Started by eUphonic, February 12, 2022, 12:19:13 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: eUphonic on February 12, 2022, 12:19:13 AMSee the attached files.I've purposedly done these tests with a sofware potentially easy to find and to use for other musicians: Rightmark Audio Analyzer. So, other people will be able to check what I publish with their own gear, if they want to.IMPORTANT FOREWORD - Any FX was disabled in the MG-30 in each case.PIC 1: white line is the response of a polyphonic signal sent directly to the board. It's as "flat" as possible in such a case.Green line shows the response to the same stimulus of the MG30 in STUDIO DIRECT output mode. Blue line = COMBO FRONT mode.Pink line = STACK FRONT mode.No flat frequency response from the MG30 for the moment, even if all effects disabled and all EQ controls at noon... STUDIO DIRECT adds 6dB to high frequencies, centered around 6hhz. COMBO FRONT does the same @ 200hz and scoops the 1khz range of 3dB. STACK FRONT mixes these tendencies.PIC 2: blue line = signal direct to the board for reference.White and green lines = COMBO REAR and STACK REAR modes.Still no flat frequency response from the MG30, even all effects are still disabled and all EQ controls are still at noon... COMBO REAR and STACK REAR scoop the mids of 16dB and 13dB respectively (!) with different center frequencies. That's as much or more than the EQing scoop generated by the tone stack of a Fender Blackface with all controls at noon, for the record, albeit with different center frequencies. Annoying for amps whose FX loop is located before the tone stack...PIC 3: shows the action of the EQing sliders once these controls are at +12dB or -12dB. Left column = PreEQ of the MG30. Right column = post EQ (the sliders under the "output mode" indication).Let's note that...1) frequencies are the same for both EQing sections, making them somehow redundant albeit they are @ the two ends of the chain ;2) these frequencies are not those mentioned under the sliders on the screen: bass freq are centered on 100hz and not 80hz. Mids are centered on 800hz and not 500hz;3)they have all a rather high Q factor (I was rather expecting a shelving EQ for low and high frequencies and a parametric mid control would have made sense).PIC 4: the S/R loop is now enabled and the output mode selected is STUDIO DIRECT. The screen shows...-the signal direct to the board for reference (green line);-the signal sent through guitar input and captured from the "Send" plug (white line);-the signal sent through the "Return" plug and captured from the normal output (blue line).At least there's something able to provide a relatively flat frequency response in the MG30 (with a slight deviation in the extreme bass and high ranges but other MFX's don't do better than this in most cases when they have an FX loop): it's the section going from S/R "Return" to output. Good to know. But FWIW, the volume slider of the "Return" plug didn't seem to work when I've tested it. :-/PIC 5: shows the Para EQ settings that I've used to flatten as much as possible the response of the MG30 from the guitar input when it's in STUDIO DIRECT output mode . This EQ was right after the guitar input and meant to be permanently enabled.PIC 6 shows the response of the MG-30 once this EQ enabled, with guitar in > "Send" and guitar in > normal output, compared to "Return" > normal output and to the signal direct to the board for reference (= blue line in this one). What a relief to obtain a flat response from this MFX with all FX disabled, finally!Before to find this solution, I was not far to send back the unit to the shop. Reason: there was no way to obtain a natural sound from the MG-30 tested above as a simple FX board compared to a regular analog pedalboard.With the "flattening para EQ" trick, it becomes much more convincing to my ears (and it diminishes the hiss with some simulations). YMMV.FOOTNOTE: I've found useful to put the S/R loop after FX's, just before amp sim / IR's, then to use the "Send" plug as the output of a basic pedalboard. It disables the volume pedal BUT can send the signal to a regular amp while the same signal keeps feeding the amp simulation inside the MG... Conversely, an external pedalboard can be plugged in the "Return" plug of the MG, to feed its amp simulations.Best of both worlds, albeit it can generate some noise, of course, if the proper tools and strategies are not used. And the loop of the MG30 has a slight squashing effect on dynamics but it's not too noticeable...EDIT - for comparison (and to verify that the results above are not due to a flawed test), PIC 7 shows in green the basic frequency response of a Valeton GP100, all FX's disabled, VS the reference signal direct to the board (white line).Hope all this stuff to be useful for some other users. Personally, I've a hard time to understand the choices made by the NUX team when it comes to output modes and pre/post EQing... :-/
Quote from: jaropda on February 13, 2022, 09:46:47 AMgreat job friend!!How can I adjust a flat response in studio direct mode?with the pre eq ,eq in line efx or eq output?I always said that this multi-effects was too high frequencies, not letting the mids breathe and less so the bass.I have readjusted the output eq by raising low and lowering high frequencies.Thank you !!!
QuoteIMPORTANT FOREWORD - Any FX was disabled in the MG-30 in each case.
Quote from: admin on February 25, 2022, 10:58:57 PMQuestion? Were MG-30 Amp modeling and CAB Sim and all CAB IR disabled too?
Quote from: eUphonic on February 25, 2022, 09:20:27 PMI share below a pic showing how to set the parametric EQ to obtain a flat frequency response from the MG-30 in STUDIO DIRECT output mode. The EQ must be just after the guitar input.
Quote from: jaropda on February 27, 2022, 12:55:08 PMPre eq y out eq reset mode?Thank you
Quote from: aptfx on March 03, 2022, 06:10:26 PM@euPhonicThis is an incredible work!I've tried to reproduce your ParaEQ as good as I could and did try it not with an amp but just using the amp models and into my FRFR monitors. The sound is smoother, less trebly and has more low end (obviously when looking at the curve).I did change my output EQ settings by raising the LOW a tiny bit and lowering the HIGH a bit. Many seem to do this. The resulting flatter response from your EQ curve may be really interesting for many users.Did you contact NUX about this? I would really like such a "flat" option just by setting a flag in the global options or something like that.Could you make your ParaEQ settings available by exporting a patch with it?
Quote from: eUphonic on March 04, 2022, 08:24:11 AMHello,Really busy right now so no, I've not contacted Nux. Feel free to send 'em a link about my topic if you want to.Regarding the patch with my EQ settings: In fact, I've tried to post it here but it didn't work because the file wasn't recognized as valid. I'd have to find some drop box to share it. Will try to do that later... :-)
Quote from: aptfx on March 05, 2022, 09:16:31 PM@euPhonicMuch discussion currently about the new VIVO amp.The former "problem child" was the SLO. I found it always hard to get something good out of it and it seemed to be a bit broken to me. I've done a recording comparing the SLO to NeuralDSP. Same dry recording, one time with the plugin and one time reamped with MG-30 and SLO. Same settings on the amps, same IR.https://soundcloud.com/aptfx/soldano-100-neuraldsp-vs-mg-30?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharingWhat do you think?
QuoteHello,I like the MG30 mainly for its clean / crunch amps and I'm not much in high gain models but I see why/where the SLO or VIVO might appears as a problem... as well as the JCM2000, BTW: too thick grainy gainy bassrange with such amp emulations
Quote from: eUphonic on March 05, 2022, 11:05:10 PMYep, the MG30 gives overwhelming bass... I've read somewhere that Nux has modeled the output transformer for the VIVO model and they might have overdone it.