amgamg wrote:

 

UK TV ya say??????? Can ya introduce me to Rachael Riley if I cross the pond??????

Do you mean Rachel Riley from Countdown? I was more of a Vorders man myself . Unfortunately that's done in Yorkshire (I'm London-based), but I did work with Countdown's director on another gameshow for a few years so I'll see what I can do.

Crusty_Old_Rocker wrote:

 

FarBeyond3 wrote:

Cleans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubu8A_wmmNI&feature=related

 

Can anyone else hear the "quack" at the beginning of each strum.  Echhhh!  I'm not liking that at all.

 

It's not like a Strat quack, it's almost like there's an autowah in there somewhere.  That one clip of "evidence" proves quite conclusively to me that the AxeFX sounds terrible.

 

Thanks FarBeyond3 for that, the first 60 seconds of that clip has turned me right off any thought of wasting money on a piece of gear that sounds so horrible.

 

Cheers,

 

Crusty

Those are Fremen's patches, and him playing, I believe.  I'm pretty sure that's just a bad compressor setting.  The Axe is capable of a lot better cleans than that.  Go have a listen to the rest of the series of videos.  He has some very nice stuff in there.

Those vids wouldn't be what would turn me off.  People ranting like FB3 do it for me without a single recording.  Hey, maybe he's a Line6Shill, but covertly.  Yeah, that's it.  He was contracted by Line6 to come in here and spew about the Axe to the point where we're sick about it and wouldn't want to own one.

FarBeyond3 wrote:

 

nuser101 wrote:

 

 

So, you admit tone is subjective - that's encouraging, but then you go on to say "ask them which sounds better". That will depend on their ears and the way they hear music - that's not objective by any stretch. To say that it is would require identical aural cavities, timpanic membranes, and neuronal circuits for all of human kind. There are several users on this forum that gave up on the Axe to use the HD series of PODs, so their ears, which are equally as qualified as yours, came to a different conclusion than you have. There's nothing in that comparison that makes them right and you wrong. However, there's nothing in it that makes you right and them wrong, either.

 

 

Not exactly. me admitting tone is subjective is like admitting that it is a subjective preference which amp to pick on any particular modeler.  But which modeler is able to produce those same tones at a higher sound quality  and depth of realism is  a whole other matter - definetly not a subjective one.

 

Whoever sold their Axe FX units for Pods likely did not know what they were doing with the Fractal Box. There is some learning curve but it helps to have a technical background in audio or even live sound.   (I dont want to use the word engineer because this other clown alladin is gonna try another round of trolling over word meanings that have nothing to do with he facts).

 

 

You're the type of person that would get on stage with a Nashville sessions player and turn your nose up at their gear. Meanwhile, they would play you off the stage. That's not an insult - they would play nearly all of us off the stage, but some of us would try to learn from them while getting our asses kicked. You'd blame it on gear.

 

As if Nashville has the best musicians ever.   I am sure the great composers  are spinning in their graves at such harmonies they could never come up with themselves.  Hail the musical paradise of Nashville!

Why did you not respond to the fact that you lied about evidence? Couldn't spin fast enough, or just lazy?

Anyway, let's get on to your next steps in the advancement of logic.

1) I don't know why others don't like an AXE-FX, so they're likely using it wrong. Yep, that's the only way to deal with data - make up a hypothesis completely unsupported by evidence.

2) Who claimed "Nashville has the best musicians ever?" No one. I said that Nashville sessions players (who, btw, make their living recording a lot of music you have heard, and back new artists for exposure to recording labels) play better than most of us. As for me, I doubt that Brahms, Bach, Beethoven and Mozart are spinning in their graves about Nashvillle sessions players or anyone else, for that matter. I'm equally certain that they wouldn't trade the aural experiences of their lifetimes for the marvelous opportunity of hearing their work recorded on guitars with an AXE-FX, which, apparently, would be a great improvement over those crappy Amatis and Strads that they had to listen to.

I look forward to your next recording - you must be a killer musician.

nuser101 wrote:

 

FarBeyond3 wrote:

 

nuser101 wrote:

 

You're the type of person that would get on stage with a Nashville sessions player and turn your nose up at their gear. Meanwhile, they would play you off the stage. That's not an insult - they would play nearly all of us off the stage, but some of us would try to learn from them while getting our asses kicked. You'd blame it on gear.

 

As if Nashville has the best musicians ever.

I have had the pleasure of playing with one of these Nashville types who happened to be the Statler Brother's guitarist on their TV show, back in the day.  He came in with an old, beat up Deluxe, a beat up Tele, and a beat up Tube Screamer.  And his tone and playing beat me up all over the stage.  He is a fantastic player with fantastic technique and tone.  Never heard of the Axe-Fx.  Doesn't care.  Try telling him his ears aren't as good as yours and that his gear is no good, FB3.  He'd just smile, chuckle, and proceed to hand your your @$$ with his playing and tone.

I learned a lot from him.  Keep it simple.  You actually can keep it relatively simple with just the Axe-Fx, but it's still relative.  I even endeavor to keep it simple with the HD500, which is much easier to do, comparitively.  Also, to keep focusing on learning your craft.  You spend all this time worrying about tone, you spend less time learning.  I know what his rig cost him.  It's all second or third hand stuff.  And it totals under $1000, from pick to amp.

So please, FB3, bless us with your greater than Nashville level of playing and tone and produce for us a clip of your Axe-Fx magic.  It's time to put your money where your fingers are.

nuser101 wrote:

 

Why did you not respond to the fact that you lied about evidence? Couldn't spin fast enough, or just lazy?

 

I dont see how I was inconsistent and you fail to point anything indicating such out.

You don't know the scientific method.  Online clips are not considered high grade evidence. And are not important here as they are not treated as evidence by a person who knows logic.  Never mind not even by normal people. But if you wish to continue to make final judgments on online clips, feel free.  But you will not get far that way. Nobody will - unless they verify their authenticity in person.

 

1) I don't know why others don't like an AXE-FX, so they're likely using it wrong. Yep, that's the only way to deal with data - make up a hypothesis completely unsupported by evi

Its too bad to claim to have some expertise knowledge about logic and failt to note that the logical concept of "Occam's Razor" applies to this - , it is a principle that generally recommends selecting the simplest competing  hypothesis when both hypotheses are said to equally explain some phenomena or lack of.  Because in this case my hypothesis is likely to be true considering that the unit is industry standard.

2) Who claimed "Nashville has the best musicians ever?" No one. I said that Nashville sessions players (who, btw, make their living recording a lot of music you have heard, and back new artists for exposure to recording labels) play better than most of us. As for me, I doubt that Brahms, Bach, Beethoven and Mozart are spinning in their graves about Nashvillle sessions players or anyone else, for that matter. I'm equally certain that they wouldn't trade the aural experiences of their lifetimes for the marvelous opportunity of hearing their work recorded on guitars with an AXE-FX, which, apparently, would be a great improvement over those crappy Amatis and Strads that they had to listen to.

Those are violins, not guitar.  Your comparision is therefore invalid.  But if you really want to know, yes they would probabily enjoy them more through an Axe FX or a real electric guitar and amp because violins are more irritating on the ear and more unpleasant and shrill (for the high notes at least). Its a no brainer, no matter who you are or what your background.

I look forward to your next recording - you must be a killer musician.

My recordings or musical ability is irrelevant because I could have made the same argument valid even if I do not own an Axe FX and base my opinion on hearing it in person if someone else owned it and showed me  and even played it for me without me touching it - not even having to own it. And hence the nail in the coffin on the subject of whether I am required to post any clips of my own as such an answer would be clear by now. I dont even have to be a guitar player for the sound quality and realistic sound point to have been made.

farbeyond3, would you mind repeating that? please put it in simpler terms so i can understand it.

FarBeyond3 wrote:

 

nuser101 wrote:

 

Why did you not respond to the fact that you lied about evidence? Couldn't spin fast enough, or just lazy?

 

 

I dont see how I was inconsistent and you fail to point anything indicating such out.

 

You don't know the scientific method.  Online clips are not considered high grade evidence. And are not important here as they are not treated as evidence by a person who knows logic.  Never mind not even by normal people. But if you wish to continue to make final judgments on online clips, feel free.  But you will not get far that way. Nobody will - unless they verify their authenticity in person.

 

 

1) I don't know why others don't like an AXE-FX, so they're likely using it wrong. Yep, that's the only way to deal with data - make up a hypothesis completely unsupported by evi

Its too bad to claim to have some expertise knowledge about logic and failt to note that the logical concept of "Occam's Razor" applies to this - , it is a principle that generally recommends selecting the simplest competing  hypothesis when both hypotheses are said to equally explain some phenomena or lack of.  Because in this case my hypothesis is likely to be true considering that the unit is industry standard.

 

2) Who claimed "Nashville has the best musicians ever?" No one. I said that Nashville sessions players (who, btw, make their living recording a lot of music you have heard, and back new artists for exposure to recording labels) play better than most of us. As for me, I doubt that Brahms, Bach, Beethoven and Mozart are spinning in their graves about Nashvillle sessions players or anyone else, for that matter. I'm equally certain that they wouldn't trade the aural experiences of their lifetimes for the marvelous opportunity of hearing their work recorded on guitars with an AXE-FX, which, apparently, would be a great improvement over those crappy Amatis and Strads that they had to listen to.

 

Those are violins, not guitar.  Your comparision is therefore invalid.  But if you really want to know, yes they would probabily enjoy them more through an Axe FX or a real electric guitar and amp because violins are more irritating on the ear and more unpleasant and shrill (for the high notes at least). Its a no brainer, no matter who you are or what your background.

 

I look forward to your next recording - you must be a killer musician.

My recordings or musical ability is irrelevant because I could have made the same argument valid even if I do not own an Axe FX and base my opinion on hearing it in person if someone else owned it and showed me  and even played it for me without me touching it - not even having to own it. And hence the nail in the coffin on the subject of whether I am required to post any clips of my own as such an answer would be clear by now. I dont even have to be a guitar player for the sound quality and realistic sound point to have been made.

1) I see, the answer is that you lied, you just don't feel you were inconsistent in your lie. Saying you didn't come here expecting evidence, then saying high grade evidence is needed by others to support their position constitutes lying, although it is a type of lying consistent with your other methodologies of fabrication.

2) The scientific method demands a hypothesis tested by data - you have plenty of the former, and none of the latter.

3) Occam's razor demands the simplest explanation consistent with data. You make a wild extrapolation, with no supporting data, to say that people who leave the AXE-FX leave it because they don't know how to use it, despite the fact that many of them have been creating tones with other modellers, of different varieties, for years. Your explanation is certainly not the simplest, which is that they prefer the HD-500.

4) You're the one who began the comparison of guitarists to the great composers, not me. I just finished the lunacy of the comparison for you, with obvious sarcastic hyperbole.

5) You're last point is correct. Your recordings are irrelevant, because they don't exist.

I am the author of eighteen US patents in the agricultural and chemical industries. You can look them up, along with my educational and professional history (PhD, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) at www.chemvantage.net. This year, my company is introducing two new herbicides for the rice market.  What have you used the scientific method to accomplish, other than argument?