Line 6 Helix vs Fractal Axe FX 2 vs EVH 5150III

ThePrettyDamned

guitarfishbay said:

ThePrettyDamned said:

In a mix? I doubt I'd find anything much different.

I agree any would be fine for a live gig through the PA. Through a guitar cab is another thing and not one we could realistically test.

Going off my own experience with recording I think by the time you've high passed the guitars to leave low end room for a bass and kick the relative punch of each amp model would still make a difference, especially if you wanted a guitars forward mix. This is where the low note being punchy (as opposed to just bassy) makes a difference for rock/metal type tones. I think it's often an internet wisdom that differences disappear in a mix and yes it's true a lot of subtlety is lost, but there are still favourable characteristics. Basically, I would expect the real amp to sound even better in a typical mix relative to certain amp models, though I think you could get a workable tone out of either. But we didn't have a full track for this test and of course quantifying how easy it would be to get a good tone is a little more difficult and a lot more subjective.

I did mean live, rather than recording. 

I have very little experience of recording, but plenty agree with your view of subtleties being important. 

kjdowd

Drew_TNBD said:

Wazmeister said:

@Drew_TNBD -what were you overall thoughts and findings of this 'shoot out' ?

Good question.

What is abundantly clear to me is that we are in such a great time for guitar tone and recording. If anyone is happy with their Helix or Axe FX or Atomic Amplifire, Eleven Rack, etc... then you should be. They're all great units and when you start getting into the territory of analysing on the level that we are, it can get a little corksniffy.

Having said that, I still feel that real amps rule the roost. Every time I listen to these clips over the last few days, my preference for the modelled tones changes, but the trophy consistently goes to the real amp - even in a blind test where I turn around and just listen to the changes.

I think modellers are struggling to get a nice even tone across palm mutes and big open chords. I still don't think they're dynamic enough - even the hallowed Axe FX doesn't quite get there for me.

My favourites were the real amp+loadbox+IR combination, the Axe FX 5150III advanced tweaks, and the Axe FX 6505+.

I like the Helix tones, but even as someone who owns and loves the thing... I tend to the think the Axe FX is better. At least for these kinds of tones.

What blew me away a bit was that I really disliked the real cab and microphone. I think I'm done recording real cabs for a bit - IR's just sound better to me right now!

The IR thing is interesting. Pete Thorn did a Helix demo when it came out and the tone of his Suhr amp into the Helix and recorded through an IR in the Helix was incredible. 

Drew_TNBD

kjdowd said:

Drew_TNBD said:

Wazmeister said:

@Drew_TNBD -what were you overall thoughts and findings of this 'shoot out' ?

Good question.

What is abundantly clear to me is that we are in such a great time for guitar tone and recording. If anyone is happy with their Helix or Axe FX or Atomic Amplifire, Eleven Rack, etc... then you should be. They're all great units and when you start getting into the territory of analysing on the level that we are, it can get a little corksniffy.

Having said that, I still feel that real amps rule the roost. Every time I listen to these clips over the last few days, my preference for the modelled tones changes, but the trophy consistently goes to the real amp - even in a blind test where I turn around and just listen to the changes.

I think modellers are struggling to get a nice even tone across palm mutes and big open chords. I still don't think they're dynamic enough - even the hallowed Axe FX doesn't quite get there for me.

My favourites were the real amp+loadbox+IR combination, the Axe FX 5150III advanced tweaks, and the Axe FX 6505+.

I like the Helix tones, but even as someone who owns and loves the thing... I tend to the think the Axe FX is better. At least for these kinds of tones.

What blew me away a bit was that I really disliked the real cab and microphone. I think I'm done recording real cabs for a bit - IR's just sound better to me right now!

The IR thing is interesting. Pete Thorn did a Helix demo when it came out and the tone of his Suhr amp into the Helix and recorded through an IR in the Helix was incredible. 

Yup. That's exactly how I did my reamps here. Everything went through the Helix.

Sporky

Drew_TNBD said:

They're all great units and when you start getting into the territory of analysing on the level that we are, it can get a little corksniffy.

I agree entirely - and there is a place for corksniffery.

I heard some "oddness" in some of the Helix sounds that I don't hear when playing - I think it's the difference between being engaged with listening for differences, and being engaged with the playing. I'm not denying the sound is there, but it just isn't as important when playing.

Which seems to be the opposite from how a lot of people go about it.

Anyways, I certainly appreciate all the effort that's been put into this. Most interesting.

guitarfishbay

Sporky said:

I heard some "oddness" in some of the Helix sounds that I don't hear when playing - I think it's the difference between being engaged with listening for differences, and being engaged with the playing. I'm not denying the sound is there, but it just isn't as important when playing.

Actually I think that's pretty common with any gear.

I have also experienced the opposite... where something sounds better when listening to it versus how you perceive it when playing... that's Telecasters to me in a nutshell!

PolarityMan

RandallFlagg said:

Aren't we past this amp vs modeller squit yet? 

Just wait til 10 years time where people are arguing who has the most authentic pod 1 treadplate emulation.

PolarityMan

There's some frequency that's slightly irritating me in the 5150 + IR like a subtle  nasal or cocked wah kind of thing that means I basically prefer the tone that's as far away from that as possible which I guess is the panama.

Have to say I prefer the helix to the AFX 2 as well.

PolarityMan

The double tracking really shows up the lack of chunk from the real cab / mic compared to the IR. Possibly the mic choice do you reckon or doesnt sound as chunky in the room too?

guitarfishbay

PolarityMan said:

The double tracking really shows up the lack of chunk from the real cab / mic compared to the IR. Possibly the mic choice do you reckon or doesnt sound as chunky in the room too?

@PolarityMan ;;;

There's actually not as big a difference in the low end as first seems - the increased treble in the mic clip makes a huge difference to perception.

The solid part is the mic and the red overlay is the loadbox plus IR clip.  You can see the biggest differences in the high end.

PolarityMan

Would be interesting to try EQ'ing some of that out and see if it makes the real cab sound better, im also surprised as you say that its the high end causing the perception difference.

guitarfishbay

I would imagine a lot of that extra high end is from the Beta mic, though I've never actually used one... it's just my understanding it has more high end than a normal 57 and that is certainly what is heard in the clip and can be seen in that screen cap.

Taken using a loop of the palm muted section using the freeze function and sidechain of FabFilter Pro Q2.

guitarfishbay

PolarityMan said:

Would be interesting to try EQ'ing some of that out and see if it makes the real cab sound better, im also surprised as you say that its the high end causing the perception difference.

Sure. (link updated 19.04)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0s0ffr5i6qs9i9/Mic - Loadbox+IR - Mic+EQ.mp3?dl=0

guitarfishbay

If it isn't clear from the filename that goes

1. 5150 III Red + SM57A raw
2. 5150 III Red + loadbox + IR
3. 5150 III Red + SM57A + EQ

guitarfishbay

At the end of the day it's a different cab, mic, room, mic position etc. 

PolarityMan

Still a tiny bit of flub, presumably from the room, on the EQ'ed one but I think I prefer it to the IR.

guitarfishbay

The thing is though is it'll take a couple of minutes of experimenting to get one good mic position.  In that time you could've tried a new IR every couple of seconds, tried different cabs, speakers, mics, combinations of etc.  Especially when it comes to doing multi mic placements and getting a good tone with the phasing challenges that introduces.  And you can do all that sat listening to your monitors at a comfortable volume, rather than crawling around on headphones like how anyone who records at home in a single room has done it for decades.

You could get a lot of cab packs for the price of one mic and the sound is close to indistinguishable as long as you don't count speaker distortion as part of your tone.

I fully respect the art of getting a good sound with a mic and have spent a lot of time trying to learn it... but pragmatically - IRs are one area where I think digital really is favourable.

Drew_TNBD

I prefer the IR's. But I think this weekend I might do some recording of each speaker in my cab and do a comparison of those, just to demonstrate the sonic differences.

bloodandtears

PolarityMan said:

RandallFlagg said:

Aren't we past this amp vs modeller squit yet? 

Just wait til 10 years time where people are arguing who has the most authentic pod 1 treadplate emulation.

Funny you should say this.. It's been my go to metal tone for over a decade (Pod v2, Flextone 2 HD, Pod Pro).. the later pod variants never came close.. although my HD500X with FRFR is better than those.. so I alternate between the two currently.

PolarityMan

guitarfishbay said:

The thing is though is it'll take a couple of minutes of experimenting to get one good mic position.  In that time you could've tried a new IR every couple of seconds, tried different cabs, speakers, mics, combinations of etc.  Especially when it comes to doing multi mic placements and getting a good tone with the phasing challenges that introduces.  And you can do all that sat listening to your monitors at a comfortable volume, rather than crawling around on headphones like how anyone who records at home in a single room has done it for decades.

You could get a lot of cab packs for the price of one mic and the sound is close to indistinguishable as long as you don't count speaker distortion as part of your tone.

I fully respect the art of getting a good sound with a mic and have spent a lot of time trying to learn it... but pragmatically - IRs are one area where I think digital really is favourable.

That is true and the differences *are* pretty subtle. It would be much harder to tell in a mix and tbh plus once the tone is EQ'ed you could correct any perceived issues with the IR too.