so, as i put in another post, i've been looking around for an fx solution for rhodes and clav. which has led me to trolling thru info on sims, vst and hardware... podxt, boss, as well as amplitube, trash, etc.. and then i popped in a local pawn shop to check out a fender twin 65 reissue. ($750) - moral of story?

it is amazing to me how elitist u guitar players r!!! i'm talking about the ones who say podxt suks compared to the real deal... oh yeah? u mean a real marshall or fender twin? mic'd by what-who-how? in what room? to what medium? and most importantly, who's pulling the strings?

i know cats in hollywood who bring 2 refrigerator size boxes of fx to session dates... but so what? good for them.... paying union dues is fun for some. what does the average cat need to make the best sounds in his bedroom?

yeah, compared to the capitol studios and Nelson Riddle Orchestra, our current brass libraries suck. Compared to the Steinway piano center stage at Carnegie Hall, our piano libraries suck. Compared to Mike Kelley or some ace engineer mic'ing and recording your drums to 2 inch tape via a neve 80 series board, stylus and the like suck.

but man, us bedroom warriors should NOT fall prey to the negative hype!!!

reminds me of what the recording engineers said about ADAT's back in the day... how they were ok for demos but not for serious projects... and then "jagged little pill" sold like 16 million units, all from the original ADATS!!!

don't get me wrong... i luv the classics... it should go without saying that a real rhodes thru a fender twin... w. some morley, some phaser, some delay... yeah... hot....

BUT... noisy, ugly, HEAVY!!! what am i saying (rambling)?

for versatility, usability, functionality... good new gear is the way to go.... i've owned a minimoog AND the arturia vst.... to say "hardware sounds better" is kinda silly. i mean, a moog sitting there on the floor doesn't sound like anything, till u figure out how to amplify it, and ultimately record it. point is... the Minimoog VST is alot more convenient...

(FLASH TO)
boy and girl in car. r&b slow jam playing on isuzu stereo. boy puts arm around girl and reaches cross seat to kiss her. she puts hands up and yells "STOP!" She points to radio and says "That is not a real minimoog bassline, but the VST! Take me home now!!!"

(FLASHBACK TO)

moral of the story?
come on guitar players, u know u love the podxt! confess!!!

www.moderngrooveassembly.com

nu jazz, deep house, future soul

While I agree that there are many who would rather have the real deal and all I must say that its not just guitarists. Look at the significant price increase in analog synth gear over the last few years. You will always have musicians in all areas of music that prefer the real thing to modeling or computer versions. The reality is that you have to work with what you prefer and can afford. Personaly I prefer the hardware interface to that of my VSTs...but I am also just starting to mess with VSTs and have not had time to adapt. In my eyes the sound quality is not based on whether its hardware or software but on the quality of the product used.

I dont thinks its because anyones elitist. I am a guitarist, and if i want to record electric I use a real amp. Why? Because i like the sound and playability of the amp. Things like Pod and Amplitube are great, but if you want a Marshall (or any other amp) sound you have use a Marshall! Its the same with synths. If you just want a nice sounding synth, you'll probably be happy with a VA synth. But, if you love the sound of an old Minimoog then you obviously know that you cant get closer than with the real thing. At least thats the way it is for me. If i like the sound of an instrument, I'd rather use it than try to copy it with something else. I think this is an area where many people get the wrong idea. Nobody uses a vintage analogue synth for any other reason than to get 100% authentic tone. You following me?

Regardless, I understand what Soultrane is alluding to, and it's well said.

I'll save my counter-arguments for the other thread.

Greg.

(the non-elitist guitarist)

im a bassist, and i've been known to be rather picky about my tone. my amp of choice is an eden metro combo and i adore it. however, i use a bass pod XT for recording now.

when i just play the two, does the pod sound as good as my eden? not by a long shot, the pod isnt even close. the eden blows it out of the water. the pod sounds woefully generic, sterile, and dead in comparison. the eden's tone is godlike to me.

so why dont i record with my eden then? because as good as it sounds just playing it, i have no idea how to properly record it. i've tried the direct out, various mic placements, preamping the di out, eq, compressors, expanders, and combinations of all the above...but no luck. because of my lack of experience and knowledge in recording, i cannot get a recorded bass tone that will sound good and sit well in a mix to save my life, especially not next to synths. every time i thought i was getting close in tone, the mix would suck yet again.

to make matters worse, i live in an apartment with lots of ambient noise. plus the amp picks up line noise from the building.

as a result of all this, i all but stopped playing bass for years because composition took precedence over playing and i couldnt stand having a crappy tone messing up my songs and my mixes.

earlier this year a friend finally convinced me to buy a pod and test it out. i had been resisting the pod because i wanted *my* tone, not some cheep virtual imitation of someone elses sound. he agreed that it wouldnt sound like the real thing, and it wouldnt be the tone i was originally striving for...but that it would sound good on a recording, give me lots of other useful tones and effects to work with, and would sit amazingly well in a mix with very little effort.

boy was he ever right. the damn thing records like a dream.

my amp may sound wonderful in the real world, but when it comes to recording, the pod's virtual world wins hands down. and the more i tweak it (and generally get use to it) the happier i am with the tones get. its even nice and quiet. thanks to the pod, the composer and bassist halves of my musical self can finally work together. im playing bass more now than i have in years.

so will i sell my eden now? not a freakin chance. but will i continue to record with a pod? hell yes.

-ugo

I'm with soultrane on this one. I've had a POD since the original version and it has never let me down. I won't deny that the real deal, properly mic'd, in a good room, will sound better. But it won't sound so much better that it outweighs the versatility and ease of use that the POD offers.

Even playing live, I use Line 6 equipment, for the same reasons -- having 30-or-so amps to choose from just by stomping on a footswitch gives me a huge advantage that I cannot get from a single amp. Being solid-state, it's lighter, and I don't have to deal with the maintenance of tubes. For the money, a Line 6 cannot be beat.

Say what you will about digital amps, but they sound good enough to me, and they offer capabilities that traditional amps do not. Plus, there's something cool about blazing a trail forward instead of using aged equipment that hasn't changed for 40 years.

I haven't owned a real amp for about 3 or four years; before that I owned Marshalls, Oranges, Trace Elliots (SpeedTwin, not a bas amp!!), Laneys etc and have rented everything from Fenders to Voxs to Soldanos for recording.

These days I can't really imagine buying another amp unless I start gigging regularly again; the benifits of amps sims MASSIVELY outweigh any draw-backs.

I use Amplitube, Trash, the Simulanalog things and a Behringer (don't laugh) Bass Vamp Pro thing and they cover EVERYTHING.

All this mojo nonsense about real amps is ok if you're talking about recording a band live and in a single room, but if not then I absolutely DO NOT believe that by the time a record is mixed anybody could tell what made the noise.

Don't get me wrong; I have far too many guitars and effects pedals to be accusing anybody of being dumb for suffering from G.A.S in relation to amps, but for recording purposes amp sims rule.

Hey, I agree with you guys totally! I have a Pod v2.0 which i use ALL the time, and i think it sounds just fine. But this really isnt the point Im trying to make at all. What Im getting at is that when you by an expensive amp, you do so for the unique tone it delivers. And if your record requires a particular tone, then why try to fake it? Like i said before, nothing does Marshall better than a Marshall. You could argue the same about a Pod! If I want the sound of a Pod on my track, then I dont reach for anything else. However, the purpose of the Pod is as a convenience rather than as a classic instrument. Do you see what I mean? Im not questioning the quality of the Pod or any other virtual amp for that matter. Im trying to point out that it pays you to use whatever does the job best. If that means using a Pod, then I use a Pod. But equally, if i can only get the sound i need from a valve amp then Im much more likely to use that instead. I even use a pocket amp from time to time, cuz it has a really unique sound. But i dont use it when I need a driven stack!

Its nothing to do with elitism, or thinking 'blah blah' is better than 'blah blah'. Its down to what every does the job best in any given situation. Its exactly the same with other electronic instruments. For example, if i need some Nord Lead on my track, then I wont dream of using anything else. But at the same time, I might need the distinctive sound of some hacky freeware VSTi, in which case I go straight to the plug in folder. I dont consider either to be 'better', its about using the right instrument for the desired result.

Sorry for ranting about this, but I cant help but feel that people confuse this for elitism. For some people Im sure it is, but to be fair these people rarely know whats good anyway. When you hear someone saying that digital amps are shite, what they mean Im sure is that they are shite for the users application. I mean, lets face it, if you were recording commercial nu-metal tracks in a big studio you are hardly going to DI your guitars. It wouldnt be the best way to get the required results at all. I think most people are open minded enough to realise that everything has its place. Be it analogue, digital, hardware or software!

It's not elitism;it's just personal preference.I've used my tube preamp/cabinet emulator setup for years;it's what I'm comfortable with.A Pod sounds great,but it just doesn't feel right to me,and I have a bitch dialing in my tone.OTOH,someone who uses a Pod would feel the same way about my rig...
ew

champion.rabbit wrote:

All this mojo nonsense about real amps is ok if you're talking about recording a band live and in a single room, but if not then I absolutely DO NOT believe that by the time a record is mixed anybody could tell what made the noise.

Yeah, maybe if you're mixing through a fuck off SSL! But lets face it, digital recording doesnt exactly 'compliment' sound sources. In my experience when you work in the digital world, you need to get the very best quality recordings to obtain decent results. This is exactly why Im picky over my source instruments. If the guitar is going to be a dominant force in the mix, then Im damn sure gonna get the right sound to tape. If the guitar will be sitting pretty in the midground, then Pod it is. But if not then Im likely to resort to real amps. Surely you can see the sense in this? I mean, can you really say that your Pod does what a driven Soldano can? If you know your guitar then I doubt it. I suppose what i should ask is whether you can compensate for that loss in the mix, but once again I doubt that too. But hey, if you can please let me know how cuz i reckon i could make a fortune with that kind of knowledge!

My apologies if i sound sceptical, but In my experience Pod + PC doesnt not eq huge pro quality sound. People are always asking what it is about commercial records that really lacks in their work. The answer in my opinion is TOP quality gear and engineering at every stage in the process. If you can replicate this quality with a native daw and amp sim then you're a far better man than me!

[/quote]
My apologies if i sound sceptical, but In my experience Pod + PC doesnt not eq huge pro quality sound. People are always asking what it is about commercial records that really lacks in their work. The answer in my opinion is TOP quality gear and engineering at every stage in the process. If you can replicate this quality with a native daw and amp sim then you're a far better man than me! [/quote]

The "not pro-quality" argument is kind of silly considering that the "Pro's" DO use the POD. There was an interview with Walter Trout in the "Guitarist" magazine where he talks about recording with the POD (v.1.0, I think!) and achieved to get a sound that SRV needed a couple of amps for.... So the "you can't use amp sims to get pro results" is utter bullshit. I am certain there are numerous examples...
Cheers
Alex

Yeah but dude, did you see the guys studio? If you record your Pod through a bunch of quality outboard, then mix it on a 250'000 desk it is highly likely to sound good. Please read my other posts, Im not saying that the Pod doesnt sound good. Infact i think it sounds very good. However, when people say that record a Pod into your PC and the make it sound like a Soldano in the mix, I have some trouble. Also, take into consideration that Im talking about using the Pod in certain contexts. I'll happily argree that in a mid - background setting the Pod will be highly suitable. In a foreground setting, AND recorded and mixed in a native PC, I dont believe the Pod could cut it. Not in direct comparion with Marshalls, Fenders, Boogies etc recorded into the same system.

Coming from sorta the other side of the desk (I'm mainly a producer and engineer), I hear these sort of outbursts quite a lot. Getting all manic and claiming that a Pod or whatever is as good as an amp, is just as stupid as claiming the opposite. I'll tell you why:

First of all, ANYTHING might work in a given situation. If we're talking guitars and amps, it's not uncommon to use little rebuilt transistor radios with line ins, or pignose 'practice' amps or the like when you're tracking in the studio. They have distinct sounds, and that's exactly what matters, not what the actual chain of gear is. Therefore, an emu box or plug might very well work just fine.

There's one thing, though, that sets more or less ANY real amp apart from the emu's: you can track loads of them on top of each other and still maintain a sense of clarity of the individual track. I've found that if you track more than, say 3 guitars with something like a Pod, even using different settings, the overall guitar sound of the song tend to flatten out a bit. The guitars start to sound misty. I have no clue why this is, there's prolly some fancy techy explanation, I'm just reporting what I hear. One way out of that problem is to use different amp simulators on top of each other. Personally, I like Amplitube a lot, and the tc thirty is cool too. The Pod was never really my thing, though. Not that I find it useless or anything, it's just not the all round do-all-in-a-box thingy that people make it to be, especially not in a studio environment. Still, it's got its own timbre, and as such it's absolutely cool with me.

That being said, I prefer working with real amps any time. I like the hands on approach of miking an amp up, finding the right pre and comp for it and making it work in a mix. I like fiddling about with the guitar player, hooking up tape delays and stomp boxes and the like. It's fun, and it's a much more creative approach to making music than just dialing stuff up on a screen (be it a mac screen or an LCD readout). There's a different aura if you will about it, and that works for me. Obviously, you have to have good mics and tracking gear (and amps) for this to work, and I have a feeling that that's the main reason why things like the Pod have become so widespread: it's pretty expensive to go down the real amp route. And it's much much more difficult.

As such I can certainly appreciate why spare bedroom studio folks like their Pods et al. So what if the sound is a little flat and boring? Given the chance though, you should really allow yourself to have some fun with a good mic/pre setup and an old amp cranked up a bit. It'll make your music breathe!


Which reminds me: Many guitarists complain that all these virtual modellers have one bad thing in common: They are somewhat lacking in dynamic reponse. You know, when you've got a big overdriven thing going on your old deluxe, but just by not pulling those strings too hard, you can still get that lovely clean Fender tube sound ... I'm not that much of a guitarist myself, but I've heard this complaint many times, and I do think I see what they mean.

Anyway, just my 5 cents worth

Anybody who mentions 'pro guitar sounds' has already lost the argument.

Pro guitar sounds:

Husker Du, Steve Vai, Eric Clapton, Fugazi, Shellac, Joe Satriani, Jesus and Mary Chain, White Stripes, Malmsteen, U2, Black Flag, Korn, SRV, Billy Bragg, The Strokes, Metallica, Gang of Four, Cocteau Twins, Cure, Azwad, Deep Purple, Stooges, Undertones, Bill Frisell, Swans, Bryan Adams, ZZ Top, Unsane...

'Pro guitar sound' indeed!

if you can't get the amp-sound you're looking for with e.g. a J-Station then there's something wrong with your fingers

edit: oh and a pod is a really bad sounding amp-sim

edit again: I only know the original one so I can't say anything about the XT

a talented comedian wrote:

(FLASH TO) boy and girl in car. r&b slow jam playing on isuzu stereo. boy puts arm around girl and reaches cross seat to kiss her. she puts hands up and yells "STOP!" She points to radio and says "That is not a real minimoog bassline, but the VST! Take me home now!!!" (FLASHBACK TO)

this had me pissing myself

Well done

Old analog equipment always smells better. But I can get over it.

has anyone tried Tech 21's Sansamps or Trademark 10?

champion.rabbit wrote:

Anybody who mentions 'pro guitar sounds' has already lost the argument. Pro guitar sounds: Husker Du, Steve Vai, Eric Clapton, Fugazi, Shellac, Joe Satriani, Jesus and Mary Chain, White Stripes, Malmsteen, U2, Black Flag, Korn, SRV, Billy Bragg, The Strokes, Metallica, Gang of Four, Cocteau Twins, Cure, Azwad, Deep Purple, Stooges, Undertones, Bill Frisell, Swans, Bryan Adams, ZZ Top, Unsane... 'Pro guitar sound' indeed!

Right, pick holes in my grammer. That'll get your point across . Errr, infact what was your point? That your Pod sounds as good on tracks as a room full of valve amps? I think you're going to need to correct a damn sight more grammer to get that theory to hold any water my man. But I'll say it again, if you can show me these results I'll be only too happy to eat humble pie (if indeed I do agree).

Anyway, just to clarify, my point was that you dont get the best guitar sounds by recording amp sims into PC's. These sounds are adequate in certain scenarios, but NOT when the when the guitars make up the main foreground. Maybe Im wrong, but Iv tried extensively to get good upfront guitar sounds from Amplitube and Pod... and have failed miserably. Ok, they sounded alright until I cranked up the JCM. And that kind of put it all in perspective.

But hey, whatever man each to their own.

tee boy wrote:

champion.rabbit wrote: Anybody who mentions 'pro guitar sounds' has already lost the argument. Pro guitar sounds: Husker Du, Steve Vai, Eric Clapton, Fugazi, Shellac, Joe Satriani, Jesus and Mary Chain, White Stripes, Malmsteen, U2, Black Flag, Korn, SRV, Billy Bragg, The Strokes, Metallica, Gang of Four, Cocteau Twins, Cure, Azwad, Deep Purple, Stooges, Undertones, Bill Frisell, Swans, Bryan Adams, ZZ Top, Unsane... 'Pro guitar sound' indeed! Right, pick holes in my grammer. That'll get your point across . Errr, infact what was your point? That your Pod sounds as good on tracks as a room full of valve amps? I think you're going to need to correct a damn sight more grammer to get that theory to hold any water my man. But I'll say it again, if you can show me these results I'll be only too happy to eat humble pie (if indeed I do agree). Anyway, just to clarify, my point was that you dont get the best guitar sounds by recording amp sims into PC's. These sounds are adequate in certain scenarios, but NOT when the when the guitars make up the main foreground. Maybe Im wrong, but Iv tried extensively to get good upfront guitar sounds from Amplitube and Pod... and have failed miserably. Ok, they sounded alright until I cranked up the JCM. And that kind of put it all in perspective. But hey, whatever man each to their own.

Well you completely missed my point!!



Well done!

tee boy wrote:

champion.rabbit wrote: Anybody who mentions 'pro guitar sounds' has already lost the argument. Pro guitar sounds: Husker Du, Steve Vai, Eric Clapton, Fugazi, Shellac, Joe Satriani, Jesus and Mary Chain, White Stripes, Malmsteen, U2, Black Flag, Korn, SRV, Billy Bragg, The Strokes, Metallica, Gang of Four, Cocteau Twins, Cure, Azwad, Deep Purple, Stooges, Undertones, Bill Frisell, Swans, Bryan Adams, ZZ Top, Unsane... 'Pro guitar sound' indeed! Right, pick holes in my grammer. That'll get your point across . Errr, infact what was your point?

I think his point was that there is in fact nothing like a 'pro'-sound...

Okey doke, my mistake. Yeh, I agree that there is not 'a' pro sound. If you refer back to my post though, Im sure i said pro 'quality' sound. By this I mean the standard (not style) of sound i expect to hear on commercial release.

But eitherway, it really dont pay to argue about it. You say potato, I say potarto...

Recently spoted on net - Marcus Miller recorded through Behringer Bass V-Amp on Jaco Tribute CD:

http://bassics.com/jacobigband/tbt16-21.html
http://www.marcusmiller.com/board_item.html?id=31476&thread=16162&peri od=2&color=1&thread_id_str=

However, this is bass, recording nicely crunched guitar is another discussion...

I think Bass Guitar is more suited towords direct recording, I think lots of studio Bass players record direct regularly. I know my warwick sounds great direct, but I always struggle a bit with my Fender Strat. Certain sounds I can get better with software, others leave me wishing I had $800 to drop on a small amp. Depends what mood i'm in and what sound I'm after.

I use an Avalon U5 for DIing bass. Sounds the biz, maybe not as good as a mixed DI / Cab but plenty good enough. I think you're right, bass does seem to DI much better than guitar.

Amp sims do suck. The state of the art for reproducing an analogue synth is way beyond the state of the art for guitar amps. Try listening to an Oddity and then telling me that Amplitube's hi-gain model is worth a damn.

Doesn't mean I don't use them, though.

Phaedo wrote:

Amp sims do suck. The state of the art for reproducing an analogue synth is way beyond the state of the art for guitar amps. Try listening to an Oddity and then telling me that Amplitube's hi-gain model is worth a damn. Doesn't mean I don't use them, though.

you should try Revalver

but yes, generally I am not that satisfied with the plugins as well, so you're right about this, but some
of the hardware amp-sims sound far better (don't know why ) e.g. the J-Station and the Yamaha DGstomp

I'm no expert, but I've read very good things about the Yamaha Stomp boxes, I think the Magic stomp it's called. Too bad there is no digital out, looks like a missed opportunity to me as I would like to see Yamaha compete with the likes of POD and even Ampltube etc...

I think that the spring reverb in my fender frontman 15 was worth the price of admission alone. The closest thing I have heard to real is the spring tank reaktor ensemble, which is not even close...

th real moral of the story is that software is cheaper an dallows you to approximate the sound of a real piece of hardware. Maybe it isnt 100% accurate, but so what. If you *have* to have a particular sound, go and get the hardware. if 95% is good enough for you then stick with software. That is why I no longer own analog synths, I can get good enough sounds with software, but I do own real guitars a real rhodes, real wurlitzer, and a real piano...

My problem with amp modellers is nothing about dynamics/feel/touch response - its to do with the high end. Listen to a guitar amp close mic'd with a real SM57 and it has a high end presence that is just missing on all the amp modellers. Its like all speaker sims are overly hi damping or something...

My experience with amp sims is that by themselves they sound fair, but certainly not better than a real amp. But add a first-class guitar tube preamp, like a Mesa Boogie pedal or Digitech GFX1 or GSP2101 as a front end, and it's a whole new game. The real tube driver seems to make up for whatever the amp sims are missing, and they all sound 100% better, maybe as good as a lot of real amps.

I own and gig with Line 6 gear, record with a Guitar Port (Pod XT Tones) and love it. I recently dusted off my old tube Laney stack and my tubeworks combo for a laugh and I quickly remembered what real tubes were all about. The real thing whipped the arse off the digital modelled stuff.

Then I put the dust covers back on and loaded the Line 6 into the car and played a gig. No tubes, no fragile parts to break in transit and over 32 amps to choose from. The average punter wouldn't know or hear the difference, only muso's would and they just stand there with their arms crossed picking everything to pieces anyway.

But when I'm recording and I want a real tube sound, I'll mike the real thing. But i've only got 5 of the 30 odd tones covered with the 'real thing', so the line 6 gear comes out again to save the day.

My point is, I would love a room full of vintage and modern amps, but with my current fiscal capacity, this is a dream. I know the real thing would sound better, but the line 6 stuff & software amp sims at least gives me a close approximation. And it's only a matter of time before they get almost as good as the real thing.

And the tubes don't need replacing in my line 6!

cbenci wrote:

I own and gig with Line 6 gear, record with a Guitar Port (Pod XT Tones) and love it. I recently dusted off my old tube Laney stack and my tubeworks combo for a laugh and I quickly remembered what real tubes were all about. The real thing whipped the arse off the digital modelled stuff. Then I put the dust covers back on and loaded the Line 6 into the car and played a gig. No tubes, no fragile parts to break in transit and over 32 amps to choose from. The average punter wouldn't know or hear the difference, only muso's would and they just stand there with their arms crossed picking everything to pieces anyway. But when I'm recording and I want a real tube sound, I'll mike the real thing. But i've only got 5 of the 30 odd tones covered with the 'real thing', so the line 6 gear comes out again to save the day. My point is, I would love a room full of vintage and modern amps, but with my current fiscal capacity, this is a dream. I know the real thing would sound better, but the line 6 stuff & software amp sims at least gives me a close approximation. And it's only a matter of time before they get almost as good as the real thing. And the tubes don't need replacing in my line 6!

sorry, just wanted to say i love you sig - i can very much relate

lates

t-willy

Quote:

My problem with amp modellers is nothing about dynamics/feel/touch response - its to do with the high end.

My problem exactly. I sometimes feel like I'm the only one who hears this, and to me it's an obvious deficiency.

...it's not just high end, though...you can bppst the highsas much as you want, but the sims always sound like they're in the next room...and every one I've heard/owned has the exact same problem...

I'm beginning to think it's inherent in whatever the digital modelling process is...

Which leads us to...

Quote:

has anyone tried Tech 21's Sansamps or Trademark 10?

I have the GT2 and the Trademark 60. I love them both...good old frying transistors.

Wayyy more honest "in-your-face" sounds than the digital stuff, and isn't that what guitar is for?

The modelling stuff always sounds great because of all of the effects and stuff, but when you turn off all the bullshit, they sound boxy.

The Tech21 stuff doesn't. Much better.

-S.

One of the main questions here:
Do you a) need a "working" guitar sound or do you need to b) reproduce a fabolous sound?
In case of a) an amp sim might do it. In case of b) only the real deal might do it. But the "real deal" includes the real player, the real instrument, the real room, the real mic, etc etc.

Personally I am using amp sims for their convenience, for their flexibility. I am not using them for quality of sound because there is none. Quality of sound IMO incorporates too much different things. Engineers have been taking ages to get the right git sound to tape (or HDD). They haven't even spent 10 years to track amp sims.

However, I must agree with Sleek and the likes: I've yet to come across an amp sim reacting as sensible to my playing, my volume pot setting and whatever in a way my Marshall/Fender/Boogie (or whatever I might be using in a particular situation) do. Just set up some rather high gain setting on your POD, VAmp, Amplitube or whatever thing, then turn the guitar volume down... with my Marshall it's like almost clean and for sure a very pleasant sound - couldn't get anything like that out of some simulation.

For recording purposes it might matter (way) less, but for live playing I just need that direct git-amp response as I'm not some sorta foot-pedal-dancing kinda dude but prefer to set up one sound per each tune and do the rest with my fingers, the pickup selector and/or volume pot.

When I was young and foolish I bought my first guitar amp. A Fender Concert 60 (The '82).

Not a bad amplifier...but the wrong one for me.

It's not a great recording amp...and my guess is that the 65 twin reissue wouldn't be the greatest either.

Layla was recorded with what, a Fender Princeton?

Led Zep used a 5-8 watt supro on a lot of records.

Tube magic is especially pronounced when you have the power tubes distorting and interacting with the speaker. It's easier if you have a low power amp in a recording situation.

I've still got the concert. Not a bad clean sound, my 12 rick sounds good through it...but for distortion I'm using a single ended danelectro amp of 5 watts.

Which raises a whole issue worthy of another thread:

Can the increasingly more popular 1-3W 'recording' amps successfully scream and thunder like a stack?

I've never used one of the little amps, but it's REALLY appealing in concept. And remember, even a 1 watt amp can piss your neighbors off, so it's still not a sim solution. Probably easier to make an isolation box for, though.

ahhh damn...

I was starting to think that amp sims were going to be this season's '303 emulation, but then you all started getting reasonable and having an actual discussion.

Bastard spoilsports.

Quote:

Can the increasingly more popular 1-3W 'recording' amps successfully scream and thunder like a stack?

Scream? Ewww...

You sound like you're talking about hard raw or metel...the closest little amp I've heard is the Zvex nano amp...it really sounds big.

Too big for me. I'm more into a "clean distortion"-type thing, like a '59 4x10 bassman sorta thing.

I have a little 10 watt amp from the '50's that does the job admirably. I can crank it in my living room, but when recording I just make a little box out of my couch cushions and it's suitably isolated that the rode nt-1 won't feed back...

Anyways, the jist is this: Yes, those little amps can rock! I really suggest you check out the Zvex for hard stuff, or just get some vintage POS for cleaner stuff.

Every shop has a couple somewhere, try a lot of them, and you'll find good ones.

One last thing: For supertopmodern heaviness, I still really like the direct out from my Trademark 60 over almost anything, and I have a randall, (the old ones like dimebag originally used), a Marshall and a 5150.

-S.

Im playing guitar for 35 years now and I never really bothered about the sound and gear of other players. What guitar is he playing?...what amp does he use?...does he play a medium or thick pick?...or does he play with fingers?..Thats not the point in my opinion.
Its about the content, what does he play, how does he play it.
When I buy a new CD I never think about gear when I hear it. If I was an engineer, and not a musician, I would do!
Guitar players tend to talk too much about "what the other guy uses".
There are so many good instruments, amplifiers and stomp boxes out there, so everyone can find what he likes more.
Use a Pod,Marshall,Fender,Mesa,J-Station, or whatever,
and look about the content of your music.

Something I tried recently with moderate success;

Recorded direct in from my amps (marshall, laney, tubeworks, fender, even Line6!) and run the DI tone through some speaker cabinet impulses I grabbed from noisevault.

Sounded much more organic, better than most amp sims, but still missed that power tube section 'magic'.

Hotbop wrote:

Im playing guitar for 35 years now and I never really bothered about the sound and gear of other players. What guitar is he playing?...what amp does he use?...does he play a medium or thick pick?...or does he play with fingers?..Thats not the point in my opinion. Its about the content, what does he play, how does he play it. When I buy a new CD I never think about gear when I hear it. If I was an engineer, and not a musician, I would do! Guitar players tend to talk too much about "what the other guy uses". There are so many good instruments, amplifiers and stomp boxes out there, so everyone can find what he likes more. Use a Pod,Marshall,Fender,Mesa,J-Station, or whatever, and look about the content of your music.

Amen!

[quote="champion.rabbit"][quote="Hotbop"]Im playing guitar for 35 years now and I [b]never[/b] really bothered about the sound and gear of other players. What guitar is he playing?...what amp does he use?...does he play a medium or thick pick?...or does he play with fingers?..Thats not the point in my opinion.
Its about the content, what does he play, how does he play it.
When I buy a new CD I never think about gear when I hear it. If I was an engineer, and not a musician, I would do!
Guitar players tend to talk too much about "what the other guy uses".
There are so many good instruments, amplifiers and stomp boxes out there, so everyone can find what he likes more.
Use a Pod,Marshall,Fender,Mesa,J-Station, or whatever,
and look about the content of your music.[/quote]

Amen![/quote]

Ditto.

For what it's worth, I gig with a small Line 6 Spider (mainly because I'm lazy and don't want to cart around an amp, or a head/cab and a rack or pedal board - I have it all integrated into one unit+foot controller); and record with a Pod Pro.

Has anyone ever come up to me after a gig and said "Ooh - that wasn't a *real* amp you were playing there"? No. In fact, I've had other guitarists and musicians come up (one did last Saturday) and say how much they liked the sound. Two weeks ago we were joined at a festival by an established (35-40 years with a variety of well-known bands) 'name' guitarist, who I know is a stickler for vintage amps - did he say anything about the sound? No.

Seems to me that it's not 'professional' guitarists who have this deprecating attitude, since they are - like Hotbop says - bothered about the notes rather than being hung up on the equipment used to make them.

There's definitely good things to say about tracking really small amps, like pignose or princeton or smaller even (I've succesfully tracked guitar leads thru a very very very small danelectro amp myself).

First of all, in a recording environment, you can basically forget the reproducing factor. If you want a guitar/amp combo to sound just like it does if you're standing right beside the amp, you've got a looong night ahead of you. It's gonna sound different, because, well, it IS different. There's a mic or two and several pieces of pre/eq/comp in between, so forget about getting 'YOUR GUITARSOUND', and focus on getting something that will work for an album instead. As with anything else, guitar sound is a different beast in the studio than it is live.

This is where the small amps come in handy. The problem with a great big stack with 4 12"s is that it's a WALL of sound, and as such it's really not that easy to track. Or more preciscely: It's not lending itself to tracking very well. You can put a 57 or a 421 up in front of one of the 12"s, but you're only tracking a fraction of the wall (in fact, you're only tracking a fraction of the 12" itself!), and it's the combination of all the speakers that make for the sound. You can then put an ambient mic a meter or two out, which will get the overall sound a bit better, but then you have the general problem with ambience miking (lack of low end, lack of clarity, etc). Combining the two, which is very common, remedies that to a degree and will often work quite great, BUT!! Getting something like a 2 or 3" speaker (hell, even a 6", if you're scared!) out of the closet and banging a 57 right in it's face will actually give you a much bigger sound, basically because the 57, even if it's really close, will still be able to 'see' pretty much the whole speaker surface.

I'm not saying it's a golder rule or anything, it's more like a really cool and nice option. If you don't believe me, you should try it. If you have tried it, you know I'm right!


rs.

Quote:

Seems to me that it's not 'professional' guitarists who have this deprecating attitude, since they are - like Hotbop says - bothered about the notes rather than being hung up on the equipment used to make them.

Nigga, please.

Guitar is about everything.

That's what's so cool about it.

It's not just a technique, it's a sound and a look and an attitude all wrapped up in one easy to play yet very very individual (to each player)instrument.

ALL of the factors matter.

There are players who play as if they are dragging the guitar across their ass, but just have such a sound or an attitude that it is a sheer pleasure to expierience them playing.

There are also very, very good players whose sound is such shit that their music is intollerable.

It's a mix, no pun intended.

If you think otherwise, or express yourself otherwise, you're just hobbling different aspects of your own appeal.

Why not have the whole package? Hmmm?

Digression, and very metel:

I remember the first time I heard Metallica's "Ride the lightning". I was astounded. Way before I knew the music well enough to form an opinion on it, I was awestruck by the SOUND of it. It was instantaneous.

...and at the time, I was listening to a lot of new metal releases. Some of them may have been better, some worse, but none of them could live up to that SOUND.

I wonder where those bands are now?

Mind you, on a non-metel front, Jellyfish's "Spilt Milk" and Crystal Method's "Vegas" had the same immiediate effect...

Never underestimate the power of a great SOUND, bitches.

-S.

I hate elitist tripe.

I'm better than that

aMUSEd wrote:

I hate elitist tripe. I'm better than that

You reminded me of a Bob Newhart schtick: "I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'" (My apologies to all country music fans. Except that one back in the late 1980s got mad at me because I couldn't make the jukebox loud enough to suit him.)

P.S.: aMUSEd? That sounds familiar... hey, didn't you used to be disGUSTed? ;->

Bob Newhart's genius is lost these days. Thanks for reminding me of it.

As for small amps-- I understand what you're getting at, but what I'm REALLY referring to is the small amps that are made -specifically- for recording, not just as bedroom/practice amps. These amps carry a price tag to match or nearly match their 50/100W counterparts.

So then people start complaining, "Why would I pay $500 for a 1W amp?", assuming that more wattage means a better amp and better value for the money. I, however, feel that if you're not a gigging musician, your money is better spent on one of these amps. At 1W, with the right cabs they'll still shake your windows at home, but can also be successfully overdriven at more tolerable, "recordable" levels. Much more suited to the home studio musician than the gigging musician, that's for sure.

Whoever mentioned the Zvex had the right idea. Brilliant-looking little amp, though I can't imagine how I could get my hands on one to test it.

So ARE they worth it?

Greg

I was looking at amps for recording and came across this one

The Blue Velvet

http://www.zinky.com/BlueVelvet25.html

It is 25 watts, but I heard it has great tone at tiny volumes as well.

Quote:

Whoever mentioned the Zvex had the right idea. Brilliant-looking little amp, though I can't imagine how I could get my hands on one to test it.

Well, they've got them at Truetone music in Santa Monica.

Duh.

-S.

We can live beside the ocean,
Leave the fires behind;
Swim out past the breakers...



I won't be making it to Santa Monica anytime soon. Thanks, though.

Sleek Month wrote:

Quote: Whoever mentioned the Zvex had the right idea. Brilliant-looking little amp, though I can't imagine how I could get my hands on one to test it. Well, they've got them at Truetone music in Santa Monica. Duh. -S.

So how do you like them?

Who?

-S.

@ soultrane

cool tunes you've got there. Reminds me of a band I heard in Netherlands + Swing Out Sister.

Are you behind the keyboards?

K

(You probably took name from the Coltrane record, right?)

Sleek Month wrote:

Who? -S.

anyone that has heard them..

yeh yeh... that's me!!! good looking out! i appreciate it.

for that date, recorded at a small but hip l.a. venue, (the ladies!?!) i used a rented rhodes suitcase...

yesterday, i ran my stage thru a neve preamp, and put the simuanalog (free plug) on it... tried amplitube demo, nigel, trash demo, as well.

for rhodes, simuanalog is pretty good. just a little tweaking, and u can get it to sound pretty close to a suitcase / stage-twin.

however, where the sims i've tried so far really falter, i have to admit, is with the clav, which is a bit more guitar like, no? ... so, i guess i have to ammend my previous post and say amp sims: good enough for rhodes...


PS!!!! When I say the Rhodes / neve / simuanalog SOUNDS like a suitcase, I don't mean to say it PLAYS like a suitcase. there's obviously a joy to FEELING your sound, which u get from the amp.

PLUS, VST's mean that's one or two less leads for my beagle to eat AND, u can pop it in as an Audio effect in Logic, adjust your sound, record (dry, but still hearing the effect) and then when you're finished, you turn to your channel, there's your *amp* all set up for u, u can save the exact settings and go in for more tweaking!!! can u even do that with podxt?

that is SWEET!!! i got a better tone for rhodes in 5 mins w. simuanalog then 2 days tweaking a rhodes preset got me in nigel!!!

which means i'll have to repent and say scarbee, i wait for you... SOON COME!!! You're on VACATION!!! damn u! what is a vacation when u r on permanent vacation here in the music biz?!?!?!?

FINAL THOUGHT!!! if someone came w. a strong VST amp / preamp sim, even one w. a card like UAD (zero latency, tho), or some kind of usable cpu load... it'd be worth $500... especially if it could do bass (it'd be great for trilogy)... i believe alot of us are starting to sense that good amp sims could take the music to the next level, and not just on real guitar, but on all the vst's out there!!!

and wait!!! ni: the unit's good but the presets suk?, is that what i'm hearing!? most of this gear is getting so complicated, i figger if the guy who made it can't get good sounds out of it, what chance do i have?... i'm just the piano player, don't shoot!!!

ps simunalog's price makes it sound nice, 2!!!


out... and still on the fence!!!

Quote:

anyone that has heard them..

I'm still confused by the question, so I'll answer several alternatives of :"Do you like them" that could apply.

1. Yes, I like Zvex. I met the guy who makes them at a guitar show.

2. Yes, I like Truetone Music, a bit elitist though they may be. (I'm not the type who uses the musopolitically correct gear...)

3. Yes, I like the Santa Monicans. They're friendly and usually good looking.

4. Yah, the nanoamp sounds great, but a little too rock-marshall for my tastes.

-S.

That's all I need to know...

thanks

I've got both a Peavey Classic 50 212 amp and a POD 2 at home. The POD seems to be what I work with the most because it's fast to set up and dial up a sound I need, wheras it takes some time to set up the mikes for the amp. Plus I live in a basement bedsit and have a number of people living above me. They don't complain about the volume, but I just don't want them to be special guests on the tracks I record . The Classic 50 sounds great, though - I wish Line 6 would come out with a direct box that has cab sims so I could use that.

Small amps will work nicely though - and you don't have to spend a fortune. Peavey just released a new version of its Backstage amp that's supposed to sound fantastic at $99 US. Epiphone at one time sold an inexpensive tube amp at the musicyo.com site that, once you replaced its speaker with something decent, came alive. And of course Vox's BMS, which is their version of Brian May's "Deaky" transistor amp.