Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

Become a Subscriber!

Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!

Read more...

A slightly different angle on Digital Versus Tubes

What's Hot
12357

Comments

  • There’s several pages of advanced tweaking options in the Axe FX 2, I haven’t seen what’s in the 3. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    I genuinely have no interest in modelling classic amps. I’ve never been completely happy with the sound or flexibility of any I’ve owned, so why would I want to copy that? All I want is an amp that sounds good and is versatile enough to give a range of clean and overdriven sounds that I like.

    I’m also not interested in ‘deep editing’ or an excessive number of parameters. If it doesn’t sound good out of the box with the onboard controls then it isn’t designed right.

    But I’m probably not the target market since I still actually prefer old-school analogue solid-state to modelling amps...

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • MayneheadMaynehead Frets: 1782
    Roland said:
    Maynehead said:
    John_A said:
    IMO all the 'it sounds almost the same a <valve amp X>' stems from valve amp users that refuse to accept modelling as a valid alternative.  If a Helix (or an Axe FX) isnt a genuinely innovative product that allows to to do things that areny possible on a traditional set-up I don't know what it.  Of course they'll do trad sounds too, but that's just the start
    I think it’s more to do with the fact that modellers mainly provide you with models of other amps. In fact that’s the definition of a “modelling amp”.

    What I’d like to see is a “digital amp” that’s designed from the ground up to leverage the extra capabilities provided through DSP.

    Just as an example (so don’t hold me to it), why constrain your EQ section to just bass/middle/treble, that you can only increase/decrease? With a digital amp you could have 10 EQ sections instead of 3, and each section of the EQ could have its own level and waveform selection. I say waveform rather than gain because you no longer need to rely on gain to clip your waveform.

    I’m sure people cleverer than me could think of lots of ground breaking designs for a digital amp that is not modelled after, or conforms to the same control options as traditional analog amps. That’s the kind of stuff that excites me, modellers don’t because I’ve already got the real thing at home, which gives me pretty much what I need and I can take it to gigs without too much bother.
    This type of thing already exists. The AxeFX has a multi-band EQ in each amp block.
    You’d need pre and post multiband EQ, and even then it probably wont offer the ability to select the shape of the clipping, based on my example above.

    And even if it did all that it would probably be far too fiddly to tweak for the casual user.

    What I want is both innovative tone shaping options AND an innovative amp design that makes it easy and intuitive to use. Finally, get rid of all the classic valve amp models from the presets, and replace them with presets that sound great in their own right.

    If someone made an amp like that, it should put up a real fight against the valve crowd.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • The old Line6 Spider amps just had generic clean - crunch - lead - ultra models didn't they? I prefer that approach tbh. I find the modelling of specific amps kind of annoying, partly because I feel like they often over-accentuate the characteristics of the amps so they will be obviously recognisable - so the Mesa ends up far too bass-y, the Marshall ends up far too middy etc. I don't particularly want either of those and they don't seem to model the ones I do want.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    The old Line6 Spider amps just had generic clean - crunch - lead - ultra models didn't they?
    Yes. There’s a first-series maroon panel Spider in the shop I work for and it sounds really good - it’s the less common stereo 2x10” version, and I think that adds a lot of space and depth to the sound compared to the usual 1x12”. It’s only about £100 and I was quite tempted to buy it...

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • I always fancied the SpiderValve - when Line6 and Bogner did stuff together for a bit. Never got great reviews though. Some of the later Spider series got much more love. Never owned a spider...anyway...off topic. :)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • John_AJohn_A Frets: 3775
    edited February 2019
    Helix comes with the following models:

    Line 6 Elektrik       Line 6 Original
    Line 6 Doom           Line 6 Original
    Line 6 Epic                Line 6 Original
    Line 6 2204 Mod Line 6 Original based on a hot-rodded Marshall® JCM® 800
    Line 6 Fatality        Line 6 Original
    Line 6 Litigator      Line 6 Original inspired by boutique mid-gain amps
    Line 6 Badonk        Line 6 Original inspired by the original high gain Big Bottom model

    Not sure about the names, but they sound good
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • I always fancied the SpiderValve - when Line6 and Bogner did stuff together for a bit. Never got great reviews though. Some of the later Spider series got much more love. Never owned a spider...anyway...off topic. :)
    I owned a MK II Spider Valve for a day before sending it back. Horrible honking over-mid tone that couldn't be dialed out. And the master volume taper was one of the worst I've ever used - made it really difficult to use at low volumes.

    I have owned a regular Spider too. I think it was a Mk III 75W and actually gigged it.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    edited February 2019
    I always fancied the SpiderValve - when Line6 and Bogner did stuff together for a bit. Never got great reviews though. Some of the later Spider series got much more love. Never owned a spider...anyway...off topic.
    I owned a MK II Spider Valve for a day before sending it back. Horrible honking over-mid tone that couldn't be dialed out. And the master volume taper was one of the worst I've ever used - made it really difficult to use at low volumes.

    I have owned a regular Spider too. I think it was a Mk III 75W and actually gigged it.
    I prefer the solid-state ones too. The valve one is an answer to a question that didn't need asking in the first place... and yes, the volume taper is absolutely terrible. Worse, although it gets very loud very quickly, when you push it up to high levels it's so compressed that it actually starts to sound *quieter* beyond a certain point.

    I have to say I really don't like the Spider IV either - which from memory was out at about the same time - so it may be a software generation thing.

    But the big problem with any of the models apart from the Valve is the lack of an FX loop (or more accurately a preamp out/power amp in insert point), which drastically limits its flexibility if you want to connect it to other things.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • CirrusCirrus Frets: 8481
    John_A said:
    Line 6 2204 Mod Line 6 Original based on a hot-rodded Marshall® JCM® 800

    IMO this is a cooler model than the actual 800 on there. I initially discounted the L6 orginals out of snobbery - "Line 6? Ha! What do they know?" Then I realised all the models of real amps were only going to be as good as Line 6's understanding of modelling and guitar tone anyway, so tried them out.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • As evidenced by the last few posts, most of the resistance to modelling is around what experience the guitarist is prepared to accept 
    Um.... that seems a bit backwards to me. It's not what people are prepared to accept. It's what people are looking for.

    Big difference. People that play electric cello aren't playing it out of some sense of being on the cutting edge. They're playing it because they're looking for a specific sound and/or experience.

    I don't see why as an artist I should be prepared to accept something that is sub-optimal for what I want to achieve.

    By "what the guitarist is prepared to accept" I am referring mostly to the immersive experience, ie. you may be able to get a FoH/recorded sound just like a pair of Marshall full stacks on 11 but it ain't gonna feel the same to the player as standing in front of a pair of Marshall full stacks on 11. For me, that's the only thing "missing" from the experience, but I choose to discount that factor in favour of all the positives.

    R.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Cirrus said:
    John_A said:
    Line 6 2204 Mod Line 6 Original based on a hot-rodded Marshall® JCM® 800

    IMO this is a cooler model than the actual 800 on there. I initially discounted the L6 orginals out of snobbery - "Line 6? Ha! What do they know?" Then I realised all the models of real amps were only going to be as good as Line 6's understanding of modelling and guitar tone anyway, so tried them out.
    Yeah, this was my favourite Marshall sound on the Helix. :)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Oh god the spider series sucked ass...I used them in a practice room back in my student days and they were terrible.
    ဈǝᴉʇsɐoʇǝsǝǝɥɔဪቌ
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    edited February 2019
    Oh god the spider series sucked ass...I used them in a practice room back in my student days and they were terrible.
    I found that too, when they're pushed hard against a loud band - a lot of people report similar experiences with a lot of different modellers too.

    They're actually fine for home practice or a low-volume gig where they aren't being driven hard, and especially if there's a backing track - because they're very un-dynamic and sound more like a recording of an amp than an actual amp, they sit in the mix against a similarly compressed background very well, whereas a 'real' amp tends to be too dynamic and uncontrollable. I wouldn't have realised that until I heard a friend doing 'guitar karaoke' with one - but he also tried it with his proper band and it was appalling.

    (Edit) I'll have to take some of this back. I've got a Spider II 15 here today, and admittedly it's the smallest, cheapest model - but I cannot get anything approaching a tolerable overdriven sound out of it, and barely a usable clean one. It's truly awful - it has a grating, whiny, metallic midrange that cannot be dialled out no matter what you do. On the bright side it doesn't need repairing after all - it must just have shut itself down when the owner was playing bass through it! So it's a fairly sturdy thing - if that's a plus, given how terrible it sounds...

    This is the kind of thing that gets modelling a bad name - even the worst analogue solid-state practice amp I've ever played through sounds better.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ArjailerArjailer Frets: 103
    Weren't the Blackstar TVP amps doing that?  Modelling "genres" of popular amps (clean, crunch, modern etc), but not specific models?

    Works for me anyway - I think my TVP 100 sounds great playing at volume with the band. Our other guitarist has a Blackstar HT Club 50 - admittedly his clean tone is better (though we don't use clean much in our 80's/90's metal covers band :smiley:) but for the high gain stuff that we mostly play there's really not much in it - both amps sound great  :+1:
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • drwiddlydrwiddly Frets: 911
    Disappearing in a live mix used to be a real feature of Line 6 gear. I had a couple of Pods and they both did it, a friend had a Flextone amp and that did it and a pro player I knew had a Vetta and that did it too!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Maynehead said:
    Maybe my question was slightly confusing.

    Basically what I’m asking is, is it the actual tone of the amps that draws people towards modellers, or is it all the other conveniences that they offer?

    If you were a millionaire rockstar recording an album at the studio, would you still use a Helix?
    I don't know if he's a millionaire but that's what Chris Robertson from Black Stone Cherry did with their last album. I saw an interview with him - he said they were struggling to get a tone and he thought he'd just try the Helix and he got a tone straight away and that's what they used for the whole thing.

    The more I think about modelling, the more confused I get. What is the purpose of modelling? Is it to re-create the sound you hear as a punter out of a PA? Or is it to re-create the sound you get out of a guitar amp. When people complain that modelling doesn't sound like a real amp, they get told "Ah - but it's not supposed to...it's supposed to sound like a recorded tone or a tone out of a PA".

    But that's not right is it...the sound we all love, and the only sound people used to hear before the invent of modern PA equipment, is the sound out of a guitar amp...surely that's what everyone wants to hear at the end of the day? If the FoH PA sounded exactly like a classic Marshall into a 4x12, the audience isn't going to go "hang on...that's not quite compressed enough and lacking in detail". OK, I'm being deliberately facetious but you get the idea.

    I was watching a comparison of various FRFR speakers today and they were commenting on how some of them were better because they sounded more like 'real amps'...but I thought hang on...I thought they weren't trying to be real amps.

    I guess I'm saying modellers are great at sounding like a guitar amp through a PA...which is probably why a lot of pros are totally happy to use modelling tech while us amateurs are still a bit hesitant. They are focused on delivering a 'PA' sound to punters and a recorded tone, whereas most of us still mostly experience the amp in the room tone.

    Dunno. Just a thought.



    You definitely raise some interesting points here but I think there is a distinction to be made, particularly with who 'everyone' is. Your general punter in a pub probably has no idea what a classic Marshall into a 4x12 in isolation in a room sounds like. They expect when they see a band for it to sound like the record which is of course, a mic'd up amp. Ultimately though, they don't care one bit as long as its loud and played right. I myself have generally preferred the sound of gigs I've been to where Kempers/Axe-fx have been used.

    I think also a lot of kids playing today, with the modern technology we have, expect their amp to sound like the record when they first start out. It's only natural. When we started out we had cheap transistor amps that sounded pretty bad and then you eventually upgraded to the classic Marshall when you had been playing a while. The quality jump was astronomical. Kids today can buy a modelling amp for less than a hundy and have access to much better tones as a beginner. This becomes their expectation for what tone sounds like; their ears learn based on a 'model' of an mic'd up amp. When they play the real deal its too raw and unpolished. I guess what I'm trying to say is we never expected amps to sound like a record, but kids now do. They learn on modelling gear. They GAS over valve amps on YouTube thinking that is what an amp sounds like, oblivious to the fact that the amp in the video has been mic'd up. Thus it always falls short for them because they are used to getting an exact EVH tone on their POD. A 5150 would be too fuzzy to their ears!

    The second distinction here is with regard to the video you watched about various FRFR speakers. I have myself heard people say they prefer 'x' because it sounds more like an amp in the room which of course defeats the purpose, but I don't think they mean 'sounds' but rather 'feels'. I personally think FRFR is great, especially in a gigging situation, but when I'm looking for a modelling/FRFR setup I need something that 'feels' like a traditional setup because it's what I'm, used to. I don't expect it to sound like one though, in fact I don't want it to. The reason I'd gig FRFR is to get away from gigs with un-mic'd cabs in pubs giving me a terribly mushy stage sound, but I can't sacrifice that 'feel' because the feel affects my playing, my own personal enjoyment of the experience. I can only assume that the type of power amp has something to do with this? I don't know the first thing about it but I know when I've played cheaper FRFR speakers (like a Behringer Eurolive) it has felt sterile in my hands, a little stiff and harsh to me. It does seem the more that you spend on FRFR the better it feels. That doesn't necessarily mean it sounds better to the audience - surely FRFR is FRFR right? but there is something in the feel of speakers that differs greatly and I think when someone says 'X FRFR sounds more like a real amp than Y' they possibly mean it feels more like a real amp?

    I think modelling is great but as someone else pointed out, while the whole system is based around modelling real valve amps, the real amps are by definition better. Its the whole 'sounds like a Golf' thing... that very marketing stance sets the bar at the Golf. Until digital does its own thing it'll always play second fiddle. But why would it do its own thing when everyone wants it to sounds like 'X'? Ironically this is exactly why I didn't get a THR100 even though on paper its perfect; I wanted whatever I bought to nail me a Slash tone. I got a Kemper instead and it does just that.

    Check out my band Coral Snake if you like original hard rock!

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • John_AJohn_A Frets: 3775

    I think modelling is great but as someone else pointed out, while the whole system is based around modelling real valve amps, the real amps are by definition better. Its the whole 'sounds like a Golf' thing... that very marketing stance sets the bar at the Golf. Until digital does its own thing it'll always play second fiddle. But why would it do its own thing when everyone wants it to sounds like 'X'? Ironically this is exactly why I didn't get a THR100 even though on paper its perfect; I wanted whatever I bought to nail me a Slash tone. I got a Kemper instead and it does just that.
    I don't agree that 'real amps are by definition better' for most people anyway.  The sound the audience at my gigs is better than if I had a real JCM800 IMO because of the constraints around getting that sound, with the amp cooking, in a little pub, with spill in to all the vocal and drum mics etc etc

    The sound you get is as good (or very nearly) as the real amp, on a big stage through a good, well placed mic, i.e. I'll sound more like Slash to the bloke in the Dog 'n' Duck than I would with a 100W marshall blasting over the top of everything

    I think :)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chrishill901 said:

    ...the real amps are by definition better.

    That does not necessarily follow.

    Real amps are more *authentic*, because they're real not copies, but they're not necessarily "better".

    R.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 71960
    chrishill901 said:

    Until digital does its own thing it'll always play second fiddle. But why would it do its own thing when everyone wants it to sounds like 'X'?
    I don't. All I want is for it to sound good.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.