BLIND TEST: Peavey 6505 vs Axe Fx III vs Helix (update: reveal posted!)

Guitarjon

Active member
Hey all,

I couldn't help it, I had to do another one of these ;)

This one features the mighty Peavey 6505 (formerly known as the 5150), the Fractal Audio Axe Fx III and the Line 6 Helix. Let's see if you guys can guess which one is which! Of course you can leave a guess here but I would recommend also leaving your guess in the YouTube comment section of the video as those are the guesses that I will count for the reveal, which will most likely be posted on saturday! This should be interesting and fun since this is a sound that many of us are very familiar with.... Here we go:


UPDATE:

 
Last edited:

SQUAREHEAD

Well-known member
Good job Bro👍
Modelling has really come a long way!
Sometimes very difficult to discern which is which, until you actually play through them… That’s where I felt the biggest difference was when dealing with the Axe FX or the Kemper, They ‘feel’ different than the real amp. Kemper felt way closer than Axe FX and Helix tho.

But, in a live situation, ‘through a PA’, I would take the Kemper (or Axe FX) all day long, no one in that club will ever hear the difference.

Plus, my back loves me. No cabinets, No FX, No amplifier head, no cables, no mic. No headaches…

3 minute set up without breaking a sweat👍
 
Last edited:

dainbramage0

Active member
I'd guess:
A - Axe FX
B - Helix
C - 6505


A sounded best to me, but the low end on C makes me think that's the real amp - or the patches just aren't very good heh
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
A - sounds the thinnest
B - has the most extra depth / least top end of the three
C - has the most mids

I'll go ahead and throw my opinion into the ring to be laughed at when the answer is revealed:

A - Helix
B - 6505
C - Axe-Fx

At any rate, I'm not very confident at all that this is correct. They're so close. My second guess would be that B is the Axe-Fx and C is the 6505 but who knows. At any rate, I think the real winner of the contest is "digital modeling tech" because man those clips are close.

edit: so my second guess was correct. Neat!
 
Last edited:

tonedover

Member
my usual complaint with Jon's tests are still at play. the IRs in use are such a dominant force in whats coming out of my speakers that i have a tough time deciphering an Orange from a Marshall in his shoot outs.... no hate, would just be nice to every once in a while for him to mix in some "in the room" mic'd recordings
 

Fordman65

Well-known member
The IRs are the tone here, not the "amp"/model or amp.

If you miced these up with a real or FRFR cabinet, the results would be vastly different.
My understanding is IRs are a capture of a specific speaker, speaker cabinet, mic-pre and DAW. How would micing a cab be different?

Edit: didn't watch the vid as I get no value out of these types of comparisons. More interested in the IR angle
 

DanTravis62

Well-known member
My understanding is IRs are a capture of a specific speaker, speaker cabinet, mic-pre and DAW. How would micing a cab be different?

Edit: didn't watch the vid as I get no value out of these types of comparisons. More interested in the IR angle
Because the various imperfections of micing a cab in a specific room in a specific way is like 70% of what makes guitar sounds distinct from one another.

The point I'm making is that these "modern metal" IRs like someone would use for a 5150/6505 all color the sound to such a vast extent, that who cares what is used in the preamp? As long as it's reasonably close to the original it's going to sound almost EXACTLY THE SAME.
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
The IRs are the tone here, not the "amp"/model or amp.

If you miced these up with a real or FRFR cabinet, the results would be vastly different.

You are mistaken. The cab is always the most influential thing about a high gain sound, whether reactive load and IRs or real cabs and mics, that's true for both instances. A reactive load and IR setup is not "more influential" to a rig's tone than a real cab and mic. Both setups impart their specific load on the amps and the frequency response of the speakers. They are both equally influential to the rig's tone.

If anything, a reactive load and IR's are better for these kinds of comparisons because you lose the possibility of accidentally moving the mic placement and messing up the apples to apples aspect of the test.
 
Last edited:

DanTravis62

Well-known member
You are mistaken. The cab is always the most influential thing about a high gain sound, whether reactive load and IRs or real cabs and mics, that's true for both instances. A reactive load and IR setup is not "more influential" to a rig's tone than than a real cab and mic.

If anything, a reactive load and IR's are better for these kinds of comparisons because you lose the possibility of accidentally moving the mic placement and messing up the apples to apples aspect of the test.
Those tiny differences in mic placement are what used to make different records sound different.

Now everything (with everyone using like 100% stock IRs) sounds like carbon copies of itself. If you're trying to sound like everything you've already heard before, I'm sure its very convenient to switch between sounds that everyone has already heard before.

But the stock 5150 IRs that everyone uses are so commonplace that you can identify modeler brand and which IR all the time if you actually listen to modern records
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
Those tiny differences in mic placement are what used to make different records sound different.

Now everything (with everyone using like 100% stock IRs) sounds like carbon copies of itself. If you're trying to sound like everything you've already heard before, I'm sure its very convenient to switch between sounds that everyone has already heard before.

But the stock 5150 IRs that everyone uses are so commonplace that you can identify modeler brand and which IR all the time if you actually listen to modern records

What are you talking about? Do you know where you are or what this thread is about? This thread is about comparing different amps and amp models, which is best done by removing as many variables as possible besides the amps. That is literally the point of the thread.

As for your last point, what "stock 5150 IR's" are you talking about? There are literally thousands of them out there. What centralized repository of IRs do you think "everyone" is drawing from?

If you really are so confident that just anybody can tell which amp is real though, why don't you post your guesses about the video in the thread?
 
Last edited:

DanTravis62

Well-known member
What the hell are you talking about? Do you know where you are or what this thread is about? This thread is about comparing different amps and amp models, which is best done by removing as many variables as possible besides the amps. That is literally the point of the thread.

What I'm talking about is; who cares? Of course all these 5150 style amps/models sound the same with the same standard 5150 type IR everyone uses.

If you really think the point of this post is the pedantic minutia between the amp and it's models holy crap dude, who cares, they're almost exactly the same.
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
What I'm talking about is; who cares? Of course all these 5150 style amps/models sound the same with the same standard 5150 type IR everyone uses.

If you really think the point of this post is the pedantic minutia between the amp and it's models holy crap dude, who cares, they're almost exactly the same.

Ok, so you have no idea how any of this works on a conceptual level and I'm wasting my time speaking to you. Cool, got it.
 
Last edited:

squealie

Active member
Guess the amp? Who gives a fuck? Pick the best tone? Who's listening on earbuds?

My 100W plexi will destroy you in a room.

Newsflash, my Axe-Fx with a 700 watt SS power amp will destroy you in a room.

This shit is dumb.
 

DanTravis62

Well-known member
Ok, so you have no idea how any of this works on a conceptual level and I'm wasting my time speaking to you. Cool, got it.

Please, explain why the miniscule difference between those clips matter? Please, for us ignorant peasants.

I can't possibly think of a reason why it would, seriously.
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
Please, explain why the miniscule difference between those clips matter? Please, for us ignorant peasants.

I can't possibly think of a reason why it would, seriously.

The point of the video and this thread is that the amp models sound almost exactly the same as the real amp. The whole point is that the differences are in fact, like you said, miniscule. Also, the differences between the models and amp are not "almost the same but only if you use these IR's" but rather they're "almost the same, period." That's it. When sent into a common source, whether it's some physical cab or a reactive load and IR or multiple blended IR's, the models are almost indistinguisable from the real thing, and we certainly can't reliably tell which one is real. That's the point.

The whole thing about guessing which one is correct, while it is presented as the point of the video, is really just the small entertaining side act that gets us to participate in the demonstration. The actual purpose of the video is to display the fact that Helix's and Axe-Fx's modeling are so close to the real thing now, no matter how they're amplified, that even under a microscope, even people on a guitar forum can't reliably pick out which one is real and which ones are the models, which is really cool.
 
Last edited:

DanTravis62

Well-known member
The point of the video and this thread is that the amp models sound almost exactly the same as the real amp. The whole point is that the differences are in fact, like you said, miniscule. Also, the differences between the models and amp are not "almost the same but only if you use these IR's" but rather they're "almost the same, period."

The whole thing about guessing which one is correct, while it is presented as the point of the video, is really just the small entertaining side act that gets us to participate in the demonstration. The actual purpose of the video is to display the fact that Helix's and Axe-Fx's modeling are so close to the real thing now, no matter how they're amplified, that even under a microscope, even people on a guitar forum can't reliably pick out which one is real and which ones are the models, which is really cool.

Ah yes, this has never been done before on YouTube, and therefore it is really cool and interesting. Because all the tube amp purists will be forced to concede that, scientifically, modelers sound exactly the same with the same stock IRs under a controlled environment modeling the same preamp sound.

Thanks for the elucidation!
 

TheGreatGreen

Well-known member
Ah yes, this has never been done before on YouTube, and therefore it is really cool and interesting. Because all the tube amp purists will be forced to concede that, scientifically, modelers sound exactly the same with the same stock IRs under a controlled environment modeling the same preamp sound.

Thanks for the elucidation!

You're still stuck on the false notion that the IR's have anything to do with it. They don't. The same results would be achieved even if you did use a physical cab and mics as long as the models' impedance curves were set to match the impedance curve of the real cab.
 
Top