Tried this digital lark…..

Slartibartfarst42

Lewy said:

Slartibartfarst42 said:

I found that with an amp, I could just plug in, make simple adjustments, and I'd be good to go. Switching to modeling involved a very steep learning curve, especially with EQ, which is absolutely essential in getting a good tone. Once done, my modelled amp tones are as good as anything I've had from a valve amp.

What are your top modelling EQ tips? 

I  can only say what has generally worked for me and others may disagree. I'm no expert, this is just what I've discovered through trial and error, as well as a little research:

• Low cut set to 80-125Hz

• High cut 6.3KHz

• A moderate boost to 100-200Hz will give a bit more bass but too much adds boom. Try +3db and no more than +6db.

• Boost 250Hz for warmth, but it needs to be moderate. 

• Cut 250-350Hz to reduce mud, but don’t cut too much or the tone loses body.

• Boost 300-500Hz to add body to the tone. This will probably be a wide boost of about +3db and is likely to be close to 500Hz as that is the core guitar frequency..

• 1-3KHz is where you find pick sound and harshness. 

• 3-4KHz adds presence. Be careful as fizz tends to arrive at 3.5-4.5KHz.

The other thing I'd say is that while people understandably focus on amp models, I find that an amp model can be great or terrible depending on the cabinet model you use. For many modellers, a really good quality IR makes all the difference, but beware because it's a rabbit warren. The only unit I've found that doesn't need third party IRs is the Boss GT1000 and GX100. I use a Boss GX100 for that reason. It's also because I'm not really bothered about copying iconic amps, I just want a really good amp tone that puts me in the Marshall area. The Boss X-amps do that perfectly for me so I use nothing else and I always just use the matching cabs. I like life relatively simple. If I'm creating a new patch, I usually start with the same EQ settings for everything and then just tweak to suit the specific sound I'm after.

Lewy

Slartibartfarst42 said:

Lewy said:

Slartibartfarst42 said:

I found that with an amp, I could just plug in, make simple adjustments, and I'd be good to go. Switching to modeling involved a very steep learning curve, especially with EQ, which is absolutely essential in getting a good tone. Once done, my modelled amp tones are as good as anything I've had from a valve amp.

What are your top modelling EQ tips? 

I  can only say what has generally worked for me and others may disagree. I'm no expert, this is just what I've discovered through trial and error, as well as a little research:

• Low cut set to 80-125Hz

• High cut 6.3KHz

• A moderate boost to 100-200Hz will give a bit more bass but too much adds boom. Try +3db and no more than +6db.

• Boost 250Hz for warmth, but it needs to be moderate. 

• Cut 250-350Hz to reduce mud, but don’t cut too much or the tone loses body.

• Boost 300-500Hz to add body to the tone. This will probably be a wide boost of about +3db and is likely to be close to 500Hz as that is the core guitar frequency..

• 1-3KHz is where you find pick sound and harshness. 

• 3-4KHz adds presence. Be careful as fizz tends to arrive at 3.5-4.5KHz.

The other thing I'd say is that while people understandably focus on amp models, I find that an amp model can be great or terrible depending on the cabinet model you use. For many modellers, a really good quality IR makes all the difference, but beware because it's a rabbit warren. The only unit I've found that doesn't need third party IRs is the Boss GT1000 and GX100. I use a Boss GX100 for that reason. It's also because I'm not really bothered about copying iconic amps, I just want a really good amp tone that puts me in the Marshall area. The Boss X-amps do that perfectly for me so I use nothing else and I always just use the matching cabs. I like life relatively simple. If I'm creating a new patch, I usually start with the same EQ settings for everything and then just tweak to suit the specific sound I'm after.

Super useful, thanks! I’d picked up on the low and high cuts but in the middle has always been a bit of a mystery to me

Bidley

I find the high and low cuts did it for me, certainly the high cuts! Also if you use a Helix, the dedicated high/low cut FX block is more drastic than the one found on cab blocks, so worth experimenting (I use the fx block FWIW).

Slartibartfarst42

The high and low cuts certainly have the most dramatic impact. You'll notice a significant improvement just by doing that and the rest is fine tuning.

TheBigDipper

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

Fiftyshadesofjay

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

Honestly that’s what I’ve always done! Maybe it’s folks not being used to a mic’d up tone but it’s perfectly easy to set up a regular amp and cab on a modeller and sound great. 

The only thing I’d do is maybe some small cuts on the desk to FOH (not the modeller) but that would happen with a mic’d amp anyway.

I’ve had tons of successful gigs sending a raw Kemper tone to FOH, I’m as baffled as you are why some people make it so complicated.

strtdv

I've only had my Helix LT for about a week, but my main observations so far are that the presets are too fizzy and most of the IRs out there are too dark for single coils.
I found a lot of people are splitting the signal into 2 cabs, one which sounds direct and bright with something like an SM57 modelled, and one which sounds "bigger" and darker with a ribbon mic model, which is slightly predelayed (about 10ms). Blending these to taste gives really good results.

It's fiddly to do on the unit but easy to do on PC 

TheBigDipper

Fiftyshadesofjay said:

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

Honestly that’s what I’ve always done! Maybe it’s folks not being used to a mic’d up tone but it’s perfectly easy to set up a regular amp and cab on a modeller and sound great. 

The only thing I’d do is maybe some small cuts on the desk to FOH (not the modeller) but that would happen with a mic’d amp anyway.

I’ve had tons of successful gigs sending a raw Kemper tone to FOH, I’m as baffled as you are why some people make it so complicated.

I'm sorry to say that I've never found a modeller that I can plug into which sounds good in the room or responds as organically as an analogue amp. And it's really not for lack of trying. I like to use the volume control on the guitar and no modeller I've ever owned responds like an amp does. I like to dig in hard into a cleanish sound and get natural breakup. I've never played through a modeller that does that. 

I'm in a fairly happy place now, but that's using analogue pedals for amp circuitry (Origin Effects Deluxe61 and RevivalDrive Compact) into a Neunaber Iconoclast (digital, but EQ-based cab emulation rather than IR-based). Nice players experience, responds to my playing in the way an amp does and sounds great into the desk and sits well in the band mix. No digital artefacts.

I'd love to find a modeller that did that for me. who wouldn't want a smaller footprint and less weight? I've failed so far. The GT1000 came closest - great cleans and high-gain, unsatisfying edge-of-breakup. I'm not against the tech, just unsatisfied with the results I've had and the process of even getting something close to what I enjoy. 

Kempers are profilers, not modellers, aren't they? Different tech, and more a snapshot of a single sound using a single set of control settings on the amp being profiled. I've never played through one. Maybe I should try? 

Slartibartfarst42

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

I have a LOT of sympathy for this point of view! When I had the Atomic AmpliFire 6, there were some great tones in there, but you needed to be a very experienced sound engineer to find them. The delay alone was like trying to work at NASA. It always struck me that if a pedal could sound great with just 3 or 4 knobs, why should a model of that pedal need 50 parameters adjusted to sound good. I totally agree that amp models should be exactly the same and I don't understand why they aren't.

I would also agree that Boss is currently closest to that ideal. The cabs need no adjustment at all; I just select the stock cabs and make a simple adjustment to the microphone. The amp models itself is also fairly easy, but it's the need for all of the EQ adjustments that I find unnecessary. Every preset I use has a high cut at 6.3KHz and a low cut of 125Hz, so if that is always required, why isn't it built into the unit? 

I use the Boss GX100 because to me, it sounds better than something like the Helix, but I'm perfectly happy to admit that it probably only sounds that much better because I find it relatively easy to dial in. I'm sure that if I was more skilled with the unit, I could get the Helix to sound very nearly as good.

Lewy

strtdv said:

I've only had my Helix LT for about a week, but my main observations so far are that the presets are too fizzy and most of the IRs out there are too dark for single coils.
I found a lot of people are splitting the signal into 2 cabs, one which sounds direct and bright with something like an SM57 modelled, and one which sounds "bigger" and darker with a ribbon mic model, which is slightly predelayed (about 10ms). Blending these to taste gives really good results.

It's fiddly to do on the unit but easy to do on PC 

The presets that you find fizzy - have you tried them with the high and low cuts in the cab block? When I first got my HX Stomp I thought exactly the same, and that I was going to end up switching off cabs and going into a power amp and real speaker, then I learned about doing this and it was like night and day. I also tend to steer clear of the SM57 unless I specifically want to cut through a mix. If I'm just practicing unaccompanied, it's a bit brash. 

You definitely don't need to start faffing about with dual cabs etc likewise 3rd party IRs. 

grungebob

As the OP I think it’s obvious I’m the complete novice here. 

But what I have found was the Headrush to me sounded like the old digital stuff from 10years back such as the flexitone line 6 amps. Very artificial and brittle. I tried hard to get  distortion sounds that were not muffled and boxy sounding. 

With the Pod Go all i needed to do was ignore their presets and turn off the cab/IR block and the sounds were already there. 

AndyJP

My 2p is the cab is EQ is really important.   Low cut and high cut depending on the styles.  

Mario Mancuso for example high cuts (on the cab block) around 4.2khz for dirty tones and 6khz for clean sounds.    That get's rid of all the stuff us guitarists refer to as the harsh digital tone.  

Roland

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

One person’s good is another’s crap sound. I guess it’s why some people are constantly buying and selling amps to find “that” sound.

Slartibartfarst42 said:

…Every preset I use has a high cut at 6.3KHz and a low cut of 125Hz, so if that is always required, why isn't it built into the unit ...

I guess because people have different needs. Low cut around 125Hz is common for guitarists, but wouldn’t suit bass or baritone. High cut needs vary considerably depending on what you’re playing. As
AndyJP said:

Mario Mancuso for example high cuts (on the cab block) around 4.2khz for dirty tones and 6khz for clean sounds.    That get's rid of all the stuff us guitarists refer to as the harsh digital tone.  

Chimpankie

TheBigDipper said:

Fiftyshadesofjay said:

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

Honestly that’s what I’ve always done! Maybe it’s folks not being used to a mic’d up tone but it’s perfectly easy to set up a regular amp and cab on a modeller and sound great. 

The only thing I’d do is maybe some small cuts on the desk to FOH (not the modeller) but that would happen with a mic’d amp anyway.

I’ve had tons of successful gigs sending a raw Kemper tone to FOH, I’m as baffled as you are why some people make it so complicated.

I'm sorry to say that I've never found a modeller that I can plug into which sounds good in the room or responds as organically as an analogue amp. And it's really not for lack of trying. I like to use the volume control on the guitar and no modeller I've ever owned responds like an amp does. I like to dig in hard into a cleanish sound and get natural breakup. I've never played through a modeller that does that. 

I'm in a fairly happy place now, but that's using analogue pedals for amp circuitry (Origin Effects Deluxe61 and RevivalDrive Compact) into a Neunaber Iconoclast (digital, but EQ-based cab emulation rather than IR-based). Nice players experience, responds to my playing in the way an amp does and sounds great into the desk and sits well in the band mix. No digital artefacts.

I'd love to find a modeller that did that for me. who wouldn't want a smaller footprint and less weight? I've failed so far. The GT1000 came closest - great cleans and high-gain, unsatisfying edge-of-breakup. I'm not against the tech, just unsatisfied with the results I've had and the process of even getting something close to what I enjoy. 

Kempers are profilers, not modellers, aren't they? Different tech, and more a snapshot of a single sound using a single set of control settings on the amp being profiled. I've never played through one. Maybe I should try? 

Both Neural and Fractal I found the factory presets perfectly good. In fact, when I was playing the Neural I never bothered building my own presets. Having gigged Helix, an FM3 and a Neural QC, I think the main differentiator between the various modellers isn’t the quality tone you can get with effort (they can all get pretty close to each other) but how easy it is to get that quality tone.

TheBigDipper

Chimpankie said:

<snip>

Both Neural and Fractal I found the factory presets perfectly good. In fact, when I was playing the Neural I never bothered building my own presets. Having gigged Helix, an FM3 and a Neural QC, I think the main differentiator between the various modellers isn’t the quality tone you can get with effort (they can all get pretty close to each other) but how easy it is to get that quality tone.

I'd jump at a modeller (FM3) or profiler (QC) that I could dial in as easily as an amp and enjoy the experience of playing through. I really, really would. I came closest with a full size GT1000, but not close enough. 

So, I've got a genuine question... Let's say I'm playing through a Fender Princeton. I will have the guitar set to full volume and the amp at edge-of-breakup, where the tone is just leaving the land of clean and getting a bit of hair. If I roll the guitar volume down the tone cleans up without losing much volume, just the hairiness. If I leave the volume at full on and hit the amp with a TC Spark, I get pleasing (to me) amp-derived overdrive. 

Could I dial in the Princeton model on an FM3 and get it to respond to my playing changes like the real amp does? Could I use a Princeton capture on the QC and get that? I know I can dial in the "guitar volume on full" tone and enjoy it. It's when I start playing the guitar differently and reduce or increase volume that I have come unstuck. And that's the way I play. I like changing the tone I hear in the speakers using my hands on the instrument and its controls.

The various modellers I've used (and gigged) over the years did not respond like an amp does - but I've never tried Fractal and I'm open to the idea if someone else is doing what I do and are getting the results I'm looking for. Anyone?

 I've never tried a profiler. My understanding of profiler tech is that it captures a specific setting of an amp perfectly, but you need more than one capture if you want to hear all the sounds that the amp is capable of. That would rule them out for me and my playing style, I fear. 

Roland

@TheBigDipper Fractal units respond to guitar volume. I can’t speak for the QC.

Danny1969

TheBigDipper said:

It's all this fiddling about like you're in a recording studio in order to get yourself a decent amp sound that I found ultimately frustrating and counter-intuitive. If you can just plug a guitar into an amp and it sounds good, why don't the software developers of modellers do that for us in the software so we don't have to? 

I was on a remix session once at 2020, the studio I built and owned 50% of. The artist was signed to a Texas label and had recorded an album at Muscle Shoals using the house band but the label didn't like the mixes. We got the remix session because we were probably the only studio in Portsmouth that could open PTHD sessions. There was one track which had a piano solo and the artist didn't like it at all and wanted a country guitar solo there instead. My partner Andy was mixing the session  and he said Danny can do that and I started looking around for something I could use. All we had to hand was a Boss GT10, which I had only ever used for delays and verbs and the odd strange effect. 

Try as I might I couldn't get a realistic country tone out of it, not compared to the tones the guys at Muscle Shoals had tracked. It just sounded thin, fake in comparison and The artist was losing interest. I can remember thinking if only I had a real amp and a couple of pedals there ready to go I might have had a better shot at it. 

That was 2014 and funny enough about a year earlier Chris of this forum had brought an AxeFx to the studio to demo to me but when he turned it on it wouldn't boot up due to an EEPROM fault. So I never tracked  anything that got used with digital modelling. 

I did the run of Kate Bush tribute gigs with a Pod Go for 3 years and I'm grateful that the unit was cheap, sounded OK - ish direct to PA but really I was only using it because there was no room in the splitter van for any amps. 

A couple of my mates use modellers and PA cabs but I'm not really sure what the advantage is. It's basically a case of using a £1000 modeller into a £300 PA speaker to make the same sounds you can get with a £400 amp and £200 worth of pedals. I think part of it is they enjoy the mucking around with settings and stuff and enjoy buying gear. And I can understand that. 

Slartibartfarst42

Danny1969 said

 I'm not really sure what the advantage is. It's basically a case of using a £1000 modeller into a £300 PA speaker to make the same sounds you can get with a £400 amp and £200 worth of pedals. I think part of it is they enjoy the mucking around with settings and stuff and enjoy buying gear. And I can understand that. 

For me, it's convenience. I don't disturb neighbours or other people in the house because I can use headphones; it takes up virtually no space at all; it weighs next to nothing; it's easy to record with; it sounds great at any volume. I find all this to be very convenient and while it takes a little while to dial in your tones, once that's done life is easy. I can pack up at home in no time, I can be set up for a gig in 5 minutes, and I haven't broken my back in-between. Moving to modeling isn't something I regret and I have zero desire to go back to valve amps. There are an increasing number of professional artists switching to digital and they're not doing it because it sounds awful.

TheBigDipper

Roland said:

@TheBigDipper Fractal units respond to guitar volume. I can’t speak for the QC.

Thanks.

Bidley

Slartibartfarst42 said:

Danny1969 said

 I'm not really sure what the advantage is. It's basically a case of using a £1000 modeller into a £300 PA speaker to make the same sounds you can get with a £400 amp and £200 worth of pedals. I think part of it is they enjoy the mucking around with settings and stuff and enjoy buying gear. And I can understand that. 

For me, it's convenience. I don't disturb neighbours or other people in the house because I can use headphones; it takes up virtually no space at all; it weighs next to nothing; it's easy to record with; it sounds great at any volume. I find all this to be very convenient and while it takes a little while to dial in your tones, once that's done life is easy. I can pack up at home in no time, I can be set up for a gig in 5 minutes, and I haven't broken my back in-between. Moving to modeling isn't something I regret and I have zero desire to go back to valve amps. There are an increasing number of professional artists switching to digital and they're not doing it because it sounds awful.

Exactly this. Not sure why this section of the forum is popular amongst people who don't like or who will never use modellers. I did all my fiddling in the Helix when I got it about 7 years ago, and only adjust my patch when I want to try a new FX block or something. Now I can go to a gig, set up in 5 minutes while bringing half the equipment (I just go through FOH, no FRFR needed) knowing I'll sound the same as everywhere else and can then help the drummer set his stands up. I can easily use my IEM setup and the sound guy loves me.

I've done less faffing around with gear and settings in the time I've used my Helix than I ever have done. I can just concentrate on and enjoy playing more.