one patch, one guitar, and focusing on pickup selection and volume. I just want more. 

guitarmangler

I don’t suppose your drummer is playing to a click ? If so, you could map out the song in a DAW and get it to trigger the lighting changes ( and your patches ) via midi. If not , I think there was a device/app that listened to you play and would change the tempo accordingly? I’ll have a Google and see if I remember what’s it called. 

Roland

@guitarmangler We do use a click, but only for starting tempo, keyboard sequences and FX delay timing. We don’t play to the click because we like a bit of ebb and flow in our music. The singer also doesn’t always come at the same point. So DAW sequenced lighting changes are a step too far. 

In songs where there’s a change in sound eg between verse and chorus I can switch scenes to change the sound, and use the scene midi block to change the lights. The extra work comes if I want to change the lights without changing the sound, or if I decide to change the sound “because I can”.

Snags

Roland said:

 The singer also doesn’t always come at the same point.

One word makes such a difference

welshboyo

Sounds like a complete faff to me - you are spending more time integrating stuff than actually enjoying playing - what you are trying to achieve is essentially the job of another "non-playing" band member - like a soundman/FOH type person.

I'm with Davus here in as much as I spend 98% of my time on 1 preset with 8 Scenes - that gives me plenty of options and with the OMG layouts I can switch in/out whatever I need. I'm also down to 1 guitar - it makes no odds whatsoever to punters that I'm playing a Killers song on an RG550!!! In fact last gig was 1 preset for the whole gig

If you were trying to re-create a specific light show as part of a tribute or whatever then fair enough (but I still think its a separate job!!) but the enjoyment must surely ebb away at gig time when you are having to constantly think about what comes next in the lighting sequence etc etc.

Without sounding like an arsehole, if you are concerned/trying to get the band to sound better then the only thing to make the band sound better is for everyone to be on top of their parts - not saying that is the case with you Roland but there is only so much you can do over and above what you can do on Auto-Pilot if you are spending all of your free time running up light sequences and then at gig time being distracted by it all - our Bass Player is similar in some respects trying to be the do it all guy but I'd rather him play the right notes rather than worry about whether the lights are in right place.... 

And lets face it, if its anything like what its like down here with us - a band turning up with lights is already a novelty and puts you above the competition - I think you are going a step too far and making unnecessary work/ballache for yourself. 

Roland

@welshboyo I actually enjoy integrating technology, and it’s not taking away from my playing time. You are right about distraction during a gig, and it’s something I’m aware of. 

There is a balance which, if I can get it right, will yield a better overall presentation. Everything is based on the one patch which I was using until a month ago. Using that patch I had to choose a Scene, and then switch individual FX on or off before or during the song. Chorus and Delay are the two main culprits. 

By copying that source preset the starting Scene and FX are set automatically, which is less work. The lighting colourway is also be set for the song. Using a copy of the source patch also lets me modify the FX settings, so I’m not using the same Chorus or Delay settings for every song.

Where the extra work that comes in during a gig is stepping on a button at the start of a verse, chorus, or bridge to change FX and/or lights. I’m not going to kick in lighting changes which aren’t related to a section of the song. If my brain gets overloaded during a gig then I can simply stop doing this, except where I need to turn FX on or off. I’ve also set up my FC12 with specific buttons for the main FX in case I need them.

DavusPG

@welshboyo ;

Are you not playing a Luke, Luke 2 or L3 anymore?

Mind you as an alternative you could do far worse than an RG550!

welshboyo

DavusPG said:

@welshboyo ;

Are you not playing a Luke, Luke 2 or L3 anymore?

Mind you as an alternative you could do far worse than an RG550!

No Mate, the L3 is still here but I’ve just fallen out of love with it, didn’t think I’d ever say that tbh….

Roland

FAS has been pretty active this year in delivering firmware upgrades. 20.0 is now in beta testing. My policy is not to upgrade until the new version has been tried and tested for a week or so. At first I thought that Dynamic Distortion wasn’t for low gain players like me. Then I saw Brett’s video using I’d with an acoustic. Now I’m intrigued. 

https://youtu.be/45cxoHiOW-s

Roland

Last night I had the opportunity to test the Setlist feature, and the per-song lighting changes, at a gig. We were playing outside. It was cold, and threatened to rain. The venue’s RCD power socket refused to work. We lost half an hour before we ran a long power cable to another socket. Consequently we didn’t get much of a sound check. 

The lighting controls worked, and syncing lighting changes to song sections seemed to add to the energy. I was worried about the lighting looking like a gimmick. If anything I’ve been too conservative in my choice of pulsing and flashing.

We’ve got two weeks before our next gig, so there’s time to install version 20, and look at Dynamic Distortion.

FarleyUK

Due to an upgrade, I'm selling my Axe Fx III Mk II if anyone is interested.

DavusPG

What kind of of upgrade?

Ah, I see from your FS thread that you got a Turbo.

Do you need the extra processing power? 

After over 4 years of zero GAS since getting my AX8 & then III I'm suddenly wanting to try tubes again in conjunction with the Fractal FX and amp modelling where required. Not sure if it'll be any better, if not then I'll stick with just the III

FarleyUK

DavusPG said:

What kind of of upgrade?

Ah, I see from your FS thread that you got a Turbo.

Do you need the extra processing power? 

After over 4 years of zero GAS since getting my AX8 & then III I'm suddenly wanting to try tubes again in conjunction with the Fractal FX and amp modelling where required. Not sure if it'll be any better, if not then I'll stick with just the III

Yeah, I need the extra horsepower due to some of the songs we're doing, plus I may be getting the bassist and other guitarist going through it too.

I mean, I could probably do without the extra power but y'know........ GAS and FOMO.

FarleyUK

So we had the first rehearsal last night with the AFX3 Turbo. I had a 1959SLP going into some OwnHammer TV greenback and H30 IRs, and a Carol-Ann Tucana going in to LT TV Mix 7. The Tucana then had a 25ms mono delay at 100% wet after the cab, before they both combined into a mixer, and hard panned left and right.

This also allowed me to set a switch on the FC12 to toggle amp 2 on and off - meaning that not only did it sound HUGE, but I could start some songs with just one guitar and then kick in the second amp with the slight delay to really make an impact.

DavusPG

Sounds great... but that's also achievable on the standard III isn't it?

Roland

Yes, I’ve got a patch which does it. I think the point is that this is just the first easy step with what @FarleyUK can do with the Turbo model.

DavusPG

I've yet to try it in a full band rehearsal, but I got hold of a Suhr Reactive Load and hooked up my old H&K tube amp using the Axe's effects pre and post amp and then using IRs in the Axe before going out to the PA.

At gig volume it does seem to have a bit more thump, sustain and "something" when I A/B it against the Axe's modelled amps, but the beauty with this set up is that I can have the best of both worlds - some scenes are all AxeFX, some are the H&K with the Axe's effects and some are a blend of all 3

Proof will be in a full mix, but it's been fun to play around with a valve head again and as much as I've got used to the Fractal interface, the immediacy of tweaking on an actual head is a satisfying experience.

Roland

I get tired of people trying to prove that xyz sounds better than my AxeFX. In precisely defined circumstances it probably does. I’m sure that the preconfigured reverbs in a Strymon take less effort to find than configuring them in the AxeFX, although once you’ve configured them there’s little difference. 

What has always attracted me to modellers, and multiFX before them, is that it’s a toolkit which you can configure to meet a need, and rarely needs any additional spend. Yesterday I wanted to play along with a looper, something which I haven’t done since the days of reel-to-reel tapes. Step 1: add a Looper block to my kitchen sink patch - position cursor and turn the dial. Step2: select the Looper layout for my FC12 - two foot presses. Hey presto.

Jonathanthomas83

I agree. The reality is that neither the Fractal or a Kemper sounds "as good" as a real tube amp. I think everyone can agree on that, but there's just so much more to a modeller/profiler than that, it's a gateway to an easier and more streamlined workflow, as you describe above.

And after all, what is "as good" and how do people conceive that? All of us differently, I'd imagine.

I'm currently using a Kemper and keeping a keen eye on this thread because your endeavours interest me. I've recently made peace with the fact that it doesn't quite get the tones I loved from my amp and Suhr Reactive Load, but that was many thousands of pounds ago and I can't afford that currently. And in actual fact, I'm not sure I'm in a rush to ever go back to that. I've found all that I need in the Kemper and I'm very happy.

Cue the naysayers...