KVR :: Hardware (Instruments and Effects) » Guitar amp or... [View Original Topic]
There are 31 posts in this topic.
zerocrossing - Sun May 06, 2012 1:07 pm
So, I've slowly over time moved my studio from all ITB to about 50/50, but one thing I've mostly left out is my guitar. Odd, as I'm a guitarist. I've been pretty happy with Amplitube and S-Gear, but I've decided I'd like to have some actual glowing glass (besides my Blackstar HT-5 pedal) in my guitar's signal chain. No speaker needed as this is something that'll always be going direct into my audio interface.
I want to keep it fairly cheap. In and around the $500ish mark, but if something is really fantastic I can save. My current top choice is to get a Hughes and Kettner Tubemeister 18 and use it's recording out. I heard some pretty fantastic demos of it.
Other possibilities are a Rocktron VooDu Valve Oneline and the Engl E530. (I've got apps that'll let me use impulses for cabs, or even the cabs in Ampitube)
Am I missing anything else? A different amp and something like the Marshall Power Break?
Hink - Sun May 06, 2012 1:22 pm
dude seriously checkout Frenzel...the line out on many of them (my new one included) has a circuit that if you disconnect the speaker and use the line out (not the fx loop send) it is post power transformer meaning you actually get power tube distortion as well. But even better when the speaker is disconnected you wont blow the amp. I'm quoting this from the description on my amp but many are this way.
Quote:
Another feature which broadens the use of the amp is the installation of a post output trannie Line Output Jack with a Line Level control which allows you to use this amp as an effects box....or to drive a higher power amp with. If you unplug the speaker, an internal load is automatically connected across the output to give you loaded output tube distortion. (Please Note: Since the output of the Line Out is post output transformer, you can crank the Master up on the amp and then by adjusting the Line Out Level control to match the level required for the amp you are driving, and then turning the Master or Volume control down on the amp you are driving, you can get loaded output tube distortion at low power levels. This eliminates the need for an attentuator.
http://www.frenzeltubeamps.net/page21.php
I know I'm coming across as a fanboi and I dont intend to and I doubt I'll buy another Frenzel myself, but please dont let the idea of me being a fanboi or how you personally feel about me deter you from checking out the other amps Frenzel has to offer. My new Frenzel with this option sounds great with IRs and AT cabs because you have the power amp so to speak.
FWIW if you get something like the power brake dont get the Marshall, a feature you will appreciate having found on the Webers (which ar the least expensive as well) and other attenuators is a treble boost or similar. Attenuators are notorious for killing the headroom and the power brake imo leads the pack in this regard. If you dont want the treble boost you can turn it off but if you do not have it you might find you wish did
zerocrossing - Sun May 06, 2012 6:29 pm
Hink wrote:
dude seriously checkout Frenzel...the line out on many of them (my new one included) has a circuit that if you disconnect the speaker and use the line out (not the fx loop send) it is post power transformer meaning you actually get power tube distortion as well. But even better when the speaker is disconnected you wont blow the amp. I'm quoting this from the description on my amp but many are this way.
http://www.frenzeltubeamps.net/page21.php
I know I'm coming across as a fanboi and I dont intend to and I doubt I'll buy another Frenzel myself, but please dont let the idea of me being a fanboi or how you personally feel about me deter you from checking out the other amps Frenzel has to offer. My new Frenzel with this option sounds great with IRs and AT cabs because you have the power amp so to speak.
FWIW if you get something like the power brake dont get the Marshall, a feature you will appreciate having found on the Webers (which ar the least expensive as well) and other attenuators is a treble boost or similar. Attenuators are notorious for killing the headroom and the power brake imo leads the pack in this regard. If you dont want the treble boost you can turn it off but if you do not have it you might find you wish did
Quote:
Another feature which broadens the use of the amp is the installation of a post output trannie Line Output Jack with a Line Level control which allows you to use this amp as an effects box....or to drive a higher power amp with. If you unplug the speaker, an internal load is automatically connected across the output to give you loaded output tube distortion. (Please Note: Since the output of the Line Out is post output transformer, you can crank the Master up on the amp and then by adjusting the Line Out Level control to match the level required for the amp you are driving, and then turning the Master or Volume control down on the amp you are driving, you can get loaded output tube distortion at low power levels. This eliminates the need for an attentuator.
http://www.frenzeltubeamps.net/page21.php
I know I'm coming across as a fanboi and I dont intend to and I doubt I'll buy another Frenzel myself, but please dont let the idea of me being a fanboi or how you personally feel about me deter you from checking out the other amps Frenzel has to offer. My new Frenzel with this option sounds great with IRs and AT cabs because you have the power amp so to speak.
FWIW if you get something like the power brake dont get the Marshall, a feature you will appreciate having found on the Webers (which ar the least expensive as well) and other attenuators is a treble boost or similar. Attenuators are notorious for killing the headroom and the power brake imo leads the pack in this regard. If you dont want the treble boost you can turn it off but if you do not have it you might find you wish did
I know you're a fanboi, but not to the point where I think you'd love anything they made just for the sake of fanaticism. I think if I were to go that way I'd go with the Wild Cat 30 as I'm not a huge Fender guy. I can't find a single demo of it though. I think I might be looking for something a little more modern high gain with foot switch controllable channel switching at the very least.
Hink - Sun May 06, 2012 8:21 pm
well be that as it may do not be surprised if you do not come across a line out (including Frenzel) you like and question the value of the investment. I could be wrong but a sansamp and AT do a very good job and anything you put against them has to be better than any line outs I have tried (even Frenzel).
Dont get me wrong, you can do well with it but the first question that comes to mind might be why? You may find yourself thinking "I can do this with a few mouse clicks". Of course this is only me but I feel the line out/recording out is the last option.
If you go with an attenuator I hope you take my advice, Weber is not the only one who makes attenuators with a treble boost but even there I cannot recommend the line out on it. (though Eric gave me an interesting option I should try).
I'm not going to give you a bum steer on this, I'm only offering the truth of what I learned along the way since about 2007 when I got a Weber so I could use my boogie instead of a pod....after that the boogie sat not even plugged into the wall for years. After everything I went through the POD xt Live still sounded just as good. I could go back to the 90s and the Marshall Tube pre I have and still have not got the sound from it I wanted and the sansamp blew it away for me.
You also have to remember also what you put between the guitar and amp, because that is going to make a huge difference. Online demos are one thing but they can be off the mark for one's personal taste. If you like if you have away to split the signal record somethings as you want them to sound with AT and send me just the dry track and I'll run it through what you like of what I have and the settings you want with the line outs
(the only amp without a line out is my boogie)
BTW you might like the Mesa/Boogie 5:25 or 5:50 Express amps, they have two channels (two complete channels) and the flexibility of being lower powered Class A single ended and Push/Pull AB (maybe B not 100% sure) at 25 or 50 watts.
lfm - Sun May 06, 2012 11:24 pm
I was never all happy with pure amp sim.
So I started with getting a Damange Control Womanizer to get some tubes to phatten things up, and still using cabinet sims. Quite an improvement.
But then I went one step further to a Koch Studiotone which has direct outs(with or without cabinet sim) as well internal load if not wanting to run with speakers. So you can crunch power amp as much as you want.
I still use the Womanizer due to the sweapable filter EQ is really cool.
I like Izotope Trash Boxmodels and their ability to create the miking with two mikes giving the feel of a miked cabinet in a room.
I also tested Waves GTR3 for cabinet sims. The option with stack of two and fiddling with delay on one gives also a sense of room miked guitar.
The search for guitartone is endless - but have come a little bit on the right track.
wasi - Mon May 07, 2012 12:07 am
Ah yes, I had a demonizer once. Awesome line out, better than anything else I've heard. But it's basically one channel... and I somehow toasted it within a week when I put other tubes in. Shipping to the US was prohibitive because it's so heavy so I gave it back.
Out of the choice in the OP, absolutely get the Engl. It's a better preamp and that pays off, especially when you're using IRs in the backend.
H&K's Redbox is very good, certainly one of the better analog speaker sims, but compared to convolution based software all analog speaker sims appear rather lifeless IMO. There's only so much you can do with EQ. Besides, the Tubemeister is just one channel, and there's no 'pure' preamp out, just speaker compensated or speaker, meaning you can't try a better speaker sim with it.
If you can, look around for a used Mesa/Boogie Triaxis (if you're in the US) or Hughes & Kettner Access (if you're in Europe) or that Marshall JMP-1 preamp. They are midi controllable and let you save presets, which is very useful when you're working with a computer because you tend to do a lot more fiddling than ptherwise. The Access is from the era of H&K when they made multi-thousand-dollar luxury-item pro gear, not the more midrange stuff of these days. The Access significantly more capable than the Triaxis IMO on several levels, the JMP-1, well...
I have an Access I bought second hand for $300 and it lets me run the midi out on the Access into the computer to control Guitar Rig, meaning I can tie everything to one midi pedal.
chokehold - Mon May 07, 2012 1:49 am
After years of being not-quite-happy with my guitar sound, I've completely gone off cabinet/mic sims "in the box".
I can say "I had them all", because I nearly have. Steinberg Warp VST, ReValver when it was still from Alien Connections, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, Kuassa Creme, Softube Metal Amp Room, the LePous, and loads of other freeware sims (Nick Crow, TSE, ...)
But all of them sound only halfway there, some not even that.
There seem to be certain complex dynamic aspects to a cabinet/mic combination which just cant be captured by a single impulse, for example, and not by mixing 2 or even 10 of them together. And I guess it would make the CPU load of a plugin unbearable even on modern systems, if developers really created algorithms as thoroughly as they would need to be to get there.
I will try not go into it too deep...
An impulse response is created by running a frequency sweep through a power amp, cabinet, microphone and preamp. So all frequencies are covered, but as the sweep has only one consistent volume level, the created impulse is only representative for the volume level used to create it.
Think about it:
The sweep is usually played back quite loudly, so that the power amp tubes start driving and saturating with the sweep being played through it, so all the drive and saturation are captured for the sweep, which is in deed a good thing because it captures all sorts of harmonic and distortion effects for every possible frequency that could run through it.
But the flaw is: if the guitar signal you're running through the impulse is any louder or quieter than the sweep was, the IR is not representative and not fitting, because it would introduce too much or too little distortion, harmonics and saturation for your guitar signal.
Also, a loudspeaker with a loud signal is moving quite a bit, so it's pushing and pulling quite some air. As most IRs are created closely mic'd, this movement of air will have an effect on the microphone, just like if you're talking/singing into one.
The more air you blow into the capsule, the more rumble you get on the record.
In the end, you have an impulse that was created with a driven and saturating tube power amp, going through a loudspeaker that's moving quite a bit, moving a lot of air and blowing quite some rumble into the microphone.
Then, there's the way the microphone's capsule reacts to different "dynamic impulses" blown into it, as in different notes (=different RMS levels) and different attack/release curves (fingered, picked, poti swell).
Now suppose you're looking for an impulse to put on your clean and quiet ballad guitar solo full of volume poti swells, or maybe your funky/twangy pop "fattening" guitar.
You don't need all this drive, saturation and rumble that was captured in the impulse.
Then what?
The appropriate approach to correctly simulate a power amp/cabinet/mic/preamp combination would be to not only have one impulse covering all frequencies, but to have one impulse covering all frequencies for every possible volume level. Volume level of your guitar signal that's going through it, that is.
And that would mean quite an impressive arsenal of IRs, just for one combination.
Also, one would need an algorithm to inspect the incoming volume in both Peak and RMS to evaluate which IR is required to be applied. Of course, one could reduce the number of IRs and start morphing between them, that would reduce the number of Impulse samples and would probably work as well. But it would mean dynamically creating and applying FFT filters for each incoming sample, and I guess in addition to all the other factors ... that would result in quite a heavy CPU load.
So for that purpose I have recently tried to break away from "in the box" amp/cab/mic sims and I've built myself an isolation cabinet, that was quite a significant improvement to my guitar tone.
My iso cab is created of what I consider to be top-end products (thick Odyssey case [no cheap 7mm multiplex wood], thick and dense acoustic foam [6cm and 8cm, not the cheap pyramid rubbish], Sommer cables, Neutrik connectors, etc. and it works impressively well.
I spent my night playing guitar over my headphones at full chug, with not much more than a constant fart sound at room level coming out.
Overall cost to date: roughly 200€, microphones not included.
As of yet I've only tested it with my guitar head connected to the iso cab, playing directly through a mic into my interface. But recording that already sounds so much more realistic and vivid than any amp sim could ever deliver.
Why? Because it has it all: the correct amount of power amp saturation/distortion for my signal, the correct amount of speaker blow/rumble for my signal, the correct amount of mic hiss for my signal... it's dynamic, it's real, it's "alive".
Later today I will try something different:
Recording a dry DI track, then running it through an amp sim's preamp with cab/mic bypassed (thinking of Amplitube German Gain/Engl), and pumping this fuzzyfied signal through a power amp into my isolation cabinet in order to re-record it.
That would make the amp sim nothing more than a distortion pedal linked between guitar and power amp/speaker/mic, and I reckon I'll be able to get quite a sweet sound out of this signal chain.
If you care, I'll let y'all know how it works out.
zerocrossing - Mon May 07, 2012 7:09 am
lfm wrote:
I was never all happy with pure amp sim.
So I started with getting a Damange Control Womanizer to get some tubes to phatten things up, and still using cabinet sims. Quite an improvement.
But then I went one step further to a Koch Studiotone which has direct outs(with or without cabinet sim) as well internal load if not wanting to run with speakers. So you can crunch power amp as much as you want.
I still use the Womanizer due to the sweapable filter EQ is really cool.
I like Izotope Trash Boxmodels and their ability to create the miking with two mikes giving the feel of a miked cabinet in a room.
I also tested Waves GTR3 for cabinet sims. The option with stack of two and fiddling with delay on one gives also a sense of room miked guitar.
The search for guitartone is endless - but have come a little bit on the right track.
So I started with getting a Damange Control Womanizer to get some tubes to phatten things up, and still using cabinet sims. Quite an improvement.
But then I went one step further to a Koch Studiotone which has direct outs(with or without cabinet sim) as well internal load if not wanting to run with speakers. So you can crunch power amp as much as you want.
I still use the Womanizer due to the sweapable filter EQ is really cool.
I like Izotope Trash Boxmodels and their ability to create the miking with two mikes giving the feel of a miked cabinet in a room.
I also tested Waves GTR3 for cabinet sims. The option with stack of two and fiddling with delay on one gives also a sense of room miked guitar.
The search for guitartone is endless - but have come a little bit on the right track.
I'm using a Blackstar HT-5 Duel Distortion in much the same way, though I feel it's good as a distortion pedal in front of a preamp (or modeler vst) it's "speaker emulated" outs blow chunks, as they say in the valley. Looks like the Womanizer is out of production and not a one on eBay. Studiotone looks cool... a lotta bread though for that little box. I'm trying to get this and a new computer done for $2K so I have some wiggle room but if I went full tilt on an amp like that it would put off the new computer for a while.
You are right about the endless search for guitar tone. I wonder why that is? Actually I'm generally really happy with my little Blackstar/Amplitube or S-gear set up for the most part. I just got a little windfall and I thought it would be nice to get a little hardware for when guitar is featured in the tune.
Hink - Mon May 07, 2012 8:37 am
chokehold wrote:
After years of being not-quite-happy with my guitar sound, I've completely gone off cabinet/mic sims "in the box".
I can say "I had them all", because I nearly have. Steinberg Warp VST, ReValver when it was still from Alien Connections, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, Kuassa Creme, Softube Metal Amp Room, the LePous, and loads of other freeware sims (Nick Crow, TSE, ...)
But all of them sound only halfway there, some not even that.
There seem to be certain complex dynamic aspects to a cabinet/mic combination which just cant be captured by a single impulse, for example, and not by mixing 2 or even 10 of them together. And I guess it would make the CPU load of a plugin unbearable even on modern systems, if developers really created algorithms as thoroughly as they would need to be to get there.
I will try not go into it too deep...
An impulse response is created by running a frequency sweep through a power amp, cabinet, microphone and preamp. So all frequencies are covered, but as the sweep has only one consistent volume level, the created impulse is only representative for the volume level used to create it.
Think about it:
The sweep is usually played back quite loudly, so that the power amp tubes start driving and saturating with the sweep being played through it, so all the drive and saturation are captured for the sweep, which is in deed a good thing because it captures all sorts of harmonic and distortion effects for every possible frequency that could run through it.
But the flaw is: if the guitar signal you're running through the impulse is any louder or quieter than the sweep was, the IR is not representative and not fitting, because it would introduce too much or too little distortion, harmonics and saturation for your guitar signal.
Also, a loudspeaker with a loud signal is moving quite a bit, so it's pushing and pulling quite some air. As most IRs are created closely mic'd, this movement of air will have an effect on the microphone, just like if you're talking/singing into one.
The more air you blow into the capsule, the more rumble you get on the record.
In the end, you have an impulse that was created with a driven and saturating tube power amp, going through a loudspeaker that's moving quite a bit, moving a lot of air and blowing quite some rumble into the microphone.
Then, there's the way the microphone's capsule reacts to different "dynamic impulses" blown into it, as in different notes (=different RMS levels) and different attack/release curves (fingered, picked, poti swell).
Now suppose you're looking for an impulse to put on your clean and quiet ballad guitar solo full of volume poti swells, or maybe your funky/twangy pop "fattening" guitar.
You don't need all this drive, saturation and rumble that was captured in the impulse.
Then what?
The appropriate approach to correctly simulate a power amp/cabinet/mic/preamp combination would be to not only have one impulse covering all frequencies, but to have one impulse covering all frequencies for every possible volume level. Volume level of your guitar signal that's going through it, that is.
And that would mean quite an impressive arsenal of IRs, just for one combination.
Also, one would need an algorithm to inspect the incoming volume in both Peak and RMS to evaluate which IR is required to be applied. Of course, one could reduce the number of IRs and start morphing between them, that would reduce the number of Impulse samples and would probably work as well. But it would mean dynamically creating and applying FFT filters for each incoming sample, and I guess in addition to all the other factors ... that would result in quite a heavy CPU load.
So for that purpose I have recently tried to break away from "in the box" amp/cab/mic sims and I've built myself an isolation cabinet, that was quite a significant improvement to my guitar tone.
My iso cab is created of what I consider to be top-end products (thick Odyssey case [no cheap 7mm multiplex wood], thick and dense acoustic foam [6cm and 8cm, not the cheap pyramid rubbish], Sommer cables, Neutrik connectors, etc. and it works impressively well.
I spent my night playing guitar over my headphones at full chug, with not much more than a constant fart sound at room level coming out.
Overall cost to date: roughly 200€, microphones not included.
As of yet I've only tested it with my guitar head connected to the iso cab, playing directly through a mic into my interface. But recording that already sounds so much more realistic and vivid than any amp sim could ever deliver.
Why? Because it has it all: the correct amount of power amp saturation/distortion for my signal, the correct amount of speaker blow/rumble for my signal, the correct amount of mic hiss for my signal... it's dynamic, it's real, it's "alive".
Later today I will try something different:
Recording a dry DI track, then running it through an amp sim's preamp with cab/mic bypassed (thinking of Amplitube German Gain/Engl), and pumping this fuzzyfied signal through a power amp into my isolation cabinet in order to re-record it.
That would make the amp sim nothing more than a distortion pedal linked between guitar and power amp/speaker/mic, and I reckon I'll be able to get quite a sweet sound out of this signal chain.
If you care, I'll let y'all know how it works out.
I can say "I had them all", because I nearly have. Steinberg Warp VST, ReValver when it was still from Alien Connections, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, Kuassa Creme, Softube Metal Amp Room, the LePous, and loads of other freeware sims (Nick Crow, TSE, ...)
But all of them sound only halfway there, some not even that.
There seem to be certain complex dynamic aspects to a cabinet/mic combination which just cant be captured by a single impulse, for example, and not by mixing 2 or even 10 of them together. And I guess it would make the CPU load of a plugin unbearable even on modern systems, if developers really created algorithms as thoroughly as they would need to be to get there.
I will try not go into it too deep...
An impulse response is created by running a frequency sweep through a power amp, cabinet, microphone and preamp. So all frequencies are covered, but as the sweep has only one consistent volume level, the created impulse is only representative for the volume level used to create it.
Think about it:
The sweep is usually played back quite loudly, so that the power amp tubes start driving and saturating with the sweep being played through it, so all the drive and saturation are captured for the sweep, which is in deed a good thing because it captures all sorts of harmonic and distortion effects for every possible frequency that could run through it.
But the flaw is: if the guitar signal you're running through the impulse is any louder or quieter than the sweep was, the IR is not representative and not fitting, because it would introduce too much or too little distortion, harmonics and saturation for your guitar signal.
Also, a loudspeaker with a loud signal is moving quite a bit, so it's pushing and pulling quite some air. As most IRs are created closely mic'd, this movement of air will have an effect on the microphone, just like if you're talking/singing into one.
The more air you blow into the capsule, the more rumble you get on the record.
In the end, you have an impulse that was created with a driven and saturating tube power amp, going through a loudspeaker that's moving quite a bit, moving a lot of air and blowing quite some rumble into the microphone.
Then, there's the way the microphone's capsule reacts to different "dynamic impulses" blown into it, as in different notes (=different RMS levels) and different attack/release curves (fingered, picked, poti swell).
Now suppose you're looking for an impulse to put on your clean and quiet ballad guitar solo full of volume poti swells, or maybe your funky/twangy pop "fattening" guitar.
You don't need all this drive, saturation and rumble that was captured in the impulse.
Then what?
The appropriate approach to correctly simulate a power amp/cabinet/mic/preamp combination would be to not only have one impulse covering all frequencies, but to have one impulse covering all frequencies for every possible volume level. Volume level of your guitar signal that's going through it, that is.
And that would mean quite an impressive arsenal of IRs, just for one combination.
Also, one would need an algorithm to inspect the incoming volume in both Peak and RMS to evaluate which IR is required to be applied. Of course, one could reduce the number of IRs and start morphing between them, that would reduce the number of Impulse samples and would probably work as well. But it would mean dynamically creating and applying FFT filters for each incoming sample, and I guess in addition to all the other factors ... that would result in quite a heavy CPU load.
So for that purpose I have recently tried to break away from "in the box" amp/cab/mic sims and I've built myself an isolation cabinet, that was quite a significant improvement to my guitar tone.
My iso cab is created of what I consider to be top-end products (thick Odyssey case [no cheap 7mm multiplex wood], thick and dense acoustic foam [6cm and 8cm, not the cheap pyramid rubbish], Sommer cables, Neutrik connectors, etc. and it works impressively well.
I spent my night playing guitar over my headphones at full chug, with not much more than a constant fart sound at room level coming out.
Overall cost to date: roughly 200€, microphones not included.
As of yet I've only tested it with my guitar head connected to the iso cab, playing directly through a mic into my interface. But recording that already sounds so much more realistic and vivid than any amp sim could ever deliver.
Why? Because it has it all: the correct amount of power amp saturation/distortion for my signal, the correct amount of speaker blow/rumble for my signal, the correct amount of mic hiss for my signal... it's dynamic, it's real, it's "alive".
Later today I will try something different:
Recording a dry DI track, then running it through an amp sim's preamp with cab/mic bypassed (thinking of Amplitube German Gain/Engl), and pumping this fuzzyfied signal through a power amp into my isolation cabinet in order to re-record it.
That would make the amp sim nothing more than a distortion pedal linked between guitar and power amp/speaker/mic, and I reckon I'll be able to get quite a sweet sound out of this signal chain.
If you care, I'll let y'all know how it works out.
I would love it if you posted your iso cab in the DIY forum, I have a jet City right now but last year I drew up plans for my own iso cab.
Mine would be at least 2 1/4" inch thick walls of composite wood.
The top and bottom would be interlocking
The foam would not be relied upon for killing sound but for treating the sound to stop booming and such. Therefore my foam would likely be wedges or pyramid because of how that diffuses sound, it would be attached with velcro so I could add or remove foam as need to obtain the tone I wanted.
The top and bottom would be longer than needed so I could add adjustable baffles to further tune the cab
Yesterday was a very nice day and while I had intended to do this last fall I didn't, I need a place to cut the wood and my best friend not on has the tools (as well do I) but he has the garage to do it in. I was there yesterday and he asked me if I still wanted to cut up the wood there and I told him I did. He would have to meet me one day at home depot because he has a pick up truck and my design calls for 3 3/4" 4x8 sheets of composite wood. (I have it laid out how to cut up the sheets so I get all the pieces I need with little waste)
In December they finally had the jet city iso cabs available so I bought one, It's 1 1/2" thick and no foam but acoustic insulation...here's what I learned with it.
You can hear it in the room (love your definition of a fart that's accurate) but not even enough to be heard in another room or even enough to generate feedback. The cab itself acts like a room within a room so in any other room in the apartment or in the common hallway in the building it cannot be heard. (it's about 8' from the doors to my apartment) I had my wife go out in the hall and jump up and down for a few seconds to see if I picked up rumble and low frequency thumping from that...I did not. We have had major reconstruction here and even with the loudest banging it has not iterupted my playing using the iso cab.
A goose neck has some serious limitations and keeping the mic positioned at the exact same spot meant some alterations were needed or the weight of the mic would bring it closer and closer to the speaker and that was with a normal dynamic mic. (my iso cab probably would lie on it's side)
You need a balance when it comes to interior wall treatment, I have some foam (auralex) and I tried adding it to hear the difference and too much foam made it too dead.
More than one mic would be useful but I'm not sure I would be comfortable cranking an amp and putting a condenser in there, my Gauge Large Dia Condenser does have a pad on it which would help but still...
I still use an attenuator even with a two watt tube amp, again it's a delicate balance between diffusing, dampening and the overall tone. Because of the room inside the room concept killing the volume as to not disturb neighbors is not an issue but the tone inside the box is key.
It is far more critical keeping the outside noises out and it does this well but getting it off the floor really is important. If I am not playing, loud noises could get picked up but once you start playing it drowns out outside noises, I think my cab design would keep out more noises.
A grill cover similar to a pop filter over the speaker would be a good addition so you can use duct tape as many do miking a cab. I have found miking my 4x12 in my closet that using tape eliminates the "ice pick to the head" tone. I have thought about a Weber Beam Blocker but inside a limited space I think that would be overkill.
The difference between using the iso cab and using a line out is huge, the line out is too static and dynamically lacking at least for playing, re-amping is another story...combined with the iso cab tracks though you can do great job with IRs to fill in gaps...however at that point sims do equally as well in this fashion.
This is why I said ZC might not be happy with just a line out as he is coming from AT and the scuffman, it's about contrast and relativity. Face it AT sounds very, very good and there will not be that jaw dropping experience in fact it's very possible it would be a let down. It could just be me but with guitar I have not found recording outs on tube amps to be satisfying at all. It might be different with the method Eric mentioned using a Berhinger DI and perhaps with a decent speaker emulator like the torpedo speaker sim might work well.
Once you have the sound from the line out recorded and you are mixing I have great luck with the cabs in AT, VANDAL and IRs but when I'm trying to lay down tracks this way I found myself stopping to adjust things so often I just wasted time.
Again because it cannot be stated enough, caution must be used choosing attenuators because so many kill the headroom. Some form of or compensation is needed. I suppose if you dont have the compensation you might not notice it, but once you have a treble boost on an attenuator you'll know why it is so important.
blueman - Mon May 07, 2012 10:45 am
Fwiw, my advice is to find a local guitar store and demo the Line 6 DT25 head and cab
I've never owned (or wanted to own) a Line 6 amp before this. Even the "Spider Valve" wasn't enough to impress me
But THIS amp intrigued me and I can now confirm, something here is truly different. It's ALL valve (preamp AND power amp tubes) and it truly mimics the sounds of Fender, Vox, Marshall and Mesa Boogie. Ok, the Vox is questionable (it sounds OK but not exactly right) BUT, it nails the other 3 sounds dead on for me 
Surprisingly, it can be tailored to achieve a signature tone as well. Somehow, the so-called "HD modeling" is mostly insignificant if you just want a great sounding amp. Idk guys, I just love this amp 
Check out the online video demos and go play one
R
fedexnman - Mon May 07, 2012 10:57 am
Get a VHT Special6Ultra and a Shure SM-57 mic and your done . $329 for the amp and $99 for the mic !
lfm - Mon May 07, 2012 11:16 am
todd sweetland wrote:
Get a VHT Special6Ultra and a Shure SM-57 mic and your done . $329 for the amp and $99 for the mic !
You have to add a little cost for soundproofing your studio/apartment!!!
zerocrossing - Mon May 07, 2012 11:26 am
wasi wrote:
Out of the choice in the OP, absolutely get the Engl. It's a better preamp and that pays off, especially when you're using IRs in the backend.
Yeah, the Engl does seem good, I do want to see if I can get my hands on one for a test.
wasi wrote:
H&K's Redbox is very good, certainly one of the better analog speaker sims, but compared to convolution based software all analog speaker sims appear rather lifeless IMO. There's only so much you can do with EQ. Besides, the Tubemeister is just one channel, and there's no 'pure' preamp out, just speaker compensated or speaker, meaning you can't try a better speaker sim with it.
The Tubemeister 18 is actually 2 channels. The 36 which is coming out soon is three and they're midi switchable. I wish I could find a MSRP on the 36. I think you can also use the effects send out as a pre-amp out.
wasi wrote:
If you can, look around for a used Mesa/Boogie Triaxis (if you're in the US) or Hughes & Kettner Access (if you're in Europe) or that Marshall JMP-1 preamp. They are midi controllable and let you save presets, which is very useful when you're working with a computer because you tend to do a lot more fiddling than ptherwise. The Access is from the era of H&K when they made multi-thousand-dollar luxury-item pro gear, not the more midrange stuff of these days. The Access significantly more capable than the Triaxis IMO on several levels, the JMP-1, well...
I have an Access I bought second hand for $300 and it lets me run the midi out on the Access into the computer to control Guitar Rig, meaning I can tie everything to one midi pedal.
The Boogie seems to expensive for my budget and not a single Access in eBay to be found, but that's an awesome price. The JMP-1 on the other hand does seem to fit a lot of my needs, though I couldn't find a single example of someone doing a direct recording and using a cab sim or impulse of some kind on it. I'll do more research on it, thanks for the tip.
Hink - Mon May 07, 2012 11:53 am
lfm wrote:
todd sweetland wrote:
Get a VHT Special6Ultra and a Shure SM-57 mic and your done . $329 for the amp and $99 for the mic !
You have to add a little cost for soundproofing your studio/apartment!!!
I do very well miking my 4x12 in a closet and using an attenuator to keep my volume down but the jet City iso cab is also 329usd and works well so you dont need to soundproof an entire room. In the case of the OP I do know that outside noise is probably more of a factor and sure soundproofing would solve that if he had that kind of money but an iso cab does the same thing at a much lower cost.
Keep in mind that quite often when soundproofing a room you start by building a room within a room and an iso cab is just a very small room within a room. Of course an iso booth would be better but talk about a huge step up in price
I may one day buy an spl meter, I suppose I could rent one cheap for a day...but if I ever have my hands on one I will surely make a video with it showing how well an iso cab can kill the sound. (when I build a second one I will likely do this to test whether my design is more or less effective)
Hink - Mon May 07, 2012 11:58 am
ZC, as long as you're talking pres put an ADA MP1 on your list to check out...I almost traded my POD xt Live for one at a local pawn shop but when I went back it was sold
(I think it was more than 200 and less than 300, unfortunately memory does not improve with age 
) zerocrossing - Mon May 07, 2012 1:34 pm
lfm wrote:
todd sweetland wrote:
Get a VHT Special6Ultra and a Shure SM-57 mic and your done . $329 for the amp and $99 for the mic !
You have to add a little cost for soundproofing your studio/apartment!!!
Yeah, in the original post I explain why this set up wouldn't work for me in more ways than just being loud. I do a lot of looping and when you're looping the output of a mic'd cab you always end up with feedback issues. I mean, if it was just that simple I would be just checking out amps at my local shops.
fedexnman - Mon May 07, 2012 1:47 pm
My ADHD , must of missed it . I have a roland cube30 , that sounds great mic'd . I prefer it to amp sims vst . Looping and feedback =
Good luck !! zerocrossing - Mon May 07, 2012 5:13 pm
Well I've been over and over every demo I could find and it's pointing to a hard truth. I don't think it'll be worth spending any money unless I go with the Kemper Profiling Amplifier. (shouldn't it be Kemper Amplifier Profiler?) It just sounds fantastic in every demo I've heard. Such a wide range of possibilities on that baby and it totally serves my needs.
I guess this blows my "budget" out of the water so I could either drop the whole thing, or re-visit my idea to do the guitar preamp/new computer thing for $2000. I think I'm currently leaning toward the Kemper and then waiting a few months to do the computer.
zerocrossing - Mon May 07, 2012 6:53 pm
chokehold wrote:
Also, a loudspeaker with a loud signal is moving quite a bit, so it's pushing and pulling quite some air. As most IRs are created closely mic'd, this movement of air will have an effect on the microphone, just like if you're talking/singing into one.
The more air you blow into the capsule, the more rumble you get on the record.
That's not totally describing sound from a speaker. An air molecule is only moving a very short distance if at all. The air doesn't get pushed and pulled any significant distance, it's more like the idea of those balls on strings where you swing one, they hit the stationary ones, and then the one on the end moves as if it's the one getting hit, except it's balls all the way from your speaker to your ear.
It's kinetic energy propagating though a medium. A pressure/vacuum wave. I'm sure there are turbulence and speaker deformation and what not that all contribute to how an amp/cab sound, but there's no air rushing by a mic. A voice or wind instrument is a very different thing and that's just because the air acts like a bow would on a string and that string is your vocal cord. The breath rushing out is a side effect of how the sound is made.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound
But you are right in that a tube pre/tube power/cab/mic all have a really complex little relationship and it's pretty amazing that some sims do as well as they do. I would think that a modeled cab response would be a bit better than a pure impulse for the reasons you describe. I don't know if any convolution based cab somehow takes multiple amplitude sweeps and somehow blends between them to make a more accurate model based on a true dynamic signal.
wasi - Mon May 07, 2012 10:46 pm
zerocrossing wrote:
Well I've been over and over every demo I could find and it's pointing to a hard truth. I don't think it'll be worth spending any money unless I go with the Kemper Profiling Amplifier. (shouldn't it be Kemper Amplifier Profiler?) It just sounds fantastic in every demo I've heard. Such a wide range of possibilities on that baby and it totally serves my needs.
I guess this blows my "budget" out of the water so I could either drop the whole thing, or re-visit my idea to do the guitar preamp/new computer thing for $2000. I think I'm currently leaning toward the Kemper and then waiting a few months to do the computer.
I guess this blows my "budget" out of the water so I could either drop the whole thing, or re-visit my idea to do the guitar preamp/new computer thing for $2000. I think I'm currently leaning toward the Kemper and then waiting a few months to do the computer.
Seriously? You started out in this thread thinking you wanted more glowing glass, now you want more (and much more expensive) modelling...?
I know the symptom, but I'd stick with your initial feeling, i.e. you were missing the organic feel and sound of tubes. You can stick more - and more expensive - margarine on your bread but it still won't taste like butter. Only butter tastes like butter.
Hink is right. I forgot about the ADA MP1 in my list. There are always tons of those available for around $300 and there's a solid 'fanbase', adadepot for mods etc. I count ten on ebay right now.
Amplitube and S-Gear are good software. I don't think the slim margin of improvement you could get out of a Kemper would justify the price.
Rangtangtang - Tue May 08, 2012 12:44 am
What about keyboard amps. Well Im getting one. Its a amplified 10 inch speaker box whith 3 channel input as well as CD input and reverb too. Has not tubes but I thought it might be usefull.
zerocrossing - Tue May 08, 2012 6:41 am
wasi wrote:
zerocrossing wrote:
Well I've been over and over every demo I could find and it's pointing to a hard truth. I don't think it'll be worth spending any money unless I go with the Kemper Profiling Amplifier. (shouldn't it be Kemper Amplifier Profiler?) It just sounds fantastic in every demo I've heard. Such a wide range of possibilities on that baby and it totally serves my needs.
I guess this blows my "budget" out of the water so I could either drop the whole thing, or re-visit my idea to do the guitar preamp/new computer thing for $2000. I think I'm currently leaning toward the Kemper and then waiting a few months to do the computer.
I guess this blows my "budget" out of the water so I could either drop the whole thing, or re-visit my idea to do the guitar preamp/new computer thing for $2000. I think I'm currently leaning toward the Kemper and then waiting a few months to do the computer.
Seriously? You started out in this thread thinking you wanted more glowing glass, now you want more (and much more expensive) modelling...?
I know the symptom, but I'd stick with your initial feeling, i.e. you were missing the organic feel and sound of tubes. You can stick more - and more expensive - margarine on your bread but it still won't taste like butter. Only butter tastes like butter.
Hink is right. I forgot about the ADA MP1 in my list. There are always tons of those available for around $300 and there's a solid 'fanbase', adadepot for mods etc. I count ten on ebay right now.
Amplitube and S-Gear are good software. I don't think the slim margin of improvement you could get out of a Kemper would justify the price.
I know, you're probably right. I did spend a tremendous amount of time listening to demos and all the ones I seemed to really like where the ones from a mic'd cab or the Kemper. Of course, it was all via Youtube, which is a scourage of modern times. Don't get me wrong, I love a good kitten sleeping video, but showing off your nice music gear? &fmt=18 helps, I guess but I wish I had a nice quality demo.
Then I'd do informal a/b comparisons with what I current have. A Blackstar HT-5 Dual distortion pedal going into (my two current favorites) Amplitube and S-Gear. I started feeling a bit silly because I can get the software to sound really very good. As good as a real amp? Well, that's a debate for another thread, but very good.
I know the Kemper's just more expensive amp modeling, but from what I could tell it seemed to be better than a preamp direct into a cab sim/impulse. Is it better than pure software? Good question. I've not been able to compare it so I have no idea. Which points out to a big problem and that's all the things I'm considering aren't available for me to demo. Doesn't even seem like I could find a Tubemeister anywhere in the area. Thanks Guitar Center! You've homogenized everything.
So the alternative is buy on eBay and sell on eBay if I don't dig it. That's a huge PITA. So that's where I am in my thinking.
I guess the one other alternative is to buy a iso cab and put it in my garage. I hadn't really considered this, but it could really be the answer I'm looking for. Hink, how's that Jet City you bought?
wasi - Tue May 08, 2012 9:19 am
But even an iso cab only gives you a close miked 1x12 sound. That's not much of a hardware selection to work with, unless that's the sound you're after. If not, you spend your time trying to turn that 1x12 sound into a 4x12 sound or whatever. That's what made me drop the iso cab idea back then. OTOH you may find out it sounds exactly the way you want. But looking at the pile of gear in my study that didn't seem very likely.
Have you tried Recabinet? I don't particularly like most of the presets but with some cab mixing it's punchier and more vivid to my ears than other cab sims that come with amp sim suites. Both AT and Guitar Rig's cab sims are very good, but there's a 'tameness' to the sound, like a retouched photograph. Recabinet is more raw to my ears, really to the point where I have to say that I couldn't do better miking a real cab. I've played everything through it, from a mesa studio pre to a distortion pedal and they all sounded really good. The mesa actually sounded better than through my real rig.
Hink - Tue May 08, 2012 10:13 am
wasi wrote:
But even an iso cab only gives you a close miked 1x12 sound. That's not much of a hardware selection to work with, unless that's the sound you're after. If not, you spend your time trying to turn that 1x12 sound into a 4x12 sound or whatever. That's what made me drop the iso cab idea back then. OTOH you may find out it sounds exactly the way you want. But looking at the pile of gear in my study that didn't seem very likely.
Have you tried Recabinet? I don't particularly like most of the presets but with some cab mixing it's punchier and more vivid to my ears than other cab sims that come with amp sim suites. Both AT and Guitar Rig's cab sims are very good, but there's a 'tameness' to the sound, like a retouched photograph. Recabinet is more raw to my ears, really to the point where I have to say that I couldn't do better miking a real cab. I've played everything through it, from a mesa studio pre to a distortion pedal and they all sounded really good. The mesa actually sounded better than through my real rig.
Have you tried Recabinet? I don't particularly like most of the presets but with some cab mixing it's punchier and more vivid to my ears than other cab sims that come with amp sim suites. Both AT and Guitar Rig's cab sims are very good, but there's a 'tameness' to the sound, like a retouched photograph. Recabinet is more raw to my ears, really to the point where I have to say that I couldn't do better miking a real cab. I've played everything through it, from a mesa studio pre to a distortion pedal and they all sounded really good. The mesa actually sounded better than through my real rig.
First let me answer ZCs question, the Jet City gets the job done but I still feel the need to use an attenuator so I can push the envelope a little more. The question of will it work for you is very subjective naturally but if you expect it to kill all the sound it wont, I still hear it but a TV at normal listening levels will mask it. On the other hand (I know an issue for you) is that I can crank it enough that it wont pick up outside noises when I am playing...but, I have picked up outside noise when not playing like during a pre-roll. I think I can improve on it building my own but only to a certain point.
Now to wasi, I'm sorry but with my experience I have found that line out recording is a nifty gimmick but not a reason to buy a tube amp. It's a great feature to have on an amp and for me the reasons are two fold. One using IRs with the signal can be quite good, but unless it's rigged like the Frenzel you do not get the distortion from the power tubes (which you can read me description on the first page of why the Frenzel is different. BTW for very cheap Weber sells a kit that does the same thing). Why have a tube power amp and not use it? So it's good when layering tracks and filling in spaces.
I really have fallen in love with single ended Class A, you do not get that from a pre-amp. That brings me to the second use a line out gives me, my single ended amp has a power amp in and I can run the line out of one amp into it for class A or other amps. Being able to completely mix up my power tube compliment is great, the jet City 50 watt via the line out into my Class A or even my Egnater Rebel 20 (which uses both 6v6 and EL84s) is very cool. The fact that one of mt Frenzels can use various power tubes and the fact I also use THD Yellow Jacket tube converters gives me countless variations with 5 amps and a Marshall pre-amp (still dont really like the marshall pre which is all tube)
While an iso cab may seem to have it's limits you leave out a very important part of the picture, re-amping. It's a closed space yes, you're not going to put a mic at the cone and one 4 feet away. But you are not limited to one speaker nor one mic when re-amping and as far as getting the sound of a mic further away can be accomplished with nearly any reverb these days after the fact (which imo is the time to use reverb, I monitor with fx but record dry). A line out is sure to be more limiting by nature than an iso cab.
I'm currently working on an article for Brent (koolkeys) and his site all about re-amping and the benefits it presents in this age. Needless to say there is plenty to write about and many ways to go but I for one will never again just record one source, I will always a direct line from guitar via a splitter.
BTW it would be very easy for me to make an adapter ring for my iso cab so that I could go down to any smaller sized speaker if I wanted say a 10" or 8". If you read on the first page you will my concept for an iso cab that I want to build and that includes being over sized height wise and using adjustable baffles, the same could be done width wise. In fact one of the iso booth companies make (or made) boxes you put you entire amp in, I can't find it right now and I have to go out.
zerocrossing - Tue May 08, 2012 10:33 am
wasi wrote:
But even an iso cab only gives you a close miked 1x12 sound. That's not much of a hardware selection to work with, unless that's the sound you're after. If not, you spend your time trying to turn that 1x12 sound into a 4x12 sound or whatever. That's what made me drop the iso cab idea back then. OTOH you may find out it sounds exactly the way you want. But looking at the pile of gear in my study that didn't seem very likely.
Have you tried Recabinet? I don't particularly like most of the presets but with some cab mixing it's punchier and more vivid to my ears than other cab sims that come with amp sim suites. Both AT and Guitar Rig's cab sims are very good, but there's a 'tameness' to the sound, like a retouched photograph. Recabinet is more raw to my ears, really to the point where I have to say that I couldn't do better miking a real cab. I've played everything through it, from a mesa studio pre to a distortion pedal and they all sounded really good. The mesa actually sounded better than through my real rig.
Have you tried Recabinet? I don't particularly like most of the presets but with some cab mixing it's punchier and more vivid to my ears than other cab sims that come with amp sim suites. Both AT and Guitar Rig's cab sims are very good, but there's a 'tameness' to the sound, like a retouched photograph. Recabinet is more raw to my ears, really to the point where I have to say that I couldn't do better miking a real cab. I've played everything through it, from a mesa studio pre to a distortion pedal and they all sounded really good. The mesa actually sounded better than through my real rig.
I'm going to try out some impulses tonight and see what's up. I do have Speakerphone but I mostly use it for oddball stuff. I thought Audioease's Cabinet was a bit bright sounding to me. I think my "ugly" sound is in the amp though, not the cab.
Hink - Tue May 08, 2012 12:03 pm
ZC my offer always stands, if you want to send me something to run through one of my amps with settings of your choice please do not hesitate to ask
zerocrossing - Tue May 08, 2012 12:54 pm
I could go iso cab. I've been avoiding it but it may be the answer. I could easily put it in my garage which is next to my studio. It would be easy to drill a small hole to run cable into the garage if the volume is too much.
Maybe the deal is get the Tubemeister 18. I seem to have found enough demos of it that I like. It seems to be fairly full featured and the price is right. I can easily see if the Redbox out makes me happy and if not go for an iso cab. I was able to hear enough of the Randall Iso cab demos that sounded good.
On the other hand, I can't help but love the elegance of the Kemper. Might not be perfect but it would literally be plug and play.
zerocrossing - Tue May 08, 2012 1:08 pm
Hink wrote:
ZC my offer always stands, if you want to send me something to run through one of my amps with settings of your choice please do not hesitate to ask
I appreciate it. I might just take you up on that, though (don't laugh!) what I do rarely even gets recorded. All this tomfoolery is about me screwing around in my studio filling RAM buffers of audio loops.
blueman - Tue May 08, 2012 1:21 pm
zerocrossing wrote:
what I do rarely even gets recorded. All this tomfoolery is about me screwing around in my studio filling RAM buffers of audio loops.
Don't worry, you're in good company
Hink - Tue May 08, 2012 2:10 pm
blueman wrote:
zerocrossing wrote:
what I do rarely even gets recorded. All this tomfoolery is about me screwing around in my studio filling RAM buffers of audio loops.
Don't worry, you're in good company
+ a billion, it's all good though. Some people are in it for the hope of fame and glory while some of us are just as happy as we can be doing what we love when we want and how we want
zerocrossing - Tue May 08, 2012 2:16 pm
Hink wrote:
blueman wrote:
zerocrossing wrote:
what I do rarely even gets recorded. All this tomfoolery is about me screwing around in my studio filling RAM buffers of audio loops.
Don't worry, you're in good company
+ a billion, it's all good though. Some people are in it for the hope of fame and glory while some of us are just as happy as we can be doing what we love when we want and how we want
Amen to that my brothers. The closer I got to any sort of compensation from playing music the more miserable I was. The only time I felt OK was doing game soundtrack work and that was 100% commercial commissioned work and the client was pretty easy to work with.
Now I noodle about for hours and it's deeply satisfying. All those years though I always felt like that wasn't enough, I had to be "successful." F' that! I now consider any night I have fun in my studio a success.
There are 31 posts in this topic.