EVH 5150 vs. Axe FX 5150
- Thread starter Ola Englund
- Start date
Morgan C
MAX LOUD PRESETS¯\(°_o)/¯
I hear a pretty huge difference here. I much prefer the real thing (but then I like a bit of fizz). The real deal sounds more saturated, realistic, brighter, aggressive.. The best way I can describe it (and impulses in general, so the AxeFX is probably not the culprit here) is that the impulse sounds as if I'm listening to it through a metal tube or something. There are weird resonances because its capturing only a single moment.
I dunno what happened to Nebula, but I hope someone produces some good impulses for that because I'm sick of what we have currently ><
I find it weird that I find major differences here, yet with my FG-X tests I seemed to be deaf to its magic that everyone else could hear :/
I dunno what happened to Nebula, but I hope someone produces some good impulses for that because I'm sick of what we have currently ><
I find it weird that I find major differences here, yet with my FG-X tests I seemed to be deaf to its magic that everyone else could hear :/
A slight difference, but nothing worth mentioning about, you can only hear a difference if you are really looking for it. Great test Ola! Say, care to share the impulse that you used? 
Melb_shredder
Orpheus: Melodic Death
After finally listening to this on Monitors/ Cans and also $20 set of in ears.... I can safely say there's definitely a difference in the tone. Not a bad thing though. Both are great, I prefer the Axe tone in this test, if the highs were a little more tamed on the 5150III then it'd be perfect for what I was expecting. Bit too fizzy. But nothin an EQ can't sort out. I get the point about the cab impulse thing. I think that's why you get that weird mid thing with sims. The single image of the speaker and being most easily distinguishable in the mids/ high mids etc.
Ola, please try this with the AXE through the same power amp/ cab as the amp you compare with. That's the single test I'm DYING to hear.
Ola, please try this with the AXE through the same power amp/ cab as the amp you compare with. That's the single test I'm DYING to hear.
I could make a test on a spanish forum and tell that the 2nd part is 5150 and first part is Axe and see what people says...
I really can't apreciate that big differences that you found (at least at low volumes... i can't turn them up at this hours)
what i can notice is the low end that 2n clip part has. nothing else... I'm on KRK RP5 and sony HD 7509…
well i'll try to post that on spanish forum inverted to see reactions
PS: i turned the volumes up with headphones... now i can hear more differences... the first one has more presence to and is ballsier
I really can't apreciate that big differences that you found (at least at low volumes... i can't turn them up at this hours)
what i can notice is the low end that 2n clip part has. nothing else... I'm on KRK RP5 and sony HD 7509…
well i'll try to post that on spanish forum inverted to see reactions
PS: i turned the volumes up with headphones... now i can hear more differences... the first one has more presence to and is ballsier
Idiots calling us modeler haters need to shut the fuck up. There's an obvious difference. And I don't think "digital" is what's to blame anyways. If you can't hear the difference between an impulse a speaker cabinet you shouldn't be on an audio engineering forum. Run the Axe through the 5150iii FX return and cab and I'm betting (hoping) you could tweak it to sound pretty much identical or at least just as good.
Melb_shredder
Orpheus: Melodic Death
I agree Brandon. It's not bitching and moaning etc. It's just an objective observation based on what we know etc. It's not modeller hating, it's acknowledging the pros/ cons and difference of the tools we have to use. We do it for everything, Monitors/ Pre amps/ Converters etc, what's wrong with doing the same for modellers?
Most guys on here who know their shit are happy to praise the quality of the axe and others etc, but still be able to realise the realistic shortcomings etc.
This is a great example of great tone, but obviously with some differences to the original
Anyways, I'd still love to hear the Axe through the FX loop etc.
Most guys on here who know their shit are happy to praise the quality of the axe and others etc, but still be able to realise the realistic shortcomings etc.
This is a great example of great tone, but obviously with some differences to the original
Anyways, I'd still love to hear the Axe through the FX loop etc.
I just sold some amps, including a 6505 for an Axe FX. Hearing them sound so similar is quite a relief. I am just hoping that the learners curve doesn't set me back to far, because I want to start tracking my current project with it immediately after I get it.
Do you edit all your tones in Axe Edit or by hand on the axe fx itself?
Do you edit all your tones in Axe Edit or by hand on the axe fx itself?
By hand actually. I'm a pro on spinning the wheel
The Axe Edit works kinda bad on my computer for some reason. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. I tried to save down the preset yesterday but it didn't work.My trick in this patch is; Don't add to much shit before and after the amp block. This patch right here I'm only using the ampblock. No filter or driver before, no eq etc.
well i made the test in spanish forum!! and suprisingly most of people said that 5150 sound better (they though that 5150 was Axe FX) and few people said that real axe sounded better thinking that was axe fx...
so, mostly won real 5150! hehehe even with psicological effect!
so, mostly won real 5150! hehehe even with psicological effect!
If you record the AxeFX through a real cab and not an impulse, I'm sure no one here will be able to pick out the difference. Record any real amp head through an impulse and you will pick the real cab over the impulse. Impulses just don't sound right to me, especially with chugging riffs.
TheDude
Jocke Skog
It's all about saturation, compression and early reflections. The Impulses are so short that it'll take some early reflection-reverb-tweaking bullshit to get it in a room. Also a transducer (speaker) have a variable OHM throughout the frequencies, and we all know what happens when we use 4 Ohm cabs or 16 ohm cabs, right? Now, the 4 ohm cab still has a 10 Ohm bump between 50-120Hz and a gradually higher Ohmage (self made word, Yay) from 3500Hz and upwards to about 10 Ohms around 10 KHz (those palm mute chugs are prominent in the low frequency area). An IR doesn't, of course. So, to get it to work perfect, there has to be some sort of multi band load simulator to get it perfect.
In a mix though, no one hears a difference, so why bother? A good riff is a good riff, even if it's through an impulse.
There. Done.
McLowery
Member
- Feb 6, 2008
- 59
- 0
- 6
Both are quite usable tones IMO! The Axe does seem to be less bright than the EVH. I think these two would sound fucking killer tracked together on their own R and L separate tracks in a mix. There doesn't seem to be any artificial sounding qualities on the Axe Fx tone either. Great comparisons! I've always liked the cold of solid state and digital amp circuits. Used Randall RG100's for years. I don't think the gap from mic'ing a real speaker and using an impulse is going to blur very soon but I do feel the tones from either, or or both are very adequate in today's recording biz.
