Amp modellers vs real amps in studio settings

What's Hot
2

Comments

  • I think you can get great record sounds from pretty much any solution these days.

    Our first album was my Laney VH100R and Amplitube 2 - because the other guitarists DSL broke two days before our recording schedule.

    Our second album was Laney VH100R and Fryette Sig X. The recorded tones are okay, but they needed a lot of work to sit in the mix. I did some overdubs with Amplitube again, and no-one has ever noticed.

    Our third album was the same combo. But some of the cleans were again Amplitube 2 - no one has ever noticed.

    The upcoming album I went tits-to-the-walls. Other guitarist had his Diezel Hagen and my Diezel VH4 for some tones. Plugged into his Mesa 4x12. I had my VH4 and SigX plugged into his Mesa 4x12 and my Egnater 4x12 - both with V30's. We profiled the shit out of the setups too; to go with the other 100+ profiles we made of all of my other amps.

    Something happened in one of the projects where I lost all of the cleans for one song - DI's too - I think hard disk failure, but really not sure. So I re-recorded the DI's and sent them to my production mate who reamped them through the Kemper. They sound fantastic. You'd never know which song uses Kemper for cleans and which ones didn't.

    For studio work - after endless A/Bing and too-ing and fro-ing - I'm completely over the distinction. As long as it sounds good.

    I'm not quite there for live yet. I do still think real amps sound better. But the best I've heard so far was a Kemper running my own "amp only" profiles into a Seymour Duncan Powerstage 700. It was definitely usable. But that combo would make a formidable live touring setup. Use the backline cabs for stage monitoring, send a cab'd up signal to FOH for the mains.

    I am very interested in going that way for live.

    Bye!

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • A related topic - the Digitech FreqOut - feedback/sustain emulation pedal. It's not real. Sounds fucking good though!! Used that a lot on the new album too.

    Bye!

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • BarnezyBarnezy Frets: 2173
    edited July 2020
    He clearly hasn't used a Line6 Spider. 

    Modelers are just trying to recreate the real thing. If you can use the real thing, why wouldn't you? 

    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. Doesn't mean they don't sound good though. But then again, is good tone about sounding good, or is it sounding familiar with what we're used to? 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • camfcamf Frets: 1190
    I've been enjoying reading all this and it's been very helpful, but I should have mentioned this was in the context of clean or edge-of-breakup tones. I think most people who use heavier sounds don't need any convincing that modelling offers lots of options to them, but there still seems to be a bit less enthusiasm regarding cleaner sounds. Or is that all in the past now?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • John_PJohn_P Frets: 2744
    camf said:
    I've been enjoying reading all this and it's been very helpful, but I should have mentioned this was in the context of clean or edge-of-breakup tones. I think most people who use heavier sounds don't need any convincing that modelling offers lots of options to them, but there still seems to be a bit less enthusiasm regarding cleaner sounds. Or is that all in the past now?
    I would say with the latest generation of modellers from the big brands, it's fine.  I've been happy with the clean and edgy sounds I was getting from a fractal and wouldn't have said that from a pod xt, although even that wasn't horrific and probably fine in a mix or live. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Barnezy said:
    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. 
    If the modeller in question uses component based modelling, then it's as real as the real thing. It just processes audio in a different domain.

    Bye!

    1reaction image LOL 1reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • CirrusCirrus Frets: 8481
    I got a Helix on the basis of the AC30 sounds being just as good as recordings I'd made of my actual AC30, and the Fender tweed model is all over stuff I'm mixing at the moment. It's just my opinion, but I think it does the job fine. Everything sounds and feels different to the player, but at the end of it all the only thing that matters is that it lets you get the results you want.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BarnezyBarnezy Frets: 2173
    Barnezy said:
    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. 
    If the modeller in question uses component based modelling, then it's as real as the real thing. It just processes audio in a different domain.
    How can it be as real as the real thing? Digital is limited by its bit rate, am amp is full sound. Are we saying digital is now the full sound spectrum. 

    It reminds me of the move to CD's and then back to vinyl. Why, when we're told there is no audible difference... humans don't hear those frequencies, etc? CD's are 16bit, as is a Helix, but vinyl is full frequency. Are we sure there is no audible difference or is it that we've got use to hearing lower quality sound, since digital music was introduced? 



    Not saying digital is not great and we all know it's very convenient and cheap, but how can it be as real as a real amp?

    My point wasn't for either or, just why wouldn't you us the real thing, if you can? 
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • digitalscreamdigitalscream Frets: 26453
    edited July 2020
    Barnezy said:
    Barnezy said:
    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. 
    If the modeller in question uses component based modelling, then it's as real as the real thing. It just processes audio in a different domain.
    How can it be as real as the real thing? Digital is limited by its bit rate, am amp is full sound. Are we saying digital is now the full sound spectrum. 

    It reminds me of the move to CD's and then back to vinyl. Why, when we're told there is no audible difference... humans don't hear those frequencies, etc? CD's are 16bit, as is a Helix, but vinyl is full frequency. Are we sure there is no audible difference or is it that we've got use to hearing lower quality sound, since digital music was introduced? 



    Not saying digital is not great and we all know it's very convenient and cheap, but how can it be as real as a real amp?

    My point wasn't for either or, just why wouldn't you us the real thing, if you can? 
    I don't have the link to hand, but I seem to recall that folk experimentally showed that traditionally-manufactured vinyl records have an equivalent bit depth of 10-15bit and a sample rate of 30kHz-50kHz. So...that translates into a lower dynamic range and a maximum of around the same frequency ceiling as CDs. In other words...CDs represent a more accurate reproduction of the original sound than vinyl records do.

    The perceived difference is because the functional difference between CDs and vinyl is not in the resolution, it's mainly in the way the recorded media is processed to turn it back into sound. Digital has a hard ceiling at 0dB by definition, beyond which everything sounds positively awful. When recorded vinyl media hits its amplitude ceiling, it kinda distorts nicely.

    At least, that's my understanding of it.
    <space for hire>
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Winny_PoohWinny_Pooh Frets: 7731
    Barnezy said:
    Barnezy said:
    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. 
    If the modeller in question uses component based modelling, then it's as real as the real thing. It just processes audio in a different domain.
    How can it be as real as the real thing? Digital is limited by its bit rate, am amp is full sound. Are we saying digital is now the full sound spectrum. 

    It reminds me of the move to CD's and then back to vinyl. Why, when we're told there is no audible difference... humans don't hear those frequencies, etc? CD's are 16bit, as is a Helix, but vinyl is full frequency. Are we sure there is no audible difference or is it that we've got use to hearing lower quality sound, since digital music was introduced? 



    Not saying digital is not great and we all know it's very convenient and cheap, but how can it be as real as a real amp?

    My point wasn't for either or, just why wouldn't you us the real thing, if you can? 
    There are so many assumptions and false logic in those images you supplied that I don't even know where to start in correcting you.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • BarnezyBarnezy Frets: 2173
    I stand corrected
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • CirrusCirrus Frets: 8481
    edited July 2020
    The basic point is... those stair-stepped graphs aren't how digital audio works.

    Digital audio, once it comes out the converter and is analogue again, is as smooth and continuous as any other natural or analogue sound. The limitation is digital audio is how quiet the signal can be before it can't be recreated by the sample depth, and how high the frequency can be before it hits half the sample rate and can't be re-produced. The stair steps... are the wrong way of understanding digital.

     B 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ModellistaModellista Frets: 2039
    I think bringing up the old digital v analogue debate is kinda missing the point, not least because that lovely vintage valve amp is almost certainly going to be digitised at some point in its journey to the listener's ear.

    The crucial point is the accuracy, or playability, of the digital simulation, which is technology-dependent, but clearly getting better all the time.  Something like the Helix can be upgraded constantly as the algorithms develop, so it's going to slowly but surely improve as time goes by.  The convenience of having a wide palette of guitar sounds in a £400 box is simply stunning.  Having said that, quite why you would bother with modelling if you have a nice room full of classic amps and mics is beyond me, however.  Surely the question is in the end moot - use what you have and make the best sound you can with it.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • siremoonsiremoon Frets: 1524
    There always seems to be an implicit assumption in these kind of debates that a conventional amp can never sound awful.  Just slap in any old settings, stick any kind of mic anywhere in the vicinity of the cab and it'll sound amazing.  That may be how it is for everybody else but it isn't my experience.  My experience is that recording a guitar well the old way requires a certain amount of understanding and nous.  I think the same applies with modellers.  I accept modellers may not be 100% there yet but they are substantially closer than they were, the remaining gap is only going to close and knowledge and experience of how to extract the best from them is only going to grow.  The other point is that when listening to a track most people don't think in terms of tone comparison with something else, they think does it sound good or bad. So for me it's not whether the modeller AC30 or whatever sounds like a real one or not, it's whether it sounds right on a given track.
    “He is like a man with a fork in a world of soup.” - Noel Gallagher
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • monquixotemonquixote Frets: 17485
    tFB Trader
    Barnezy said:
    Barnezy said:
    A modeler will never be as "real" as the real thing. 
    If the modeller in question uses component based modelling, then it's as real as the real thing. It just processes audio in a different domain.
    How can it be as real as the real thing? Digital is limited by its bit rate, am amp is full sound. Are we saying digital is now the full sound spectrum. 

    It reminds me of the move to CD's and then back to vinyl. Why, when we're told there is no audible difference... humans don't hear those frequencies, etc? CD's are 16bit, as is a Helix, but vinyl is full frequency. Are we sure there is no audible difference or is it that we've got use to hearing lower quality sound, since digital music was introduced? 



    Not saying digital is not great and we all know it's very convenient and cheap, but how can it be as real as a real amp?

    My point wasn't for either or, just why wouldn't you us the real thing, if you can? 

    That's not how digital signals look!

    Stair step signals don't exist. It would look like A.

    Vinyl is pretty terrible quality in terms of audio. It's cool though so it's all good.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • andy_kandy_k Frets: 818
    I don't really think it is a digital vs analogue thing anymore.
    I do a lot of my own demos, from ideas without even using an amp in the chain, I play my electric acoustically, with a Line 6 backtrack connected. If I come up with an interesting idea, it has been captured as a Wav on the backtrack and I can begin to work with it in a DAW. I usually start with a plexi type sound and can build up an idea from it.
    This is not the same experience as playing through a hot amp.
    Can you imagine what a DI of Jimi Hendrix star spangled banner would have sounded like, that is an example of a performance where the amp IS the instrument, so that kind of thing could not be done with my method. It would be interesting to hear a DI of something like that though, and it is probably something that is done routinely these days, plugins make it possible.
    Analogue recording has become a niche market these days, there is a good documentary on Jack White using a studio in a very old school way-recording with a single mic, direct to acetate disc. If you have the equipment, and the setup, it is probably a very lucrative business model, but most of us otherwise have easy access to tools that can digitally emulate the sound of that process, Waves have a large selection of plugins that make it simple, tape, vinyl and even Abbey Rd recording studio are all just a mouse click away.
    It's nice to stand in front of a Marshall stack for a little while, and these days we can get some of that excitement without ever being in the room with one.
    Whats not to like?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • mudslide73mudslide73 Frets: 3049
    siremoon said:
    There always seems to be an implicit assumption in these kind of debates that a conventional amp can never sound awful.  Just slap in any old settings, stick any kind of mic anywhere in the vicinity of the cab and it'll sound amazing.  That may be how it is for everybody else but it isn't my experience.  My experience is that recording a guitar well the old way requires a certain amount of understanding and nous.  I think the same applies with modellers.  I accept modellers may not be 100% there yet but they are substantially closer than they were, the remaining gap is only going to close and knowledge and experience of how to extract the best from them is only going to grow.  The other point is that when listening to a track most people don't think in terms of tone comparison with something else, they think does it sound good or bad. So for me it's not whether the modeller AC30 or whatever sounds like a real one or not, it's whether it sounds right on a given track.
    There's no way I could record a physical amp as well as Helix Native. I think it gives beginners like myself a fighting chance of getting a decent sound - being able to go back in to edit the sounds gives you time to save it (not always a good thing, I know). I recently redid some demos of ours from 2011 in this way replacing Amplitube with Helix Native - 2011 performances with new amps, IRs etc.
    "A city star won’t shine too far"


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • AntonHunterAntonHunter Frets: 916
    I wonder if there's something about the imperfections of analogue gear that is appealing, in the variety it offers? Like, if everyone uses the same digital model of a particular Fender amp, then recordings in general might end up sounding more homogenized. Whereas what makes things human is mistakes and imperfections, the way this particular room in this particular studio sounds, the way your speakers have worn in etc.

    That's not to say one is better or worse, and of course you should always serve the music and use what sounds best to your ears, but I like sounds created by pushing things in ways they weren't intended to be pushed. At the extreme end of it, Sylvia Massy's youtube channel has her recording guitars through pickles and drums through home cassette recorders and all sorts, for example... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQV1RLrqmHDICg5HK4okuWA
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • PolarityManPolarityMan Frets: 7273
    I wonder if there's something about the imperfections of analogue gear that is appealing, in the variety it offers? Like, if everyone uses the same digital model of a particular Fender amp, then recordings in general might end up sounding more homogenized. Whereas what makes things human is mistakes and imperfections, the way this particular room in this particular studio sounds, the way your speakers have worn in etc.

    That's not to say one is better or worse, and of course you should always serve the music and use what sounds best to your ears, but I like sounds created by pushing things in ways they weren't intended to be pushed. At the extreme end of it, Sylvia Massy's youtube channel has her recording guitars through pickles and drums through home cassette recorders and all sorts, for example... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQV1RLrqmHDICg5HK4okuWA
    They never show the 8 million times doing stuff like that doesnt work though. 


    ဈǝᴉʇsɐoʇǝsǝǝɥɔဪቌ
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7953
    Amps arguably sound better but tbh there are a multitude of ways it might not matter by the time a song is finished.

    I personally care more about the performance rather than if the amp is real or not. That is the foundation of the tone either way. Beyond that the tone still has to suit the production and using analogue gear is no guarantee of that.

    I’d happily use amps but I’m also happy using digital and have done so for several years at this point. I feel I get better tones now because I’ve got better at playing and production in general, that’s been a bigger factor than the fact I used to own valve amps for recording with 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.