Are modellers as good as amps?

professorben

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

lysander said:

I don’t understand the ‘change in guitar volume’ argument. 

16 bit of digital audio resolution is a hell of a lot more dynamic range than any analog amp will ever have when you take the noise floor into account so there’s no technological limitation.

And putting theory aside, I can’t remember any modern amp sim I’ve tested that didn’t respond to volume change realistically.

Now the first generation pods and stuff was indeed utter shit when it comes to dynamics but this was more than 15 years ago ?

Essentially. A lot of people played a Spider 1 in a shop about 15 years ago and are now desperate to justify the boutique box of bottles that gets turned up to 0.001% of its wattage every Sunday arvo whilst the wife/mother/carer is out buying their favourite Angel Delight again. 

A lot of people with a toaster they control with their phone getting cross at people expressing a preference for a thing they prefer the feel of when they play. Guys, you don't have to justify your purchase or your feelings to anyone. Enjoy what you have. If you don't miss the things that people are saying they miss then that is brilliant for you. 

Not everyone can hear properly. No shame in it

YOU CANT FEEL SOUND!!!!!!

gahhhhhhh

NURSE!!!!!

BRING ME MY MEDICATION AGAIN!!!!!

professorben

professorben said:

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

lysander said:

I don’t understand the ‘change in guitar volume’ argument. 

16 bit of digital audio resolution is a hell of a lot more dynamic range than any analog amp will ever have when you take the noise floor into account so there’s no technological limitation.

And putting theory aside, I can’t remember any modern amp sim I’ve tested that didn’t respond to volume change realistically.

Now the first generation pods and stuff was indeed utter shit when it comes to dynamics but this was more than 15 years ago ?

Essentially. A lot of people played a Spider 1 in a shop about 15 years ago and are now desperate to justify the boutique box of bottles that gets turned up to 0.001% of its wattage every Sunday arvo whilst the wife/mother/carer is out buying their favourite Angel Delight again. 

A lot of people with a toaster they control with their phone getting cross at people expressing a preference for a thing they prefer the feel of when they play. Guys, you don't have to justify your purchase or your feelings to anyone. Enjoy what you have. If you don't miss the things that people are saying they miss then that is brilliant for you. 

Not everyone can hear properly. No shame in it

YOU CANT FEEL SOUND!!!!!!

gahhhhhhh

NURSE!!!!!

BRING ME MY MEDICATION AGAIN!!!!!

Actually you can feel sound, but it just makes me cross that people spout such hippy nonsense about one type of sound making box over another. 

If you don't like it just don’t use it. 

hywelg

When Matt Schofield opts to use a modeller live, I'll know they're good enough. Till then they're second best.

And if you've never seen him live you have no reference on  which to base a valid comment.

professorben

hywelg said:

When Matt Schofield opts to use a modeller live, I'll know they're good enough. Till then they're second best.

And if you've never seen him live you have no reference on  which to base a valid comment.

Seen him, dull as fuck, amazing organist though. 

soma1975

Not even the best guitarist named Schofield. 

professorben

soma1975 said:

Not even the best guitarist named Schofield. 

1000% agree

p90fool

professorben said:

p90fool said:

soma1975 said:

Fair enough. The semantics of what he is saying is happening might not be 100% but I certainly get the same feeling on the attack when I have played a modeller.

Me too, and I know exactly what he's getting at here;

“One thing it doesn’t respond to well is the change in guitar volume. Because it’s an amp modeler, it doesn’t quite understand gain structure. It doesn’t quite get it. 

"Amp modelers don’t quite understand two [other] things: they don’t understand the impulse of the note, so they don’t quite get the contact with the string correct - the way a tube goes ‘whoosh’; what I call the ‘wapoosh’ of the note. Amp modelers don’t yet know how to take a note and squeeze it the right way and send it out."

You don't have to have an intricate knowledge of how the algorithms are written to have an opinion on this stuff - modellers are fine for some things and not for others, and like Brexit, you'll never change the minds of those for whom it works just because you're frustrated by them. 

A  lot of guitar players regard dynamics and response to volume control changes as irrelevant, but if you need those things we're really not much closer than we were twenty years ago, they just SOUND better to the listener. 

I recorded a couple of albums in 1998 with a Zoom 2100 and it sort of worked ok-ish. I bought an Atomic Amplifire last year and although it sounded much more accurate, it still felt EXACTLY like the Zoom. 

The Brexit analogy is rather apt. 
A minority of enlightened rational souls being out shouted by a geriatric hoard of people refusing to believe its not the 1950’s.....

ymmv
  

I have been using digital modelling and amp sims for over 20 years, they have their place and I'm happy with that. 

If you and I were in the same room as a decent amp and the latest modeller I could show you exactly why I don't use them live and you would hear it and understand it instantly. 

So less it with the geriatric bollocks. 

WiresDreamDisasters

Please keep politics to the dickhead areas of the website, thanks.

professorben

p90fool said:

professorben said:

p90fool said:

soma1975 said:

Fair enough. The semantics of what he is saying is happening might not be 100% but I certainly get the same feeling on the attack when I have played a modeller.

Me too, and I know exactly what he's getting at here;

“One thing it doesn’t respond to well is the change in guitar volume. Because it’s an amp modeler, it doesn’t quite understand gain structure. It doesn’t quite get it. 

"Amp modelers don’t quite understand two [other] things: they don’t understand the impulse of the note, so they don’t quite get the contact with the string correct - the way a tube goes ‘whoosh’; what I call the ‘wapoosh’ of the note. Amp modelers don’t yet know how to take a note and squeeze it the right way and send it out."

You don't have to have an intricate knowledge of how the algorithms are written to have an opinion on this stuff - modellers are fine for some things and not for others, and like Brexit, you'll never change the minds of those for whom it works just because you're frustrated by them. 

A  lot of guitar players regard dynamics and response to volume control changes as irrelevant, but if you need those things we're really not much closer than we were twenty years ago, they just SOUND better to the listener. 

I recorded a couple of albums in 1998 with a Zoom 2100 and it sort of worked ok-ish. I bought an Atomic Amplifire last year and although it sounded much more accurate, it still felt EXACTLY like the Zoom. 

The Brexit analogy is rather apt. 
A minority of enlightened rational souls being out shouted by a geriatric hoard of people refusing to believe its not the 1950’s.....

ymmv
  

I have been using digital modelling and amp sims for over 20 years, they have their place and I'm happy with that. 

If you and I were in the same room as a decent amp and the latest modeller I could show you exactly why I don't use them live and you would hear it and understand it instantly. 

So less it with the geriatric bollocks. 

I doubt it because we almost certainly hear different things from each other, I would say we almost certainly prefer different tones too. 

I would say that the same test would demonstrate to you beyond any argument why they stand side by side as viable options. 

soma1975

Yes they are completely viable options, depending on what you priorities are. I don't think anyone has ever disputed that. 

It's more that people saying they are indistinguishable from the valve amp they are modelling where the argument comes up. 

professorben

The shocking reality that members of the valve loving camp are using John Mayer as some kind of beacon of hope fills me with a despair I fear only Rum can drown.  

soma1975

Nobody is doing that at all. It was just something topical to add to the conversation. 

Mayer uses both modellers and amps live (on the size stages most likely none of us in here will play on) and has a practical use for both depending on the situation. He says really nice things about modelling amps and continues to use them yet makes a bunch of tiny criticisms and everyone is up in arms about how he doesn't know what he's talking about. If someone of that stature isn't allowed an insight I don't know who is. 

The defensiveness is absurd. I recently got a Marshall SV20H and cab and an attenuator and am happier with my sound than I have ever been in nearly 30 years. Appreciate it's not for everyone though and really don't mind if people hate that combo or think it's not fit for their needs. 

WiresDreamDisasters

professorben said:

The shocking reality that members of the valve loving camp are using John Mayer as some kind of beacon of hope fills me with a despair I fear only Rum can drown.  

I've already given you my perspective and as I said, Mastodon and Tool aren't giving up their valve amps. Valve amps are not solely the realm of the blues wanker.

professorben

soma1975 said:

Yes they are completely viable options, depending on what you priorities are. I don't think anyone has ever disputed that. 

It's more that people saying they are indistinguishable from the valve amp they are modelling where the argument comes up. 

Ah ok so I never said they copy/replicate /imitate the amps they are named after exactly. 

But then neither do two JCM800’s...
they sound similar, slightly different, in exactly the same way a Strat may play or sound a little different from ones either side of it on the production line. 

Satriani said that each take he records “Is a variation on a somewhat generalised theme” 
So it’s hard to pin down exactly how ‘accurate’ the models are without owning that exact amp, plus I’ve never played a Friedman but it doesn’t stop me from loving the whole experience from pick strike to soaring feedback of using that amp model live. 

It just bugs me ( I know it shouldn’t but it does) that Valve gear is seen as romantic or soulful and Digital gear isn’t, even the term Digital conjures up connonations of cold calculated detachment.  
Both get the same voltage from the wall, both get the same signal from the guitar, to say there is some type of mystical reciprocal relationship in one type of tech but not the other is just bollocks. 

Its all in in your head mate, and that’s cool, if it helps you make great ( or let’s be honest mostly bland) music (me included) so much the better. 

Humans are soulful creative spiritual things.

Boxes of bolts and and bottles and chips and diodes are not. 

soma1975

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit is a bit irksome, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

professorben

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit is a bit irksome, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

I cannot understand this. 

Sorry but I just don’t. 

You play the string, the noise comes out the speaker. 

End of. 

p90fool

professorben said:

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit is a bit irksome, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

I cannot understand this. 

Sorry but I just don’t. 

You play the string, the noise comes out the speaker. 

End of. 

I could demonstrate it to you, but I have the feeling you'd just deny it now anyway, out of stubbornness. 

You may not use a particular technique which highlights it, but that doesn't mean that those who do are imagining it. 

That's not a put down btw, lots of other players have requirements from their equipment which I don't, because of techniques I don't use, like a massive but defined bottom end for high gain palm muting for example. A lot of people would find limitations in some gear which I would never notice. 

dindude

professorben said:

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit is a bit irksome, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

I cannot understand this. 

Sorry but I just don’t. 

You play the string, the noise comes out the speaker. 

End of. 

See for me that statement shows a complete disrespect and dumbing down of what (great) guitar playing is - nothing to do with valve vs modellers.

professorben

p90fool said:

professorben said:

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit is a bit irksome, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

soma1975 said:

professorben said:

Its all in in your head mate

It's all in everyone's head. 

Once digital gear gives me what I get from my valve amp I'll happily swap. If it gives you want you want now then yey. 

Just like for work I swapped from film to digital imaging when the results I could get were as good (but different from) what I got from film. 

But to tell people they are wrong for wanting something else that you don't want from your kit, and just because I or John Mayer might lack the language and vocabulary to express what we mean in a way that is universally and immediately understood and quantifiable does not mean that this 'thing' is a figment of our imagination. 

I cannot understand this. 

Sorry but I just don’t. 

You play the string, the noise comes out the speaker. 

End of. 

I could demonstrate it to you, but I have the feeling you'd just deny it now anyway, out of stubbornness. 

You may not use a particular technique which highlights it, but that doesn't mean that those who do are imagining it. 

That's not a put down btw, lots of other players have requirements from their equipment which I don't, because of techniques I don't use, like a massive but defined bottom end for high gain palm muting for example. A lot of people would find limitations in some gear which I would never notice. 

I’m quite stubborn, that may surprise you, but I’m also open to new ideas and concepts as demonstrated by my about face on valve to digital gear. 

I have absolutely no problem with people using whatever they want, hell, people actually use fuzz.... in public!!!!!

what annoys me is when people use imaginary concepts to either laud or diminish things that are inanimate. 

You could demonstrate to me all you like fella,  I’d prob enjoy it, I love music, but I can’t hear what only you are hearing in your head, that’s my point, you feel you have some type of relationship with the notes coming out of your amp, and I totally believe you do, you believe that, it’s not a real thing but if you feel it makes you a better player that’s awesome.

Music is just frequencies, measure-able, recordable, repeatable, any emotional response or content is by interpretation by that thing in your head, that’s all it is.

The Matt Schofield thing is apt here, if he wasn’t supporting Joe Satriani that night, I’d have walked out, dull dull dull, I actually resented him playing, I could have 30 mins more Joe Satriani instead of this dirge, but looking around, people actually were enjoying that crap, fair enough, then Satch comes out and I’ve got goosebumps 3 notes in. 
That’s all in my head.

And I’m not as one dimensional as you might like to think playing wise, yes I like heavy guitar and metal, but I currently play punk with a mid gain tone, I’ve played in a Van Morrison tribute band, a Roxy Music tribute, wedding covers, pub rock covers, punk pop originals, acoustic jazz/blues, indie rock, ambient prog metal, straight blues and funk. 

I played the notes, they came out the speaker, end of. 

so in answer to the OP....

Amps are best, they make the notes you play come out of the speaker, it doesn’t matter what type of technology they use, if the player is good, they sound good, if the player is crap they sound crap. 

soma1975

Yep. Your confessed inability to understand something doesn't mean the thing doesn't exist.