Scuffham Amps S-Gear (developed with former Marshall product designer)

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Effects Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
S-Gear

Post

btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency. It's not an s-gear thing, but I can't stand it. :x

Post

hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency. It's not an s-gear thing, but I can't stand it. :x
There has to be a reason.
What is the buffer size setting in Sonar?
Are you familiar with all the settings in Sonar?
Many host will have hidden things like "double buffer" on input, output
or both.
Many times they don't call them "buffer" but some other name.

In any case you should be able to disable them all.... you just have to find them first.


:wink:

Post

hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency.
Play slower :shrug:
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.

Post

AndrewSimon wrote:
hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency. It's not an s-gear thing, but I can't stand it. :x
There has to be a reason.
What is the buffer size setting in Sonar?
Are you familiar with all the settings in Sonar?
Many host will have hidden things like "double buffer" on input, output
or both.
Many times they don't call them "buffer" but some other name.

In any case you should be able to disable them all.... you just have to find them first.


:wink:
Live's got something called "track buffer" I think. I never noticed it until I upgraded and for some odd reason the default was set to be pretty high and I noticed it right away.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

Hink wrote:
hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency.
Play slower :shrug:
Oh that's no issue, I can't play fast :shrug:

Post

hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency. It's not an s-gear thing, but I can't stand it. :x
That's me as well. With the same settings Tracktion is totally fine and playable. Used it for years with no problem. With Sonar X1 it is unusable and like there is a 250ms delay in the signal. Apart from not getting on well with the interface the latency is the big killer for me and the reason I'll uninstall it and not try to learn it further.
Intel Core i7 8700K, 16gb, Windows 10 Pro, Focusrite Scarlet 6i6

Post

morelia wrote:
hibidy wrote:btw, sonar for some reason DOES have more latency. It's not an s-gear thing, but I can't stand it. :x
That's me as well. With the same settings Tracktion is totally fine and playable. Used it for years with no problem. With Sonar X1 it is unusable and like there is a 250ms delay in the signal. Apart from not getting on well with the interface the latency is the big killer for me and the reason I'll uninstall it and not try to learn it further.
this is why I use either one of my amps (most of the time now) or one of my PODs when I record guitar. I use a radial aby box with a bypass out so I have three output feeds, I can record a dry signal and use one of the above as a reference amp (while recording it too) so I can use direct monitor and forget about latency :shrug:
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.

Post

Hink wrote:I can record a dry signal and use one of the above as a reference amp (while recording it too) so I can use direct monitor and forget about latency :shrug:
Exactly what I do, except for jamming.
Projects typically are too heavy for low latency by the time guitars come in.
In the rare case I really need to play with the exact ampsim sound, I'll do a rough mix, import that in a new project and can track @ 32 buffers.
Reimport the guitar tracks in the original project, done.
And Cubase is pretty straightforward about latency, no fishy hidden beauty tricks. :roll:
Ymmv,
susiwong

Post

OR, you can use reaper and not worry about it :hihi:

I've been spending too much again. Even though I'm not pleased it's not x64, it really does seem to "fit in" better :shrug: Anyways, I'm happy with it.......I will be getting out the pen/paper and writing down my niggles.....to report.......just in case :hihi:

Post

bump
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.

Post

susiwong wrote:Imho that's what separates S-Gear from all the last-generation ampsims - the devs are not afraid to make decisions and design choices, focusing on the essence of the models - in the real world you wouldn't expect a Marshall to excel at JC-120 sounds and vice versa, somehow in software people are expecting that and a lot more, the age old gourmand - gourmet dilemma. :hihi:
Yeah, I read everything on http://www.scuffhamamps.com about S-Gear and the fact that they have made design decisions is what really excites me about this one! Also the fact that they are concentrating on boutique amps with a lot of range and superior tone and feel - plus the developer is likely someone who can actually recognize and appreciate that superior tone/feel, which is the first step in modeling it.

I guess I disagree a little about what software could do, though.... I mean, it is totally possible in software to have a modeled JC-120 circuit morph into a Marshall circuit as the drive is raised, etc...but then it would be an original design rather than a "model" I suppose. Still, I look forward to such original boutique software amps being developed more in the future.

I guess I'm most impressed that you're impressed, susiwong! It must be something different!! I don't know when I'll get a chance to try it out - it may be quite a while - but I can hardly wait! :)

Post

guitarzan wrote:Yeah, I read everything on http://www.scuffhamamps.com about S-Gear and the fact that they have made design decisions is what really excites me about this one! Also the fact that they are concentrating on boutique amps with a lot of range and superior tone and feel - plus the developer is likely someone who can actually recognize and appreciate that superior tone/feel, which is the first step in modeling it.

I guess I disagree a little about what software could do, though.... I mean, it is totally possible in software to have a modeled JC-120 circuit morph into a Marshall circuit as the drive is raised, etc...but then it would be an original design rather than a "model" I suppose. Still, I look forward to such original boutique software amps being developed more in the future.

I guess I'm most impressed that you're impressed, susiwong! It must be something different!! I don't know when I'll get a chance to try it out - it may be quite a while - but I can hardly wait! :)
Let us know about yout impressions, when you find time to lay down the guitar again, that is. :wink:
One other thing I enjoy immensely about S-Gear (compared to AT, GR, TH and many hardware multi-FX):
Gainstaging is a non-issue, once you have dialed in your input signal you're home free :love: , much like a real tube setup.
No constant danger of digitally overloading various stages of the plugin. :scared:
If Mike can extend that bonus to future included pedals we are another step closer to real tone ITB. :tu:
Ymmv,
susiwong

Post

Any metallish demos out there by any chance?
My Youtube Channel - Wires Dream Disasters :: My Band - Tacoma Narrows Bridge Disaster
Product owner working for inMusic Brands - posting here in a personal capacity, but I will assist with any BFD related questions - hit me up!

Post

Amberience wrote:Any metallish demos out there by any chance?
http://www.scuffhamamps.com/user-sounds

Post

Amberience wrote:Any metallish demos out there by any chance?
If I recall right I have used at 2 lead guitar layered tracks in this :

http://soundcloud.com/residentour/curse-of-feanor

Post Reply

Return to “Effects”